KUCHING: Advocates Association of Sarawak, Miri Branch ex-chairman David Siaw said that it was not necessary for a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) to look into Sarawak and Sabah’s discontent.
He explained that if a RCI was accepted by both the federal and Sarawak governments to look into such matters, it would be a waste of public money and time.
He pointed out that it would be a meaningless exercise for several reasons.
Firstly, he said, any recommendations from the findings on such RCI which favoured Sarawak would wholly be dependent on the political will of the government, that is, the federal Parliament of the day.
“Furthermore, the total number of Sarawak and Sabah MPs in the Dewan Rakyat is less than half of the total seats. Therefore, any legislations favouring Sarawak and Sabah which involve giving greater autonomy to the state governments or giving more finance control provisions will involve amending the Federal Constitution (FC) and we just do have the two third majority to entrench such favourable legislations as the Malayan MPs may not support such amendments or new legislations favouring Sarawak.
“Therefore, any favourable RCI on Sarawak’s discontent will be another toothless tiger and a mere attempt to appease the discontented activists in Sarawak and perhaps, giving them the illusory hope. Nevertheless, one just needs to look with dismal and distrust at the records of the previous governments of not taking any viable actions or seriousness at all after receding the numerous RCI reports over the years,” he told New Sarawak when contacted on Monday (Aug 23).
Recently, Constitutional law expert Prof Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi suggested having a Royal Commission to look into Sarawak and Sabah’s discontent.
Siaw, a senior legal practitioner, added the latest Cabinet Committee on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), formed last year by the then Perikatan Nasional (PN) government which somehow replaced the Special Cabinet Committee on the MA63 set up by the Pakatan Harapan (PH) government in 2018, was just incompetent and powerless.
“There will be very little if no difference at all if the present government were to get rid of the Cabinet Committee on MA63 and decides to thoughtlessly go through the hassle of appointing a new RCI as it will be playing a mere advisory role to the government,” he said.
More importantly, Siaw said the inquiry into Sarawak’s discontent would involve a much more intellectual discourse into the agreements between the inter-governmental parties prior to the formation of Malaysia with respect to the preservation of Sarawak’s autonomous rights.
That, he added, would involve a deep knowledge of the constitutional issues surrounding the formation of Malaysia and identifying the gradual dilution of the state’s rights.
“Furthermore, Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Commissions of Enquiry Act 1950 limits or prohibits the Agong from directly setting up the proposed RCI whereby the subject matter or scope of inquiries touch on matters specified in Item 10 of the State List in relation to Sabah or Sarawak.
“Item 10 of the State List, as defined in the Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution (List II- State List), strictly provides for ‘Inquiries for State purposes, including commissions of inquiry and collection of statistics with respect to any of the matters included in the State List or dealt with by State law.
“As the words ‘commissions of inquiry’ is clearly stated in Item 10, there may be challenges if any proposed RCI is set up on any subject matter by interpreting widely the meaning of ‘State purposes’ and/or ‘matters included in the State List’ in Item 10,” Siaw explained.
Thus, he suggested that the federal government together with the Sarawak government relook into deep details and seriously appreciate the Reports and Recommendations of the Cobbold Commission of 1962 prior to the formation of Malaysia.
“The Cobbold Commission was not taken seriously into consideration by the power-that-be because the reports would reflect on their shortcomings. They may also raise from the dead the thorny issues of Singapore leaving Malaysia in 1965 — which does not augur well if Sarawak were to decide on such a course due to perhaps any fundamental breaches of the terms of Constitutional Agreements between the Federation of Malay States, the Strait Settlements, Sabah and Sarawak,” he said.
To avoid being bound to the provisions of the FC, Siaw added, the state government, in all its seriousness to resolve its listed discontentment, ought to propose a State Referendum with carefully drafted questions to be put to a vote together with the coming state election so that the federal Parliament would definitely look seriously into remedying such dissatisfaction.
“As a constitutional lawyer, I believe that the German word ‘Grundnorm’ allows and fundamentally empowers the Sarawak government to suggest such a mini referendum, along with the state election, to save costs and efforts.
“‘Grundnorm’ is a word which denotes the ‘Basic Norm’ upon which the order or rule that forms the underlying basis of a legal system and is therefore the most fundamental and original source of authority which empowers and/or legitimises all the underlying constitutional institutions. It shall avoid any argument by conveniently referring to the provisions of the FC,” said Siaw.
