All oil and
resources within Sarawak’s continental shelf belongs to Sarawak
Oct 18, 2019 @
18:49
“If the contention
of the federal government was that Sarawak’s continental has been
constitutionally and legitimately acquired under Petroleum Development Act
(PDA) 1974, even though it transgressed Article 2 of the Federal Constitution,
then the federal government must pay compensation to the state government at
market price,” he said in a media statement today.
He pointed out that history, the International Law, the Federal Constitution and State Laws are on Sarawak side.
“On June 24, 1954, Her Majesty the Queen of England made an Order in Council at Buckingham Palace, London. The Sarawak (Alteration of Boundaries) Order in Council was gazetted on 30th June 1954. The Order states:
“2. The boundaries of the Colony of Sarawak are hereby extended to include the area of the continental shelf being the seabed and its subsoil which lies beneath the high seas contiguous to the territorial waters of Sarawak.”
“3. Nothing in this order shall be deemed to affect the character as high seas of any waters above the said area of the continental shelf.”
Asfia emphasised that this is the territory of Sarawak with its landmass and continental shelf, sea-bed and subsoil at the birth of Malaysia on September 16, 1963.
He went on citing Part II Section 4(3) of the Malaysia Act, 1963, which read: “The territories of each of the States mentioned in Clause (2) are the territories comprised therein immediately before Malaysia Day.”
Pointing out that the PDA, the Continental Shelf Act 1966 and other related Acts of Parliament had the effect of acquiring Sarawak’s Continental Shelf, seabed and subsoil, he however argued that these Acts and related laws flagrantly violate Article 2 of the Federal Constitution.
He cited Article 2(b) of the Federal Constitution which read: “Parliament may by law -(b) alter the boundaries of any State, but a law altering the boundaries of a State shall not be passed without the consent of that State (expressed by a law made by the Legislature of that State) and of the Conference of Rulers.”
Asfia also reminded that neither the Dewan Undangan Negeri of Sarawak has ever passed a law expressing consent to the alteration of its boundaries, nor to our knowledge the Conference of Rulers has consented to the alteration of Sarawak’s boundaries.
“If the boundaries of Sarawak have shrunken, confined only to its land mass depriving the state of its original boundaries at the material time Malaysia was formed, the burden of proof is on the federal government and Petronas that Article 2(3) in the Federal Constitution had been fully complied with,” he said. He added that this was consistent with the article in the United Kingdom (UK) Parliament in 1960 (HC Deb 10 May 1960 vol 623 cc41-2) on continental shelf which states:
“The jurisdiction of the Sarawak Government over the continental shelf for the purposes of exploring and exploiting its mineral resources derives from the Sarawak (Alteration of Boundaries) Order-in-Council, 1954, which extends the boundaries of Sarawak to include the adjacent continental shelf, and not from the Oil Mining Ordinance, 1958, which merely confers powers on the Government to enable it to regulate exploration and exploitation of certain mineral resources of the shelf.
“The right to such jurisdiction is now embodied in the 1958 United Nations Convention on the Continental Shelf. The Convention defines the shelf as extending to the depth of 200 metres or beyond that limit where the depth of the superjacent waters admits of exploitation, and contains provision as to the boundaries between the respective shelves of neighbouring countries. There is no intention of exercising jurisdiction beyond the boundaries as defined in the Convention or except for the purposes allowed by the Convention.”
Citing Article
83(1) of the Federal Constitution, Asfia highlighted: “If the Federal
Government is satisfied that land in a State, not being alienated land, is
needed for federal purposes, that Government may, after consultation with the
State Government, require the State Government, and it shall then be the duty
of that Government, to cause to be made to the Federation, or to such public
authority as the Federal Government may direct, such grant of the land as the
Federal Government may direct: Provided that the Federal Government shall not require
the grant of any land reserved for a State purpose unless it is satisfied that
it is in the national interest so to do.”
Citing Article 83(2) of the Federal Constitution, Asfia said: “Where in accordance with Clause (1) the Federal Government requires the State Government to cause to be made a grant of land in perpetuity, the grant shall be made without restrictions as to the use of the land but shall be subject to the payment annually of an appropriate quit rent and the Federation shall pay to the State a premium equal to the market value for the grant; and where the Federal Government so requires the State Government to cause to be granted any other interest in land, the Federation shall pay to the State the just annual rent therefore and such premium, if any is required by the State Government, as may be just.” — DayakDaily
砂拉越大陆架内的所有石油和资源都属于砂拉越
2019 年 10 月 18 日 @ 18:49
古晋，10 月 18 日：砂拉越大陆架内的所有油田和油田都属于砂拉越，而不是联邦政府。
砂拉越立法议会（DUN）议长拿督阿斯菲亚Asfia今天强调，砂拉越拥有石油和油田的权力，因为收购砂拉越的大陆架是违宪的，并且违反了 1958 年的联合国公约。
“如果联邦政府的论点是，砂拉越的大陆是根据 1974 年石油开发法（PDA）在宪法和合法地获得的，即使它违反了联邦宪法第 2 条，那么联邦政府必须向州政府支付赔偿金市场价格，”他在今天的媒体声明中说。
“它必须是整个大陆架的长度和宽度以及大陆架下的石油，”他补充说。
他重申，油田和油田属于砂拉越，因为石油是在砂拉越的大陆架、海床和底土下发现的，所有这些都在砂拉越境内。
他指出，历史、国际法、联邦宪法和邦法都站在砂拉越一边。
“1954 年 6 月 24 日，英国女王陛下在伦敦白金汉宫下达议会命令。砂拉越（更改边界）议会命令于 1954 年 6 月 30 日在宪报上公布。命令指出：
“2。砂拉越殖民地的边界特此扩大，包括大陆架区域，即海床及其位于与砂拉越领海相邻的公海之下的底土。”
“3。本命令中的任何内容均不得被视为影响大陆架上述区域上方任何水域的公海性质。”
阿斯菲亚强调，1963 年 9 月 16 日马来西亚诞生时，这是砂拉越的领土，拥有陆地和大陆架、海床和底土。
他继续引用 1963 年马来西亚法令第二部分第 4(3) 条，其中写道：“第 (2) 条中提到的每个州的领土是紧接马来西亚日之前包含在其中的领土。”
他指出 PDA、1966 年大陆架法案和其他相关的议会法案具有收购砂拉越大陆架、海床和底土的效果，但他认为这些法案和相关法律公然违反了联邦宪法第 2 条。
他引用了联邦宪法第 2(b) 条，其中写道：“议会可以通过法律 -(b) 改变任何州的边界，但未经该州同意，不得通过改变州边界的法律（由该州立法机构和统治者会议制定的法律表达。”
Asfia还提醒说，砂拉越的Dewan Undangan Negeri从未通过任何法律表示同意改变其边界，据我们所知，统治者会议也没有同意改变砂拉越的边界。
“如果砂拉越的边界缩小，只限于它的土地，剥夺了马来西亚成立时的原始边界，那么举证责任在联邦政府和马来西亚国家石油公司身上，联邦第 2 条第 3 款宪法完全得到遵守，”他说。他补充说，这与 1960 年英国 (UK) 议会关于大陆架的文章 (HC Deb 10 May 1960 vol 623 cc41-2) 一致，该文章指出：
“砂拉越政府为勘探和开发其矿产资源而对大陆架的管辖权源自 1954 年砂拉越（边界变更）命令，该命令将砂拉越的边界扩展到包括相邻的大陆架，而不是来自 1958 年的《石油开采条例》，该条例仅授予政府权力，使其能够规范对大陆架某些矿产资源的勘探和开采。
“这种管辖权现在体现在 1958 年的《联合国大陆架公约》中。该公约将大陆架定义为延伸至 200 米或超过上覆水域深度允许开发的界限的深度，并包含有关邻国各自大陆架之间边界的规定。无意在公约规定的边界之外或公约允许的目的之外行使管辖权。”
Asfia 援引联邦宪法第 83 条第 1 款强调：“如果联邦政府认为一个州的土地（不是被转让的土地）是联邦目的所需要的，该政府可以在与州政府协商后，要求州政府，然后是该州政府的责任，向联邦政府或联邦政府可能指示的公共当局作出联邦政府可能指示的土地授予：联邦政府不得要求授予为国家目的保留的任何土地，除非它确信这样做符合国家利益。”
Asfia 援引联邦宪法第 83 条第 2 款说：“如果联邦政府根据第 (1) 款要求州政府促使永久授予土地，则授予应不受限制，因为土地使用权，但须每年支付适当的地租，联邦应向国家支付相当于赠款市场价值的溢价；如果联邦政府要求州政府促成授予土地的任何其他权益，则联邦政府应向州支付相应的合理年租金以及州政府要求的溢价，如果有的话，可能是合理的。” — Dayakdaily
No comments:
Post a Comment