Press Release: 40% Revenue Fight: Stop Hiding Behind Process — Sabah Deserves Action, Not Delay
KOTA KINABALU, 8 April 2026 — The handling of Sabah's 40% revenue entitlement by both the Federal and State Governments demands scrutiny — not only over what has been delayed, but also over what has never been answered.
Warisan Supreme Council Member and legal advocate Chen Ket Chuin (KC Chen) stated that the Court of Appeal's decision to grant a stay has exposed systemic failures and raised questions far beyond the courtroom.
The Stay Was Not a Surprise — It Was the Plan
"Let's be clear about what happened. The High Court gave both governments 90 days to conduct a review. That deadline expired on 14 January 2026. According to the Federal Government's own admission in court, only four meetings were held with the State Government in that period. Four meetings in 90 days. That is not a review — it is a 'performance'."
"At that pace, the 180-day agreement deadline of 15 April was never going to be met. The stay was not requested due to difficulty — it was always the exit strategy."
"I challenge both governments to make the minutes of these meetings public. Sabahans have the right to know what was discussed, what proposals were made, and what — if anything — was achieved. If these meetings were genuine, there should be nothing to hide. If they were hollow, the people deserve to know that too."
"Even with a court-imposed timeline, there was no urgency. Now that the stay has removed that timeline entirely, we are back to square one — with no deadline, no pressure, and no accountability. If both governments could not deliver with a court order, what reason do Sabahans have to believe anything will be delivered without one?"
KC Chen added that the GRS State Government’s passive compliance with the stay decision is deeply concerning. "This is not prudence — it is capitulation. At the critical juncture for Sabah’s constitutional rights, the Hajiji administration chose the path of least resistance."
If the 40% Is Not in Dispute — Then Pay Up
Chen highlighted that the Attorney General's Chambers has publicly stated that the appeal does not challenge Sabah’s 40% entitlement under Article 112C of the Federal Constitution.
"If the entitlement formula is not in dispute, there is no legal reason to withhold payment from 2025 onwards. The appeal concerns the 'lost years' and the constitutional findings — not the ongoing right. So pay what is owed now, and argue about the past later."
"Will the Federal Government commit to paying Sabah its rightful 40% starting immediately? If the right is acknowledged and the formula remains unchanged, what is the excuse for further delay?" he asked.
Everyone Focuses on the Past — But What About Now?
Chen said that debates have focused excessively on the 'lost years' of 1974 to 2021, while a more urgent question remains unanswered.
"What about 2022? 2023? 2024? 2025? 2026? If the entitlement has been acknowledged but not implemented, the 'lost years' are not history — they are still happening. Every year that passes without payment is another year added to Sabah’s loss."
He added that Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has publicly acknowledged Sabah’s 40% revenue share. "If that acknowledgment is sincere, it must be backed by immediate action — not prolonged negotiations that risk becoming a delaying tactic."
Show Us the Number
Chen further challenged both governments to disclose the actual amount owed to Sabah.
"After 47 years of non-payment, not a single figure has been made public. Is it RM10 billion? RM50 billion? RM100 billion? Nobody knows — and that is unacceptable."
"The High Court has already found that the Federal Government acted unlawfully — not incorrectly, not inadequately, but unlawfully — for nearly five decades. The Court of Appeal stay does not erase that finding. The unlawfulness stands."
"If the State Government is serious about defending Sabah’s rights, it should demand a full public accounting. Sabahans have a right to know the number. Transparency is not a threat to negotiations — secrecy is," he said.
A Constitutional Breach, Not a Revenue Dispute
Chen stressed that this case must be understood for what it truly is.
"This is not a revenue dispute. This is a constitutional breach — a finding by the High Court that Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution have been violated for 47 years. The Malaysia Agreement 1963 is the foundation of Sabah’s place in the Federation."
"When treated as a mere budgetary negotiation, its significance is diminished. The Federal Government breached the Constitution. The State Government failed to enforce it. Both must be held accountable."
"Either GRS stands up for Sabah — or it stands exposed. Sabahans will remember who fought, and who folded," he concluded.
Chen Ket Chuin @ KC
8 April 2026
