KOTA KINABALU: N.25 Kapayan Assemblyman Chin Tek Ming views seriously the statement by Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor who continues to describe the issue of Sabah’s 40% net revenue entitlement as “still under negotiation.”
According to him, the legal reality and current developments clearly show that the matter has already entered the judicial process after being decided at the Kota Kinabalu High Court and is now before the Court of Appeal.
He said the issue would not have entered the court system if negotiations had truly reached a fair resolution consistent with the Federal Constitution.
He stated that previous High Court proceedings had demonstrated significant failures in implementing Sabah’s rights under Article 112C and the Tenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution.
At the same time, Chin also expressed concern that the Chief Minister continues to state that payment of Sabah’s 40% entitlement depends on the “financial capability” of the Federal Government.
According to him, Sabah’s 40% entitlement is not compassionate aid, not political funding, and not a voluntary contribution, but a constitutional right that must be implemented without fiscal excuses or political considerations.
He also referred to a statement by government-appointed Assemblyman Roger Chin during a forum that the case would most likely end up before the Federal Court.
He said the statement indirectly confirmed that Sabah’s 40% issue is no longer merely a matter of “negotiation,” but has become a constitutional dispute currently being determined through the country’s highest judicial process.
According to Chin, this raises a fundamental question: if negotiations are truly still progressing effectively, why has the matter entered litigation to the extent that it may ultimately reach the Federal Court?
He also raised concerns about the possibility of Sabah losing its entitlement to the 40% payments for the previous 48 years as well as for the years beginning from 2022 onwards if the Federal Court ruling does not favor Sabah.
In the same statement, Chin also expressed disappointment over the rejection of his private motion in the Sabah State Legislative Assembly by the GRS government.
According to him, the motion was not intended to interfere with or replace the existing court case, nor was it a duplication of ongoing judicial proceedings.
Instead, he said the motion specifically aimed to address Sabah’s rights after 2021, including for the years 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025, and the years ahead.
He stated that Sabah’s rights under Article 112C do not end at a certain period but continue every year so long as the constitutional review and implementation mechanism has not been fully finalized.
According to him, the motion aimed to determine the official calculation of Sabah’s 40% entitlement for 2022 onwards, obtain full disclosure of the Federal Government’s actual revenue derived from Sabah, demand payment shortfalls based on the constitutional formula, and establish Sabah’s official position for future claims.
He said the motion was important to ensure Sabah does not lose its legal basis and constitutional standing for future claims.
However, according to Chin, the rejection of the motion sends a worrying signal that the GRS government is unwilling to bind itself to a transparent and continuous official position in defending Sabah’s rights after 2021.
He stated that the narrative of “still negotiating” is becoming increasingly difficult to defend now that the courts are involved, the High Court has already delivered its decision, and government leaders themselves acknowledge the possibility of an appeal to the Federal Court.
He stressed that the people of Sabah deserve clarity and have the right to know the actual amount of revenue obtained by the Federal Government from Sabah and how the 40% entitlement is continuously calculated and implemented.
He emphasized that all of Sabah’s natural resources belong to the people of Sabah, and Sabah’s rights must not continue to be delayed or hidden behind endless “negotiations.”
According to him, Sabah’s rights are constitutional rights that must be calculated, claimed, defended, and fully implemented in accordance with the Federal Constitution and the original spirit of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).
