By Daniel John Jambun, Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Founsation (BoPiMaFo)
KOTA KINABAU: Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) views the recent statement by Datuk Jerry Ambuting Mohd Said as nothing more than political polishing dressed up as “responsibility.
Let us be clear:
This is not statesmanship. This is submission.
1. The “Do Not Politicise” Excuse Is a Classic Deflection
When Sabah leaders demand accountability, we are told:
“Don’t politicise.”
But what exactly is being “politicised”?
A High Court judgment
A constitutional entitlement
A 60-year failure of implementation
If defending Sabah’s constitutional rights is “politicising,”
then what do we call decades of delay?
Negligence? Or deliberate avoidance?
2. This Is Not a Negotiation — It Is a Legal Obligation
Jerry Ambuting claims the matter cannot be rushed due to:
* fiscal considerations
* national interest
* technical negotiations
This is fundamentally misleading.
Article 112D is not subject to negotiation. It is subject to compliance.
The Court has already found:
The Federal Government failed to conduct the mandatory review
The entitlement was not implemented for decades
A *timeline was imposed*(90 days + 180 days)
This is no longer a policy discussion.
This is enforcement of a constitutional duty.
3. “Financial Implications” Is Not a Legal Defence
We must address the most dangerous line in his statement:
“Financial implications to the country must be considered.”
Let us be blunt:
> Since when does affordability override the Constitution?
If this argument is accepted, then:
* Any constitutional right can be delayed
* Any obligation can be ignored
* Any breach can be justified
All under the excuse of “national interest.”
That is not governance. That is constitutional erosion.
4. The Court Already Set the Timeline — Not Politicians
The so-called “countdown” that Jerry criticises is not political rhetoric.
It comes directly from the High Court order:
* 90 days → *Review must be conducted*
* 180 days → Agreement must be concluded
This timeline is not optional.
> It is a judicial directive.
To dismiss it as “politicising” is to undermine the authority of the Court itself.
*5. Blind Faith in Assurances Is Not Leadership*
Jerry urges Sabahans to rely on:
“clear assurances” from the Prime Minister
But Sabah has heard assurances for decades.
What matters is not promises.
*What matters is compliance.*
And the reality is:
* An *appeal has been filed*
* A *stay of execution has been sought*
* The timeline is now effectively being delayed
So let us ask the real question:
If the commitment is genuine — why appeal?
*6. Sabah Is Not Asking for Favour — Sabah Is Demanding What Is Owed*
This entire narrative attempts to reframe the issue as:
* complex
* sensitive
* negotiable
It is none of the above.
This is a debt long overdue.
Sabah is not begging.
Sabah is not negotiating.
Sabah is asserting a constitutional entitlement that has been denied for over 50 years.*
Datuk Jerry Ambuting’s statement does not defend Sabah.
It defends delay.
It normalises inaction.
And worst of all—
It conditions Sabahans to accept less than what the Constitution guarantees.
BoPiMaFo rejects this narrative entirely.
The Constitution is not a suggestion.
The Court order is not a guideline.
And Sabah’s rights are not subject to comfort, convenience, or political patience.
