Lawyer sees no change in proposed amendment to Article 1(2)

SIBU: There is no difference between the amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution in 1976 and that of proposed amendment of the Article and it is just playing with the construction of a sentence.

Robert Lau Hui Yew, a lawyer here, viewed the amendment as a window dressing as the proposed amendment just split the 1976 version into two parts - (a) and (b). “It is still in one sentence. There is no explanation or clarification as to why there is two part - (a) and (b).

“A very simple amendment will look like this:

“(2) The States of the Federation shall consist of:

(a) the Federation of Malaya (which consists of the eleven states in the Federation of Malaya); (b) the State of Sarawak; and (c) the State of Sabah. These three States shall form the Federation of Malaysia,” he said.

He pointedout that in 1963, the Federation of Malaysia was formed by four different territories, namely the Federation of Malaya (consisting of 11 states), the State of Sarawak, the State of North Borneo and the State of Singapore.

These were the four signatories to the Agreement in 1963. The other signatory was United Kingdom, acting as the colonial master of the States of Sarawak, North Borneo and Singapore.

The amendment to Article 1(2) in 1976 made the federation to be of 13 states and the federal territories.

“That had the effect of doing away with the Federation of Malaysia as envisaged in 1963 and to assimilate the two States of Borneo into the Federation of Malaya but called it Malaysia.

“After 43 years Parliament is having another go and I have just read the proposed amendments.

“I am disappointed as it should be a very simple exercise and yet the drafters are trying to confuse and hold on the assimilated nature or Malaya in the guise of Malaysia.”

He added that what the Parliament under the PH Government is trying to do is maintain Sarawak and Sabah as one of 13 states and assimilate (by a take over) Sarawak and Sabah to Malaya.

“I want my MP of Sibu to vote against this proposal and put forward an amendment in the manner I provide above,” he urged.