Selepas 24 Tahun Pemerintahan Gagal UMNO, Rakyat Sabah Mesti Tolak Parti Ini Selama-lamanya

Borneo Herald

11.00AM MYT, 19-10-2025

Oleh Jayden Lisandu

KOTA KINABALU : Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS) hari ini menyatakan bahawa cubaan terbaru UMNO untuk menggambarkan dirinya sebagai parti “Sabahan” hanyalah sandiwara politik semata-mata bagi memperdayakan pengundi menjelang pilihan raya negeri pada 29 November ini.

Jurucakap CAMOS, Calextus Edwin, berkata kenyataan Presiden UMNO merangkap Pengerusi Barisan Nasional (BN), Datuk Ahmad Zahid Hamidi — bahawa “insya-Allah BN bersedia membentuk kerajaan bersama parti-parti lain atas dasar perkongsian kuasa” (Malay Mail, 18 Oktober 2025) — sebenarnya mendedahkan niat sebenar UMNO: untuk menapak semula di Sabah melalui perjanjian politik, bukan melalui kepercayaan rakyat.

“Selepas 24 tahun pemerintahan panjang UMNO dari 1994 hingga 2018, rakyat Sabah tahu apa maksud sebenar ‘perkongsian kuasa’ — ia bukan kerjasama, tetapi penaklukan Persekutuan yang diselindungi dengan slogan perpaduan.

"Segala dasar, kontrak dan keputusan penting akhirnya tunduk kepada Kuala Lumpur. Hasilnya, Sabah semakin miskin, terbahagi dan bergantung,” kata Calextus yang juga Ketua Penyelaras CAMOS Kimanis dalam satu kenyataan di sini.

Sepanjang tempoh itu, UMNO secara sistematik melemahkan institusi-institusi Sabah, mengurangkan autonomi negeri, dan membiarkan kemiskinan serta rasuah berleluasa, sementara berbilion ringgit hasil minyak, balak dan cukai disedut keluar dari Sabah.

Lebih parah lagi, di bawah pemerintahan UMNO, pendatang tanpa izin diberi kad pengenalan dan kemudiannya didaftarkan sebagai pengundi, sehingga mengubah komposisi demografi dan landskap politik Sabah untuk selama-lamanya.

“Ini bukan sekadar kegagalan pentadbiran — ia adalah tindakan yang disengajakan untuk merampas hak demokratik dan kedaulatan rakyat Sabah,” tegasnya lagi.

Jika benar UMNO peduli tentang Sabah, katanya lagi, mereka sudah lama memulangkan hak 40% hasil bersih negeri seperti yang termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan — bukannya mempertahankan penggantungannya yang tidak sah, kata lagi.

Menurut Calextus, mereka juga sepatutnya mengembalikan pilihan raya kerajaan tempatan, bukannya menghapuskan sistem tersebut, serta memberdayakan rakyat Sabah, bukannya menggantikan mereka dengan kepentingan luar.

Beliau turut menempelak dakwaan Zahid bahawa UMNO kini mempunyai autonomi di Sabah sebagai janji kosong lama yang diulang dengan kata-kata baharu.

“UMNO tidak boleh membersihkan dosa politiknya hanya dengan mengaku diri sebagai parti ‘Sabahan’. Parti ini sejak awal hingga kini tetap menjadi simbol penguasaan politik Malaya terhadap Sabah. 

"Rekod kegagalannya terukir dalam sejarah pengkhianatan — daripada penindasan ekonomi hinggalah kepada manipulasi demografi,” ujarnya lagi.

Sehubungan itu, beliau menyeru seluruh rakyat Sabah — khususnya generasi muda — agar menolak UMNO dan Barisan Nasional sekali dan untuk selamanya.

“Masa depan Sabah tidak boleh lagi ditentukan dari Malaya. Kita telah belajar daripada sejarah, dan kita tidak akan diperbodohkan lagi. Pilihan raya kali ini, Sabah mesti memilih maruah, autonomi, dan masa depan yang diterajui oleh anak-anak Sabah sendiri," katanya.

Calextus Edwin ialah Ketua Penyelaras Kawasan Kimanis bagi NGO Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS)#~Borneo Herald™

Anwar’s “Misleading Interpretation” Remark Misses the Real Issue — The 40% Entitlement Is a Constitutional Right, Not a Federal Gift

                          Daniel John Jambun 

Borneo Herald 

4.5.00PM MYT, 22-10-2025

KOTA KINABALU : The Borneo Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) today expressed concern over Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s remarks in Parliament suggesting that the Kota Kinabalu High Court’s ruling on Sabah’s 40% federal revenue entitlement “invites misleading interpretations” as though the Federal Government merely takes revenue from the state without contributing to its development.

BoPiMaFo said this statement mischaracterizes the essence of the High Court’s judgment, which did not in any way question or diminish the Federal Government’s development role. Instead, the Court simply affirmed a constitutional duty under Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution — that the Federal Government is legally bound to return 40% of the net federal revenue derived from Sabah as part of the original financial arrangements agreed upon under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

“The Prime Minister’s comment risks confusing the public. The Court’s decision was not about development assistance or federal contributions, but about restoring constitutional compliance that has been ignored for over five decades,” BoPiMaFo said.

Development spending by the Federal Government is discretionary and political in nature, whereas the 40% entitlement is mandatory and constitutional. One does not replace or offset the other.

“For far too long, successive federal administrations — including the present one — have failed to carry out the periodic financial reviews required every five years under Article 112D. The High Court ruling merely directs Putrajaya to fulfil this long-neglected legal obligation,” the Foundation added.

BoPiMaFo said that if there has been any misleading interpretation, it is not from the Court, but from those who continue to frame Sabah’s constitutional rights as an act of federal generosity.

“The 40% entitlement is not a grant, not a subsidy, and not a favour. It is a right enshrined in Malaysia’s founding constitution — part of the solemn bargain that persuaded Sabah to join the Federation. To imply otherwise is to undermine the very foundation of MA63,” the statement read.

BoPiMaFo therefore urges the Prime Minister and his Cabinet to accept the High Court judgment in good faith, comply fully with the directive to conduct the joint review with the Sabah Government, and stop treating constitutional compliance as a matter of political discretion.

“As the head of a government that professes to uphold reform and justice, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim must ensure that Malaysia honours both the letter and spirit of MA63 — not reinterpret them for political convenience,” BoPiMaFo concluded.

Daniel John Jambun

President

Borneo's Plight in Malaysia foundation {BoPiMaFo}

Versi Bahasa Malaysia:

Kenyataan “Tafsiran Mengelirukan” Anwar Tersasar — Hak 40% Adalah Hak Perlembagaan, Bukan Pemberian Persekutuan

KOTA KINABALU — Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) hari ini menyuarakan kebimbangan terhadap kenyataan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim di Parlimen yang menyifatkan keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi Kota Kinabalu berhubung hak Sabah kepada 40% hasil Persekutuan sebagai sesuatu yang “mengundang tafsiran mengelirukan”, seolah-olah Kerajaan Persekutuan hanya mengambil hasil dari negeri ini tanpa menyumbang kepada pembangunan.

BoPiMaFo berkata kenyataan itu telah menyalahertikan intipati sebenar keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi yang sama sekali tidak menafikan peranan Kerajaan Persekutuan dalam pembangunan negeri. Sebaliknya, Mahkamah hanya mengesahkan kewajipan perlembagaan di bawah Perkara 112C dan 112D Perlembagaan Persekutuan — bahawa Kerajaan Persekutuan terikat secara undang-undang untuk memulangkan 40% daripada hasil bersih Persekutuan yang diperoleh dari Sabah sebagai sebahagian daripada perjanjian kewangan asal yang dipersetujui di bawah Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 (MA63).

“Kenyataan Perdana Menteri itu boleh mengelirukan rakyat. Keputusan Mahkamah bukanlah mengenai bantuan pembangunan atau sumbangan Persekutuan, tetapi mengenai pemulihan pematuhan terhadap Perlembagaan yang telah diabaikan lebih lima dekad,” kata BoPiMaFo.

Perbelanjaan pembangunan oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan bersifat discretionary dan berasaskan pertimbangan politik, manakala hak 40% tersebut bersifat mandatori dan termaktub dalam Perlembagaan. Kedua-duanya tidak boleh saling menggantikan antara satu sama lain.

“Sejak sekian lama, kerajaan-kerajaan Persekutuan — termasuk kerajaan sekarang — gagal melaksanakan semakan kewangan berkala yang diwajibkan setiap lima tahun di bawah Perkara 112D. Keputusan Mahkamah hanya mengarahkan Putrajaya untuk menunaikan kewajipan undang-undang yang telah lama diabaikan,” tambah kenyataan itu.

BoPiMaFo berkata bahawa jika terdapat sebarang tafsiran mengelirukan, ia bukan datang daripada Mahkamah, tetapi daripada mereka yang terus menggambarkan hak perlembagaan Sabah sebagai bentuk kemurahan hati Kerajaan Persekutuan.

“Hak 40% bukan geran, bukan subsidi, dan bukan ihsan. Ia adalah hak yang termaktub dalam Perlembagaan Malaysia — sebahagian daripada perjanjian muktamad yang meyakinkan Sabah untuk menyertai Persekutuan. Menyiratkan sebaliknya bermaksud menafikan asas sebenar MA63,” kata kenyataan itu lagi.

BoPiMaFo oleh itu menggesa Perdana Menteri dan Jemaah Menteri supaya menerima keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi itu dengan niat baik, mematuhi sepenuhnya arahan untuk melaksanakan semakan bersama dengan Kerajaan Negeri Sabah, dan berhenti memperlakukan pematuhan perlembagaan sebagai isu pilihan politik.

“Sebagai ketua kerajaan yang mengaku memperjuangkan reformasi dan keadilan, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim mesti memastikan Malaysia menghormati bukan sahaja teks tetapi juga semangat MA63 — dan bukannya menafsirkannya semula demi kepentingan politik,” BoPiMaFo menegaskan.

Daniel John Jambun

Presiden

Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)#~Borneo Herald™

A GRS Victory Means Five More Years of Ruthless Abuse, Rampant Corruption, and Shameless Plundering of Sabah’s Wealth

                            Chrisnadia Sinam 

Borneo Herald 

1.50PM MYT, 21-10-2025

Statement by Chrisnadia Sinam, Head of Wanita Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS)  

KOTA KINABALU

The Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS) today issued a scathing condemnation of Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor’s recent call for a “resounding victory” for Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS), describing it as a desperate attempt to entrench a regime marked by exploitation, corruption, and betrayal of Sabah’s rights.

> “A GRS victory will doom Sabahans to suffer five more years of unchecked abuse of power, shameless greed, and the blatant selling off of Sabah’s precious resources to the highest bidder,” declared Chrisnadia Sinam, Head of Wanita CAMOS.

Chrisnadia accused Hajiji’s administration of systematically plundering Sabah’s resources, dismantling key industries, and leaving the state’s economy in ruins.

> “Sabah Forest Industries has been abandoned to rot, the Pitas Prawn Farm driven to bankruptcy, and state land and mineral concessions flagrantly handed out as spoils to political cronies. This is not governance — this is daylight robbery on an industrial scale,” she said.

She highlighted the Sabah Mineral Mining (SMM) concession scandal as a grotesque example of how state assets have been weaponized to buy political loyalty through defections.

> “When mining concessions intended to serve the people are twisted into tools to bribe assemblymen, corruption reaches a new, dangerous depth — power is no longer won but bought and bartered,” she added.

Chrisnadia also condemned the corrosive “gaji YB tidak cukup makan” mentality, calling it symptomatic of a morally bankrupt leadership.

> “Leaders who brazenly justify corruption as necessary because their salary is ‘not enough’ showcase the rot at the heart of Sabah’s governance. Greed is official policy, and it is why Sabah’s wealth vanishes while ordinary citizens remain trapped in hardship,” she said vehemently.

She rejected Hajiji’s claim that GRS alone can champion Sabah’s rights, pointing to the coalition’s silence on critical constitutional issues.

> “If GRS truly cared, why did it remain silent when the Federal Government challenged the High Court ruling on Sabah’s 40% constitutional rights? Why has it not demanded the immediate fulfilment of the MA63 promises?” she challenged.

Chrisnadia further denounced GRS’ so-called “unity” as a cynical alliance of convenience among politicians clinging desperately to power.

> “GRS is united not by love for Sabah, but by greed and survival instinct. It is a coalition entrenched in self-interest, not public service,” she stated.

She concluded with a rallying cry to Sabahans—especially women and youth—to reject the corrupt cycle and demand leaders of true integrity.

> “No more selling Sabah’s lands and minerals for political favors. No more pathetic excuses about ‘insufficient salary.’ Sabah demands clean, courageous leadership that serves its people, not the corrupt elite. We refuse to sacrifice our children’s futures on the altar of political greed,” Chrisnadia said powerfully.

Issued by:  

Wanita Head

Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS)  

Kota Kinabalu, Sabah#~Borneo Herald™

GRS Lambang Kompromi Politik, Bukan Kematangan, kata CAMOS

                             Handery Pijin

Borneo Herald 

9.30PM MYT, 20-10-2025

PAPAR : Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS) hari ini menolak dakwaan Presiden LDP, Datuk Chin Su Phin bahawa Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) melambangkan “kematangan politik,” sebaliknya menyifatkannya sebagai satu gabungan yang lahir daripada kepentingan, kompromi dan ketakutan kehilangan kuasa.

Ketua Penyelaras CAMOS Papar, Handery Pijin, berkata tidak ada apa-apa yang matang tentang sebuah gabungan yang terbentuk hasil pengkhianatan politik pada tahun 2020 dan kekal berkuasa hanya kerana perlindungan serta sokongan daripada Kerajaan Persekutuan, bukannya kehendak rakyat.

“Kematangan politik sebenar lahir daripada rasa hormat terhadap mandat pengundi, berpegang kepada prinsip, dan mempertahankan hak-hak Sabah di bawah Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 — bukan daripada membentuk gabungan semata-mata untuk mengekalkan kuasa,” kata Handery dalam satu kenyataan di sini.

Handery berkata pujian Chin terhadap GRS mengabaikan hakikat bahawa di bawah pentadbiran GRS, Sabah kekal sebagai antara negeri termiskin di Malaysia, dengan jurang ketidaksamarataan yang semakin melebar, pengabaian luar bandar, dan kekecewaan yang meningkat dalam kalangan pengundi muda yang tidak melihat sebarang kemajuan nyata selain janji-janji lama dan projek-projek dibiayai oleh Persekutuan.

"Kestabilan politik tidak bermakna apa-apa jika ia tidak membawa keadilan, pekerjaan, dan maruah kepada rakyat. 

"Lebuhraya Pan Borneo dan jalan-jalan luar bandar sudah pun merupakan projek Persekutuan jauh sebelum GRS wujud — mendakwa ia sebagai kejayaan GRS adalah satu pembohongan,” kata Handery lagi.

Beliau turut menegaskan bahawa di bawah pentadbiran Ketua Menteri, Datuk Hajiji Noor, autonomi Sabah semakin terhakis apabila Ketua Menteri terus menyesuaikan diri dengan kepentingan Putrajaya daripada menegaskan hak perlembagaan negeri — termasuk hak Sabah terhadap 40% hasil bersih Persekutuan di bawah Perkara 112C dan 112D Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

“Jika inilah yang dikatakan sebagai ‘kematangan politik baharu’, maka ia adalah kematangan dalam kepatuhan, bukan kedaulatan,” tegasnya.

Handery menyeru rakyat agar tidak terpedaya dengan retorik “kestabilan” yang sering dilaungkan oleh GRS, dan menyedari bahawa kestabilan sebenar hanya boleh dicapai melalui sebuah kerajaan yang berpihak kepada rakyat — bukan kerajaan yang hidup atas dasar perjanjian politik dan bantuan Persekutuan.#~Borneo Herald ™

Federal Breach of MA63 Would Have Given Sabah the Moral Right to Seek International Remedy

                          Daniel John Jambun 

Borneo Herald

12.20PM MYT, 20-10-2025

KOTA KINABALU : The Borneo Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) today said that if the Federal Government had succeeded in defeating Sabah’s claim to its 40% revenue entitlement, it would have amounted to a fundamental breach of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) — giving Sabah the moral and political right, though not yet the legal standing, to seek international remedy through the United Nations or even the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

BoPiMaFo emphasised that the 40% net revenue entitlement is not an ordinary fiscal issue but one of the core constitutional guarantees negotiated under MA63 to preserve Sabah’s fiscal autonomy within the Federation. Any attempt by Putrajaya to deny or nullify that right would effectively repudiate one of the founding terms upon which Sabah agreed to form Malaysia.

“Had the Federal Government won the case, it would have signalled a unilateral dismantling of the MA63 partnership — undermining the foundation upon which the Federation was built. Such a breach would have provided Sabah the moral right to seek international recourse, even if formal legal standing at the ICJ remains limited,” BoPiMaFo said.

The Legal and Constitutional Context

BoPiMaFo explained that under international law, only sovereign states may file or defend cases before the ICJ. Although Sabah and Sarawak were equal founding partners under MA63, subsequent constitutional developments — particularly the 1976 amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution — downgraded both territories to the same status as Peninsular states, stripping them of their separate international identity.

The Foundation acknowledged that the 2021 constitutional amendment (which came into effect in 2022) restored the original structure of Article 1(2), once again distinguishing between the States of Malaya and the Borneo States of Sabah and Sarawak.

“This amendment was a welcome symbolic correction and a recognition of Sabah and Sarawak as co-founding partners. However, it was largely declaratory, not substantive. The amendment did not alter Article 160(2), which still defines ‘the Federation’ as the one established under the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957 — a definition that continues to exclude Sabah and Sarawak’s distinct status under MA63,” BoPiMaFo said.

As such, Sabah and Sarawak are today acknowledged as equal partners in name, but remain subnational entities in law. This means that while Sabah cannot directly bring a case to the ICJ, it can still pursue international remedy through the United Nations system, including through diplomatic representations or UN General Assembly resolutions.

The Chagos Precedent

BoPiMaFo cited the Chagos Archipelago case as an example of how international bodies can review historical breaches of decolonization or partnership agreements.

In that case, the ICJ’s 2019 Advisory Opinion found that the United Kingdom’s separation of the Chagos Islands from Mauritius in 1965 violated international law. The proceedings were initiated not by the Chagos Islanders themselves, but by the Government of Mauritius, after the UN General Assembly formally requested the ICJ’s opinion.

“This demonstrates that international remedies exist for breaches of post-colonial agreements — but they must be pursued through the UN process, not by unilateral legal action. If MA63 is repeatedly violated, Sabah and Sarawak could similarly seek international review through the United Nations General Assembly or the Committee on Decolonization,” BoPiMaFo said.

Restoring Equal Partnership

BoPiMaFo stressed that it does not advocate secession, but calls for the full restoration of constitutional equality and the faithful implementation of MA63.

“The High Court’s judgment affirming Sabah’s 40% entitlement spared Malaysia a deeper constitutional and diplomatic crisis, but it also confirmed what we have said for years — that the Federal Government has been in continuing breach of MA63,” the Foundation said.

BoPiMaFo reminded Putrajaya that MA63 is not a domestic administrative arrangement, but an internationally recognized treaty deposited with the United Nations.

“When one party consistently violates the terms of such a treaty, the matter ceases to be internal — it becomes a legitimate concern of the international community. The restoration of Article 1(2) in 2021 reaffirmed Sabah and Sarawak’s status as equal partners. It is now time to give that equality real meaning through action, not symbolism,” BoPiMaFo concluded.

Daniel John Jambun

President

Borneo's Plight in Malaysia Foundation {BoPiMaFo}

Versi Bahasa Malaysia :

Pelanggaran MA63 oleh Persekutuan Akan Memberikan Sabah Hak Moral untuk Mencari Pemulihan Antarabangsa

KOTA KINABALU — Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) hari ini menyatakan bahawa sekiranya Kerajaan Persekutuan berjaya menafikan tuntutan Sabah terhadap hak 40% hasil bersih persekutuan, ia akan merupakan satu pelanggaran asas terhadap Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 (MA63) — sekaligus memberikan Sabah hak moral dan politik, walaupun belum mempunyai kedudukan undang-undang yang formal, untuk mencari pemulihan antarabangsa melalui Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu (PBB) atau Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa (ICJ).

BoPiMaFo menegaskan bahawa hak 40% hasil bersih bukan isu fiskal biasa, tetapi merupakan salah satu jaminan perlembagaan teras yang dirundingkan di bawah MA63 bagi mengekalkan autonomi fiskal Sabah dalam Persekutuan. Sebarang cubaan oleh Putrajaya untuk menafikan atau membatalkan hak tersebut adalah tindakan menolak salah satu syarat asas yang menjadi asas pembentukan Malaysia.

“Sekiranya Kerajaan Persekutuan memenangi kes tersebut, ia akan menandakan tindakan sebelah pihak untuk membubarkan semangat perkongsian MA63 — sekali gus meruntuhkan asas pembentukan Persekutuan. Pelanggaran seperti itu akan memberikan Sabah hak moral untuk mencari pemulihan antarabangsa, walaupun kedudukan undang-undang formal di ICJ masih terhad,” kata BoPiMaFo.

Konteks Perundangan dan Perlembagaan

BoPiMaFo menjelaskan bahawa di bawah undang-undang antarabangsa, hanya negara berdaulat yang boleh memfailkan atau mempertahankan kes di ICJ. Walaupun Sabah dan Sarawak merupakan rakan pengasas setara di bawah MA63, perkembangan perlembagaan seterusnya — khususnya pindaan tahun 1976 terhadap Perkara 1(2) Perlembagaan Persekutuan — telah menurunkan taraf kedua-dua wilayah itu kepada status yang sama dengan negeri-negeri di Semenanjung, sekaligus menafikan identiti antarabangsa yang berasingan.

Yayasan itu mengakui bahawa pindaan perlembagaan pada tahun 2021 (yang berkuat kuasa pada 2022) telah memulihkan semula struktur asal Perkara 1(2), yang sekali lagi membezakan antara Negeri-Negeri Tanah Melayu dan Negeri-Negeri Borneo Sabah dan Sarawak.

“Pindaan ini merupakan pembetulan simbolik yang dialu-alukan dan satu pengiktirafan bahawa Sabah dan Sarawak ialah rakan pengasas bersama. Namun, ia lebih bersifat deklaratif berbanding substantif. Pindaan itu tidak mengubah Perkara 160(2) yang masih mentakrifkan ‘Persekutuan’ sebagai yang ditubuhkan di bawah Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957 — satu takrif yang terus menafikan kedudukan khas Sabah dan Sarawak di bawah MA63,” kata BoPiMaFo.

Oleh itu, Sabah dan Sarawak hari ini diiktiraf sebagai rakan setara pada nama sahaja, tetapi kekal sebagai entiti subnasional dari segi undang-undang. Ini bermakna walaupun Sabah tidak boleh membawa kes terus ke ICJ, ia masih boleh mencari pemulihan antarabangsa melalui sistem PBB, termasuk melalui saluran diplomatik atau resolusi Perhimpunan Agung PBB.

Duluan Chagos

BoPiMaFo turut merujuk kepada kes Chagos Archipelago sebagai contoh bagaimana badan antarabangsa boleh menilai semula pelanggaran sejarah terhadap perjanjian pasca-penjajahan atau perjanjian perkongsian.

Dalam kes itu, Advisory Opinion ICJ pada tahun 2019 memutuskan bahawa tindakan United Kingdom memisahkan Kepulauan Chagos daripada Mauritius pada tahun 1965 adalah bertentangan dengan undang-undang antarabangsa. Prosiding itu bukan dimulakan oleh penduduk Chagos sendiri, tetapi oleh Kerajaan Mauritius, selepas Perhimpunan Agung PBB secara rasmi meminta pendapat nasihat daripada ICJ.

“Kes ini menunjukkan bahawa terdapat mekanisme pemulihan antarabangsa terhadap pelanggaran perjanjian pasca-kolonial — tetapi ia mesti dilakukan melalui proses PBB, bukan tindakan undang-undang sebelah pihak. Jika MA63 terus dilanggar, Sabah dan Sarawak juga boleh mencari semakan antarabangsa melalui Perhimpunan Agung PBB atau Jawatankuasa Nyahpenjajahan,” kata BoPiMaFo.

Memulihkan Perkongsian Setara

BoPiMaFo menegaskan bahawa pihaknya tidak menyokong pemisahan, sebaliknya menyeru kepada pemulihan sepenuhnya kedudukan setara dan pelaksanaan sebenar MA63.

“Keputusan Mahkamah Tinggi yang mengesahkan hak 40% Sabah telah menyelamatkan Malaysia daripada krisis perlembagaan dan diplomatik yang lebih mendalam, tetapi ia juga mengesahkan apa yang telah kami nyatakan selama ini — bahawa Kerajaan Persekutuan telah lama melanggar MA63 secara berterusan,” kata yayasan itu.

BoPiMaFo mengingatkan Putrajaya bahawa MA63 bukan satu urusan pentadbiran dalaman, tetapi perjanjian antarabangsa yang diiktiraf dan didaftarkan dengan Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu.

“Apabila satu pihak terus-menerus melanggar syarat perjanjian sedemikian, perkara itu tidak lagi bersifat dalaman — ia menjadi perhatian sah masyarakat antarabangsa. Pemulihan Perkara 1(2) pada tahun 2021 telah mengesahkan semula kedudukan Sabah dan Sarawak sebagai rakan setara. Kini tiba masanya untuk memberikan makna sebenar kepada kesetaraan itu melalui tindakan, bukan sekadar simbolisme,” BoPiMaFo menegaskan.

Daniel John Jambun

Presiden

Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)#~Borneo Herald™

40% Judgment Confirms MA63 Has Been Breached, Sabah and Sarawak Must Now Seek ICJ Review

Borneo Herald

9.16PM MYT, 19-10-2025

Issued by: Sabah Sarawak Rights – Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ) & Borneo Plight in

Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)

SSRANZ and BoPiMaFo commend the Sabah Law Society (SLS) for initiating the landmark

lawsuit on Sabah’s 40% Special Grant entitlement, and the Sabah High Court for its historic

judgement upholding constitutional justice and the rule of law. This decision has crystallised

decades of unresolved grievances and confirms what Sabah and Sarawak people and leaders have

long argued — that the Federal Government has persistently and unlawfully breached its

fundamental obligations under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

The Court found that no formal revenue reviews had been conducted for nearly fifty years, despite

MA63 and Article 112D of the Federal Constitution mandating periodic reviews of Sabah’s

40% entitlement to net federal revenue. The judge held that this duty was mandatory, not

optional, and that the Federal Government’s failure to act was irrational, unlawful, and injurious

to the people of Sabah. This ruling is judicial confirmation of a constitutional delinquency

that strikes at the foundation of the Federation.

Any further attempt by the Federal Government to delay, dilute, or frustrate the High Court’s

ruling would amount to holding in contempt both the MA63 treaty and the court’s decision to

honour it, while reaffirming the Federal Government’s own position that it is not bound by

MA63. This entrenched pattern of defiance confirms that all domestic remedies have been

exhausted, leaving international recourse as the only lawful path for Sabah and Sarawak to seek

justice — including final decolonisation and the restoration of full independence.

SSRANZ said the 40% ruling serves as a long-overdue indictment which questions the very

foundations of Malaysia and exposes a federal betrayal so deep that it removes any remaining

reason for Sabah and Sarawak to stay in the Malaysian federation.

A Pattern of Foundational Breaches

SSRANZ explains that the 40% issue is only part of a broader pattern of systemic breaches of

MA63’s founding guarantees, which include:

• Failure to review and honour the 40% revenue entitlement since 1974, despite its

express inclusion in MA63 and Article 112D of the Federal Constitution;

• Reported default on the mandatory MA63 1973/74 review, roughly a decade after

Malaysia’s formation, reportedly deferred following the death of Deputy Prime Minister Tun

Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman and later financial excuses — no formal review was ever

conducted;

• Denial of equitable seat allocation (after Singapore secession) and political safeguards,

weakening Sabah and Sarawak’s representation and autonomy;

• Malaysia’s MA63 component structure/foundation based on 4 members was destroyed

by Singapore secession, but Sabah and Sarawak were not consulted about their membership

in the federation or a new agreement reached on the altered structure.

• Suppression of genuine self-government (Borneonisation replaced by Malayanisation),

contrary to the IGC’s guarantees of local authority;

• Erosion of secularism, violating the foundational secular character of the “Malaysian

federation”;

• Institutionalised racial discrimination, particularly through the New Economic Policy

(NEP), which has disadvantaged over a quarter of the population of Sabah and Sarawak in

access to education, employment, and development;

• Unlawful expropriation of territorial and natural resource rights, including oil and gas,

in breach of Article VIII of MA63 and the IGC Report.

• The 1976 constitutional amendment to Article 1(2) of the federal constitution, enacted

in violation of MA63, unlawfully reduced Sabah and Sarawak to the status of ordinary states

of Malaysia and denied their constitutional role as equal founding partners — without whose

participation Malaysia could not have been formed.

• The major breach of human rights and MA63 foundational term of Sabah control pf

immigration by the unlawful federal 1970-1990s demographic change in Sabah

designed to disenfranchise locals, quash dissent, and entrench Peninsular Malaysia's political

dominance under its Ketuanan Melayu agenda.

• Breach of International Preconditions under the Manila Accord 1963 and Bangkok

Peace Agreement (ending Konfrontasi between Indonesia and Malaysia) 1966.

 Failure to resolve the Philippines’ Sabah claim continues to question Malaysia’s

legitimacy on the legal basis that the United Kingdom could not lawfully transfer

Sabah’s sovereignty to Malaya in 1963 without first complying with the Manila

Accord’s precondition for Malaysia’s formation.

 Failure to comply with the 1966 Bangkok Peace Agreement (and in breach of the

Manila Accord 1963), which required a democratic act of self-determination

allowing the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak to determine their political future — a

vote that was never held.

These failures demonstrate that Malaysia’s formation did not meet the mandatory

conditions agreed by Malaya, the Philippines, and Indonesia under the Manila

Accord (31 July 1963) and reaffirmed under the Bangkok Peace Agreement

(1966). Under these instruments, Malaysia’s creation was conditional upon (a) a

United Nations-supervised and genuinely free ascertainment of the peoples’ wishes

in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 1541 (XV), and (b) a peaceful

settlement of the Philippines’ territorial claim over Sabah. Neither condition was ever

fulfilled. The integrity and credibility of the UN mission’s assessment was impaired

and compromised by the UK and Malayan governments’ premature announcement

that Malaysia would be proclaimed on 16 September 1963, and no referendum or

plebiscite was conducted. Proceeding without meeting these conditions meant that

Malaysia’s proclamation contravened international law and the UN Charter’s

decolonisation framework.

These breaches violate both the Basic Structure Doctrine of the Malaysian Constitution and

international treaty law (Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Articles 60–62), which

provides that a treaty fundamentally breached in its essential terms may be voided or terminated.

The MA63 Legal Void and Malaysia’s Questionable Legitimacy

Adding to these constitutional breaches is the legal void surrounding MA63 itself. The Malaysia

Agreement 1963 was not registered with the United Nations until 1970, creating a seven-year

period (1963–1970) during which the treaty had no standing under international law.

Article 102 of the UN Charter explicitly states that no unregistered treaty may be invoked before

any organ of the United Nations. Yet the UN Secretariat relied on this unregistered and therefore

legally non-existent agreement to authorise the 1963 UN Assessment Mission and to issue its Legal

Opinion of 19 September 1963 — actions that were ultra vires and in violation of the UN’s own

Charter.

The failure to comply with the Manila Accord and the Bangkok Peace Agreement compounded this

legal vacuum. These instruments established preconditions for Malaysia’s formation that were never

fulfilled — a genuine act of self-determination for the peoples of North Borneo and Sarawak and a

negotiated settlement of the Philippines’ claim. Proceeding without fulfilling those conditions meant

that the 1963 proclamation of Malaysia contravened international law and the UN Charter’s

decolonisation framework, further undermining Malaysia’s legitimacy as a lawful successor state.

This legal vacuum fatally compromised the legitimacy of Malaysia’s creation. During this

unregistered period, the Federation of Malaya exercised de facto control over Sabah and Sarawak,

enacted federal laws curtailing state and native rights, and imposed political domination without

legal foundation. The absence of UN registration, coupled with Malaya’s unilateral assumption of

authority, demonstrates that Malaysia’s formation proceeded in breach of both international law and

the UN Charter, thereby casting serious doubt on Malaysia’s legitimacy as a lawful successor state

under MA63. Malaysia is no more than a de facto federation.

Legal and Political Consequences

Taken together, these developments confirm that if MA63 was ever validly made in 1963, it has

since been legally and substantively destroyed through ongoing violations and procedural defects.

The High Court’s 40% judgement now provides judicial corroboration that Malaysia no longer

functions as a genuine federation of equal partners and that its legal foundation has been fatally compromised.

Call for International Legal Review

SSRANZ therefore calls upon the Governments of Sabah and Sarawak to refer the issues of

MA63’s validity and Malaysia’s legitimacy to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). This call

is in line with the recent parliamentary intervention by Mr Willie Mongin, GPS Member of

Parliament, marking a historic first in Malaysian parliamentary history.

Referral to the ICJ represents a lawful, peaceful, and internationally recognised pathway to

determine, once and for all, the legitimacy of MA63 and the international status of Sabah and

Sarawak. It accords fully with UN General Assembly Resolutions 1514 (XV) and 1541 (XV) on

decolonisation and the right to self-determination.

Conclusion

The Sabah High Court’s 40% judgement, together with the Sabah Law Society’s principled action,

has vindicated the long-standing struggle of the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak for justice, equality,

and sovereignty. It confirms that the Federal Government’s failures and violations have

fundamentally breached MA63 and undermined Malaysia’s constitutional and international

legitimacy.

The time has come for Sabah and Sarawak leaders — across all political lines — to unite in defence

of their peoples’ rights. The High Court’s ruling is not an end but a beginning. Both State

Governments must immediately convene a joint legal and diplomatic task force to prepare an ICJ

submission, mobilise international support, and assert Sabah and Sarawak’s political equality under MA63 and international law.

SSRANZ calls on both State Governments to act decisively and lawfully — to bring these matters

before the ICJ and the United Nations, so that the world may finally hear the case for Sabah and

Sarawak’s right to self-determination and national restoration.

Signed by

Robert Pei

President, Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)

Daniel John Jambun

President, Borneo Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMafo)

Endorsed by

Voon Lee Shan

President Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK)#~Borneo Herald™

CAMOS Mendesak Warisan Sokong Seruan Datuk Willie Mongin dan Pimpin Pembentukan Blok Borneo

Para penyelaras CAMOS bersama presiden NGO itu, Daniel John Jambun (tengah) di Inanam hari ini.

Borneo Herald

2.39PM MYT, 18-10-2025

Oleh Daniel John Jambun 

CHANGE Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS) hari ini menggesa Parti Warisan untuk tampil memimpin usaha pembentukan Blok Borneo bersama pemimpin dan parti-parti politik di Sarawak yang berkongsi visi sama — iaitu menegakkan kesamarataan, maruah, dan autonomi bagi kedua-dua negeri Borneo di bawah kerangka Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 (MA63).

CAMOS menyatakan sokongan penuh terhadap kenyataan Datuk Willie Mongin di Parlimen yang menyeru agar pembentukan Malaysia dikaji semula oleh Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa (ICJ), dibawa ke Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu (PBB), dan diikuti dengan satu referendum rakyat bagi mengembalikan hak kepada rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak untuk menentukan masa depan politik mereka selaras dengan prinsip MA63.

“Kenyataan Datuk Willie Mongin mencerminkan kebangkitan kesedaran baharu Borneo — satu kesedaran yang tidak lagi bertolak ansur dengan ketidaksamarataan, manipulasi politik, serta penghakisan berterusan terhadap hak-hak kita sebagai rakan setara dalam Malaysia,” kata jurucakap CAMOS, Daniel John Jambun.

CAMOS percaya bahawa Warisan, sebagai gerakan politik tempatan terbesar di Sabah, berada pada kedudukan paling tepat untuk memperjuangkan agenda Borneo ini dan menyatukan semua kekuatan sehaluan di Sabah dan Sarawak di bawah satu wadah bersama — iaitu Blok Borneo.

“Ini bukan soal pemisahan atau permusuhan. Ini soal memulihkan keadilan, kesamarataan dan maruah — asas sebenar pembentukan Malaysia pada tahun 1963,” tegas Daniel.

CAMOS turut mengalu-alukan keputusan bersejarah Mahkamah Tinggi hari ini yang memihak kepada Sabah Law Society (SLS), yang menegaskan bahawa Kerajaan Persekutuan terikat secara perlembagaan untuk membayar hasil negeri yang menjadi hak Sabah di bawah Perkara 112C dan 112D Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

“Keputusan ini merupakan kemenangan kepada kedaulatan undang-undang serta pengiktirafan terhadap perjuangan panjang Sabah menuntut keadilan fiskal. Ia membuktikan bahawa tuntutan kita bukan bersifat emosi atau politik — tetapi berasaskan undang-undang, sah dan termaktub dalam Perlembagaan,” tambah Daniel.

Sehubungan itu, CAMOS menyeru agar Parti Warisan mengambil langkah berikut:

1. Menyatakan sokongan rasmi terhadap kenyataan Datuk Willie Mongin sebagai manifestasi kehendak politik Borneo;

2. Memulakan rundingan dengan rakan sejawat di Sarawak bagi menubuhkan Jawatankuasa Blok Borneo untuk menyelaras strategi perundangan, politik dan diplomatik bersama; dan

3. Menubuhkan Sekretariat Tetap Borneo di bawah kerajaan pimpinan Warisan pada masa hadapan bagi memastikan hak Sabah sentiasa dipertahankan dalam semua urusan dengan Kerajaan Persekutuan.

“Kini apabila kehakiman sudah mengesahkan hak Sabah, tibalah masanya pemimpin politik kita bertindak dengan keberanian dan kesatuan yang sama,” ujar Daniel.

CAMOS menegaskan bahawa rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak kini mesti bersuara dengan satu nada — bukan sebagai wilayah bawahan kuasa Persekutuan, tetapi sebagai pengasas bersama Malaysia yang persetujuan dan kesamarataannya tidak boleh lagi dipandang ringan.

“Warisan mesti bangkit sebagai suara Borneo — untuk memimpin, menyatukan dan mengembalikan maruah serta destinasi sebenar bangsa kita.”

Daniel John Jambun ialah Presiden

Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS)

The English Version :

CAMOS Urges Warisan to Support Datuk Willie Mongin’s Call and Lead the Formation of a Borneo Bloc

Kota Kinabalu — The Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS) today urged Parti Warisan to take the lead in forming a Borneo Bloc together with Sarawak leaders and political parties that share the same vision of equality, dignity, and autonomy for the two Borneo states under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

CAMOS said it fully supports the statement made by Datuk Willie Mongin in Parliament, calling for Malaysia’s formation to be reviewed by the International Court of Justice (ICJ), raised before the United Nations (UN), and followed by a referendum to return to the people of Sabah and Sarawak the right to determine their political future in accordance with the principles of MA63.

> “Datuk Willie Mongin’s statement reflects the awakening of a new Bornean consciousness — one that no longer tolerates inequality, political manipulation, and the continued erosion of our rights as equal partners in Malaysia,” said CAMOS spokesperson Daniel John Jambun.

CAMOS believes Warisan, as the largest homegrown political movement in Sabah, is uniquely positioned to champion this Borneo agenda and unite all like-minded forces in Sabah and Sarawak into a common front — the Borneo Bloc.

> “This is not about secession or hostility. It is about restoring justice, equality, and dignity — the foundation upon which Malaysia was created in 1963,” Daniel said.

CAMOS also welcomed the landmark High Court ruling today in favour of the Sabah Law Society (SLS), which reaffirmed that the Federal Government is constitutionally obliged to pay Sabah its entitled revenue under Article 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution.

> “The Court’s decision is a victory for the rule of law and a vindication of Sabah’s long struggle for fiscal justice. It proves that our claims are not emotional or political — they are legal, legitimate, and grounded in the Constitution,” Daniel added.

In light of this, CAMOS called on Warisan to:

1. Publicly endorse Datuk Willie Mongin’s statement as a declaration of Borneo’s political will;

2. Initiate discussions with Sarawak counterparts to establish a formal Borneo Bloc Committee to coordinate joint legal, political, and diplomatic strategies; and

3. Form a permanent Borneo Secretariat under a future Warisan-led government to safeguard Sabah’s rights in all federal dealings.

> “With the judiciary now affirming Sabah’s rights, it is time for our political leaders to act with equal courage and unity,” Daniel said.

CAMOS concluded by saying the people of Sabah and Sarawak must now speak with one voice — not as subjects of federal power, but as co-founders of Malaysia whose consent and equality must never again be taken for granted.

> “Warisan must rise as the voice of Borneo — to lead, to unite, and to restore the honour and destiny of our people.”

Daniel John Jambun 

President 

Change Advocate Movement Sabah (CAMOS)#~Borneo Herald™

The 40% Right : Sabah’s Rights Vindicated - Justice at Last

Datuk Roger Chin (sixth from left) at the Kota Kinabalu High Court today.

Borneo Herald 

2.30PM MYT, 17-10-2025

By Datuk Roger Chin

TODAY marks a turning point for Sabah. The High Court has upheld what we have long fought for — our constitutional right to 40% of federal revenue. This victory belongs to every Sabahan who never stopped believing that justice would come.

The High Court of Sabah and Sarawak has delivered a judgment of historic importance. It confirms that Sabah’s 40% Special Grant is not a privilege to be negotiated, but a constitutional right owed since 1963.

For half a century, our entitlement was withheld. These were the “lost years,” when promises made at the birth of Malaysia were forgotten. Today, the Court has restored those promises and reaffirmed the rule of law.

This ruling is more than numbers. It means schools for our children, hospitals for our families, roads that connect our villages, and opportunities worthy of Sabahans. It is about dignity, fairness, and respect for Sabah’s rightful place in Malaysia.

This victory also recognises the vital role of the State Government of Sabah, which has continued to uphold and assert the State’s constitutional rights. The State’s efforts in clarifying the historical records — including the Share of Growth of Federal Revenue Derived from Sabah from 1964 to 1968 — have been instrumental in reaffirming that the intent and effect of Articles 112C and 112D remain unchanged. The acceptance of the interim payments were without prejudice to the State's constitutional rights. The Court’s decision confirms that the 1969 Order to vary did not extinguish or alter the original formula, but that the constitutional mechanism guaranteeing Sabah’s 40% share has always remained intact.

The Court’s decision now sets into motion a clear course of action. Part of the flawed 2022 Review Order has been quashed, together with the subsequent Review Orders 3 and 4 that were issued to replace and continue it, not the entire orders themselves and there is no order against the State Government of Sabah. They are flawed insofar as they implied that the omitted years could be forgotten — the Court has ruled that such omission was unlawful. Importantly, this does not affect the 40% grant due to Sabah from 2022 onwards under those orders. The Federal Government must meet with the State Government of Sabah within 90 days and reach an agreement within 180 days, applying the 40% formula guaranteed by the Constitution. The arrears due from 1974 to 2021 have been recognised as a continuing debt to Sabah, and payment must follow — whether through direct settlement or constitutional damages. Until these obligations are fulfilled, all reliance on the 2022 Order and its successors is stayed. In short, the constitutional path is restored, and Sabah’s rights must now be given practical effect

What this means for the people of Sabah

The Constitution’s original promise must be honoured. Within the next three months, the Federal Government must sit down with the Sabah State Government — the rightful constitutional counterpart in this process — and within six months they must agree, using the 40% formula, on what Sabah is owed.

The Court has also ruled that Sabah is entitled to what was denied for almost fifty years, from 1974 to 2021. This money must be paid to the State, either directly or through compensation. Until that happens, the Federal Government cannot rely on the flawed review orders. The law is clear, the formula must be followed, and Sabah must finally receive its rightful share.

The Sabah Law Society will resist vigorously any attempt to appeal or undermine this decision. At the same time, it is hoped that now that the Court has spoken and decided, the Federal Government will respect the judicial process, accept the outcome, and abide by it. While it remains their right to appeal, doing so would betray sincerity, especially when successive governments — including the present one — have pledged to honour MA63 yet failed to resolve the 40% entitlement.

This judgment is not a victory against the Federation — it is a victory for the Federation. It proves that Malaysia honours her founding promises, that no State stands beneath the Constitution, and that true unity is built not on neglect but on respect.

Today, Sabah has been heard. Today, justice has been done. And today, history records that promises made in 1963 remain promises kept in 2025.

The Court has ended Sabah’s lost years — justice has been restored and the promise of Malaysia redeemed. Honouring this judgment is not just about Sabah — it is about strengthening Malaysia itself.

Datuk Roger Chin is the Immediate Past President of Sabah Law Society.#~Borneo Herald™

GRS’ “Economic Success” Claim Is Built on Propaganda and Half-Truths — Warisan’s Record Speaks for Itself

                Datuk Honorsius Bosuin @ Hobo

Borneo Herald 

1.65PM MYT, 16-10-2025

By Datuk Honorsius Bosuin 

THE attempt by Datuk John Ambrose to paint the Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS)-PH government as an “economic success story” compared to the Warisan administration is a textbook case of political distortion and selective storytelling.

His sweeping statement that Warisan “brought no real economic change” ignores both the economic data and the context of Warisan’s short two-year tenure (2018–2020) — during which Sabah faced the worst global pandemic in a century.

⚖️ 1. Warisan Inherited a Broken System — and Began Structural Reforms

When Warisan took office in 2018, Sabah’s fiscal management and state-linked investments were heavily centralised and opaque, with questionable deals inherited from Barisan Nasional.

Warisan’s first task was not to chase headlines, but to clean house:

A full audit of state GLCs and land allocations was initiated.

Unprofitable or redundant agencies were consolidated.

New transparency rules were introduced for state tenders and procurement.

The Sabah Credit Corporation and Sabah Development Bank were strengthened to channel financing directly to SMEs and local entrepreneurs — not cronies.

These measures laid the foundation for the responsible fiscal management that GRS now claims credit for.

💰 2. Warisan Left Sabah With Healthy Reserves and Zero Debt Growth

John Ambrose’s claim that Warisan “did nothing” to grow reserves is factually misleading.

When Warisan assumed office, Sabah’s cash reserves stood at RM1.8 billion.

By 2020, despite the pandemic, reserves were RM2.35 billion — an increase, not stagnation.

What GRS conveniently omits is that Warisan achieved this while maintaining zero new debt, and without receiving any additional oil royalty or federal revenue share — despite repeated MA63 negotiations.

GRS’ much-touted RM6.0 billion reserve today is built on federal windfalls, petroleum price recovery, and carryover funds — not superior governance.

📉 3. Economic Growth Under Warisan Was Real — Until the Pandemic Hit

Between 2018 and 2019, Sabah recorded its highest private investment inflow in over a decade, totalling RM11.2 billion (MIDA data).

Tourism arrivals surpassed 4.1 million, generating over RM9 billion in tourism receipts.

Warisan’s SME empowerment programs, Rural Entrepreneurship Hubs, and Momogun Agropreneur initiative created tens of thousands of new micro-businesses and jobs — until the Covid-19 lockdowns halted the global economy.

For John Ambrose to use pandemic-induced job losses as “proof of failure” is disingenuous and insulting to the global context every government faced in 2020.

🌾 4. Warisan’s Policies Were People-Centric, Not Cosmetic

While GRS brags about aid packages, Warisan’s economic philosophy was empowerment over dependency:

Agropreneur Program: boosted smallholder productivity through modernised farming and access to export markets.

Youth and SME Grants: RM60 million in direct support disbursed through state-linked banks, with record repayment rates.

Warisan focused on systemic reforms — not short-term handouts designed for political mileage.

🧾 5. GRS’ “Economic Boom” Is Fueled by Federal Transfers, Not Merit

The alleged RM6 billion “reserve growth” under GRS is not new money generated through productive investment.

It comes largely from:

Increased federal development grants, not state-generated revenue.

Deferred expenditure on rural projects.

Unspent allocations from delayed infrastructure tenders.

In other words, Sabah’s “savings” grew because the government didn’t spend money meant for the people — not because it created wealth.

⚠️ 6. What GRS Won’t Admit

If GRS’ economic management is as brilliant as claimed, then explain:

Why is Sabah still the poorest state in Malaysia by median household income?

Why has the unemployment rate risen to above 7% in 2024 — the highest in Malaysia?

Why are rural electrification, water supply, and internet access still far below national standards?

Why has foreign direct investment in Sabah fallen by 45% since 2021 (MIDA, 2024)?

The truth: GRS has mastered press releases, not progress.

🕊️ 7. Warisan Built Trust, GRS Built Illusions

Warisan’s economic record is about laying honest groundwork for a fair, sustainable Sabah economy — not self-glorifying propaganda.

The Warisan government respected transparency, empowered rural communities, and defended state rights under MA63.

GRS’ claim of “economic transformation” is a façade — built on federal dependency, unspent allocations, and public relations spin.

The people of Sabah deserve leadership that tells the truth, not one that hides behind selective figures and shallow bragging.

Datuk Honorsius Bosuin is a Warisan supreme council member.#Borneo Herald™

BoPiMaFo Sokong Penuh Kenyataan Datuk Willie Mongin - Rakyat Sabah & Sarawak Wajib Bangkit Pertahan Hak

                           Datuk Willie Mongin

Borneo Herald

10.48AM MYT, 16-10-2025

Oleh Daniel John Jambun

BORNEO's Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) menyatakan sokongan padu dan tanpa ragu terhadap kenyataan berani Datuk Willie Mongin di Parlimen baru-baru ini yang menggesa agar kesahihan penubuhan Malaysia dirujuk ke Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa (ICJ), dikemukakan kepada Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu (PBB) dan seterusnya dilaksanakan referendum rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak.

Ini bukan soal parti politik atau individu — ini soal hak, maruah dan kedaulatan rakyat Borneo!

🩸 1. Ini Soal Hak Rakyat, Bukan Politik Kepartian

BoPiMaFo menyeru seluruh rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak untuk bangkit dan bersatu menuntut keadilan.

Cukuplah kita disamun, dirampas dan diperbodohkan oleh pemimpin tamak yang menggadaikan hak negeri kepada kepentingan politik sempit.

> “Berpolitiklah semasa PRU, PRN dan PRK, tetapi menjaga amanah rakyat dan mempertahankan hak negeri adalah tanggungjawab setiap pemimpin sejati.”

⚖️ 2. Kenyataan Willie Mongin: Suara Keberanian dan Kebenaran

Ucapan Datuk Willie Mongin adalah suara keberanian seorang anak Borneo yang mewakili jeritan rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak yang sudah lama menanggung ketidakadilan hasil pelanggaran Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

Cadangan beliau untuk membawa isu ini ke ICJ dan PBB adalah langkah berdasarkan prinsip undang-undang antarabangsa, bukan emosi atau politik kebencian.

MA63 adalah perjanjian antarabangsa yang ditandatangani oleh empat pihak berdaulat — UK, Malaya, Sabah (North Borneo) dan Sarawak.

Jika perjanjian itu dilanggar, maka kesahihan Malaysia sebagai persekutuan wajar disemak semula oleh badan antarabangsa yang sah.

🌏 3. Referendum: Mengembalikan Suara Rakyat Borneo

BoPiMaFo menyokong penuh cadangan referendum yang akan memberi semula kuasa kepada rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak untuk menentukan sama ada mereka masih rela kekal dalam Malaysia berdasarkan realiti hari ini.

Sejak 1963, rakyat Borneo tidak pernah ditanya semula — sama ada mereka masih bersetuju dengan keadaan yang semakin pincang dari semangat asal MA63.

Referendum bukan hasutan pemisahan, tetapi penentuan semula mandat rakyat yang berdaulat.

💰 4. Hentikan Penindasan Ekonomi dan Pelanggaran Hak Negeri

Selepas lebih 60 tahun Malaysia ditubuhkan, Sabah dan Sarawak masih jauh ketinggalan — dari segi infrastruktur, pendidikan, kesihatan dan peluang ekonomi.

PDA 1974, pengambilalihan kuasa hasil bumi, dan pelaksanaan dasar pusat yang menafikan kuasa negeri adalah bukti nyata pengkhianatan terhadap semangat MA63 dan Laporan IGC 1962.

BoPiMaFo menegaskan bahawa hak terhadap minyak, gas, tanah, hasil laut dan sumber asli Borneo mesti dikembalikan sepenuhnya kepada kerajaan negeri dan rakyat.

🕊️ 5. Tuntutan BoPiMaFo

Bagi menjunjung semangat perjuangan ini, BoPiMaFo menuntut bahawa:

1. Kerajaan Sabah dan Sarawak menyokong secara rasmi cadangan YB Datuk Willie Mongin dan membentuk Pasukan Undang-Undang Bersama Borneo ke ICJ dan PBB.

2. Referendum rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak dilaksanakan untuk menentukan kedudukan sebenar negeri-negeri Borneo dalam persekutuan.

3. Hak-hak negeri di bawah MA63 dipulihkan sepenuhnya, termasuk kuasa hasil bumi, pendidikan, dan pentadbiran tempatan.

4. Pimpinan politik Sabah dan Sarawak berhenti tunduk kepada tekanan pusat, dan kembali kepada prinsip asal penubuhan Malaysia yang berasaskan kesamarataan dan persetujuan bersama.

🔥 6. Seruan Akhir: Bangkit dan Bersatu!

BoPiMaFo menyeru seluruh rakyat Borneo — tanpa mengira parti, kaum atau agama — untuk bangkit mempertahankan hak dan maruah kita.

> “Kita bukan menentang Malaysia, kita menuntut Malaysia ditegakkan atas dasar yang sah, adil dan dihormati.”

Biar dunia tahu bahawa Sabah dan Sarawak tidak lagi mahu menjadi wilayah yang terus ditindas, tetapi rakan setara dalam persekutuan yang sebenar — berdaulat, bermaruah dan berhak menentukan masa depannya sendiri.

Daniel John Jambun ialah Presiden Change Advocate Movement Sabah (Camos) dan juga Presiden Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)

The English Version:

BoPiMaFo FULLY SUPPORTS DATUK WILLIE MONGIN’S STATEMENT – THE PEOPLE OF SABAH & SARAWAK MUST RISE AND DEFEND OUR RIGHTS!

The Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation  (BoPiMaFo) expresses its firm and unequivocal support for the courageous statement made by  Datuk Willie Mongin in Parliament recently, calling for the legitimacy of Malaysia’s formation to be referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), raised before the United Nations (UN), and followed by a referendum for the people of Sabah and Sarawak.

This is not about party politics or individuals — this is about the rights, dignity, and sovereignty of the people of Borneo!

🩸 1. This Is About the People’s Rights, Not Partisan Politics

BoPiMaFo calls upon all citizens of Sabah and Sarawak to rise and unite in demanding justice.

Enough of being robbed, deceived, and oppressed by greedy leaders who have sold out the rights of our states for narrow political gain.

> “You may engage in politics during elections, but safeguarding the people’s trust and defending the rights of our states is the duty of every true leader.”

⚖️ 2. Willie Mongin’s Statement: A Voice of Courage and Truth

Datuk Willie Mongin’s speech represents the courage of a true son of Borneo — echoing the long-suppressed cry of the people of Sabah and Sarawak who have endured injustice from the violation of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

His proposal to bring this matter to the ICJ and the UN is grounded in the principles of international law, not emotion or divisive politics.

MA63 is an international treaty signed by four sovereign parties — the United Kingdom, Malaya, Sabah (then North Borneo), and Sarawak.

If the terms of that treaty have been violated, then Malaysia’s legitimacy as a federation deserves to be reviewed by the proper international authorities.

🌏 3. Referendum: Restoring the Voice of the Borneo People

BoPiMaFo fully supports the proposal for a referendum, which would return power to the people of Sabah and Sarawak to decide whether they still wish to remain in Malaysia under today’s circumstances.

Since 1963, the people of Borneo have never been asked again whether they still consent to the present conditions, which have drifted far from the original spirit of MA63.

A referendum is not a call for secession, but a legitimate exercise of the people’s sovereign mandate to reassess their position.

💰 4. End Economic Oppression and Violations of State Rights

More than 60 years after Malaysia’s formation, Sabah and Sarawak remain far behind in infrastructure, education, healthcare, and economic opportunities.

The Petroleum Development Act 1974, the centralization of resource control, and federal policies that deny state autonomy are clear evidence of betrayal of the MA63 spirit and the 1962 IGC Report.

BoPiMaFo emphasizes that the rights over oil, gas, land, marine wealth, and natural resources of Borneo must be fully restored to the state governments and the people.

🕊️ 5. BoPiMaFo’s Demands

In upholding this spirit of struggle, BoPiMaFo demands that:

1. The Governments of Sabah and Sarawak formally support YB Datuk Willie Mongin’s proposal and establish a Joint Borneo Legal Team to bring the matter to the ICJ and the UN.

2. A referendum for the people of Sabah and Sarawak be held to determine the true position of both Bornean states within the federation.

3. All rights under MA63 be fully restored, including control over natural resources, education, and local governance.

4. Sabah and Sarawak political leaders must stop bowing to federal pressure and return to the founding principles of Malaysia — equality and mutual consent among partners.

🔥 6. Final Call: Rise and Unite!

BoPiMaFo calls upon all the people of Borneo — regardless of party, race, or religion — to rise and defend our rights and dignity.

> “We are not against Malaysia; we demand that Malaysia be built upon lawful, just, and respected foundations.”

Let the world know that Sabah and Sarawak will no longer remain as oppressed territories, but as equal partners in a genuine federation — sovereign, dignified, and entitled to determine their own destiny.

Daniel John Jambun

President

Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)#~Borneo Herald™