Sabah Needs Solutions,
Unity, and Honest Engagement
I
refer to the recent commentary and narratives published by the editor
of FMT’s Malay News Desk in relation to Sabah’s constitutional
rights and the broader discussion surrounding the implementation of
MA63 and Sabah’s 40% revenue entitlement.
While
differing opinions are part of a healthy democracy, it is important
that public discourse, especially on constitutional matters affecting
Sabah, is grounded in proper historical context and accurate facts.
Certain
recent commentaries have unfortunately created a misleading
impression by selectively portraying Warisan’s position and actions
without acknowledging the broader constitutional and political
developments that took place before and during the Warisan
administration.
At
the end of the day, regardless of political affiliation, we are all
Sabahans, and we all want what is best for Sabah and its people.
The
rakyat are less interested in political rhetoric or competitions over
who is “more Sabahan.” What the people truly want are practical
solutions, transparent governance, and sincere efforts to defend
Sabah’s rights and future.
Constructive
Opposition Is Part of Democracy
The
role of the opposition is not merely to criticise, but also to offer
ideas, raise concerns responsibly, and contribute solutions where
necessary.
That
is precisely why the motion brought forward by the ADUN for Kapayan
was tabled — not to create unnecessary conflict, but to encourage
transparency, accountability, and a more structured discussion
regarding Sabah’s 40% constitutional rights.
One
of the key principles behind the motion is that separating legacy
claims from new claims is both a practical and strategic approach.
The
motion clearly distinguishes interim special grants from Sabah’s
actual 40% constitutional entitlement under the Federal Constitution,
so that temporary arrangements are not misconstrued as a final
settlement of Sabah’s rights. This distinction is important because
interim payment should not be misunderstood as a final settlement of
Sabah’s entitlement.
It
further seeks a clear timeline and structured framework to ensure
this long-standing issue is resolved with certainty after decades of
negotiations and legal processes. More importantly, the motion is
intended not merely to criticise, but to assist the government in
identifying practical and lawful pathways to recover what is
constitutionally owed to Sabah. Ultimately, this issue transcends
politics, as it concerns Sabah’s future, fiscal strength, and the
constitutional rights of future generations of Sabahans.
By
focusing on claims for the 2022–2025 period, Sabah no longer needs
to remain trapped in prolonged delays arising from older disputes
that have dragged on for years without resolution.
This
approach is not about abandoning historical claims. It is about
ensuring Sabah can move forward strategically and begin securing
tangible outcomes instead of remaining stuck in endless procedural
and political delays.
However,
the real question now is this:
Who
truly has the courage and political will to push until Sabah fully
secures what rightfully belongs to it?
Questions
raised in the Dewan should never be viewed negatively. The Dewan
exists precisely so that matters affecting the people can be debated
openly, responsibly, and constructively.
Historical
Context Must Be Viewed Fairly
Recent
attempts to place blame solely on Warisan regarding Sabah’s 40%
constitutional entitlement issue should be viewed fairly and within
proper historical context.
Before
2019, Sabah was governed for decades by many of the same political
networks and political figures who today continue to exist within
different coalitions and political branding. Following the political
shift in 2018, many of these same structures simply reorganised
themselves under different arrangements.
Warisan
governed Sabah for only a relatively short period of approximately
two years. Yet within that limited timeframe, the issue of Sabah’s
constitutional entitlement was elevated into a serious national
discussion involving actual payment mechanisms, negotiations, and
financial figures.
For
many years before 2019, very little visible progress was achieved on
this issue despite the previous administration having governed Sabah
for a much longer period.
It
must also be remembered that prior to the Warisan administration,
there were no major visible breakthroughs or concrete outcomes
regarding Sabah’s constitutional revenue rights, apart from the
establishment of a technical committee relating to MA63 chaired at
the time by former Foreign Minister Tan Sri Anifah Aman. On this
note, a great beginning move headed by Anifah.
Thereafter,
the responsibility was continued under Datuk Seri Nancy Shukri.
However, despite those institutional efforts, the rakyat generally
did not see or feel significant progress on the ground regarding
Sabah’s constitutional claims and financial entitlements during
that period.
The
issue only began receiving wider national attention and more serious
political urgency when the Warisan administration elevated the matter
into direct and active state-federal engagement involving actual
negotiations, figures, and implementation discussions.
It
is therefore inaccurate and misleading to selectively isolate one
administrative letter or negotiation point without acknowledging the
broader reality that the Warisan administration was among the first
to push aggressively for serious financial recognition of Sabah’s
constitutional rights.
The
RM53.4 million issue must also be understood within the framework of
ongoing negotiations and constitutional processes at that material
time. It was never intended to compromise or abandon Sabah’s
constitutional position.
It
must also be acknowledged that if not for the pressure and political
urgency created during the Warisan administration, there may not even
have been an interim special grant discussion in the first place.
Whatever
differing political views may exist today, the reality remains that
the issue of Sabah’s constitutional revenue rights only began to
seriously shake federal attention when Warisan elevated the matter
into a major state-federal issue backed by sustained political
pressure, negotiation, and public accountability.
The
existence of interim grant arrangements itself demonstrates that
Sabah’s demands could no longer be ignored once the issue was
aggressively brought to the forefront during that period.
I
would also like to thank Armizan Mohd Ali for reminding the rakyat
that 2019 was indeed a significant turning point in Sabah’s 40%
constitutional rights discussion.
2019
was the year Sabahans finally saw a more concrete and structured
starting point on the 40% issue under the Warisan administration.
While the matter remains unresolved today even in the second term of
GRS led government, it cannot be denied that important groundwork and
formal engagement began during that period.
This
is not about claiming exclusive credit, but about acknowledging
historical facts fairly and ensuring that every genuine effort to
defend Sabah’s constitutional rights continues to be strengthened
moving forward.
In
fact, the broader national conversation today regarding Sabah’s
entitlement exists because the issue was revived, prioritised, and
pushed seriously during the Warisan administration.
Transparency
Strengthens Public Confidence
The
recent discussions regarding figures and negotiations involving
Sabah’s revenue entitlement demonstrate clearly that this issue
remains highly important to the people of Sabah.
If
figures and negotiation updates can be announced publicly, then
greater clarity and engagement in the Dewan would only strengthen
public confidence and ensure the rakyat fully understand the
direction being taken.
This
is not about attacking any individual or party. It is about ensuring
Sabah’s rights are defended in a transparent, united, and credible
manner.
Support
for Institutional and Legal Processes
Warisan
has consistently respected legal and institutional processes relating
to Sabah’s constitutional rights, including efforts undertaken by
the Sabah Law Society in matters relating to the 40% revenue
entitlement.
Legal
processes and legislative discussions should complement one another,
not be treated as mutually exclusive.
Sabah’s
constitutional rights require both legal persistence and political
courage.
Proposal
for a Bipartisan Sabah Rights Task Force
Moving
forward, I would like to propose that the State Government establish
a bipartisan special task force focused specifically on Sabah’s 40%
constitutional rights and related MA63 financial matters.
This
task force should involve:
-Government
representatives
-Opposition
representatives
-Legal,
constitutional and accounting experts
-Relevant
stakeholders and civil society
The
issue of Sabah’s constitutional rights is bigger than politics. It
requires continuity, unity, and a long-term strategy that goes beyond
party lines and election cycles.
As
ADUN for Kapayan, I am prepared to be among the first to offer my
full cooperation and participation in such a bipartisan effort for
the benefit of Sabah.
Conclusion
Sabah’s
future cannot be built through division alone. It must be built
through courage, transparency, and cooperation.
The
people expect all sides — government and opposition alike — to
rise above political narratives and work together in defending
Sabah’s rights, strengthening its institutions, and securing a
better future for the next generation.
END
Issued
by:
CHIN
TEK MING
ADUN
N.25 KAPAYAN
7
MAY 2026
