Sabah rights matter, says ex-Sabah Law Society head
Published on: Wednesday, June 19, 2024
Roger said although SLS as a body of advocates in Sabah did not suffer a personal wrong, one of SLS’s objectives is “to uphold the cause of justice without regard to its own interests.”
Kota Kinabalu: SLS Immediate Past President Datuk Roger Chin feels vindicated by the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of the Federal Attorney-General's appeal that, among others, it has no locus standi to proceed with the judicial review on the 40pc tax revenue entitlement.
“The Court was not persuaded by the AG’s arguments. Nor was it convinced that the decision in the Review Order 2022 following an Article 112D-Review was not justiciable (i.e., amenable to judicial review),” he said, Tuesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
“They considered the historical facts that provide the factual context for this judicial review,” he said, adding that it was also clear that SLS did not act as a busybody as it was earlier made to appear.
“The judicial review application concerns the Special Grant provided for Sabah under Article 112C and section 2 of Part IV of the Tenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution.
The Special Grant was agreed to by all parties when Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore formed Malaysia by signing the Malaysia Agreement 1963 on 9.7.1963 with the Federation of Malaysia and the United Kingdom. The Special Grant is subject to review under Article 112D.”
“Following the legal principles laid down in recent cases decided by the Court of Appeal and Federal Court (QSR Brands Bhd (2006), Malaysian Trade Union Congress (2011), and Datuk Bandar Kuala Lumpur (2023)), the judges agreed with SLS’ argument that this judicial review is a public interest litigation.
ADVERTISEMENT
“They did not accept the AG’s argument that SLS must have a personal interest in the subject matter.
The omission of the two governments to consider the period from 1974 to 2021 (48 years), referred to as the ‘Lost Years’, concerns the interpretation of provisions in the Federal Constitution, namely, Article 112C read with section 2(1) of Part IV of the Tenth Schedule and Article 112D.”
ADVERTISEMENT
Roger said although SLS as a body of advocates in Sabah did not suffer a personal wrong, one of SLS’s objectives is “to uphold the cause of justice without regard to its own interests.”
He said since the payment of the 40 per cent entitlement is from the Federation to Sabah, SLS is not pursuing this case for a personal grievance but as a matter benefiting Sabah and, by extension, its people.
The judges were satisfied that this is a public interest litigation. SLS was adversely affected as it has a real and genuine interest in the subject matter.
Chin noted the court held the view that to shut out SLS would be a retrograde step and not consonant with recent development of the law in this area.
The judges were of the view that whether the duties contained in Article 112C read with section 2(1) of Part IV of the Tenth Schedule and Article 112D have been complied with are legal issues.
“They involve the interpretation of those provisions in the Federal Constitution, and the Court is the body that should decide whether there is any breach or unlawfulness in the governments’ performance of their constitutional duties.”
SLS was also not asking the Court to perform an Article 112D-Review; that is to be done by the federal and Sabah state governments in accordance with the provisions of Article 112D read with Article 112C.
“The judges found this to be “a matter of high constitutional importance,” one for the Court to determine in the substantial hearing of this judicial review,” said Chin.
“Sabah rights matter and SLS will continue advocating for Sabah rights while remaining non partisan and independent of any political party,” Chin said.
Stay up-to-date by following Daily Express’s Telegram channel.
Daily Express Malaysia
