KOTA KINABALU: Sungai Sibuga Assemblywoman, YB Nurulalsah Hassan Alban, took note of the latest statement by Datuk Joniston Bangkuai who once again claimed that the GRS government remains “committed” and that the issue of Sabah’s 40% claim is still under negotiation.
According to her, the statement merely repeats an old narrative without answering the main question regarding the actual direction of Sabah’s 40% rights claim.
She said attempts to portray the increase of the Special Grant to RM600 million and the Petronas Commercial Collaboration Agreement (CCA) as absolute proof of success are misleading to the people.
She stressed that the people of Sabah must understand the difference between receiving a “compassionate token payment” and defending Sabah’s “absolute sovereign rights”.
According to her, the RM600 million increase through Gazette P.U.(A) 271/2025 does not constitute a lawful legal revision to P.U.(A) 328/1970, which forms the basis of Sabah’s 40% net revenue formula.
Instead, she said the new gazette is merely a form of interim grant or ad-hoc federal grant created by the Federal Government without restoring the original 40% claim formula in its true form.
She said that by celebrating the grant, the GRS government is effectively trapped in a Federal political game that replaces the original rights formula with interim lump-sum payments.
Nurulalsah likened the situation to Sabah owning rights over its own inherited land but ultimately only receiving an “annual discount” from another party just to remain on that land.
She said Sabah is the rightful owner of the rights and not a beggar seeking handouts from the Federal Government.
She stated that the people of Sabah have heard the narratives of “still negotiating”, “still committed”, and “still in process” for too long without any concrete outcome based on the Shared Growth principle which should form the basis of Sabah’s claim.
According to her, after years under the GRS administration, the state government has still failed to present a clear implementation plan to restore Sabah’s actual 40% formula.
She also questioned the absence of a definitive and transparent resolution timeline as well as a claim mechanism that can be audited by the people of Sabah.
She said that until today, the people have only witnessed a series of fixed grant gazettes such as Gazette 119/2022, 364/2023, and 271/2025 which, according to her, diminish the dignity of Sabah’s financial rights.
In the same statement, Nurulalsah also raised questions regarding the ongoing Court of Appeal proceedings related to the claim.
She questioned how the state government could continue using the narrative of “harmonious negotiations” while Sabah’s rights are simultaneously being disputed in court.
According to her, the people of Sabah have the right to know whether the government is negotiating as an equal partner or merely searching for political excuses to gradually surrender.
She said the people of Sabah no longer want to hear recycled political excuses without tangible results.
According to her, if negotiations are truly ongoing, then the state government must openly explain the form and terms of the negotiations to the public.
She also questioned whether the ongoing negotiations are genuinely pursuing the absolute rights under the 40% formula or merely discussing annual payment increases from Putrajaya.
In addition, she demanded that the government clarify who represents Sabah in the negotiations and whether they possess a strong legal mandate to defend the state’s rights.
Nurulalsah also demanded clarification on when a final resolution would be achieved before Sabah’s rights continue to be delayed and lose their true value due to the passage of time.
She stressed that the phrase “still negotiating” can no longer be used to lull the people without a clear direction.
According to her, this is why the Kapayan Motion was previously filed to compel government transparency through debate in the Sabah State Legislative Assembly.
However, she said the rejection of the motion only raises questions as to whether the current government is truly serious about resolving Sabah’s 40% rights issue or merely using it as seasonal political propaganda.
She stressed that Sabah’s 40% rights are not political publicity material but constitutional rights enshrined under the 1962 IGC Report and MA63.
She asserted that the people of Sabah want truth, implementation, and the genuine restoration of Sabah’s sovereign rights — not lump-sum rhetoric that, according to her, could sacrifice the future of the next generation.
