Follow and subscribe to DayakDaily on Telegram for faster news updates.
KUCHING, Jan 31: Sabah activist Zainnal Ajamain took a swipe at Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) leaders who disagreed with his views over the amendment of Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution to be retabled in March.
In his rebuttal statement via a YouTube video titled “Rebutting Sarawak PBB Leaders” uploaded on Jan 29 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7i8Dwdq47Zs), he reminded that Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) did not belong to Sabah and Sarawak exclusively.
“Any decisions made by Sarawak have an impact on Sabah and vice-versa. In the context of Sabah and Sarawak, we should be together in our decisions,” he said.
In responding to Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) vice president Datuk Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah, Zainnal said he was not interested in Sarawak’s legal advisors or their capabilities, but concerned about the ruling elites and the politicians behind these advisors.
On the two different interpretations of ‘The Federation’, he replied: “Yet you have been living with two different interpretations for more than 50 years. Do you have no idea what Sabah and Sarawak can do with this anomaly? You have no idea at all. If you want to know more, follow me.”
He also asked Santubong MP Datuk Seri Dr Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar to recommend him a lawyer who knows the ins and outs of MA63 and chided his professionalism in the matter.
“You are also a lawyer, but you only heard about MA63 after the late Pehin Sri Adenan Satem talked about it.
“You are embarrassing me when you claim ‘there wasn’t any phrase in MA63 that signified Sarawak and Sabah as equal partners. Do not look for any phrase, you will never find them, instead you should look at the Form of Agreement,” he said.
He then schooled Wan Junaidi on the importance of getting Borneo territory back in amending Article 1(2) as it was a key step to restoring Sarawak’s eroded rights.
He also criticised Petra Jaya MP Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof on claiming that there was no mention of MA63 in the Federal Constitution, saying: “It is like you are standing in a forest and asking where is the tree. How can you be a leader?”
Zainnal explained that Act 26 or Malaysia Act 1963 was passed by the Malayan Parliament on Aug 20, 1963 which was from Annex A of MA63-Malaysia Bill.
Emphasising on the definition of ‘state’, he added: “MA63 is accepted as International Agreement or Treaty. Therefore, MA63 is bound by Vienna Convention Law of Treaties (VCLT). Malaysia’s accession to the VCLT was on 27 July 1994.”
“Do you understand the meaning of ‘accession’? The VCLT meaning of ‘State’ is recognised internationally. Your Melayu meaning of ‘State’ is only understood in Malaysia. That’s your problem, not mine.”
Hitting back at Batang Sadong MP Datuk Seri Nancy Shukri, he said if getting back Sarawak territory meant there was no substance, then it meant Sarawak preferred the status quo to be under Malaya territory.
“So what is the point of going to court with OMO (Oil Mining Ordinance)? You are still in Malaya territory.”
In graphics, Zainnal elaborated that the Malaysia territories in 1963 were categorised as States of Malaya, State of Singapore and Borneo States; while in 1965 was States of Malaya and Borneo States; but in 1976, the three entities became States of The Federation which was equal to States of Malaya.
“Because of this, we want the territories in Malaysia to be reverted to States of Malaya and Borneo States. This is what we want after the 2020 constitution amendment bill is passed,” he stressed. —DayakDaily