STAR: Petronas’ court action desperate move to hang on to Sarawak’s oil and gas
KUCHING: State Reform Party Sarawak ( STAR) has described Petronas’ court action as a desperate move to hang on to Sarawak’s oil and gas resources.
Party president Lina Soo has turned to question the haste of the procedure in which Petronas leapfrogs directly to the Federal Court without going through due judicial process.
“This will mean that there will be no appeal allowed once the court makes its ruling,” she said, adding that she was stunned by Petronas’ action to seek the Federal Court’s declaration that it is the exclusive owner and regulator of petroleum resources in the country, including Sarawak, under the Petroleum Development Act 1974 ( PDA).
Assistant Minister for Law, State-Federal Relations and Project Monitoring Sharifah Hasidah Sayeed Aman Ghazali confirmed on Monday that the Sarawak government had been made a party in the suit, cited as ‘ Petroliam Nasional Berhad vs Kerajaan Negeri Sarawak’.
The haste in which the procedure was undertaken, Soo claimed, smack of the federal government’s desperation to hang on to Sarawak’s oil and gas resources.
“Is it because the federal government has now realised that their right to claim ownership of Sarawak’s petroleum resources can be challenged that they have to resort to such tactic?” she questioned.
Soo also believed that Petronas’ court application was being used to avoid implementing the election manifesto of Pakatan Harapan ( PH)’s offer of 20 per cent oil royalty in its so- called ‘New Deal’ promise.
“Sarawak petroleum resources are safeguarded by Malaysia Agreement 1963 ( MA63) and the Federal Constitution.
“The federal government has breached both the MA63 and the Federal Constitution by taking control of Sarawak’s oil and gas through the PDA and the Territorial Sea Act ( TSA), which were not constitutionally passed through the our State Legislative Assembly ( DUN),” she added.
Soo also said the PDA should not be applicable to Sarawak in reference to Article 160 Interpretation of the Federal Constitution, which stipulates that ‘ the Federation’ means the federation established under the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957.
“The Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957 does not include Sarawak, as Sarawak was never a signatory to the Agreement.
“Article 160 remains effective and binding for the Federation of Malaya Agreement which established the Federation of Malaya in 1957, and not for the Federation of Malaysia which was established in 1963,” she added.
Soo thus called upon the Sarawak government to strongly oppose the Petronas’ court application and proposed that the Sarawak government file a counter claim on several matters.
“That the PDA and TSA are unconstitutional because they altered the boundary of Sarawak without the consent of the DUN; that all oil and gas resources rightfully belong to Sarawak; an order that Petronas cease all its oil and gas operations onshore and offshore immediately; claim for damages to be assessed from the date Petronas entered Sarawak, to the date of the order; and whatever relief that the court deems fit.”
The Sarawak government, Soo added, must defend Sarawak rights and territorial integrity as the people of Sarawak would rally firmly behind them in defence of their motherland.
“The Sarawak government should engage a Queen’s Counsel, who is an expert in constitutional and international law, because I believe there is no existing credible legal expert in Malaysia who is capable of defending the constitutional rights of Sarawak,” she said.