By Daniel John Jambun, President Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia foundation (BoPiMaFo)
KOTA KINABALU: BoPiMaFo expresses serious concern over recent remarks by Sabah and Sarawak Affairs minister, Mustapha Sakmud, suggesting that Sabah’s “subtle and gentle” partnership with Petroliam Nasional Berhad represents the most appropriate approach to managing the state’s petroleum resources.
Such statements risk sending the wrong message at a moment when fundamental constitutional questions concerning petroleum governance in Malaysia are being examined before the courts.
Petroleum Rights Are Not a Courtesy Arrangement
The governance of petroleum resources in Malaysia is rooted in legal and constitutional frameworks, including the Petroleum Development Act 1974, whose constitutional implications are currently under judicial scrutiny in proceedings initiated by the Sarawak government.
These proceedings seek judicial clarification on whether federal petroleum legislation properly applies to the Borneo states within the constitutional structure established when Malaysia was formed.
The issue is therefore not simply about commercial cooperation with Petronas.
It concerns the underlying constitutional position of Sabah and Sarawak over their natural resources.
Reducing this matter to a “partnership model” risks trivialising a question that carries long-term implications for Sabah’s economic future.
Constitutional Rights Do Not Depend on Administrative Capacity
BoPiMaFo is particularly concerned by suggestions that Sabah’s current approach reflects the state’s “stage of capacity-building”.
Constitutional rights do not arise from the level of industrial capacity possessed by a state government.
They arise from law.
A state does not lose its constitutional position simply because it has not yet developed the same institutional structures as another.
Capacity can be built over time.
But constitutional rights, once diluted through policy choices or political acquiescence, may be far more difficult to restore.
Sarawak’s Legal Path Deserves Respect
The Government of Sarawak has chosen to seek clarification through the courts regarding the constitutional validity and applicability of several federal petroleum laws.
Seeking judicial interpretation of the law is not a threat to Malaysia’s oil and gas industry.
On the contrary, legal certainty strengthens both governance and investor confidence.
Respectful differences in approach between Sabah and Sarawak should therefore not obscure the legitimacy of asking fundamental constitutional questions.
National Industry Must Not Silence Constitutional Debate
BoPiMaFo agrees that Malaysia’s oil and gas sector is strategically important and that Petronas has contributed significantly to national development.
However, invoking the need to “protect the national oil company” should not become a rhetorical device to discourage legitimate constitutional inquiry.
A mature federation must be capable of protecting national institutions while also respecting the constitutional rights of its constituent states.
These two objectives are not mutually exclusive.
Sabahans Deserve Clarity From Their Political Leaders
Given the gravity of the issue, BoPiMaFo believes the people of Sabah are entitled to clear answers.
Is the position articulated by Mustapha Sakmud the official policy of the Sabah State Government led by Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS)?
Or does it reflect the stance of Pakatan Harapan (PH) leaders serving in the Federal Cabinet?
This distinction matters.
The governance of Sabah’s petroleum resources is not a routine administrative matter. It concerns one of the most consequential economic questions affecting the future of the state.
Sabahans therefore deserve transparency regarding the policy position of their elected leadership.
Sabah’s Resource Future Must Be Guided by Constitutional Clarity
The petroleum resources located off Sabah’s shores represent one of the most significant economic assets available to the state.
Decisions affecting their governance should be guided by constitutional clarity, informed public debate, and long-term strategic thinking.
Commercial cooperation may form part of that framework.
But cooperation must follow from a clear understanding of Sabah’s constitutional position — not replace it.
BoPiMaFo urges Sabah’s leaders to address this issue with the seriousness and transparency it deserves.
The people of Sabah have the right to know where their leaders stand on matters affecting the state’s economic sovereignty.
