Kota Kinabalu: The Sabah Action Body Advocating Rights (Sabar) which is challenging a controversial Federal law that limits Sabah’s sea boundary to just three nautical miles is confident the State Government will agree to be an intervenor in the case.
This is because it expects a lengthy and costly hearing that may involve enlisting the expertise of Queen’s Counsel since any decision will have major ramifications for the state as it involves rights specifically accorded to Sabah under the Malaysia Agreement (MA63).
“The rising legal costs may be too much for the group to bear alone.
“The case has also become more complicated after recent court developments,” said Sabar Chairman Datuk Zainie Abdul Aucasa.
“The High Court has allowed the Federal Attorney General, who is representing the Federal Government, to submit newly found documents from British records. They have also said they plan to ask the court for permission to bring in expert witnesses.
“While we are not sure yet if these expert witnesses will be needed, we have to be ready for it. If it happens, Sabar may have no choice but to hire our own experts, but this we cannot afford,” he said.
The local advocacy group has been fighting in court against the Territorial Sea Act 2012, which the group says unfairly restricts Sabah’s control over its waters compared to what had been promised when Sabah agreed to form Malaysia in 1963.
Sarawak has flatly refused to entertain any negotiations on its sea boundary that it insists was decided and accorded by late Queen Elizabeth 2 to Sarawak and not to Malaysia in the 1950s, long before Malaysia’s formation.
In a letter dated Oct. 2 to the State Attorney-General’s office, Sabar sounded the alarm that the case is becoming too expensive for it to handle on its own.
The letter, sighted by Daily Express, was addressed to State Attorney-General Datuk Brenndon Keith Soh and copied to Chief Minister Datuk Seri Hajiji Noor.
It is not known whether the State Government had agreed to act as intervenor, although Hajiji, himself, had expressed similar sentiment as Sarawak that borders decided during the colonial administration must be respected.
He was quoted as saying on Jan. 20, this year, that the Sabah Government maintains its stand in rejecting the Territorial Sea Act 2012.
The letter comes after the High Court rejected the State Government’s request to participate as a friend of the court or amicus curae in September last year.
Legal views, including in social media, supported the court’s decision, saying the State Government should have applied to be an intervenor or directly as an interested party, rather than merely hold a watching brief.
Zainie suggested that the State seriously consider joining the court process again.
“The State Government has more resources than Sabar to hire expert witnesses if needed. Getting these experts is a big challenge that Sabar will find very difficult to overcome,” he said.
The next court date is set for Nov 7, when Sabar would ask to refer constitutional questions to the Federal Court.
Hence, Zainie expects the Federal Attorney General may seek permission to use expert witnesses at that hearing or even before.
“We hope to get a positive answer from the State Government before the next court date. Even if expert witnesses are not needed, it would still be smart to hire an expert to support our lawyers, because this matter is extremely important to Sabah,” he added.
For the record, Sabar is challenging the Territorial Sea Act 2012, which says Sabah’s sea boundary only extends three nautical miles from the coast.
The group said this law goes against Sabah’s rights under the Malaysia Agreement 1963.
In May this year, Sabar was allowed by the High Court to submit 500 pages of old documents from British records to support its case.
The Federal Government has also been allowed to submit additional historical papers from the British archives.
In February, the High Court rejected the Federal Government’s attempt to stop the case early and ruled that Sabar has the right to challenge the law, thus allowing the case to move forward.
The sea rights dispute is about who owns and controls the seabed and underwater areas beyond Sabah’s coastal waters, which could have major effects on the state’s rights and money from oil and gas resources.