Latest news with #DatukRogerChin
Daily Express
4 days ago
- Business
- Daily Express
Use neighbours as tourism benchmark
Published on: Sunday, July 06, 2025 Published on: Sun, Jul 06, 2025 By: Datuk Roger Chin Text Size: Sabah's tourism figures are often paraded as a mark of success. Year after year, we hear about millions of tourist arrivals and billions in tourism receipts. But beneath this feel-good narrative is a far more uncomfortable reality - Sabah's tourism industry is propped up by domestic visitors, while international tourism — the true driver of foreign exchange and high-value growth — is stagnating. Advertisement Domestic Tourism Dominates the Headlines In 2023, Sabah recorded around 2.6 million tourist arrivals. But nearly 1.75 million of these were domestic travellers — Malaysians visiting from other parts of the country. That leaves just 858,000 international tourists, or about one-third of total visitors. This is not a new trend. Even before Covid-19, Sabah's international tourism numbers hovered around 1.5 to 1.6 million a year, showing no real growth. Meanwhile, the majority of the celebrated 'tourism boom' has always come from domestic visitors — travellers who spend less, stay for shorter periods, and contribute little in terms of foreign exchange. Compare Sabah's numbers to its regional competitors and the gap is stark. (see table) While Bali, Phuket, and Da Nang have surged back post-pandemic, Sabah's recovery has been modest at best. The international market that matters most is where Sabah lags the most. Air Connectivity - Sabah's Weak Link Part of the reason Sabah struggles to attract international tourists lies in its poor connectivity. Kota Kinabalu International Airport offers just 79 weekly international flights to 13 mostly short-haul destinations such as Singapore, Brunei, Taipei, Narita, and Incheon. Routes come and go, with airlines cancelling services when demand fails to materialise. In contrast, Bali and Phuket enjoy direct connections to Europe, the Middle East, Australia, and all major Asian hubs — making them far more accessible and attractive to international travellers. The Visitor Experience - Disappointing First Impressions Even when international tourists do arrive, what they find often leaves much to be desired. Roads to key attractions like Tanjung Aru Beach are potholed and poorly lit. Large sections of Kota Kinabalu city — including Sinsuran and Segama — are plagued by crumbling buildings, broken pavements, garbage, and general neglect. There is no vibrant city centre or waterfront district, no cohesive shopping or dining experience, and no signature cultural or entertainment attractions to extend stays. Unlike Bali's Seminyak, Phuket's Old Town, or Da Nang's riverfront promenade, Sabah offers little beyond its natural beauty — and nature alone is no longer enough. Economic Impact - Limited Gains from Tourism Sabah's tourism industry generated around RM 2.23 billion in receipts in the first quarter of 2024. This sounds impressive until we remember that the bulk of this comes from domestic visitors. By comparison, Bali's tourism sector accounts for about 70% of its regional GDP, driven by high-spending international tourists who stay longer and spend more. Sabah, by failing to grow its international market, misses out on this kind of economic uplift and job creation. Sabah's Challenge - Stop Believing Our Own Headlines Sabah's natural assets — its islands, mountains, and forests — are exceptional. But we are being outclassed because we have failed to match them with modern infrastructure, strong connectivity, vibrant cities, and compelling visitor experiences. If we want to change our trajectory, Sabah must: Expand international air links beyond short-haul regional cities. Invest in urban renewal, especially in Kota Kinabalu's decaying zones. Create signature festivals, shopping districts, and entertainment hubs that make tourists want to stay. Develop a clear, distinctive brand that tells the world what makes Sabah unique. The Time for Illusions Is Over Sabah has spent too long hiding behind impressive-sounding numbers that don't tell the full story. The data is clear: we are not competing where it matters most. Unless Sabah addresses its weaknesses head-on — with courage, investment, and vision — we will remain a secondary destination in a region that has left us behind. The views expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Express. If you have something to share, write to us at: [email protected]
Daily Express
29-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Express
How Emergency affected Sabah and Sarawak: Both states yet to see MA63 autonomy fully restored despite revocation of the Emergency Ordinance in 2011
Published on: Sunday, June 29, 2025 Published on: Sun, Jun 29, 2025 By: Datuk Roger Chin Text Size: Few moments in Malaysian history have reshaped the constitutional fabric of the Federation as profoundly as the 1969 Emergency. For Sabah and Sarawak, the Emergency did not just suspend civil liberties — it laid the groundwork for a slow dismantling of the autonomy promised under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). The Proclamation of Emergency in 1969, triggered by the 13 May riots in Peninsular Malaysia, profoundly reshaped Malaysia's constitutional framework. Beyond its immediate suspension of civil liberties, it initiated a centralisation of power that altered the federal structure originally negotiated in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). Relying on Article 150 of the Federal Constitution, the Federal Government enacted a series of Emergency Ordinances that bypassed both democratic oversight and state consent. Many of these emergency-era laws continue to shape governance in Sabah and Sarawak today, despite the revocation of the Emergency in 2011. Importantly, Article 150(6)–(8) of the Federal Constitution shielded Emergency Ordinances from constitutional challenge while the Proclamation was in force. However, with the revocation of the Emergency in 2011, that protection no longer applies. These laws must now comply with the Federal Constitution or risk being struck down. Laws such as the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA 1974) and the Territorial Sea Act 2012 (TSA 2012), which were derived from or rely on these Emergency ordinances, have outlived their legal justification. Emergency Ordinances - Federal Overreach Institutionalised Among the most impactful were six Emergency Ordinances that drastically reconfigured federal-state relations: Ordinance No. 1 (Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance 1969) gave sweeping powers to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, including suspending elections and overriding any law. Ordinance No. 2 created the National Operations Council (NOC), centralising executive authority across all states. Ordinance No. 5 introduced detention without trial, severely weakening state judicial safeguards. Ordinance No. 6 authorised unilateral amendment or suspension of any federal or state law. Ordinance No. 7 redefined Malaysia's territorial sea as 12 nautical miles but limited state jurisdiction to only 3 nautical miles. Ordinance No. 10 extended federal laws such as the Continental Shelf Act 1966 and Petroleum Mining Act 1966 to Sabah and Sarawak, sidestepping constitutional safeguards. These ordinances disrupted the federal balance and centralised control over petroleum, law enforcement, and legislative powers. Territorial Boundaries Undermined - From Continental Shelf to 3 Nautical Miles Ordinance No. 7 and subsequently the Territorial Sea Act 2012 (TSA 2012) codified the restriction of state jurisdiction to 3 nautical miles from the coast. This legal sleight of hand over maritime boundaries set the stage for the more consequential centralisation of Sabah and Sarawak's petroleum wealth. This contradicts the 1954 North Borneo and Sarawak Orders in Council, which defined their boundaries as extending to the edge of the continental shelf. The application of TSA 2012 to Sabah and Sarawak is constitutionally suspect, as Article 2(b) of the Federal Constitution requires the consent of both the state legislative assemblies and the Conference of Rulers for any alteration of state boundaries. No such consent was obtained. Beyond legal infringement, this restriction has real-world consequences for marine resource rights, indigenous fishing communities, and state planning authority over maritime development. These limitations impact the exercise of Native Customary Rights (NCR), particularly among coastal and island communities whose traditional fishing zones now fall under exclusive federal jurisdiction. Petroleum Development Act 1974 - A Centralised Grab Passed during Emergency rule, the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA 1974) vested ownership and regulatory control of petroleum in Petronas, under federal authority. Section 2(1) vests ownership in Petronas. Section 2(2) grants it exclusive regulatory powers. However, land and natural resources are matters under List II (State List) of the Ninth Schedule to the Constitution. The PDA was passed without the consent or adoption of the Sabah and Sarawak legislatures and without invoking Article 76(1)(c) or 76(2). With the revocation of the Emergency in 2011, the continued enforcement of the PDA in Sabah and Sarawak is open to constitutional challenge. Sarawak, for instance, has reasserted its rights under the Oil Mining Ordinance 1958 (OMO1958) and the imposition of State Sales Tax (SST) on petroleum products — a move upheld by the Court in Petronas v Comptroller of State Sales Tax, Sarawak [2020] 6 MLJ 1. The Frozen Special Grant Reviews - A Breach of Fiscal Federalism MA63 enshrined fiscal safeguards through Articles 112C(1) and 112D(4): Article 112C(1) entitles Sabah and Sarawak to a special grant. Article 112D(4) mandates that the grant be reviewed every five years. The first and only review occurred in 1969, but its recommendations were never implemented. For decades thereafter, no reviews took place. This dereliction, enabled by Emergency-era centralisation, amounts to a prolonged breach of constitutional duty. Even recent allocations were offered outside the constitutionally mandated framework. Emergency-Era Origins of the 1969 Grant Review The first and only formal review of the special grant due to Sabah under Article 112D of the Federal Constitution took place in 1969. However, it occurred during the nationwide Emergency, when Parliament had been suspended and federal authority was centralised under the National Operations Council (NOC). This context severely compromised the legitimacy and effectiveness of the review. Although the Federal Constitution envisages that such reviews must involve meaningful consultation and mutual agreement between the Federal and State Governments, the 1969 review was carried out in a top-down manner, without the participation or approval of the Sabah State Legislative Assembly. Moreover, while the review order was gazetted, its recommendations were never implemented. This amounted to a breach of Article 112D(4), which not only requires a review every five years but also assumes that each review is a substantive and binding constitutional process—not a discretionary or symbolic exercise. The Emergency framework at the time, reinforced by Article 150(6)–(8), insulated the federal executive from judicial scrutiny and eliminated ordinary mechanisms of accountability. As a result, Sabah was left with no constitutional remedy to enforce its entitlement. The absence of subsequent reviews—until recent efforts more than 50 years later—further entrenched a fiscal imbalance that denied Sabah the revenue it was due under the Malaysia Agreement 1963. In effect, Sabah's constitutional entitlement to special grants was frozen in both legal and fiscal terms. The Emergency enabled the Federal Government to bypass its duty under Article 112D, delaying not only a fair financial settlement but also the broader principle of equal partnership in the Federation. The legacy of this inaction persists to this day, and any new review must take into account the decades of underpayment and the urgent need for restitution. Federal Laws Imposed Without Consent During and after the Emergency, federal legislation was extended to Sabah and Sarawak without compliance with Article 76 of the Federal Constitution. Examples include: Education Act 1996 Local Government Act 1976 Under Article 76: Subsection (1)(b) requires a state request for Parliament to legislate on State List matters. Subsection (2) requires state consent to impose laws for uniformity. These constitutional safeguards were bypassed, eroding state autonomy and violating the spirit of MA63. Constitutional Supremacy and Post-Emergency Legality Article 4(1) of the Federal Constitution establishes that the Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation. Emergency Ordinances, while valid during the Emergency, lost immunity from judicial review once the Proclamation was revoked in 2011. Laws whose validity relied solely on Emergency powers must now comply with constitutional procedures or risk being ultra vires. The Constitution does not permit the permanent distortion of federal-state relations through temporary emergency measures. This includes the PDA 1974, TSA 2012, and all extended legislation not passed with Article 76 consent. Restoring Federal Balance - A Reform Agenda To undo the legacy of Emergency-era centralisation and revive true federalism, the following reforms are necessary: Restore Pre-1963 Maritime Boundaries Amend TSA 2012 or enact legislation reaffirming Sabah and Sarawak's continental shelf limits. Suspend or repeal its application to Sabah and Sarawak pending a new, equitable petroleum framework. Resume Article 112D Reviews Conduct overdue reviews, compensate for lost revenue, and institutionalise a permanent review mechanism. Identify, challenge, and repeal laws extended under Emergency powers that violate MA63 or lack state consent. Fulfilling the Promise of Malaysia Day A federation held together by historical agreements must not be allowed to drift apart through decades of constitutional erosion. The Emergency may be history, but its distortions are not. Sabah and Sarawak deserve not just rhetorical recognition, but a return to constitutional truth. The path to a stronger Malaysia begins with putting right what the Emergency put wrong. The views expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Express. If you have something to share, write to us at: [email protected]
Daily Express
22-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Express
Options on honouring 40pc entitlement
Published on: Sunday, June 22, 2025 Published on: Sun, Jun 22, 2025 By: Datuk Roger Chin Text Size: SABAH's 40% entitlement under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) has long been a point of contention, with the Federal Government often citing financial constraints as the reason for not fulfilling this obligation. However, the argument of 'inability to pay' is not an absolute financial limitation but rather a matter of budgetary prioritisation. The Federal Government has consistently funded large-scale infrastructure projects in Peninsular Malaysia—such as public transportation systems, skyscrapers, and highways—while similar investments in Sabah have been minimal. This demonstrates that fulfilling Sabah's 40% entitlement is more about political will and resource allocation than an actual lack of financial capacity. It is essential to emphasise that the 40% entitlement is distinct from the Federal Government's other obligations to Sabah under the Federal Constitution, such as development funds. These are separate commitments, and the entitlement under MA63 should not be mixed with broader Federal allocations. A range of innovative mechanisms can be employed to fulfil this legal obligation while ensuring equitable development across Malaysia. Advertisement 1. Phased Instalment Payments A structured instalment plan would allow the Federal Government to meet its obligation to Sabah while mitigating any immediate financial burden. This approach could mirror how large-scale infrastructure projects in Peninsular Malaysia are prioritised. Key features: Gradual Payment Structure - Payments could be spread over 10 to 20 years, starting with smaller instalments and gradually increasing over time, allowing the Federal Government to manage its fiscal obligations more effectively. Interest on Delays - Should payments be delayed, interest could accrue, ensuring Sabah is not unfairly penalised by any Federal fiscal management issues. 2. Interest-Free Development Loans or Grants In lieu of direct payments, the Federal Government could offer Sabah interest-free loans or grants earmarked for critical development projects, such as infrastructure, healthcare, and education. Considerations: Targeted Development Funding - These funds could be directed towards sectors where Sabah is underdeveloped, providing an immediate boost to the state's growth. Offset Against Entitlement - The value of these loans or grants could be deducted from the total entitlement, allowing for progress towards fulfilling the obligation while directly benefiting Sabah's development. 3. Transfer of Oil and Gas Fields Transferring ownership and control of oil and gas fields within Sabah's territorial waters would provide the state with a direct revenue stream from its natural resources, fostering long-term economic autonomy. Key aspects: Full Ownership - By gaining full control of its oil and gas fields, Sabah could generate significant revenue from resource extraction, with the profits offsetting the Federal Government's 40% obligation. New Resource Exploration - The right to explore and develop new fields could ensure sustainable future revenue for the state, reducing dependence on Federal transfers. 4. Transfer of Federal-Owned Land A feasible option to reduce the Federal Government's financial burden would be the transfer of Federal-owned land in Sabah, particularly those with high economic potential, to the state government. Advantages: Strategic Land Transfers - Economically valuable land could be surrendered to Sabah, enabling the state to generate revenue through development or other uses. Offsetting the Amount Owed - The value of the transferred land would be credited against the 40% entitlement, providing an immediate means of fulfilling part of the obligation without direct cash payments. 5. Revenue-Sharing from Federal Investments Revenue-sharing arrangements for Federal projects in Sabah would ensure that the state benefits from economic activities generated within its borders, particularly in key sectors such as tourism and agriculture. Key considerations: Profit-Sharing Models - Federal enterprises operating in Sabah, such as airports, and tourism developments, could share a portion of their profits with the state. Sector-Specific Revenue - Industries crucial to Sabah's economy could be prioritised for revenue-sharing, ensuring that local resources and projects directly benefit the state. 6. Enhanced Tax Autonomy Granting Sabah greater autonomy in tax collection, particularly in sectors such as tourism and natural resources, would reduce its dependence on Federal transfers and ensure that the state benefits more directly from its own economic activities. Considerations: Exclusive Taxing Authority - Sabah could be given exclusive rights to tax specific industries, ensuring that revenue generated within the state remains in the state. Increased Royalties - The Federal Government could increase Sabah's share of oil and gas royalties from the current 5% to a more equitable level, providing an additional revenue stream. 7. Issuance of Federal Bonds or Sukuk The Federal Government could issue bonds or sukuk (Islamic bonds) specifically designed to fulfil Sabah's entitlement. This would provide immediate funds for development while allowing the Federal Government to spread the repayment over time. Mechanics: Entitlement-Backed Bonds - Bonds linked to Sabah's 40% entitlement would provide upfront financing, allowing for immediate development projects, while the Federal Government repays bondholders over a set period. Sukuk Option - Bonds backed by Federal assets in Sabah could comply with Islamic finance principles, offering an ethical and sustainable method of financing the entitlement. 8. Equity Participation in Government-Linked Companies Sabah could be granted equity stakes in Federal Government-linked companies (GLCs) such as Petronas or Tenaga Nasional Berhad (TNB). These stakes would provide the state with a recurring revenue stream through dividends. Key features: Equity Stakes - Shares in key GLCs would enable Sabah to receive regular dividend payments, which could then be deducted from the overall entitlement. Dividend-Based Fulfilment - Regular dividend payments would serve as an alternative to direct cash transfers, offering a sustainable source of income. 9. Performance-Based Entitlement Adjustments A portion of the entitlement could be linked to Sabah's economic performance, incentivising both the Federal and Sabah state governments to focus on growth-oriented policies. Benefits: Development Incentives - Tying part of the entitlement to key performance indicators, such as GDP growth or infrastructure improvements, would promote long-term development in Sabah. Joint Investment Projects - Federal and State Governments could collaborate on large-scale projects, with profits reinvested into fulfilling Sabah's entitlement. 10. Dedicated Federal Development Funds A one-off, dedicated allocation of Federal development funds to Sabah would provide long-term stability for critical infrastructure projects, separate from the annual budget allocations, and ensure continuity in development initiatives. Key elements: Fully Allocated Funds - Unlike regular budgetary allocations, these development funds would be transferred entirely to Sabah, providing the state with full control over long-term infrastructure projects. Priority Sectors - The funds could be earmarked for essential sectors such as transport, rural electrification, and industrial growth, ensuring that Sabah's development progresses at a comparable rate to Peninsular Malaysia. Concluding Remarks The Federal Government's claim of financial incapacity to meet Sabah's 40% entitlement is more about prioritisation than genuine fiscal limitations. By adopting innovative mechanisms—such as phased instalments, land transfers, or equity stakes—the Government can fulfil its legal obligation while simultaneously supporting Sabah's development. Crucially, these solutions must remain distinct from the Federal Government's other obligations, ensuring that Sabah receives both its rightful entitlement under MA63 and its fair share of Federal development resources. This balanced approach would foster not only fairness for Sabah but also sustainable growth for Malaysia as a whole. The views expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Express. If you have something to share, write to us at: [email protected]
Daily Express
15-06-2025
- Business
- Daily Express
Sabah is at turning point in achieving good governance: Investors finally having confidence in Sabah
Published on: Sunday, June 15, 2025 Published on: Sun, Jun 15, 2025 By: Datuk Roger Chin Text Size: Sabah is beginning to show signs of a state turning a corner. Where past governments have often lacked follow-through or institutional clarity, the current Sabah State Government is quietly but steadily laying the foundations of a more self-reliant, results-driven administration. Across sectors — energy, education, investment, and institutional reform — a more confident Sabah is emerging. Advertisement Building Institutional Muscle - Power, Regulation, and Autonomy The establishment of the Energy Commission of Sabah (ECoS) is more than a bureaucratic development — it marks a turning point in how Sabah governs its most strategic resource. With Sabah Energy Corporation (SEC) now actively managing gas distribution, and with Petronas recognising Sabah's growing autonomy over its own energy landscape, the state is strengthening both regulatory and commercial control over its resources. The approval of 1,000 MW in new power generation capacity under ECoS — including 200 MW of solar and 100 MW of battery storage in Lahad Datu — nearly doubles Sabah's current installed capacity of 1,200 MW. This proactive approach to energy security demonstrates administrative focus in preparing for growing industrial and domestic demand. Taking back 50pc equity in the producing Semarang Oil Field under SMJ Energy was once unimaginable. Today, Sabah holds a historic 50pc stake in an operating oil asset, with further back-in rights on other fields — a significant marker of progress in asserting energy sovereignty. This shift aligns with the broader spirit of Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) implementation — returning rights and agency to Sabah without fanfare, but with focus. Institutional Reform That Inspires Investor Confidence Sabah is no longer just talking about attracting investment — it is doing the hard work of institutional preparedness. The creation of the Borneo International Centre for Arbitration and Mediation (BICAM) is a notable move, signalling that Sabah is serious about dispute resolution infrastructure and legal professionalism. These are the quiet building blocks of an investor-friendly ecosystem. The state's ability to secure long-term, high-impact investments — such as E-Steel's manufacturing facility and other FDI-led industrial projects — reflects this shift. These are not fly-by-night deals but strategic entries into Sabah's industrial and logistics backbone, particularly in energy-adjacent and halal sectors. The government's target of developing 400,000 hectares of industrial tree plantations is also notable, laying the groundwork for a sustainable, regulated timber industry that can support long-term economic and ecological objectives. Fiscal Responsibility and Strategic Spending Under current leadership, Sabah has also improved its fiscal standing. State revenue has seen stable growth, with increased allocations to development budgets. A record-setting education fund through Yayasan Sabah signals not just an investment in human capital, but a turnaround in financial governance. Where once Yayasan Sabah was associated with mismanagement, today it is stabilising its accounts and focusing on outcomes: scholarships, rural education access, and TVET capacity. State reserves have grown from RM2.93 billion in 2020 to RM8.6 billion today — a clear indicator of improved financial governance and expanding revenue streams. This reflects not just fiscal prudence, but also stronger performance from some state-linked companies. For instance, Innoprise Corporation declared RM500 million in dividends over the past four years (since 2021), after previously declaring none. This speaks to stronger GLC performance and improved governance. There's also a sharper focus on aligning spending with long-term returns — whether in roads, ports, industrial parks, or digital infrastructure. Lifting the Rural Heartland Beyond Kota Kinabalu, the state has expanded rural electrification, water access, and road upgrades — critical interventions for a state where over 40pc of the population lives outside urban centres. Programmes aimed at uplifting native and rural entrepreneurs — including agro-based industry support and SME grants — reflect a more inclusive vision of economic participation. The government is also gradually tackling longstanding issues in land recognition and native customary rights, though much remains to be done. A Grounded but Forward-Looking Approach There is no claim here of a perfect government. Bureaucratic delays, inequality, and capacity constraints persist. But the approach has shifted. Instead of headline-chasing, the Sabah State Government has chosen institutional depth and economic realism — a style of leadership that may not always grab national attention but is increasingly delivering results on the ground. From Capacity to Delivery Sabah's next challenge is ensuring delivery keeps pace with ambition. Institutions are being rebuilt, but administrative culture and political stability must continue evolving. The state must also take greater ownership of climate resilience, digital transformation, and youth employment — all of which will define its trajectory over the next decade. Still, for a state so long defined by unrealised potential, the signs today are encouraging. Sabah is not just asking for more from the Federation — it is preparing to do more for itself. The views expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Express. If you have something to share, write to us at: [email protected]
Daily Express
08-06-2025
- Politics
- Daily Express
There must be open dialogue, mutual respect
Published on: Sunday, June 08, 2025 Published on: Sun, Jun 08, 2025 By: Datuk Roger Chin Text Size: By working together, all stakeholders can build a brighter future for Malaysia, one that benefits all its citizens. A Legacy of Discontent - Resolving Sabah and Sarawak's Oil and Gas Impasse Sabah and Sarawak, the emerald jewels of Borneo, are the economic powerhouses of Malaysia. Their vast oil and gas reserves fuel the nation's growth, yet a deep sense of discontent threatens to shatter this prosperity. The root of this tension lies in the unresolved issue of oil and gas rights, a legacy of historical promises and contemporary disagreements. Advertisement This paper delves into the complexities surrounding Sabah and Sarawak's claims, arguing that a critical review of existing frameworks, coupled with open dialogue and a commitment to equitable resource sharing, is essential for achieving a lasting solution. Broken Promises - The Malaysia Agreement of 1963 (MA63) and the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) The Malaysia Agreement of 1963 (MA63) stands as a cornerstone document, promising significant autonomy for Sabah and Sarawak over their natural resources, including oil and gas. However, the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA) appears to contradict this very foundation. Advertisement Established under the cloak of a national emergency, the PDA vested sole authority over Malaysian oil and gas in Petronas, the national oil and gas company. This move by the federal government significantly altered the power dynamic, raising concerns about its adherence to the spirit and letter of MA63. Questioning Legitimacy and Transparency - Deeper Scrutiny Needed Legal scholars raise serious concerns about the PDA's legitimacy. Firstly, the absence of ratification by Sabah and Sarawak's state assemblies potentially violates Article VIII(2)(a) of MA63, which guarantees their control over their natural resources. This unilateral action by the federal government disregards democratic processes and undermines the autonomy promised to these resource-rich states. Secondly, the timing of the emergency coinciding with heightened racial tensions in 1974 necessitates a deeper examination of its true purpose. Was it a genuine crisis, or a convenient justification for a power grab over valuable resources? Scrutinizing historical records and emergency justifications becomes crucial in this context. Beyond legalities, the PDA's lack of transparency adds fuel to the fire. There's no record of citizen consent in these resource-rich states, and the current revenue-sharing formula within the PDA remains shrouded in secrecy. This lack of transparency fuels resentment, as vast wealth is extracted from Sabah and Sarawak with minimal reinvestment in these states. Statistics paint a stark picture - a 2022 World Bank report indicated that Sabah and Sarawak have a GDP per capita significantly lower than the national average. Additionally, these states consistently rank lower in metrics like road quality and access to healthcare compared to the developed peninsular states. The Human Cost of Inaction - Festering Wound and National Unity The extended state of emergency, lifted only in 2011, further stifled legal challenges to the PDA. Decades of simmering discontent have become a festering wound, threatening national unity. Ignoring these grievances has significant economic and social consequences. The oil and gas dispute stands as a major obstacle to national security, prosperity, and cohesion. A fractured Malaysia with a discontented Sabah and Sarawak is unlikely to achieve its full economic potential on the global stage. Beyond Money - A Fight for Self-Determination and Shared Prosperity Sabah and Sarawak's claims extend beyond mere monetary gain. They yearn for a fair deal, a chance to shape their own economic destinies. While increased oil royalty payouts are a necessity, the current model extracts vast wealth, leaving these states lagging behind. They deserve greater control over their resources, the power to decide how their wealth uplifts their people and fuels development. This is not a fight for greed; it's a fight for self-determination. They envision a future where they are active participants in shaping the national economic landscape, not just resource providers. Successful resource-sharing models exist in other federations. Canada's model grants significant autonomy to resource-rich provinces like Alberta over their oil and gas reserves, while ensuring a fair contribution to the national coffers. Similarly, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) employs a successful model where emirates rich in oil and gas contribute to a federal development fund. This fund is then used to support the development of less resource-rich emirates, fostering national unity and shared prosperity. These examples demonstrate that a balance can be achieved, allowing resource-rich regions to contribute to the national good while retaining a significant degree of control over their own resources. Implementing a similar framework in Malaysia, with revenue-sharing based on a transparent formula and provisions for regional development, could pave the way for a more equitable and sustainable future for all Malaysians. The Road to Reconciliation - A Call for Open Dialogue and Mutual Respect Open and honest dialogue involving all stakeholders is essential for forging a path towards reconciliation. This dialogue must extend beyond politicians to include economists, legal experts, and civil society representatives from Sabah and Sarawak. It must be a genuine attempt to understand the depth of discontent and explore solutions that address the root causes. Ignoring these grievances is a recipe for national fracture. A Sustainable Solution - Benefits for All Malaysians A sustainable solution requires a commitment from all parties involved. The federal government must acknowledge the legitimacy of Sabah and Sarawak's claims and demonstrate a willingness to revisit the existing agreements. This could involve: Establishing a revenue-sharing model that reflects a fairer distribution of oil and gas wealth, with a transparent formula that takes into account factors like production costs and depletion rates. Granting Sabah and Sarawak greater autonomy in managing their own oil and gas reserves, allowing them to decide on exploration, development, and production strategies. Investing in infrastructure development and social programs in Sabah and Sarawak to address historical neglect. This could include projects in transportation, education, healthcare, and rural development. Amending MA63 and related agreements to explicitly recognize Sabah and Sarawak's rights over their natural resources. By embracing a more equitable approach, Malaysia can unlock the full potential of Sabah and Sarawak. These resource-rich states can become not just contributors of wealth but active participants in shaping the national economic landscape. This will lead to a more prosperous and cohesive Malaysia, where all states feel they have a stake in the nation's success. Unity or Dissolution - The Choice Before Malaysia The fate of Sabah and Sarawak's oil and gas rights is a crossroads for Malaysia. The nation can choose the path of reconciliation and shared prosperity, or it can continue down the road of disenfranchisement and risk national dissolution. The time for empty promises and half-measures is over. Sabah and Sarawak deserve nothing less than genuine partnership, one that recognizes their rights and unlocks their full potential. Only then can Malaysia truly thrive as a united and prosperous nation. Call to Action The Malaysian government must take decisive steps to address the grievances of Sabah and Sarawak. A comprehensive review of existing agreements, coupled with open dialogue and a commitment to equitable resource sharing, is essential for achieving a lasting solution. By working together, all stakeholders can build a brighter future for Malaysia, one that benefits all its citizens. The views expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Express. If you have something to share, write to us at: [email protected]
