How to exit from the federation of Malaysia by peaceful means – Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) Plan
I had been advised by many legal experts that there is a right to Sarawak and Sabah to seek independence from the Federation of Malaysia by peaceful and legal means. This right was mentioned by Lord Lansdowne, the Chairman of the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) during the formation of Malaysia. United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 (UNGAR 1514) also mentioned the right of self-determination by colonies which can lead to independence. There is no prohibition in the federal and state constitutions to exit from the federation of Malaysia.
Legal experts also opined that Malaysia Agreement 1963(MA63) signed on 9 July 1963 used to form the federation of Malaysia was null and void or even if valid, the fundamental breaches of MA63 had led the Agreement void.
The position of Sarawak and Sabah (SS) in Malaysia is unique and there are a few strategies to set SS free and independent from the federation of Malaysia if the people of Sarawak and Sabah are willing to follow PBK Plan to exit. Many experts opined that Sarawak and Sabah are colonies of Malaya. Malaya took a new name, MALAYSIA, after Sabah Sarawak and Singapore were acquired to enlarge Malaya.
The strategies that PBK has in mind are as follows:
1. Follow Singapore strategy under PAP. PAP was the government of Singapore in 1965 and LKY then created political tensions with Malayaa by Malaysian Malaysia issue. This forced Tunku Abdul Rahman or Malaya to sit at the table to trash the differences with Singapore on Malaysian Malaysia issue. The matter could not be resolved and Singapore then declared herself independent from Malaysia on 9 August, 1965 to become an independent and sovereign state.
We must capture the state government first because the high court already made it clear only the state government can move or deal matters in connection with MA63 to court. The court also made it clear that the issues about the formation of Malaysia and MA63 could or should be brought in parliament by the state government.
If PBK forms the state government, PBK will bring the issues concerning the formation of Malaysia and all problems arising and concerning the illegality of the MA63 to the federal government. A dateline must be set to resolve the differences to resolve all differences about MA63. PBK would likely demand terms to be resolved within the timeline. Once dateline passed, PBK may like what Singapore did, just declare independence through the Dewan Undangan Negri (DUN) but before this is done, PBK government may stir the matter to get people support. If 70%-80% Sarawakians and Sabahans want independence, what can Malaya do?
This would be like a referendum and is good for purpose of UN General Assembly Resolution 1514.
This is people’s power
We can also move motions in parliament to remove provisions concerning Malay supremacy. This would be in line with what Singapore campaigned for that led to Singapore Exit from Malaysia.
2. File in court to declare MA63 void. If the court declares that MA63 is null and void, Sarawak and Sabah should be allowed to leave the federation of Malaysia.
3. File suit in United Kingdom (UK) to declare MA63 a fraud and claim damages- see how HINDRAF did for Malaysian Indians. Although HINDRAF failed to get what they wanted but the case how HINDRAF took the matter to UK court is worth exploring. To say that UK court may not have the jurisdiction to hear the application to declare MA63 as a fraud should be strongly disputed because MA63 was signed in UK and if fraud is argued there should not be barred from limitation of time to file the suit in UK court.
4. Persuade at least two nations that are sympathetic to our problems and or countries that are not in good terms with UK and Malaya to speak about the neo-colonization of Sarawak and Sabah and defects of formation of Malaysia with view to refer the issues to United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) to declare MA63 null and void or to declare Malaysia was a fraud. Maybe we get a member nation of United Nations to sponsor the suit before ICJ like how South Africa did for Palestine against Israel recently.
5. Bring the matter to United Nations Human Rights Commission (UNHRC) to tell the world the federal constitution is discriminatory and or not protecting the minorities etc. See the case of Sandra Lovelace v. Canada, Communication No. R.6/24, U.N. Doc. Supp. No. 40 (A/36/40) at 166 (1981) an Indian in Canada who brought her matter to UNHRC. It was also about issues of discrimination against Sandra Lovelace and also land rights caused by her marriage to an non-indian.
If UNHCR opined that the federal constitution is discriminatory against the minorities of Sarawak and Sabah, the Sarawak and Sabah governments have to pursue the matter in parliament and also to the court to get the relevant discriminatory provisions in the federal constitution removed. If the discriminatory provisions not removed, this could be good reason for Sarawak and Sabah to exit peacefully from the federation.
For Malaysia, a law professor whom I consulted, told me Malaya would not be able to amend the constitution against race, Religion and Royalty (3R issues). Once the constitution is not amended to remove the discrimination against minorities, the people of Sarawak and Sabah should decide whether to exit from the federation of Malaysia. If exit is favoured this could, perhaps, be done by Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) in the Dewan Undangan Negeri.
Voon Lee Shan
16 March 2024
