Letter to the Editor
By Dato Shankar Ram Asnani and Sidharth Shankar Asnani
Dear Sarawakians,
Lately, there have been some false narratives circulating online about our oil and gas industry and Sarawak’s rights. These misinterpretations have caused confusion, so it is important to set the record straight.
First and foremost, our present leadership, under the stewardship of the Right Honourable Premier of Sarawak, YAB Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri (Dr) Abang Haji Abdul Rahman Zohari Tun Datuk Abang Haji Openg (Abang Jo), has worked hard to restore the rights that were taken from us in the past.
This became possible only after the lifting of the Emergency Ordinance and the repeal of the Internal Security Act 1960.
In fact, Sarawak already had a strong regulatory system in place for its oil and gas industry well before the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA). Mind you, Sarawak’s first oil well – the Grand Old Lady – is situated in Miri. It was discovered in 1910 and remained in operation until 1972. During its entire operational period, the oil well was exclusively managed by Shell as the sole concessionaire.
Then, the Oil Mining Ordinance 1958 (OMO) was enacted, ensuring the industry was properly regulated on Sarawak’s land and continental shelf. So yes, long before Malaysia was formed on September 16, 1963, Sarawak already had a strong regulatory system in place for its oil and gas industry.
Looking back at our history, there were no issues with our foreign partners back then, so why would we need help from Malaya to regulate our oil and gas industry?
I invite you to think of this crucial turning point in 1963 – Did Sarawak need any sort of help from Malaya to regulate its hydrocarbon industry when it was all well and running for so many decades?
The OMO 1958 was in force, ensuring the industry was properly regulated on Sarawak’s land and continental shelf.
It is clear that Sarawak did not need the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) of 1974, which was passed in Malaya without Sarawak’s approval. The OMO 1958 provided Sarawak with authority over the exploration and exploitation of petroleum resources within its territory, including the continental shelf. This ordinance has never been repealed and remains in force, affirming Sarawak’s regulatory control over its oil and gas resources.
Furthermore, the PDA 1974, was enacted by the Federal government during a state of emergency, which raises questions about its applicability to Sarawak and considering that the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and the Federal Constitution safeguard Sarawak’s rights over its natural resources, the unilateral enactment of PDA 1974 by the federal government, without Sarawak’s approval in DUN, has been viewed by many as a violation of these entrenched constitutional right and protections.
In relation to a Constitutional position on entrenched rights – the then Sarawak Chief Minister Tun Rahman Ya’kub had no authority as the then chief minister to give and/or hand over Sarawak’s rights – no Chief Minister has such rights or powers to hand over Sarawak’s entrenched rights – and constitutional lawyers would know that the Petroleum Development Act 1964 has some serious legal issues.
In 1963, Malaya did not have a legal framework for the hydrocarbon exploration and industry. The PDA 1974 was pushed through by certain characters without the consent of Sarawak’s Legislative Assembly.
Some may say Sarawak had agreed to PDA 1974, but this is not correct from a constitutional law position. History shows that the PDA 1974 was created and passed without proper consultation with Sarawak’s government or its people and was never endorsed. Further, the so-called “vesting order” was not a fair deal – technically it was forced on Sarawak during strange times.
The crux of the matter is that there was never any endorsement from Sarawak’s Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) or Sarawak Legislative Assembly to draft the PDA 1974 and Sarawak had never endorsed PDA 1974 in DUN.
In fact, it is apparent that PDA had flouted various provisions of the Federal Constitution and this is a major issue that cannot be waived or overlooked.
In case we forget, Sarawak’s rights over its natural resources are preserved in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and the Federal Constitution. The OMO 1958, which predates the PDA 1974, remains a valid and enforceable law, affirming Sarawak’s regulatory authority over oil and gas within its territory.
Some people claim that Federal laws automatically overrule Sarawak’s laws, but this ignores the fact that Malaysia was formed under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). This agreement promised Sarawak control over its own resources.
These characters talk so much and disseminate so much of misleading information regarding Sarawak Oil mining rights but kept completely mum about Petronas ever tabling their accounts in Parliament.
And here is something important: How many of you know that Petronas has never tabled its accounts in Parliament for proper scrutiny? Why has this not been done? Is there anything important that Malaysians should know, and see? We need transparency, and these are the questions that need answering.
What has happened now is that after some legal wrangle, firm political action and stand taken, the Federal government had relented knowing the actual situation and they have started to recognise Sarawak’s rights and entered into certain commercial arrangements for a win-win situation for both the Federal Government and Sarawak Government that will benefit the whole nation!
The question is: Should Malaysians have complaints about profit sharing with Sarawak when all the oil and gas revenue comes from Sarawak? Is it so troubling for some to accept profit sharing with Sarawak?
Prior to 1963, Sarawak had full control and enjoyed full rights over its oil and gas resources and revenue but it later shared it with Malaya. Over the years, the ‘shared’ concept was eroded and Sarawakians were left behind in many aspects.
These characters should stop spreading false information. What we have now with the commercial arrangement scheme is probably a fairer position for Sarawak. It is good for the nation that all its partners stand to benefit on an equal footing. – DayakDaily
________________________________________________________________________
Dato Shankar Ram Asnani is the presiden of Sri Maha Mariamman Temple and Sidharth Shankar Asnani, a member. Both are concerned Sarawakians.
This is the personal opinion of the author(s) and does not necessarily represent the views of DayakDaily. Letters to the Editor may be lightly edited for clarity.
