Amendment Bill meant to restore country’s fundamental structure, says Chong
KUCHING: The Bill to amend Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution was meant to restore the ‘fundamental structure’ of the country first, before proceeding to negotiations over the rights of Sabah and Sarawak.
Pakatan Harapan (PH) Sarawak chairman Chong Chieng Jen said while Umno and PAS lawmakers had their own political agendas in not supporting the Bill, he questioned the reason for Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) MPs in abstaining from voting on the Bill on April 9.
“It (the Bill) was to create and restore the foundation of our nation, consisting of Sabah, Sarawak and Peninsula Malaysia, but it was still rejected.
“Since GPS could not convince the people (on why they abstained from voting), their tactic now is to confuse the people,” claimed Chong, who is Deputy Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs, during a talk at a coffee shop in Hui Sing Garden, here on Sunday night.
He added the amendment Bill had followed the original wordings of the Malaysia Agreement (MA63) and was definitely better than the amendment made in 1976, meaning there was no reason for GPS not to support it.
“The sincerity of the PH federal government to restore whatever that rightfully belongs to Sabah and Sarawak is always there,” he said, adding that Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad had even proposed setting up a Parliamentary Select Committee to oversee the implementation of MA63.
Chong stressed to those at the talk that negotiation on the rights of Sabah and Sarawak is an ongoing process, especially with the establishment of the steering, technical and working committees in regard to MA63.
The Stampin MP also said he believed in increasing the number of parliamentary seats for Sarawak, but said the process had to be carried out in a ‘ fair’ manner.
He said in MA63, it was stated that Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak should altogether command onethird of parliamentary seats in ensuring fair representation.
“Now with arguments surfacing that Sabah, Sarawak and Peninsula Malaysia should each command one-third of parliamentary seats, it actually exceeds the original agreement as stated in MA63.”
Chong also said that it would be difficult to negotiate for more parliamentary seats if Sarawak’s status is not first restored in the constitution, and Sarawak continues to remain as one of the 13 states in Malaysia.
On demands that the Petroleum Development Act 1974 be repealed, he pointed out that the entire oil and gas industry in the country would be affected, as the Act covered not only oil and gas in Sarawak, but also Sabah and Terengganu.
Meanwhile, Bandar Kuching MP Dr Kelvin Yii, who was also present at the talk, said the proposed amendment to Article 1(2) was actually recommended by the Sarawak government.
He said as there were concerns and dissatisfaction on the Bill when it was tabled for the first reading, the federal government subsequently made changes to the wordings before the second reading.
“From the beginning, the federal government always had the intention to restore the rightful status of Sabah and Sarawak.
“The demand by GPS MPs that the phrase ‘pursuant to Malaysia Agreement 1963’ be put into Article 1( 2) of the Federal Constitution was never raised by them during the discussion on restoring the rights of Sarawak,” he claimed.
Others who spoke at the event were Pending assemblywoman Violet Yong and Padungan assemblyman Wong King Wei.