Source: Borneo
Post
The Malaysian Agreement 1963 is the most important document in Malaysia.
Without it, our nation wouldn’t exist. However, there are a few misconceptions
that you (probably) have.
Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore joined Malaysia
Source:
Malaysiapublicholiday.net
Truth: They formed Malaysia together.
The common misrepresentation is that the bodies joined Malaya and
applied for statehood status. Due to this, confusion occurs whether Malaysia is
58 years old or 52 years old.
This misconception has led to arguments how Malaysia should emphasize on
31st August instead of 16th September. The reality is that
all of these states had independence prior and decided to form a new body, for
greater influence in the region. In short, 16th September is our 4th of July. The
rebuttal for that was also explained in
another article of ours.
Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore has the same status as the states
in Peninsular Malaysia
Source:
Israqadventure.com
Truth: All of the partners should be treated as equal members to Malaya
This means, they should not have been relegated to the status of states
but they had the expectation to have their own autonomy. This is the reason why
the 20 point agreement for North Borneo and the 18 point agreement for Sarawak
existed.
Both documents detailed the areas where the states have their own
autonomy and the federal government should interfere. While there are still
debates whether it is fully preserved, some of the areas were immigration,
education and to a lesser extend the civil service.
Forming Malaysia made the other states independent from the
British
The Malaysian
Proclamation in Sabah | Source: Astro Awani
Truth: Both Sabah and Sarawak were independent prior to this and Singapore
already had administrative independence from the British.
This misconception is not only wrong, it can also be offensive depending
on whom do you talk to. Sarawak got its independence on the 22nd of July 1963
while Sabah (North Borneo back then) got theirs on the 31st of August 1963.
Due to this, many East Malaysians see West Malaysians, having a saviour
complex where they have freed East Malaysia from the shackles of colonialism.
It effectively reduces the struggle that East Malaysians have made to secure
their place towards independence.
In turn, Malaya’s struggle to independence became front and centre
rather than complementary to our history.
Brunei was part of the Malaysian agreement
Source:
kanggatheren-manogaran.blogspot.com
Truth: Brunei was only in talks but was never part of it.
The Malaysian agreement was between four parties, Sabah, Sarawak and
Singapore. Brunei was in talks to the agreement but they never actually signed
the deal.
While at first Sultan Omar Ali Saifuddin III called the deal
“attractive” he decided to not to be part of it in the long run. His initial
plans were met with vocal resistance.
1962, the Brunei People’s Party won all seats contested, giving them a
significant voice in their legislature. At first, they were to only agree to
form Malaysia if the proposed three Malaysian states were united under one
banner, with their own sultanate. As history played out, it never came to
fruition.
The Brunei Revolt, an attempt to
take down the monarchy also occurred. The party responsible was the North
Kalimantan National Army, which was also unhappy with the Malaysia deal. The
party looked towards Indonesia as a model for nationalism rather than Singapore
or Malaya. With the revolt crushed by the British, it partially pressured the
monarchy not to be part of Malaysia.
With the Sultan also possibly losing some extent of their powers and
control over their oil resources, the Sultan decided not to join Malaysia. The
Brunei Revolt is normally referred to the precursor of the “Indonesian-Malaysia
Confrontation” period.
It was signed on 16th September 1963
in Malaysia and has been planned initially as “Malaysia Day”
YTM Tunku Abdul
Rahman Putra Al-Haj, entertaining a press conference before flying off to
London to settle the Malaysian Agreement. | Source: Astro Awani
Truth: It was signed on the 9th of July 1963 in London
This one is easy to get it wrong. The American Declaration of
Independence was signed in the United States, the Kyoto Protocol was signed in
Kyoto while the Copenhagen Accord was signed in Copenhagen. Naturally, people
would think assume that it was signed in Malaysia.
While Malaysia Day was on the 16th of September 1963, it is however
signed on the 9th of July. The period is to get the administration to prepare for
the formation. However, the period wasn’t planned to be that long.
The original date for Malaysia Day was 31st August 1963.
The Malayan Prime Minister at that time, Tunku Abdul Rahman, gave
the United Nations extra two weeks to study the sentiments of East
Malaysians about forming the Federation.
The Cobbold Commission held a referendum for Sabah &
Sarawak
The members of the
Cobbold Commission | Source: Dalulian.net
Truth: Only inquiries were made, not a referendum
While most countries, when it comes to secession or referendums, they
often turn to the ballot box for answers. Such we can see the within the
attempted secession of Scotland.
Sabah & Sarawak however, did not go through that phase. In assessing
the sentiments of the people, the Cobbold Commission was formed. The commission
led by Lord Cobbold, the former Governor of the Bank of England instead held
enquiries from a total of 4000 people and
2200 memorandums.There were also
arguments on how there were no North Borneo representative in the commission
while there was only one Sarawakian representative, Anthony Foster
Abell, the former Governor of Sarawak.
It is however, can be argued that recent elections that preceded the
commission can be considered as a de facto referendum.
According to the Hansard for the
Malaysia Bill, dated 19th July 1963, Nigel Fisher argued
that the elections have been won by pro-Malaysian parties.
In Sarawak, according to Mr Fisher, 24 out of 36 seats were won by
pro-Malaysian parties. In North Borneo (Sabah), in all 125 district councils,
none of the representatives were known to be anti-Malaysian.
All states in Malaya were on board with the Malaysian Agreement
Source:
commons.wikipedia.org
Truth: The Government of Kelantan opposed it at the time
Not all other states in Malaya were happy to form Malaysia. On the 10th of September
1963, the government of Kelantan opposed. This was reflected in the landmark
case of The Government of the State of Kelantan v The Government of the
Federation of Malaya and Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj.
In this court case, the Kelantan government felt that their right as a
state have been infringed when the parliament decided to form Malaysia. They
claim that the parliament needed their consent and the Sultan of Kelantan
needed to be present for the Malaysian agreement.
This in turn according to them makes the agreement null and void as it
contravenes the federal constitution for the Federation of Malaya. If the
agreement was found not to be void, the terms of the Malaysian Agreement should
not affect the state of Kelantan.
Chief Justice James Thomson simplified their demands into one simple
question; “”whether the Parliament or the executive government has trespassed
in any way the limits placed on their powers by the constitution.”
According to CJ Thomson, the Malayan Constitution was silent on
consulting other states in regards to new territory. The Malaysia Act and
the Malaysian Agreement does not contravene the Federal
Constitution in any way.
Originally written for GreaterMalaysia.com
