By DayakDaily Team
KUCHING, June 18: Sarawak practising lawyer, Sidharth Shankar Asnani, and Sarawak youth representative to UNICEF’s Youth Policy Advisory Group (YPAG) Malaysia, Telford Engan Tan, have called for public discourse on the Rohingya refugee issue to be conducted with respect for both humanitarian principles and Sarawak’s unique constitutional position within Malaysia.
In a joint statement today, they cautioned against reducing the ongoing debate to a simplistic question of whether Sarawak should accept or reject refugees.
Instead, they emphasised that any decision or national policy involving entry into Sarawak must recognise the State’s special immigration autonomy under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and the legal safeguards afforded to the Borneo States.
They noted that Sarawak and Sabah occupy a distinct position in the formation of Malaysia, particularly in matters of immigration control. Unlike movement between states in Peninsular Malaysia, entry into Sarawak is subject to separate immigration procedures, including for Malaysian citizens from outside the State.
“This is not a mere administrative formality. It reflects Sarawak’s special position within Malaysia and the safeguards agreed upon during the formation of the Federation under MA63,” they said.
Tan, a 20-year-old law student, stressed that Sarawak must not be treated as an afterthought in national decisions involving refugees or any group whose entry may have implications for the state’s security, social welfare capacity, local communities, and long-term governance.
“Sarawak must have a seat at the table. Any national policy involving refugees must include meaningful consultation with the Sarawak government and relevant State institutions before decisions affecting the State are made,” he said.
He added that if Sarawak is expected to host any refugee groups, it is reasonable for Sarawakians to ask key policy questions, including how such groups would contribute to the local economy, whether they would become dependent on State resources, and what legal status they would hold.
“Will they be permitted to work or move legally? How will shelter, food, healthcare, and education be funded? What role will the federal government play, and what burden, if any, will fall on Sarawak? Compassion must be matched with planning,” he said.
Tan stressed that such questions should not be misconstrued as hostility, but rather recognised as part of responsible governance.
He added that defending Sarawak’s rights does not require hostility towards refugees or other vulnerable groups.
“We can defend Sarawak’s autonomy without undermining the dignity of others. Refugees are human beings, and their struggles are real. However, this does not justify decisions that overlook the autonomy of the Borneo States,” he added.
Sidharth, meanwhile, said the issue must be addressed within the proper legal framework, particularly the Immigration Act 1959/63 and the MA63.
He pointed to Section 64 of the Immigration Act 1959/63 and Article 9(3) of the Federal Constitution, which recognise the special position of East Malaysian States in relation to immigration, residence, and free movement within the Federation.
He also cited the Federal Court decision in Pihak Berkuasa Negeri Sabah v Sugumar Balakrishnan (2002), which affirmed that Sabah and Sarawak’s immigration autonomy is a fundamental term of their participation in Malaysia as enshrined in MA63.
“Malaysian citizens from Peninsular Malaysia generally require a pass or permit to enter Sarawak, as provided under Section 66 of the Immigration Act 1959/63. In light of this, it is legally and constitutionally unsound to suggest that decisions involving the entry of non-citizens, refugees, or displaced persons can be made without meaningful consultation with Sarawak,” he said.
He added that the objective is not to hinder Federal–State cooperation, but to ensure that all policies remain lawful and consistent with Sarawak’s constitutional position.
Immigration powers, he noted, must be exercised by the Sarawak State Authority and the Director of Immigration in accordance with Section 65 of the Act.
“The federal government and Sarawak government should cooperate on humanitarian and migration matters, but cooperation must not come at the expense of Sarawak’s autonomy. Any sustainable policy must respect the Immigration Act 1959/63, the MA63 framework, and the constitutional position of the Borneo States,” they said. — DayakDaily
