By Darell Leiking, Deputy President, Parti Warisan Sabah
KOTA KINABALU: I refer to the Prime Minister and Minister of Finance’s oral reply in Parliament on 30 June 2026 regarding the Review of Sabah’s Special Grant under Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution.
While I welcome the Prime Minister’s willingness to address this long-standing constitutional issue, his reply has unfortunately created the impression that the Warisan administration in 2019 agreed to accept a lower Special Grant as a final settlement of Sabah’s constitutional entitlement.
That impression is incorrect.
Warisan never surrendered, compromised or negotiated away Sabah’s constitutional rights.
The proposal to increase the Special Grant from RM26.7 million to RM53.4 million in October 2019 was never intended to be a final settlement. It was agreed strictly as an interim payment, accepted without prejudice to Sabah’s constitutional rights while negotiations continued on the proper constitutional formula provided under Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution.
The objective was straightforward.
For more than four decades, Sabah’s Special Grant had remained virtually unchanged despite the constitutional requirement for periodic review. The interim arrangement enabled Sabah to receive additional financial assistance immediately while negotiations under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) Special Cabinet Committee continued towards a comprehensive constitutional settlement.
Accepting an interim payment can never be interpreted as surrendering Sabah’s constitutional entitlement.
Importantly, the negotiations in 2019 took place with the full knowledge and participation of the Federal Government led by Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, together with Datuk Seri Dr. Wan Azizah Wan Ismail as Deputy Prime Minister and Lim Guan Eng as Minister of Finance.
The understanding throughout those negotiations was clear.
The RM53.4 million proposal was an interim arrangement, accepted without prejudice, pending agreement on the proper constitutional formula.
That is precisely why no Constitutional Order or Federal Gazette was issued in 2019. The negotiations were still ongoing and had not been concluded.
If there remains any doubt regarding the true nature of those negotiations, I respectfully invite the Prime Minister to seek clarification from those who served in the Federal Cabinet at the time. They were directly involved in the discussions and are well placed to confirm that the 2019 arrangement was never intended to constitute a final settlement of Sabah’s constitutional entitlement.
The situation changed fundamentally in 2022.
Warisan objected to the Federal Constitution (Review of Special Grant under Article 112D) (State of Sabah) Order 2022 [P.U. (A) 119] because it departed from the 2019 interim understanding.
First, the Federal Government publicly stated that the original constitutional formula was no longer applicable.
Second, unlike the 2019 arrangement, the 2022 Constitutional Order omitted any reference to the payment being interim or without prejudice.
This created legitimate legal concerns that Sabah’s constitutional entitlement was being replaced with a fixed lump sum rather than being determined according to the constitutional framework.
The issue before us should never be reduced to political rhetoric.
It concerns the constitutional rights of Sabah and the integrity of the Federal Constitution.
Accordingly, I call upon the Federal Government to immediately declassify the MA63 Special Cabinet Committee Report, the relevant Cabinet Committee minutes, Cabinet papers and technical negotiation documents covering the period from 2018 to 2020.
Those official records will objectively demonstrate that:
* the RM53.4 million proposal was always intended as an interim payment;
* negotiations on the constitutional formula were still ongoing;
* Warisan consistently maintained Sabah’s constitutional claim; and
* there was never any agreement to treat RM53.4 million as the final settlement of Sabah’s constitutional entitlement.
Transparency serves the interests of both the Federal Government and the people of Sabah.
Ultimately, this debate is not about RM26.7 million or RM53.4 million.
It is about whether the Federal Constitution will be faithfully implemented.
Sabah’s constitutional rights are neither discretionary nor matters of political generosity.
They are constitutional obligations that must be honoured.
The people of Sabah deserve nothing less.
