The 40% Question: Sabah's Right vs. Federal Excuses – A Matter of Justice, Not Charity

Lately, an old wound has been reopened in Malaysia, specifically concerning the state of Sabah. If you've been following the news, or even just social media, you’d know about the ongoing saga of the 40% special grant for Sabah. This isn’t some new request; it’s a fundamental constitutional right, enshrined in the very fabric of how Malaysia was supposed to be formed. And thanks to the relentless efforts of the Sabah Law Society (SLS), the Sabah High Court recently reaffirmed this right, a significant win for the people of Sabah.

But, predictably, like clockwork, the usual suspects emerged to defend the indefensible. I saw a video recently, where a Sabah commentator was dissecting the words of a Barisan Nasional agent, Bung Mokhtar. His argument? That if the central government were to actually hand over this 40% royalty, the entire Central Government of Malaysia would go bankrupt.

Let that sink in for a moment. Bankrupt.

My immediate reaction, which I commented on that very video, was simple, direct, and I believe, fundamentally true: "Siapa suruh kerajaan pusat eksploitasi kekayaan orang sejak awal? Kerajaan pusat kena terima akibat daripada perbuatan mereka." (Who told the central government to exploit the wealth of the people from the start? The central government must accept the consequences of their actions.)

This isn't just about a percentage of money. This is about decades of exploitation, a systemic siphoning of wealth from a region that is incredibly rich in natural resources, yet remains, paradoxically, one of the poorest states in Malaysia. It's an indictment of a federal system that has, for too long, taken without adequate return, promising development that has either been glacially slow or never fully materialised.

The video I watched also brilliantly called out the hypocrisy of certain Sabah politicians, especially those aligned with the Barisan Nasional. Instead of standing firm with the dignity and rights of their own state – their own people – they choose to act as apologists for a central-led government that has consistently failed to honour its commitments to Sabah. The commentary was a powerful public call to action: "Please defend the place where Bung Mokhtar is from: Sabah."

And this brings me to a crucial point about ethics, loyalty, and self-interest. In my opinion, those who actively defend oppressors are, almost without exception, benefiting directly or indirectly from the oppression itself. It’s a bitter truth, but it’s a truth nonetheless. They will endlessly concoct justifications, twist narratives, and create smoke and mirrors to defend the injustice, all to maintain their influence, secure their positions, and ultimately, for their own personal gain. Their loyalty isn't to the people they supposedly represent, but to the system that feeds them.

Let’s be brutally honest: The ethics surrounding the exploitation of another region’s natural resources, especially under a veil of manufactured justifications, are always, always questionable. There's no moral high ground in taking what isn't rightfully yours and then pleading poverty when asked to return a fraction of it. The argument that the central government will go bankrupt by fulfilling its constitutional obligation to Sabah is not a valid excuse; it’s an admission of gross financial mismanagement and an attempt to shift blame. It's a deflection from the core issue: the central government's long-standing failure to abide by the terms of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

My stance on this is unwavering, and I believe it should be the stance of every Sabahan, and indeed, every Malaysian who believes in justice and equity: Those 100% of Sabah’s natural resources belong to Sabah. Full stop.

There's no room for negotiation on this fundamental principle. Any activities that exploit these resources without the explicit and genuine consent of Sabah, using manufactured justifications to legitimize what is essentially an act of taking, are not recognised. They are, unequivocally, a violation of Sabah's autonomy, its dignity, and its inherent rights.

Think about it this way: for decades, Sabah has contributed immensely to the national coffers through its oil, gas, timber, and other resources. Yet, when you travel through parts of Sabah, you see dilapidated schools, poor infrastructure, and a lack of basic amenities that are taken for granted in other parts of the country. How can a state so rich be so relatively poor? The answer lies in the unjust distribution of its own wealth. The 40% special grant is not charity; it is a constitutional right, a long-overdue rectification of a historical wrong. To suggest that returning what is due would bankrupt the central government only further highlights the depth of this systemic injustice and the utter dependency created by years of fiscal centralisation.

The battle for the 40% isn't just a legal one; it's a moral one. It’s a fight for self-determination, for economic justice, and for the promise of a truly equitable Malaysia that was envisioned in 1963. It's time for the central government to face the consequences of its actions and honour its agreements, not just for Sabah, but for the integrity of the entire federation.

This is a long fight, but one that is crucial for Sabah's future. And we must never cease to advocate for what is right.

Edit:-

A Question of Priorities: Justice is Not Negotiable

I’ve had a few moments to reflect on the core of this issue, and I realise I need to make my position absolutely clear, because the arguments coming from certain politicians are nothing more than scare tactics. They try to use the bogeyman of Federal bankruptcy to distract from the reality of their own historical failures and ethical compromises.

Let me be clear about my personal ethical position on this matter, and it is a point of principle that goes beyond mere politics:

I would rather the so-called central government be forced to go bankrupt paying those 40% of Sabah's resources that they have exploited for decades.

Why? Because the issue at hand is not a budget shortfall; it is a profound matter of justice and dignity. The financial stability of the Central Government, if that stability is entirely built upon the systematic and illegal exploitation of a people's wealth and the deliberate disregard of constitutional rights, is fundamentally immoral. This kind of stability is not worth preserving. The dignity and justice of the Sabahan people is a higher value than the financial convenience of Putrajaya.

We must tell the world that any actions have consequences. And the current state of Malaysia's federal finances – if they are genuinely reliant on withholding Sabah’s lawful share – is the inevitable, painful example of those consequences finally catching up. This isn't about being punitive; it's about establishing a clear ethical boundary: exploitation, even if politically normalised, is not free. The bill has come due.

The politicians who cry "bankruptcy" are merely trying to protect their own comfortable status quo. They are attempting to frame the victim (Sabah) as the villain causing the economic destruction, while protecting the historical oppressor (the Central Government’s exploitative system). We cannot fall for that narrative.

This demand for the 40% is a global lesson in accountability. It shows that constitutional agreements must be honoured, that natural wealth belongs to the people of the land, and that decades of taking will eventually require a full, painful, and necessary reckoning. The time for accountability, irrespective of the cost to the system built on injustice, is now.