KOTA KINABALU – Former chief minister Datuk Seri Yong Teck Lee has called for a total revamp of the Sabah Attorney-General’s Chambers in view of four pressing constitutional issues facing the state.
He pointed out that one of the constitutional issues was the Sulu claim, whereby a Spanish court in Madrid had ordered that Malaysia be properly summoned – i.e., that the original summons to the Stampa arbitration was not done properly by procedure.
The same court had also ordered that the proceedings to appoint a new arbitrator be restarted.
In other words, although Malaysia’s law minister Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said had beaten Spanish arbitrator Gonzalez Stampa, she did not beat the Sulu case.
So now, if the Sulu lawyers wish to do so, the entire arbitration process would have to be restarted.
“Is our Sabah AG ready? Or does Sabah leave everything to the federal AG? Don’t forget that a serious mistake in acknowledging the Sulu claim of the 1878 ‘pajak’ was made by the then-federal AG based on wrong historical facts,” said Yong, who is a lawyer by profession.
He said the second issue was the Territorial Sea Act 2012, which through the federal government’s rebuttal to Terengganu showed that Putrajaya was similarly denying Sabah’s territorial sea limits under the British Order in Council 1954 and the Federal Constitution in defining the territory of the Malaysian federation.
“This constitutional case has huge economic and financial implications to Sabah. This case will need top legal minds and strategists,” he said.
Yong, who is also a nominated assemblyman, added the third issue was Putrajaya’s unconstitutional interference in the administration of villages in Sabah by arbitrarily forming Madani Village Community Committees along party political lines.
According to him, village administration was the third and lowest tier of government in the Malaysian federal system. This third tier of government is the exclusive jurisdiction of the Sabah government.
“What is going to be the legal advice of the AG to the Sabah government?” he asked in a statement today.
Lastly, is the fiasco of the handling of the judicial review over Sabah’s 40% net revenue entitlement under Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal constitution.
Yong said the judicial review application by the Sabah Law Society (SLS) in June 2022 had received the support of the Sabah government at the time. Surely, he said, the Sabah AG’s Chambers had always been aware of the Sabah government’s support of the SLS application for judicial review.
“My known fact is that nobody from the AG’s Chambers was with lawyer Datuk Tengku Fuad Ahmad at the Court of Appeal. Where was the Sabah attorney-general? Why was no lawyer from the AG’s Chambers assigned to be present at the Court of Appeal on May 16, 2024? Where was everyone?”
Sabah Attorney-General Datuk Nor Asiah Mohd Yusof said in a statement yesterday: “The Sabah AG’s Chambers has been actively participating in all matters (relating to the 40% net revenue) together with the Sabah Finance Ministry and the federal government”.
Yong asked: “So, why was no lawyer from the Sabah AG’s Chambers present with lawyer Tengku Fuad at the Court of Appeal to firmly state the stand of the Sabah government on the 40% net revenue claim?”
Yesterday, Liberal Democratic Party president Datuk Chin Su Phin said Nor Asiah must and should take charge of such important matters concerning the state’s rights and revenue, and should not have left it to an appointed legal counsel who may not have been properly instructed on the official stand and position of the state government.
Chin said the six component parties of Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) had had a meeting where Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor asserted that the state government did not appoint Tengku Fuad as the legal counsel to represent the administration.
He said this issue seemed to be a political conspiracy to topple the GRS government and tarnish the reputation of the chief minister. – May 20, 2024
