By Bob Munang JP
KOTA KINABALU: – Lawyer Bob Munang said there was erroneous and misinformation in Datuk Teddy Chin’s article.
He pointed out that, if not corrected, will cause confusion and uneasiness regarding the appointment of a Yang di-Pertua Negeri in Sabah, specifically for Sabahans and Malaysians in general.
I am responding to the opinion article by Datuk Teddy Chin titled ‘Narrowing the Choice for New Governor,’ published on the Daily Express and Talantang Sabah News Portal Online.
My response is a sincere effort to correct the misconceptions and inaccuracies surrounding the appointment of the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah, and to help prevent any confusion on this matter.
In my reply, I will draw upon evidence, the legal provisions and precedents to clarify the issue.
To provide further clarity and context, I will address each of the points raised by Teddy, breaking them down into specific statements as follows:
Statement 1:
A TYT is not supposed to serve more than two terms or eight years in total. That had been the arrangement since Malaysia came into being in 1963.
Reply:
The statement is factually incorrect. There is no such arrangement in place since the
formation of Malaysia, and no legal provisions in the Sabah, Sarawak, Melaka, or Penang Constitutions, nor the Federal Constitution, to limit the tenure of the Yang di-Pertua Negeri to two terms or eight years.
For example, the 5th Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Melaka, TYT Tun Datuk Seri Utama Syed Ahmad Al Haji bin Syed Mahmud Shahabudin, served for five terms (20 years) from 4 December 1984 to 3 June 2004.
Similarly, the 6th Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Melaka, TYT
Tun Datuk Seri Utama Dr. Mohd Khalil bin Yaakob, served for four terms (16 years) from 4 June 2004 to 3 June 2020
The 1st Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Penang, TYT Tun Raja Uda Al-haj, served for 10 years from 31 August 1957 to 30 August 1967 and the 6th Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Penang TYT Tun Hamdan Sheikh Tahir served for three terms (12 years) from 1 May 1989 to 30 April 2001.
Closer to home, the 5th Sarawak Yang di-PertuaNegeri, TYT Tun Ahmad Zaidi Adruce, served for 15 years from 2 April 1985 to 5 December 2000.
These examples clearly demonstrate that there is no legal limit on the number of terms a Yang di-Pertua Negeri can serve.
Statement 2:
The late Tun Mustapha, Tun Pengiran Raffae, Tun Fuad Stephens, Tun Hamdan Abdullah, Tun Suffian Koroh, Tun Adnan Robert, Tun Said Keruak, Tun Sakaran, Tun Ahmad Shah – nobody served more than eight years.
Reply:
The inaugural Sabah Constitution, as outlined in Article 1(2) of Annex B of the Malaysia Agreement 1963, did not impose any limit on the number of terms a Yang di-Pertua Negeri could serve.
Article 1(2) simply states that the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah is appointed for a term of four years, with provisions for resignation or removal by the Yang di- Pertuan Agong, but no restriction on the number of terms.
Article 1(2) reads:
The Yang di-PertuaNegeri shall be appointed for a term of four years but may at anytime resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, and maybe removed from office by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in pursuance of an address by the Legislative Assembly supported by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total number of the members thereof.
Tun Mustapha’s term as the inaugural Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah ended on 16 September 1965, but he did not seek reappointment because he decided to pursue politics full-time.
Tun Mustapha led USNO in the first Sabah general elections in 1967 and was later appointed as the third Chief Minister of Sabah.
The 2nd Yang di-PertuaNegeri, TYT Tun Pengiran Ahmad Raffae, served two terms (8 years) from 16 September 1965 to 16 September 1973.
He was succeeded by Tun Fuad Stephens as the 3rd Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Sabah.
Tun Fuad served for less than two years, from 16 September 1965 to 28 July 1975,because, like Tun Mustapha, he wanted to pursue politics full-time.
He resigned to lead BERJAYA and was later appointed as the fourth Chief Minister of Sabah.
The 4th Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Sabah, TYT Tun Mohd Hamdan Abdullah, served for just over two years, from 28 July 1975 to 10 October 1977, as he passed away prematurely while in office.
The 5th Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah, TYT Tun Ahmad Koroh, served the shortest term, holding office from 12 October 1977 to 25 June 1978, for less than one year, before he too died while in office.
The 6th Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah, TYT Tun Adnan Robert, served for two terms (8 years), from 25 June 1978 until 31 December 1986.
It wasn’t until the PBS government era, which began on 22 April 1985, that the Sabah Constitution was amended vide Enactment No. 1 of 1987, which came into force from 16
April 1987 to limit the Yang di-Pertua Negeri’s tenure to two terms through the introduction of Article 2(3),which states:
A person shall not hold office as the Yang di-Pertua Negeri for more than two terms, either continuously or otherwise.
Before this 1987 amendment, there was no limit on the number of terms a Yang di-Pertua Negeri could serve.
After the 1987 amendment, the 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah – namely TYT Tun Adnan Robert, TYT Tun Said Keruak, TYT Tun Sakaran Dandai, and TYT Tun Ahmadshah Abdullah – served for the maximum two terms (8 years) each pursuant to Article 2(3).
Statement 3:
The Warisan+ State Government under Shafie Apdal amended the Constitution (in 2019 I think) so that the TYT can serve more than two terms or indefinitely.
Reply:
The Sabah Constitution was amended during the Warisan+State Government era by deleting Article 2(3) vide Enactment No. 11 of 2018, which came into force on 20 December 2018, seeking to remove the limitation on the number of terms a person may hold office as
the Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah.
The decision of the Warisan+ State Government to delete Clause (3) of Article 2 is essentially reverting back to the original Sabah Constitution, which did not limit the number of terms for the Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Sabah.
Whether the decision made by the Warisan+ State Government is correct or not is for the people of Sabah to judge.
Statement 4:
Since Merdeka in 1963, the Sabah TYT had been the head of the Islamic religion in Sabah.
Reply:
This is erroneous and misinformation, which, if not corrected, will cause confusion and uneasiness regarding the appointment of a Yang di-Pertua Negeri in Sabah, specifically for Sabahans and Malaysians in general.
Bear in mind that when the Malaysia proposal was first brought to the fore and a commission of inquiry was held, headed by Lord Cobbold, the issue of making Islam the official religion for the Federation of Malaya was not intended to be applied to the two Borneo states of
Sabah and Sarawak.
In fact, the matter of religion was so important that it was proposed as one of the major constitutional arrangements in the IGC report, which forms an important constitutional document relating to the formation of Malaysia.
Unfortunately, contrary to the political understanding and compromise reached by the
founding leaders of Sabah on the issue of religion, the USNO government went ahead and amended the Sabah Constitution by inserting a new Article 5A vide Enactment No. 8 of 1973, which came into force on 27 September 1973, to make Islam the state religion in Sabah.
Article 5A reads:
Islam is the religion of the State; but other religions maybe practised in peace and harmony in any part of the State.
The passage of Article 5A, which made Islam the state religion of Sabah, may appear legal on the surface, but it is, in essence, unconstitutional when considered in light of the political understanding and compromises made by the founding leaders of Sabah during the formative years of Malaysia.
This constitutional change lacked true consensus and was instead
supported by the acquiescence of former UPKO assemblymen, who were forced to join USNO after UPKO’s dissolution in December 1967.
It is important to note that during
USNO’s second term in government (1971- 1976), there were no opposition assembly members following the dissolution of UPKO, as the USNO-SCA alliance won all 32 seats unopposed in the 1971 Sabah State Election.
This lack of opposition facilitated the passage of the amendment.
Additionally, the 1970s were characterised by authoritarian rule, particularly with the extension of Emergency rule in Sabah, which significantly influenced the political
climate of the time.
On the issue of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong being the head of the religion of Islam in Sabah, it was during the PBS era that the Sabah Constitution was amended to insert a new Article 5B via Enactment No. 8 of 1985, which came into force on 31 December 1985.
This amendment was made following similar provisions in the Sarawak, Melaka, and Penang Constitutions, which provide for the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to be the head of the religion of Islam.
Article 5B reads:
(1) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall be the Head of the religion of Islam in the State.
(2) The Legislative Assembly shall be responsible for making provisions for regulating Islamic
religious affairs and for constituting a Council to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in matters relating to the religion of Islam.
Pursuant to Article 5B(2), a Council was constituted to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in matters relating to the religion of Islam in Sabah, vide the Majlis Ugama Islam Negeri Sabah Enactment 2004.
Section 4(1) of the Majlis Ugama Islam Negeri Sabah Enactment 2004 reads:
There shall be a body known as the ‘Majlis Ugama Islam Negeri Sabah’ to aid and advise the Yang di- Pertuan Agong in matters relating to the religion of Islam.
Article 5B of the Sabah Constitution, along with the subsequent enactment of the Majlis
Ugama Islam Negeri Sabah 2004, cements the fact that the appointment of a Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Sabah does not require the person to be of the Islamic faith.
The contention that the Yang di-PertuaNegeri of Sabah is the head of the religion of Islam in Sabah is untenable because the Yang di-PertuaNegeri has never held that role since Sabah became part of Malaysia.
Statement 5:
To have a non-Muslim as TYT maybe legally correct but politically wrong in the eyes of some quarters.
Reply:
This statement is untenable, especially when considering the precedent set by the appointment of the first Yang di-Pertua Negeri of Melaka, TYT Tun Leong Yew Koh, who was both a non-Muslim and anon-Malay.
This demonstrates that such an appointment can be legally valid and does not conflict with established practices.
It is essential to correct the inaccuracies surrounding the appointment of the Yang di-Pertua
Negeri of Sabah to prevent confusion and misinterpretations.
By addressing the factual errors,
presenting evidence, and highlighting relevant precedents, I hope to provide my fellow
Sabahans with a clearer understanding of the state’s governance structure, particularly the proper context of the Yang di-PertuaNegeri’s appointment.
It is important to reaffirm that the role of Islam in Sabah’s constitutional framework does not require the Yang di-PertuaNegeri to be of the Islamic faith.
While the position is largely ceremonial, the Yang di-Pertua Negeri plays a crucial role in the formation of the government following a general election.
Clarifying the appointment process of the Yang di-Pertua Negeri and the Constitution will promote a more informed public discourse on Sabah’s governance and its historical context within the broader framework of the Malaysia Agreement.
Equally important is the need to
uphold the promises, compromises, and political understandings made by the founding leaders of Sabah and Malaysia.
By doing so, we can ensure that Sabah moves forward as a united and progressive state, honouring its foundational agreements and contributing to the continued success of the nation.
Bob Munang JP is a life member of the Kadazan Dusun Cultural Association (KDCA) and a founding life member of the Momogun National Congress (MNC).
He serves as a Justice of the Peace for the State of Sabah and is a qualified Barrister and Solicitor of the New Zealand High Court, as well as a practising Advocate and Solicitor of the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak.
His work reflects a strong commitment to both cultural preservation