Petronas 在砂的权限

石油发展法只赋予国油开采权 作者：LianCheng (2023)

古晋，11 月 23 日：1974 年石油开发法案 (PDA74) 并未将其经营或曾经经营的区域的土地所有权授予国家石油有限公司 (Petronas)。

砂拉越法律顾问拿督斯里JC Fong解释说，PDA74仅授予PETRONAS勘探、开采和拥有石油的权利，而没有将土地本身归属于该公司。

“PDA74 从未将土地归属于 PETRONAS。根据《砂拉越土地法》，大陆架上的土地被定义为（砂）国有土地。”

如果石油和天然气枯竭，则有义务将土地归还给砂拉越，为(砂)国家提供决定其未来用途的机会。

“然后我们就可以决定如何处理它。在这种情况下，我们希望利用废弃或枯竭的油井或油田来开发碳储存场所。”

砂拉越正在积极探索将其 1,665 口废弃油井开发为碳储存中心的潜力，这一举措符合砂拉越对绿色经济的承诺。

能源与环境可持续发展部副部长拿督Hazland Abang Hipni博士表示，这些废弃油井有能力储存至少90亿吨碳。

这个数字超过了砂拉越森林的碳储存能力，估计在 7500 亿吨至 10 亿吨之间。

他进一步解释说，上述容量不包括沿海含水层（渗透岩层）所带来的潜力，该含水层也可以作为碳储存介质。

这项碳储存计划预计将抵消该地区的碳排放，同时减少总计60万吨的碳排放，并为砂拉越带来额外收入。

Petroleum Development Act only vests in Petronas right to mine

By Lian Cheng 

KUCHING, Nov 23: The Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74) does not vest land ownership to National Petroleum Limited (PETRONAS) for the areas it operates or used to operate on. 

Sarawak Legal Counsel Dato Sri JC Fong explained that PDA74 only grants PETRONAS the rights to explore, exploit, and own petroleum, without vesting the land itself in the company. 

“PDA74 never vests the land in PETRONAS. The land in the continental shelf is defined as State land under the Sarawak Land Code,” Fong told DayakDaily. 

In the event of oil and gas depletion, the obligation arises to return the land to Sarawak, providing an opportunity for the State to determine its future use. 

“Then we can decide what to do with it. In this case, we want to develop the sites for carbon storage, by using the abandoned or depleted oil wells or oil fields,” said Fong

Sarawak is actively exploring the potential development of its 1,665 used oil wells as a carbon storage center, an initiative aligning with the Sarawak’s commitment to a green economy. 

Deputy Minister of Energy and Environmental Sustainability Datuk Dr Hazland Abang Hipni said these used oil wells have the capacity to store at least nine billion tonnes of carbon. 

This figure surpasses the carbon storage capacity of Sarawak’s forests, estimated to be between 750,000 million and one billion tonnes. 

He further explained that the mentioned capacity does not include the potential posed by coastal aquifer (permeable rock layer), which can also serve as a carbon storage medium. 

This carbon storage initiative is expected to offset carbon emissions in the region, while simultaneously reduce a total of 600,000 tonnes of carbon emissions, apart from raking in additional income for Sarawak. — DayakDaily

我对James Chin的10点看法

我对James Chin的10点协议的看法

James Chin提出的新的10点协议，好是好，想留马的砂人民肯定会认同。认同归认同，没有强大的民运当后盾，一切皆空。

想脱马独立的人，像我，认为砂需要更激进的新领袖设时限，严厉的要求实践这些协议，不然就上法庭。对付狼豺虎豹就是要用猎枪和围墙；对付马联邦霸权就是法律规范和法庭裁决一切。政治协谈很难。

眼前的情况，砂政盟如何坚持立场才是关键。以砂政盟现有的势力对付马联邦霸权是绰绰有余，可是这政盟都选择退让。 煤气拥有权100%属于砂拉越，可是砂政盟选择慷慨分权给Petronas 49% 股份，这是怎么一回事？砂总理AbangJo 带领的砂政府真的不行。

该做的事，他都没有好好的去做。在2012年前首相Najib撤销【内安法令】后，其实，1966年大陆架法令；1974年PDA74法令和2012年领海法令就马上失效。可是总理AbangJo 有去处理砂这些拥有权吗？ 

是的，PDA74 法令在2019年后，已经受到局限和权限。据（Petroleum Development Act only vests in Petronas right to mine – DayakDaily By Lian Cheng） 他们只有开采权力，土地和矿物拥有权全属砂拉越的。

过去联邦霸道95% ：砂5%的做法已经无法再新发现的油田用了。现在好像是30%盈利五五分账；70%是给承包商的。有请大家去查证。

1966大陆架法令和2012领海法令，处理好了吗？希望，大家去查证，还有砂人对砂政盟绝不能放松。

过去砂的18点，联邦霸权连想都没想去实践，因为砂人太无知，不够团结，国家和联邦关系也没搞得清楚。现在，James Chin提议的新10点，我认为只有砂民在乎，坚持，捍卫砂权益到底，一寸都不放过，这10点才算数。

我还是我，认为对付狼豺虎豹就是猎枪和围墙；对付联邦霸权就是设时限，法令规范和上法庭裁决一切，别的免谈，就这么办！

砂政盟该办的事

砂政党联盟政府将精力集中在天然气分配的垄断游戏上，而不是废除1974年石油发展法令以收回砂拉越石油和天然气所有权，并废除2012年领海法令以收回砂拉越海域和大陆架所有权（以便砂拉越人民可以恢复 300 海里而不是减少 3 海里）。 GPS政府是“砂拉越优先”吗？

据信，当前首相纳吉废除紧急法令时，马来西亚紧急时期制定的1974年石油开发法和2012年领海法已自动失效，不再具有执行力。砂拉越人民质疑砂政党联盟政府是否不愿与联邦政府对抗，并且为了个人利益而不敢收回砂拉越的所有权。

砂政党联盟的YB和国会议员必须告诉砂拉越人民收回砂拉越所有权的下一步是什么吗。如果他们愿意对此事保持沉默，那么现在是时候就不要再支持他们了。

Sarawak GPS government focus its effort in monopoly game of gas distribution instead of repealing Petroleum Development Act 1974 to get back Sarawak oil and gas ownership and repealing Territorial Seas Act 2012 to get back ownership of Sarawak Seas and continental shelf ownership (so that Sarawak people can get back 300 nautical miles Instead of reduced 3 nautical miles). Is GPS government for "Sarawak first"?

It is believed that when ex Prime Minister Najib Razak revoked Emergency Ordinance the Petroleum Development 1974 and Territorial Seas Act 2012 created during Malaysia emergency period has been automatically null and void and no longer enforceable. Sarawak people questioned whether GPS government preferred not to antagonise federal government and for personal interest is too scared to claim back Sarawak ownerships.

Will GPS YBs and MPs tell Sarawak people what's next on taking back Sarawak ownerships? If they prefer to remain silent on the matter， it is time not to support them.

James Chin 的10点协议

大学教授为沙巴和砂拉越提出新的10点协议

古晋（11月30日）：砂拉越出生的学者提出了一项新的10点协议，以取代砂拉越现有的18点协议和沙巴的20点协议。

澳洲Tasmania大学亚洲研究教授 James Chin 表示，他提出的 10 点协议重申了该国祖先对沙巴和砂拉越的期望，以及这两个婆罗洲州对联邦政府的期望。

“2023年是马来西亚成立60周年，因此现在是一个非常独特的机会来回顾马来西亚人的经历。

“我们需要向前看，而不是回头看。如果我们都回顾过去，我们的国家就无法进步。”他告诉《婆罗洲邮报》。他强调，这10点建议是他以个人身份起草的，不代表任何组织。

“在我们前进的过程中，我尽可能多地了解沙巴和砂拉越人民的愿望。

他说：“我认为强调我们希望保留我们独特的文化、传统、语言，更重要的是，保持我们人口的多元化，这一点非常重要。”

钦的十点协议呼吁（一）立即实现马来西亚联邦对沙巴和砂拉越人民的梦想和承诺；（二）重申沙巴和砂拉越在组建马来西亚联邦时与马来亚是平等伙伴；（三）并重申婆罗洲州属在联邦宪法第1（2）条下的独特地位，有别于1963年马来西亚协议所载的马来西亚半岛11个州属。

（四）他还寻求重申沙巴和砂拉越各自对其领土范围内的资源拥有专属领土权；（五）重申沙巴和砂拉越的每个社区都有权拥有其独特的文化和仪式表达、身份和语言；（六）重申沙巴和砂拉越是世俗国家、多元宗教社会，正如我们的祖先所承诺的那样；（七）并重申所有沙巴人和砂拉越人都是平等公民，并拒绝一切形式的种族主义、宗教不容忍和至上主义意识形态

最后三点（八）促请沙巴和砂拉越领导人采取主动，按照开国元勋的承诺，在马来西亚联邦内履行国家自治权；（九）重申沙巴人和砂拉越人决定自己未来的基本权利；（十）并申明为所有沙巴人和砂拉越人建设现代、世俗、民主、进步和可持续的未来的承诺。

“我们不希望马来西亚半岛突然强加一个框架，使人口状况分为穆斯林与非穆斯林，或马来人与非马来人一样。这在沙巴和砂拉越行不通的。”他强调，沙巴和砂拉越必须在很大程度上摆脱宗教、民族和/或种族紧张局势。

“我们希望按照我们祖先的愿望保持世俗。我希望人们使用这个 10 点协议作为 18点协议的后续协议，”Chin 说。

Don proposes new 10-point agreement for Sabah, Sarawak

KUCHING (Nov 30): A Sarawak-born academician has come up with a new 10-point agreement to replace the existing 18-point agreement for Sarawak, and 20-point agreement for Sabah.

James Chin, a professor of Asian Studies at University of Tasmania, Australia said his proposed 10-point agreement reaffirms what the nation’s forefathers had wanted for Sabah and Sarawak, and also what the two Borneo states want from the federal government.

“As 2023 is the 60th anniversary of the formation of Malaysia, hence now is a very unique opportunity to look back at what Malaysians had experienced.

“Rather than looking back, we need to look forward. If we all look back, our country cannot progress,” he told The Borneo Post.

He stressed that he drafted the proposed 10-point in his personal capacity and not on behalf of any organisation.

“I have captured as much as possible what are the wishes of the people of Sabah and Sarawak as we move forward.

“I think it is very important to stress that we want to retain our unique cultures, traditions, languages and more importantly, to maintain our diverse population,” he said.

Chin’s 10-point agreement calls for （1） the dream and promise of the Federation of Malaysia for the people of Sabah and Sarawak to be fulfilled without delay; （2）reaffirm Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners with Malaya in the formation of the Federation of Malaysia; and （3） reaffirm the unique status of the Borneo states under Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution, distinct from the 11 states in Peninsular Malaysia, as enshrined in the Malaysia Agreement of 1963.

It also seeks to （4） reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak each possess exclusive territorial rights over the resources that are within their own territorial boundaries; （5）reaffirm that every community in Sabah and Sarawak has the right to their distinct unique cultures and ceremonial expression, identity and language; (6) reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak as secular states, multi-religious society as promised by our forefathers; and (7) reaffirm that all Sabahans and Sarawakians are equal citizens, and reject all forms of racism, religious intolerance, and supremacist ideology.

The final three points (8) urge the leaders of Sabah and Sarawak to take the initiative and fulfil the state’s autonomy within the Federation of Malaysia as promised by the founding fathers; (9) reaffirm the fundamental right of Sabahans and Sarawakians to determine their own future; and (10) affirm the commitment to build a modern, secular, democratic, progressive and sustainable future for all Sabahans and Sarawakians.

“We do not want Peninsular Malaysia to suddenly impose a framework where the population situation is like Muslims versus non-Muslims, or Malays versus non-Malays. This does not work very well in Sabah and Sarawak,” he said, stressing that Sabah and Sarawak must remain largely free from religious, ethnic and/or racial tension.

“We want to remain secular as per the wishes of our forefathers. I hope people use this 10-point agreement as a successor to the 20-point agreement,” said Chin.

该做的事，没做

砂政党联盟政府将精力集中在天然气分配的垄断游戏上，而不是废除1974年石油发展法令以收回砂拉越石油和天然气所有权，并废除2012年领海法令以收回砂拉越海域和大陆架所有权（以便砂拉越人民可以恢复 300 海里而不是减少 3 海里）。 GPS政府是“砂拉越优先”吗？

据信，当前首相纳吉废除紧急法令时，马来西亚紧急时期制定的1974年石油开发法和2012年领海法已自动失效，不再具有执行力。砂拉越人民质疑砂政党联盟政府是否不愿与联邦政府对抗，并且为了个人利益而不敢收回砂拉越的所有权。

砂政党联盟的YB和国会议员必须告诉砂拉越人民收回砂拉越所有权的下一步是什么吗。如果他们愿意对此事保持沉默，那么现在是时候就不要再支持他们了。

Sarawak GPS government focus its effort in monopoly game of gas distribution instead of repealing Petroleum Development Act 1974 to get back Sarawak oil and gas ownership and repealing Territorial Seas Act 2012 to get back ownership of Sarawak Seas and continental shelf ownership (so that Sarawak people can get back 300 nautical miles Instead of reduced 3 nautical miles). Is GPS government for "Sarawak first"?

It is believed that when ex Prime Minister Najib Razak revoked Emergency Ordinance the Petroleum Development 1974 and Territorial Seas Act 2012 created during Malaysia emergency period has been automatically null and void and no longer enforceable. Sarawak people questioned whether GPS government preferred not to antagonise federal government and for personal interest is too scared to claim back Sarawak ownerships.

Will GPS YBs and MPs tell Sarawak people what's next on taking back Sarawak ownerships? If they prefer to remain silent on the matter， it is time not to support them.

砂人有何感触？

砂人有何感触？

拉巴益：有3000 空缺 – 砂明年填补1500 教师 （诗华日报25/11/23）

这怎么一回事？联邦教育部到底怎么了？是否办事能力出问题或是特意制造砂教师短缺的问题。砂政盟要求砂教师和外州比例为 90：10。

我猜联邦霸权就是要’做死’砂要求的教师比例10个教师中，砂必须占9个。因此，联邦霸权就特意制造这种短缺逼使砂【饥不择食】，欣然接受马半岛来的教师。

砂31位联邦议员完全没有发挥维护砂权益的作用。张健仁还好意思问砂政府为什么在砂议会讨论这些问题（某课题）。前线没做好事，后线不得不插手了。

这些政客应该都把砂人当‘死人’来看待。砂人没有发挥多少砂人的本色；没有多少大格局的思维；没有把砂大小事当成一回事；没看重集体权益。个体整天盲目的忙个不停，到头来一场空。是的，砂人太松散，不够团结，所以政党才如此猖獗。砂民普遍都被政党耍得团团转。

拉巴益说砂教育部在2024下半年才可以解决3000教师短缺中的大概1500. 他声言到30/9/2023，砂缺3076名教师：中学819名；小学2257名。在2/2024年，预测819名中学教师短缺会获得解决。到6/2024年，752名小学教师，预测获得填补。之后，砂还有的1505名教师短缺的问题，有待解决，天啊！

拉巴益‘希望’能招聘失业的非教师本地毕业生解决眼前的教师短缺问题，以维持砂90：马10教师比例。他有向联邦教育部“提议使用所谓服务合同雇佣非教师本地毕业生”。

砂NGOs也有百多个是时候发挥作用集体行动创造大力量维护砂权益。砂人要记得联合国赋予的1514个人自决权和1541集体力量裁决砂未来。记得，S4S集合的共识和行动维护砂权益，慢慢走向独立自主一切像新加坡。

Action now

Actions now

‘We are only asking for what’s ours, Dr Sim says of efforts to claim money from Putrajaya’

The total revenue collected from Sarawak last year was roughly about RM300 billion. The federal development funds Budget 2024 to Sarawak is 5.8 billion (6.4%) though a bit higher than Budget 2023 . 

Besides, the budget promised often was often pickpocketed in Putrajaya. Otherwise, there should not have been so many dilapidated schools, clinics, under-equipped hospitals and poor infrastructure in Sarawak. Were 31 parliamentrary members and the Sarawak government doing their work?

Dr Sim says that the Sarawak government has been pursuing the matter relentlessly. But, is there any result besides negotiating X 2?

Why don’t they set the time to accomplish the tasks or sue the Federal government in court? Do they have the political will to do so?

To deal with carnivore-like federal government, we need strict law, boundary and stringent actions.  

According to Dr Sim, last year, Petronas had the recorded profit of RM90 billion and the dividend payment to the federal government is RM50 billion. Why didn’t Sarawak get a share?

Last year (2022), 8 new oil fields and this year 6 new oil fiedls were discovered in Sarawak waters. AbangJo has finally demanded 50% profit share if Petronas wants to drill oil in Sarawak waters from 2022 onwards.  

The 31 MPs should voice out gallantly with no fear to be qualified and be prepared to reject federal development budget 2025 if Sarawak is not given 20% if not 30% of the federal development fund.

To realise the autonomy of Education and Health, we needs the fund.

To accomplish the tasks, the Sarawak government should set the time or sue the federal government in court.