By Remy Majangkim (Majangkim Office)
KOTA KINABALU: The historical and legal architecture that birthed this nation proves that the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) is an unalterable international contract.
This reality makes Putrajaya’s recent decision to shield its implementation report behind the Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972 look less like a routine bureaucratic move, and more like a profound historical and legal betrayal.
Before a single federal responsibility could be accepted in 1963, strict legislative prerequisites had to be met.
The Federation of Malaya passed the Malaysia Act 1963 (Act 26), which was immediately mirrored by the British Parliament enacting the Malaysia Act 1963 (Chapter 35). These parallel statutes gave municipal legal effect to an international treaty registered with the United Nations.
By stamping the current evaluation of these statutory obligations as “secret,” the Federal Government signals a severe lack of sincerity in fulfilling the binding terms that Malaya legally committed to over six decades ago.
The Continental Shelf: Who Holds the Title Deed?
At the absolute core of the MA63 impasse is a question that Putrajaya desperately tries to avoid answering in the open: Who owns the continental shelf, and who holds the true title deed to Borneo’s oil and gas?
Long before the concept of Malaysia was even conceived, the boundaries of the Borneo States were legally defined and extended. In 1954, the British Crown issued the North Borneo (Alteration of Boundaries) Order in Council and the Sarawak (Alteration of Boundaries) Order in Council.
These imperial decrees explicitly extended the sovereign boundaries of Sabah and Sarawak to encompass the continental shelf—the seabed and its subsoil lying beneath the high seas contiguous to our territorial waters.
When the nation was formed on September 16, 1963, Sabah and Sarawak entered the Federation with these exact, pre-existing boundaries intact, protected by Article 1(3) of the Federal Constitution.
There was never a single clause in MA63, nor the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) Report, requiring the Borneo States to surrender their underwater territories or resource sovereignty to the new federal entity.
Furthermore, statutes like the Oil Mining Ordinance (OMO) 1958 already vested the exclusive rights to control, manage, and license petroleum exploration firmly within state jurisdiction. Borneo holds the original “title deed” to its seas.
The Iron-Clad Deal of the IGC Report
The Federal Government’s current narrative—which frames MA63 as an ongoing, open-ended series of “negotiations” and “discussions”—is a complete historical fiction. All negotiations were completely finalized, signed, and sealed during the IGC Report of 1962.
Representatives from Great Britain, Malaya, North Borneo, and Sarawak debated, structured, and mutually signed off on every single constitutional safeguard.
This was an iron-clad deal meant to protect the Borneo States for generations. There are no new terms to negotiate, no formulas to invent, and no room for bureaucratic compromise.
The blueprint was completed before the nation was even born; the only task left today is absolute, unfiltered enforcement.
Equal Partners, Protected by Article 161E
To treat Sabah and Sarawak like Malacca, Penang, or any ordinary state in Malaya is a severe violation of the Federal Constitution.
Sabah and Sarawak are not mere components; they are founding partners, uniquely protected under Article 161E of the Federal Constitution.
Article 161E serves as an explicit, constitutional lockbox. It dictates that no amendment can be made to the constitutional safeguards of Sabah and Sarawak—including their judicial autonomy, legislative powers, and financial rights—without the express concurrence of the Governors of the Borneo States.
By locking the evaluation of these distinct constitutional rights behind the OSA, the Federal Government is treating a sovereign, international pact as if it were a routine, localized ministry budget.
Weaponizing Secrecy to Create Deadlocks
Putrajaya frequently uses the lack of operational readiness or the need for legislative consensus as excuses for delay.
A prime example is the long-overdue reallocation of 35% of Parliamentary seats to Sabah and Sarawak under Article 46. The federal narrative claims this requires a two-thirds majority and immense bi-partisan cooperation.
Yet, by hiding the implementation data under the OSA, the Federal Government actively denies lawmakers the very data required to build that consensus.
Secrecy creates the deadlock, and Putrajaya then uses that very deadlock as an excuse for further postponement.
Furthermore, the defense that oil royalties and financial compliance are “too sensitive or technical” to be public must be rejected.
The federal government’s reliance on the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) 1974 to override state rights ignores a glaring historical fact: those powers were asserted during a state of emergency.
Now that the emergency rule has ended, the unilateral extension of federal control over our continental shelf has lost its legal crutch.
Technical compliance regarding revenues and resource rights is not a matter of military intelligence or national security—it is a matter of a public ledger. You cannot categorize the financial dues of a founding partner as a state secret simply to avoid an open public audit.
Shrouding an International Obligation
A country’s constitutional foundation cannot be classified as a state secret. When Members of Parliament take their oath, they swear to uphold the Constitution—which includes the laws enacted by Act 26, Chapter 35, and the safeguards protected by Article 161E.
By burying the implementation data in the dark, the Federal Government creates a dangerous precedent:
Evading International Law: It treats an international treaty ratified by multiple sovereign parliaments as if it were a minor, internal ministry memo.
Demonstrating Insincerity: It signals to the people of Sabah and Sarawak that the Federal Government is either incapable of fulfilling its original statutory promises or is actively trying to bypass them.
Breach of Trust: It confirms the long-held suspicion in Borneo that the wealth generated from its soil and seas is being managed through an opaque ledger, deliberately hidden from the people who rightfully own it.
The Debt Must Be Settled Openly
The enactment of the Malaysia Acts in 1963 proved that Malaya accepted these obligations openly before the eyes of the world. There is no legal ground for the current administration to audit its compliance in the shadows.
The execution of the terms signed in the IGC report is an absolute, outstanding legal debt.
A sincere government does not hide the receipt of its debts from its creditors. For true partnership to exist, the veil of secrecy must be lifted, and the implementation of MA63 must be laid bare for every citizen of Sabah and Sarawak to see.
