KUCHING: The Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) is a fraud perpetrated by the British, said Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) president Voon Lee Shan (pic) yesterday.
Voon was citing legal experts who opined that the agreement is fraudulent as it was only used by the British government to hand over Singapore and former Borneo states, Sabah and Sarawak, to the federation of Malaya.
“I have consulted lawyers of international stature who are experts in international law. They opined that MA63 is a void Treaty from its inception,” he said.
The PBK president also dismissed opinions from many quarters, including Sarawak Patriots Association (SPA) over the latter’s stance on the agreement.
Last Friday, New Sarawak Tribune published SPA secretary-general David Hii Chin Loung’s argument that there was no reason to declare MA63 null and void.
Voon opined that it was never the intention of Singapore and the Borneo states to be acquired to enlarge the territory of Malaya. They wanted to be treated as equal partners with equal status.
“After taking Singapore and the Borneo states, Malaya notified the United Nations that Malaya changed its name to Malaysia. This was a fundamental breach of MA63.
“It is also opined that the 4,000-odd people interviewed by the Cobbold Commission in 1963 from a population of 800,000 could not form consent by the people of Sarawak to the formation of Malaysia.”
Voon also argued that MA63 was void from its inception due to its failure to comply with international law which stated that colonies being unequal in capacity with its parent country could not sign a legally binding Treaty — an opinion held by international law experts.
“It is clear that the recent advisory opinion delivered on February 25, 2019 by the United Nations International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the Chagos Archipelago case is like a nail into the coffin when the ICJ opined that colonies had no legal capacity to make agreements or treaties with their parent countries.
“The argument concerning the capacity to sign treaties or agreements by colonies with their parent countries was never put forward in the Government of Kelantan v. The Federation of Malaya & Tunku Abdul Rahman [1963] 1 LNS 145 and in other domestic cases.”
Voon believed that MA63 is also void because it failed to comply with international law as colonies could not be party to an international Treaty or agreement.
“At the time MA63 was signed, Singapore and the Borneo states were colonies of Great Britain.
“It is also void when there are fundamental breaches of terms and conditions in the Treaty. This included reducing the Borneo states from their status as countries to states within Malaya.
“The federal government knew of the breaches in MA63. The recent attempt in the failed amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution on April 9, 2019 was an attempt by the federal government to rectify the breaches of MA63,” said Voon.
