Remy Majangkim (Majangkim Office)
KOTA KINABALU: “You cannot ‘gift’ someone their own property that you have been using for the past four decades.”
The political narrative put forward by federal ministers frames the transfer of Bintulu Port’s regulatory authority to Sarawak as a “win-win negotiation” and a monumental “milestone” granted by the federal administration.
This is pure lip service designed to disguise a long-overdue legal correction as a political favor.
When you return property that you have occupied and profited from for over 40 years, you are not giving a gift. You are merely halting an ongoing encroachment.
I. The Territorial Reality: Land Law Trumps Federal Port Classification
The federal government’s historical claim over the port relies heavily on Item 9(b) of the Federal List (List I, Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution), which covers “Ports and harbours.” However, using this to claim absolute ownership is a deliberate misreading of the supreme law of the land:
The Supremacy of State Land Law: Under Item 2 of the State List (List II), “Land” is an absolute, non-negotiable State matter. This explicitly includes the physical foreshores, seabed, and subsoil.
The Constitutional Shield (Article 95D) & The IGC Report: The Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) Report (Paragraph 18) and the Federal Constitution explicitly protect the territorial sovereignty of the Borneo States.
The Reality: Bintulu Port sits entirely on Sarawak land and operates within Sarawak waters. The Federal Government could never legally expand, alter, or structurally administer the port without Sarawak’s explicit consent.
By vacating its regulatory control, the Federal Government is not “granting” Sarawak power; it is finally acknowledging the limits of its own constitutional boundaries.
II. Correcting the 1981 Legislative Overreach
The federalization of Bintulu Port in 1981 via an Act of Parliament was an anomaly that bypassed the foundational spirit of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).
MA63 Article III: Vested all former Crown lands, continental shelves, and territorial waters (as defined by the Sarawak (Alteration of Boundaries) Order in Council 1954) squarely within the State of Sarawak upon the formation of Malaysia.
The Bare Minimum: Passing the Bintulu Port Authority (Amendment) Bill does not create a new right for Sarawak.
It simply repeals a piece of federal overreach that ran counter to MA63 for 43 years. The federal government enjoyed the maritime revenues and strategic leverage of an asset built on Sarawak’s soil—returning it is an act of mandatory legal compliance, not MADANI benevolence.
III. The Fallacy of the “MADANI Gift”
Federal ministers are using the phrase “concrete legal action” to take credit for Sarawak’s economic evolution, highlighting Bintulu’s future as a global green energy and LNG hub.
The Economic Illusion: The federal administration did not build a world-class hub out of nothing. Bintulu Port’s global prominence is entirely derived from Sarawak’s natural wealth (LNG) and its state-funded infrastructure (such as large-scale hydropower giving it a green energy advantage).
Constitutional Safeguards Are Not Bargaining Chips: Under Article 161E of the Federal Constitution, safeguards for the constitutional position of the Borneo States cannot be treated as political commodities or traded for national political stability.
The Verdict: True partnership under MA63 means respecting state autonomy implicitly, not using the piecemeal return of hijacked constitutional rights as a PR milestone.
You cannot “gift” a homeowner their own front yard just because you parked your car in it for 40 years. Bintulu Port belongs to the territory of Sarawak.
