IN July 1976, Parliament voted to relegate the status of Sabah and Sarawak from equal partner to one of the 13 states in Malaysia. 

Forty-three years later, a Bill will be tabled in Parliament to restore the Bornean states’ equal partner status.  It will need two-thirds majority support to be passed. 

On March 8, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Liew Vui Keong announced that the Cabinet had agreed to amend Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution to restore the status of Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners with Peninsular Malaysia.  Liew said it was a major step towards the implementation of and compliance with the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). 

(MA63 set out the terms and conditions in which Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore agreed to merge with the Federation of Malaya to form Malaysia.) 

If the Bill is passed, it will be a recognition of what Sabahans and Sarawakians have been clamouring for – that we are equal partners to Peninsular Malaysia.  It will also drive a historical point that many in the peninsula are clueless about.  Sabah and Sarawak did not JOIN Malaysia.  But, they together with Singapore and Malaya, FORMED Malaysia in 1963. 

I WhatsApp-ed my fellow Sabahan, Liew, to ask what it meant if the Bill was passed. 

For a start, he said it would “bring us back to being of equal status with our counterparts where previously we were downgraded to mere states as the other 11 when the then Parliament amended the constitution in 1976”. 

The de facto Law Minister gave a brief history lesson: Prior to the amendment of the Federal Constitution, it was stated in the Federal Constitution that the States of the Federation should be; (a) the States of Malaya, namely, Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor and Terengganu; and (b) the Borneo States, namely, Sabah and Sarawak and (c) the State of Singapore. 

After the amendment in 1976, it was stated in the Federal Constitution that the states of the Federation shall be Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Sabah, Sarawak, Selangor and Terengganu. 

The proposed amendment, said Bandar Kuching MP Dr Kelvin Yii, was the first step of many things that had to be done to restore and balance the injustice done to the two territories over the years. 

“It sets a good stepping stone and a good tone for further negotiations under the Special Cabinet Committee for MA63 as we are not on the discussion table as recognised equal partners, but as just one of the 13 states,” said Yii of DAP. 

On the lost rights that Sabah and Sarawak should fight for, Yii pointed out their legal rights to natural resources and equitable development in the region. 

The big questions asked on WhatsApp and in coffee shops were: “Other than getting their equal partner status restored, what else will Sabah and Sarawak get?  How different will Sabah be to, just say, Selangor?” 

I posed these questions to Liew. 

“We’ll cross the river first before we get to the bridge.  We’ll answer that when the Bill has been tabled and approved by the august House,” said the Batu Sapi MP of Parti Warisan Sabah. 

Sarawak deputy Chief Minister Tan Sri James Masing was unequivocal in stating what he expected. 

“Once equal partner status is restored, all Sarawakians want is the full implementation of MA63.  Nothing less, nothing more.” 

With the full implementation of MA63, the Parti Rakyat Sarawak president contended that Sarawak and Sabah would gain what they have lost. 

“Oil and gas revenue which is worth in billions and our pride as equal partners to the formation of Malaysia.  Pride is important in nation building.  We will no longer be treated as one of the 13 states in Malaysia,” said Masing. 

MA63, according to former Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Yong Teck Lee, had much more substance than merely equal partner status. “ Equal status, as the name implies, is only about status.  MA63 contains other rights,” said the Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) president. 

The idea that equal partner status – as some argued – to mean that Sabah gets 1/3 of the Federal budget did not hold water, said Yong.  Equal partner status was not directly linked to financial allocations and control of resources, he said. 

“The 40% Net Revenue provision is in the Federal Constitution pursuant to MA63,” he said. “ As for oil and gas, the entire PDA (Petroleum Development Act) should be abolished so that mineral resources go back to the states.” 

Yong noted that the four corners of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 stipulated financial rights and resources, Borneonisation of the public service and the judicial service. 

“Beyond the four corners of the agreement, as stated in many public pronouncements and statements by Malaya, the British and other leaders, are the spirit and intent of the formation of Malaysia.  That is, include autonomy, native rights, shared prosperity and security,” he said. 

There was also discussion among Sabahans and Sarawakians about the two states getting “equal” MP seats to Peninsular Malaysia.  In 1963, Sarawak was allocated 23% of the total MP seats.  With the secession of Singapore in 1965, the creation of Federal Territories and the increase of MP seats over the years, Sarawak only has 18% of MP seats (31 MPs). 

“We should have 38 instead of 31 MP seats now.  Therefore, the amendment of the Federal Constitution to recognise Sarawak as a region must include this amendment which would increase MP seats from 31 to 38!”  said Masing. 

“Putrajaya must take this increase of MP seats for Sarawak and Sabah.  The number of MP seats is crucial in determining who is in control of the political administration in Malaysia!” 

Yong noted that Malaya grabbed the quota for Singapore MPs and added to Malaya after the island state left the Federation. 

“Those MP seats should have been rightfully allocated to Sabah and Sarawak in order to preserve the balance between Malaya and Borneo in the federation,” he said. 

Yii said he was a believer of moving away from MA63 as a new structure for Sabah and Sarawak including more autonomous powers were not mentioned in the agreement. 

“In general, I believe in the decentralisation of the federal government, where certain bureaucratic or even administrative decisions can be made on the local or state level without relying on a central government decision that may not fully understand the conditions or needs on the ground.  This will include certain responsibilities over important ministries such as healthcare or education.  All these are not in MA63,” he said.  Yii qualified his comment by saying that he was not asking for a totally different educational or healthcare system from Peninsular Malaysia. 

Certain decisions which were demographic or locally-sensitive could be made by the state, for example, hiring or even allocation needs and destination, he said: “So, there is a different model of administration, where there is more autonomy in governance, but that will also come with fiscal autonomy where we need to take fiscal responsibility for the extra responsibilities. 

“There can be a better arrangement in terms of concurrent obligations of federal-state, but in a nutshell, more deciding power on a state-level in both Sabah and Sarawak.” 

Going back to the amendment, I asked the de facto Law Minister whether the life of Sabahans and Sarawakians will change once the equal partner status was restored. 

“We’ve to be realistic in that our life will not change overnight with the proposed amendment.  There is still a lot of work to be done and efforts to be made,” he said. 

“It will not magically make our life better overnight.  But it’ll be a good start as we’ll have a basis and a platform to proceed further in our quest.” 

For Masing, he is looking beyond the restoration of the equal partner status.  He wants more funds from his state’s natural

resources like oil and gas. 

“Before these funds were mostly taken to Malaya for their uses!  KLCC and other infrastructure in Malaya are built on our oil and gas money!”  he said, referring to the Twin Towers in Kuala Lumpur. 

Many times, my fellow Malaysians from the Bornean states feel that Putrajaya treats them as the stepchild of Malaysia.  Now, the Pakatan Harapan/Warisan federal government is tabling a Bill to recognise us as “bro” to Peninsular Malaysia.  Terbaik! (“ The best”).