Sarawak's right to regulate gas fully backed by MA63, Federal Constitution, says Kota Sentosa rep
KUCHING (May 2): Sarawak's regulatory authority over its gas resources is legally sound and compliant with the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), said Kota Sentosa assemblyman Wilfred Yap.
His remark came in response to former Malaysia Petroleum Resources Corporation official Jamil Ghani, who warned that Sarawak's move could trigger 'an unmanageable federal-state regulatory overlap', potentially encouraging other states to follow suit and creating a 'regulatory nightmare'.
Yap, who is a lawyer, dismissed the comparison as flawed, saying Sarawak's constitutional status is unlike that of the peninsula states.
'Unlike other states, Sarawak's autonomy over its resources is enshrined in MA63.
'Jamil's hypothetical scenario of other states imposing similar requirements does not apply, as they do not possess the same legal and historical safeguards,' he said in a statement.
Yap emphasised that Sarawak is not merely one of the states in Malaysia but an equal partner in the federation under MA63, adding that the Federal Constitution and MA63 provide Sarawak with legislative and executive authority over its natural resources including gas.
'The Distribution of Gas Ordinance 2016 is a lawful exercise of this authority, and Petronas, like any other entity operating in Sarawak, must comply with Sarawak laws.'
He added that the Sarawak Utility and Telecommunication Ministry had recently issued a notice to Petronas Carigali for operating the Miri Crude Oil Terminal (MCOT) without a license, in violation of Section 7(e) of the DGO.
'The company was given 21 days to comply or face penalties under Section 21A.
'The MCOT may have operated under federal mandate for decades, but that does not exempt it from complying with Sarawak's laws.
'Sarawak has every right to regulate its gas distribution to ensure orderly and lawful operations within its territory,' he said.
In view of this, Yap also urged public figures to be better informed about Sarawak's legal rights before making sweeping remarks.
'It would be proper for individuals like Jamil to first understand the legal and constitutional framework governing Sarawak's rights before making sweeping remarks.
'MA63 is not a trivial matter; it is the foundation of Sarawak's partnership in Malaysia.
'This is not about confrontation but about ensuring compliance with the law. Sarawak will continue to assert its rights in a manner consistent with the Federal Constitution and MA63,' he said. MA63 Malaysia Petroleum Resources Corporation oil and gas Wilfred Yap
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Barnama
27 minutes ago
- Barnama
Understanding The Constitutional Effect Of A Royal Pardon - Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi
KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 16 (Bernama) -- Following is an op-ed by Emeritus Prof Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi of Universiti Malaya regarding the Royal Pardon granted to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim: Now and then, the placid surface of the constitutional lake is buffeted by legal storms. This is the situation now. A few prominent opposition leaders have questioned the constitutional right of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim (PMX) to hold the office of the Prime Minister because of Articles 48(1)(e) and 48(3) of the Federal Constitution. Article 48(1): Article 48(1)(e) of the Federal Constitution provides that a person is disqualified for being a member of Parliament if he has been convicted of an offence and sentenced to imprisonment for a term of not less than one year or to a fine of not less than RM 2,000 and has not received a free pardon. The key words are 'and has not received a free pardon'. The opposition leaders concede that PMX had indeed received a royal pardon from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (YDPA) under Article 42 in May 2018. However, their argument is that a royal pardon is not enough due to Article 48(3). Article 48(3): Article 48(3) disqualifies a person for being an MP for five years unless the YDPA removes the disqualification. The opposition submission is that in 2018, the YDPA only pardoned PMX and did not remove the disqualification under Article 48(3). They therefore submit that PMX's appointment as PM in November 2022 is still during his 5-year disqualification period. The indirect implication of this allegation is that PMX's by election was a violation of Article 48(1)(e). These are important constitutional issues that require clarification to prevent confusion to the public. First, a royal pardon under Article 42, if free or full, removes all adverse legal consequences of a criminal conviction. As was laid down in the British case of Regina v Foster (1985), the subject of the pardon is freed of all pains, penalties, and punishments that ensued from the conviction. On this view, there was no further need for the YDPA to issue another order for the removal of the Article 48(1)(e) disqualification. Second, it would be different if, instead of a pardon, what was granted was something lesser - a conditional pardon by way of reprieve, respite, suspension, remission or a commutation. A case in point is Dato' Mokhtar Hashim who was sentenced to death for the 1982 murder of fellow politician, Dato' Mohamad Taha Talib, but the death sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment. The commutation did not obliterate the conviction for murder but only reduced the penalty.
.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
Daily Express
5 hours ago
- Daily Express
GRS achieved MA63 gains, not Warisan
Published on: Saturday, August 16, 2025 Published on: Sat, Aug 16, 2025 Text Size: Norazlinah and Mohammad Mohamarin. Kota Kinabalu: Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) has made great strides in securing the rights of Sabahans under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), a state lawmaker said, adding that Warisan's efforts pale in comparison. Kunak Assemblywoman Datuk Norazlinah Arif said the ruling coalition carried out its task quietly and without resorting to political grandstanding. The Kunak Assemblywoman said although Warisan leveraged MA63 to consolidate public support during its time in office between 2018 and 2020, very little progress was achieved. 'At the time they claimed to have resolved 17 of the 21 MA63 demands,' she said. 'However, in 2023, then Sabah and Sarawak Affairs Minister Datuk Armizan Mohd Ali clarified that those points had already been agreed upon previously at the policy level but were not implemented.' At that time, Armizan rejected Warisan's claim, asserting that no right could be deemed secured unless it had been fully implemented for the public's benefit. 'GRS very rarely uses MA63 to score political points, but it has overseen encouraging results, such as the increase in the interim payments (by Putrajaya to the state) to RM600 million,' the former Wanita Warisan chief said. In 2022, Putrajaya agreed to pay Sabah RM125.6 million by way of a special grant, up from an annual allocation of RM26.7 million previously. The following year, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim authorised an interim payment to the state of RM300 million, before doubling the amount this year. 'I am confident that if GRS remains in government, many of our rights will be restored — just as regulatory control over Sabah's power supply was successfully returned to the State Government,' said Norazlinah. In March, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Fadillah Yusof said apart from these two issues, the Unity and State governments had resolved an additional nine key MA63-related claims. These include the recognition of the state's public works and irrigation and drainage departments as technical departments for the purposes of Treasury Instruction 182 (AP182). Also, the Inland Revenue Board Act 1995 has been amended to allow a Sabah representative to sit as a permanent board member. Special guidelines are also being drawn up to govern the resumption of land reserved for federal purposes in the state. On Sept 12, the Federal Government is scheduled to deliberate on Sabah's proposal to reclaim its 40 per cent net revenue entitlement. Meanwhile, Banggi Assemblyman Mohammad Mohamarin raised doubts about his former party Warisan's commitment to the resolution of MA63 issues. He recalled that there was very little meaningful discussion on the subject during his time in the party. 'Under GRS, the matter would be raised (at the coalition's pre-council meeting) every time a state assembly sitting approaches,' he said. Mohammad said Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor would touch on efforts made to introduce or amend enactments linked to MA63 and how his government intended to go about securing these rights. * Follow us on our official WhatsApp channel and Telegram for breaking news alerts and key updates! * Do you have access to the Daily Express e-paper and online exclusive news? Check out subscription plans available. Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express's Telegram channel. Daily Express Malaysia
Focus Malaysia
a day ago
- Focus Malaysia
Is Waytha Moorthy's civil suit to disqualify PMX's premiership a sheer publicity stunt?
WHEN starved of the oxygen of publicity, one tactic is to create some legal drama to capture the public's attention. The higher the defendant's profile, the better. Could this be the thinking behind the Hindu Rights Action Force (HINDRAF)/Malaysian Advancement Party founder P. Waytha Moorthy's civil suit that seeks to disqualify the premiership of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim? This is on grounds that the royal pardon granted to the PKR president in 2018 did not state that he was exempt from the five-year disqualification period for contesting an election after being released from prison. For context, the former minister in Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad's cabinet from 2018 to 2020 has wanted the High Court to declare PMX's election as Tambun MP on Nov 19, 2022 and his appointment as Prime Minister five days later null and void. On X, governance advocate ksampoh@MyOwn Inc (@Ksampoh) gave a detailed explanation as to why Waytha's suit was doomed to fail, citing similar suits against disgraced former premiers Datuk Seri Najib Razak and Tun Dr Mahathir which were previously thrown out by the court. Claiming that it was all just 'political theatre', the self-described true patriot confidently predicts that the suit will not succeed as 'the Federal Constitution, statutory time limits and past court decisions all make it clear that your case won't survive the first procedural hurdle'. Dear Waytha Moorthy, This lawsuit to 'disqualify' Anwar as Tambun Wakil Rakyat & Prime Minister is legally dead on arrival -& I say that based on the Constitution, the law, & precedent, not politics. 1- The Constitution doesn't back it Articles 48 & 50 of the Federal… — ksampoh@MyOwn Inc (@ksampoh) August 12, 2025 Commenters on the post were no less scathing with a few seeing right though the charade. One contended that the rakyat are tired of all the smokescreen acts 'by the same line-up of lawyers' that are mere diversionary tactics. It was a calculated move to ride on the momentum of the Turun Anwar rally, claimed one commenter. Knowing full well that the suit is not valid, it was argued that the former unity minister during Dr Mahathir's second premiership stint was merely trying 'to score some points in the court of public opinion'. As a person with a legal background, one commentator accused Waytha of manipulating the judicial system to spin conspiracy theories by claiming that the 'Madani (administration) controls the judiciary'. He would not be surprised if many citizens would believe Waytha. A few condemned this being a waste of court time and resources. One commenter suggested that the suit be dismissed and the 59-year-old politician be left to shoulder all the cost of this frivolous action. It was also claimed this was a part of a concerted attack on PMX by opposition groups to weaken his grip on power. One commenter highlighted that this suit was only filed AFTER the lawyer had met with Bersatu representatives, an insinuation that this was calculated political manoeuvring. More pertinently, the timing of the suit was questioned. Why not when PMX won in the Port Dickson by-election in 2018? Such gaps in reasoning caused one commenter to denounce 'this HINDRAF man is just good for nothing'. Such spurious and superfluous suits to create mere political theatre are an abuse of the legal process. As pointed out by one commenter, Malaysians are 'tired' of the constant wayang kulit (theatrics) in the jostle for power and influence. One commenter simply urged such individuals to stop wasting the rakyat's time. – Aug 15, 2025
