Petronas gets leave to challenge Sarawak oil and gas laws

LocalPolitics
16 Mar 2026 • 7:04 PM MYT
The Sun Daily
The Sun Daily

For the latest news and features from Malaysia and the rest of the world.

image is not available

The Federal Court grants Petronas leave to challenge the validity of several Sarawak state laws governing oil and gas, citing an arguable case.

PUTRAJAYA: The Federal Court has granted Petroliam Nasional Bhd (Petronas) leave to commence proceedings challenging the validity of several Sarawak state ordinances governing oil and gas. Chief Judge of Malaya Datuk Seri Hashim Hamzah ruled the national oil company had met the legal threshold for leave.

He stated the case was arguable and not frivolous, ordering Petronas to commence proceedings within 21 days. The case will now be argued before the Federal Court in its original jurisdiction.

Petronas filed the motion in January against the Sarawak state government. It seeks to challenge the legislative competency of the Sarawak State Legislature to enact the laws in question.

The company aims to have several provisions declared invalid. These include sections of the Sarawak Distribution of Gas Ordinance 2016 and the Sarawak Oil Mining Ordinance 1958.

Petronas claims the state legislature lacked competence over matters in the Federal List. Its lawyers argued the state’s legislative power is limited to gas distribution within Sarawak.

They contended it does not extend to other petroleum lifecycle activities. Lawyer Datuk Dr Cyrus Das also argued laws implementing international treaties would conflict with the Federal Constitution.

Sarawak State Attorney-General Datuk Sri Saferi Ali objected to the application. He argued Petronas failed to present an arguable case.

State Legal Counsel Datuk Sri J.C. Fong said the leave application should be dismissed. He argued the state did not encroach on federal powers and called the application frivolous.

Senior Federal Counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly@Arwi said the federal government did not oppose the leave. He stated Petronas’s grounds met the constitutional threshold for an arguable case.