Wong King Wei
KUCHING: Padungan assemblyman Wong King Wei is disappointed by the negative reactions to the proposed amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution, particularly those that accuse the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government of betraying Sarawak, lacking sincerity or even deceiving the people of Sarawak.
The DAP lawmaker said the PH government could have followed in the footsteps of the previous Barisan Nasional (BN) government by not doing anything to address the issue, but instead chose to restore the status of Sabah and Sarawak as per the formation of Malaysia in 1963.
“The PH government could have swept everything under the carpet as if nothing happened but it did not.
“We had formed a Special Cabinet Committee on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) to look into how to return the rights to Sabah and Sarawak, and even tabled the amendment Bill in Parliament, with an aim of restoring the status of Sabah and Sarawak,” he said in a statement Saturday, in response to various reactions from the opposition following the first reading of the amendment Bill last Thursday.
According to Wong, the proposed amendment is just the start of restoring the status of Sabah and Sarawak and that once the status is restored, the Bornean states can come back to the roundtable in the Cabinet Committee for further negotiations on their state rights.
The PH government could have not tabled the amendment Bill because the Cabinet Committee had already been set up to deliberate all MA63-related issues, he asserted.
“So why the proposed amendment? The significance of such amendment is that the PH government wants Sabah, Sarawak and the Federation of Malaya to be on an equal footing as what it was in 1963, and then engage negotiations.
“Once your status is restored, you will have leverage to negotiate. This is what the proposed amendment is all about,” he explained.
“Let’s take a look at the Federal Constitution dated 1963. Back then, the Federation of Malaysia comprised: (a) the 11 states in Peninsular Malaysia; (b) the two Borneo states; and (c) Singapore. Even though the Constitution read ‘State’ or in Bahasa Malaysia ‘negeri’, the term ‘State’ could mean ‘territory’.”
Wong said the amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federation Constitution in 1976 merged (a) and (b) into one, making Sabah and Sarawak among the 13 states in Malaysia.
The proposed amendment now, he pointed out, is to restore (a) and (b), and this is not ‘11+2’ but altering the 13 to two.
“The Bill is straight to the point without the need to negotiate because the PH government wants those who came together to form the Federation of Malaysia to have their respective status restored before negotiation,” he said.
He said the PH government was of the opinion that negotiation was not required to restore the status of Sabah and Sarawak because the 1976 amendment had gravely undermined the status of Sabah and Sarawak.
“All we have to do is restore the status of Sabah and Sarawak to what it was when they (forefathers) formed Malaysia in 1963.
“Therefore, the proposed amendment is set to restore the original spirit of MA63, and it perplexes me that GPS, including SUPP and PBB who have been singing about the significance of MA63, were the ones who objected to the amendment Bill and criticised the move.
“Unless all parties involved come together to renegotiate MA63, there is no way we can directly amend the points which were agreed upon in MA63. To renegotiate MA63, the status of Sabah and Sarawak has to be first restored, which is to alter from among the 13 states to (a) and (b),” he stressed.
Wong noted that those who felt the proposed amendment would not return the eroded rights of Sabah and Sarawak should understand that this was because further negotiations had yet to take place.
The proposed amendment, he said, was aimed at restoring the status of Sabah and Sarawak to offer the two Bornean states leverage to renegotiate MA63.
“Because of this, I cannot comprehend why SUPP and PBB, who assert so much on MA63, are not willing to accept the amendment Bill and would rather let Sarawak remain as one of the 13 states in Malaysia.
“Once this Bill is passed in Parliament, the status of Sabah and Sarawak will be elevated. But Umno and GPS would rather reject the Bill. Once our status is restored, we will be put in a better position to negotiate at the roundtable,” he pointed out.
Wong said every Bill tabled in Parliament had to go through first, second and third readings – the first is to introduce the content of the Bill and the second, to allow members of the House to debate on the Bill.
If any further amendment was required, it could be done during the third reading before being passed as an Act, he explained.
“A two-thirds majority is required for a Bill to be passed. As we can see, the PH government does not have the required majority and it looks certain that GPS and other Sabahan MPs are not supporting the Bill, so this proposed amendment is not likely to get through.
“I also wonder why GPS and BN MPs had to object to the first reading of the Bill. If they are not happy with any point, they can bring it up during the second reading of the Bill to seek further amendment.
“They can propose further amendment and seek support of two-thirds majority of the House to be passed. What we saw on Thursday (April 4) was that they objected to the first reading of the Bill, and this obviously indicates that they are not objecting to the content of the Bill, but the opportunity to amend the Bill,” he added.
Wong also regretted that leaders of SUPP ‘went all out’ to mislead the people that the proposed amendment was worse than the 1976 amendment.
He opined that SUPP leaders should first admit it was their fault that the 1976 amendment downgraded Sabah and Sarawak to one of the 13 states.