KUCHING: Is the Malaysia Agreement 1963 valid?
Social media is abuzz with speculation and gossips after media statements by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Liew Vui Keong were construed as his affirmation that the federal government was inclined to not recognise the MA63 due to what it viewed as complications arising from Singapore’s involvement as a signatory to the document.
More gossips ensued when a message allegedly from Liew in the WhatsApp social media platform strengthened the theory that Putrajaya doesn’t recognise MA63.
SUPP Central Working Committee member and chairman of SUPP Stakan branch Sim Kiang Chiok joined the chorus of voices in Sarawak asking the question whether MA63 is valid?
“Should MA63 be invalid, what would that mean for Sarawak? Does this mean we are now free? Were we all colonised, enslaved and exploited for the last 54 years since Singapore left?” he said in a statement here yesterday.
“The minister should clarify his statement and be very clear on what he said.
“If the government really doesn’t recognise MA63, then my understanding is that Malaysia does not exist as well and following that logic, Sarawak need not argue … we are free already from the obligations in MA63.
“It is SUPP Stakan branch’s stand that GPS was right to demand the words ‘pursuant to MA63’ be used in the constitution to rightly recognise the document that gave birth to the nation of Malaysia.
“Pakatan Harapan’s refusal and political games now prove that they were never sincere in this exercise,” he said.
Kelab Kesetiaan Sarawak president and MA63 activist Abdul Halim was livid with the minister’s remarks.
“Do not use sub clause ‘c’ State of Singapore as an excuse! Because the main and original reason to form Malaysia was to reunite only Singapore with Malaya without Sabah, Sarawak or even Brunei.
“Sarawak and Sabah came into the formation for the purpose of stabilising the population ratio without jeopardising Sarawak and Sabah’s identity as independent nations within the federation of Malaysia but Singapore was expelled by the Federal Government without the consent of Sarawak and Sabah on August 9, 1965,” Abdul Halim said.
He clarified in order to enlighten those whom he felt were being fed false information in the internet.
“Why Malaysia still exists after that date is because of Sarawak and Sabah still taking responsibility over their signature in MA63, but sadly somebody from Malaya is thinking otherwise as if the formation of Malaysia means the surrender of Sarawak and or Sabah to Malaya which is against the spirit of MA63.
“I don’t know what he (Liew) is really saying but either Singapore is still here with us or not (and clearly they are not), so the weight and final decision over the legitimacy of MA63 lies on Sarawak and Sabah for reasons that it was not Sarawak and Sabah which requested to Malaya to form Malaysia but it was the Federal Government of Malaya proposing Sarawak and Sabah to form Malaysia with Singapore.
“That is why it was Sarawak and Sabah which gave terms and conditions (when forming Malaysia) and it is still Sarawak and Sabah that have the legitimate right to determine the legitimacy of the document and to gauge and force the federal government to respect it, and that is why the Sarawak MPs asked to include the words “pursuant to MA63” in the constitutional amendment. We (Malaysians) ask for a genuine Malaysia; not the return of Singapore to the federation.”
The New Sarawak Tribune also reached out to the Sarawak representatives in Parliament for comment but were told that GPS will have a formal response to the remarks made by Liew.
