ADVERTISE HERE

Dato Ahmad Ibrahim
KUCHING (Jan 27): Reducing the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) to what it does not explicitly list, risks overlooking both its intent and its legal effect, said Sarawak senator Dato Ahmad Ibrahim.
“While it is technically correct that the Malaysia Agreement 1963 does not expressly spell out oil and gas ownership, MA63 was never meant to be a sector-by-sector statute,” he said.
“Its core purpose was to safeguard the rights, powers and laws of Sarawak and Sabah as they existed at the time of Malaysia’s formation, and to ensure they were not overridden by pre-Malaysia Malayan laws or by federal legislation enacted after 1963 without proper constitutional process.”
“The absence of specific terminology does not negate those protections. On the contrary, MA63 must be read as a constitutional guarantee that state rights – particularly over land and resources – remain intact unless lawfully altered in accordance with the Federal Constitution.”
Ahmad said this in response to recent remarks made by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, who stated that MA63 does not contain any provision concerning the ownership or regulation of oil and gas resources.
She also said MA63 does not assign the roles of petroleum entities such as Petroliam Nasional Berhad (Petronas) or Sarawak’s sole gas aggregator, Petroleum Sarawak Berhad (Petros).
“The MA63 is the foundational document that sets the terms for the formation of Malaysia, including the rights and autonomy of Sabah and Sarawak in certain areas.”
“The management and regulation of the oil and gas industry are determined by federal laws, specifically the Petroleum Development Act (Act 144),” she said in a written parliamentary reply.
Azalina said that under Act 144, Petronas is given whole ownership of petroleum in Malaysia, with exclusive rights and privileges to explore and acquire this resource, whether onshore or offshore.

1 week ago
9








English (US) ·