Azhar, who is popularly known as Art Harun, said he had reviewed various documents, including the Federal Constitution, the Malaysia Act 1963, and the MA63 in the UK as well as the report by the Intergovernmental Committee (IGC).

“There is nothing in these documents specifying that Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore are to occupy 35% of the seats (in the lower house).

“Nor was there any clause stipulating that in the event Singapore were to separate from Malaysia, its seats must be given to Sabah and Sarawak.

“If there is (such a clause), then point it out. Otherwise it’s just a political narrative,” he said in a podcast with former law minister Zaid Ibrahim today.

Last year, Sarawak premier Abang Johari Openg was reported as saying that East Malaysia should hold 35% of the parliamentary seats to safeguard against any attempts to cancel MA63 and the rights it promises.

On Saturday, an academic wrote that the MA63 enshrined specific safeguards to ensure Sabah and Sarawak retain significant autonomy and influence, with one critical aspect being the allocation of parliamentary seats.

James Chin said Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak were allocated a combined 34% of the seats in the Dewan Rakyat, a proportion meant to guarantee a veto of constitutional amendments proposed by Malaya if one of the three “Ss” objects.

Chin, of the University of Tasmania, said that when Singapore left the federation, the right thing to do was to redistribute its parliamentary seats to Sabah and Sarawak to maintain the status quo.

“This was not done, and following subsequent redelineation exercises, Sabah and Sarawak are now left with 25% of parliamentary seats,“ he said.

However, Azhar said the assumption that Singapore’s seats would be redistributed to Sabah and Sarawak when the republic left the federation was political in nature and had no legal basis.

“Such interpretation is not backed by any document, nor is it legitimate,” he said.