He suggested a royal commission to address the issue once and for all.

Speaking during a webinar today, Shad Saleem said the autonomy of Sabah and Sarawak had, in many areas, suffered retreat because of constitutional, political, social and religious developments.

“I think leaders of the federal government must recognise that the restiveness of Sabah and Sarawak is real and must be addressed,” he said in the forum, titled “Constitutional Safeguards for Sabah and Sarawak Autonomy”.

The webinar was organised by the Constitutional Literacy Initiative, a collaboration between the Bar Council and Universiti Malaya’s law faculty, in conjunction with Malaysia Day.

“A thorough study of constitutional, legal, financial and political instruments needs to be undertaken.

“Balancing the concerns of equity and efficiency in intergovernmental financial relations is paramount. In all other federations, this is an issue that causes a great deal of unhappiness,” he said.

Shad Saleem said the special committees on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) established by the previous Pakatan Harapan government in 2018 and later by Perikatan Nasional in 2020 had made some progress

“But obviously, much more needs to be done. Perhaps a royal commission is necessary.

“Petrol royalty issues have triggered separatist movements in many federations … look at Sudan. Last time it was one country but there is north and south now.

“Many decades ago, Biafra and Nigeria (fought) over petrol earnings. So I think an amicable settlement is necessary to ensure investors are not scared off and at the same time there is equitable sharing,” he said.

Earlier, Shad Saleem said that regrettably, some constitutional amendments had diluted the special position of Sabah and Sarawak, for instance, the amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution, which effectively made Sabah and Sarawak one among the 13 states in Malaysia.

“This was a status downgrade without their consent,” he said.

Others were the federalisation of critical state matters such as water and tourism, he said, adding that Sabah and Sarawak were also arguing that the Territorial Sea Act 2012 reduced their territorial waters from 12 to three nautical miles, in violation of Article 2(b).

He said Article 121(1) was also amended to emasculate the powers of the courts, including the High Court of Borneo.

“Likewise, Article 121(1A) was inserted to reduce the power of the courts, including the High Court of Borneo. Was the consent of the governors of Sabah and Sarawak obtained?” he asked.

Shad Saleem said there was also discontent over the inequitable sharing of resources and lack of fiscal federalism.

“There are allegations that these states do not derive the kind of financial benefit they deserve as a result of their contribution to the national coffers from petroleum, hydroelectricity and tourism.

“It is alleged that federal allocations to the Borneo states do not take into account the huge direct and indirect federal earnings from these states,” he said.

He said there was a need to strengthen institutional mechanisms for regular, non-partisan dialogue between the federal government and Sabah and Sarawak.

“This is so that the inevitable tensions that are inherent in a federal setup can be resolved with the least friction. We need to recapture the spirit of accommodation, moderation and compassion that animated the leaders of MA63.

“The federal government and West Malaysians must rededicate themselves to the pacts of the past,” he said.