KUCHING: Gabungan Parti Sarawak’s (GPS) chief whip Datuk Ibrahim Baki has rejected former law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim’s claims that Sarawak’s assertion of rights over the Oil Mining Ordinance 1958 (OMO) is “misguided and disingenuous.”
In a statement Saturday, Ibrahim pointed to the Federal Constitution, specifically Item 8(j) of List I (Federal List) in the Ninth Schedule, which, he argued, is subject to Item 2(c) of the State List.
He explained that while the federation may have authority over the development of natural resources, including oil and oil fields, such power is subject to the provisions of Item 2(c) under the State List.
“In Malaysia, the federal constitution is supreme. It lays down who has the legislative authority over ‘exploitation’ of resources like petroleum and these resources are part of land.
“Hence under Item 2 of the List (State List) in the Ninth Schedule of the federal constitution, the state has legislative (and hence executive) authority over ‘land’. Such legislative authority includes under Item 2(c) the issuance of prospecting licences, mining leases and certificates,” he said in a statement.
This statement comes in response to Zaid’s recent remarks that the Petroleum Mining Act 1966 and Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA) effectively nationalised the exploitation of onshore petroleum resources.
Ibrahim, who is also Satok assemblyman, added that all states, including Sarawak, have the right to regulate petroleum mining or the development of oil fields on land within their jurisdiction.
He pointed out that federal powers to develop petroleum resources must adhere to the state’s authority, especially regarding the issuance of prospecting licences and mining leases under Item 2(c).
“Bear in mind, the Constitution, and not Parliament, is supreme. On what constitutional basis did Parliament pass the Petroleum Mining Act 1966 to authorise a federal ‘Petroleum Authority’ to issue mining leases?”
“Perhaps, Datuk Zaid can enlighten every Malaysian, under what provision of the federal constitution, is Parliament empowered to pass a law to vest all petroleum found onshore and offshore Sarawak in Petronas?”
He asserted that unless these constitutional questions are convincingly addressed, Sarawakians have every reason to feel aggrieved.
“They have been deprived of their rights to exploit petroleum resources found onshore and offshore through laws enacted by Parliament without proper constitutional authority.
“Sarawakians want a more equitable and fair share of the revenue from petroleum produced in Sarawak, after having contributed almost RM1 trillion to the federal coffers since the advent of the Petroleum Development Act, 1974 and more natural gas to support its industrial development and power generation expansion,” he added.
In July, Premier Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Abang Johari Tun Openg had said that the OMO and PDA should co-exist in terms of the development of oil and gas mining in the region.
He said while the interpretation of the PDA is absolute, it cannot overrule or breach the constitution.
“Our supreme law is our Constitution. But in the Constitution, what happened before Malaysia is still valid.
“This means OMO was already there in 1958; it was not repealed, which means the law still exists where Sarawak has some power in terms of oil and gas in the mining industry,” he said.
