| Agreement relating to Malaysia between United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore | |
|---|---|
 Agreement relating to Malaysia | |
| Drafted | 15 November 1961; 63 years ago (1961-11-15) |
| Signed | 9 July 1963; 61 years ago (1963-07-09) |
| Location | London, United Kingdom |
| Sealed | 31 July 1963; 61 years ago (1963-07-31) |
| Effective | 16 September 1963; 61 years ago (1963-09-16) |
| Signatories | |
| Parties |
|
| Depositary |
|
| Languages | English andMalay |
| Full text | |
 Agreement relating to Malaysia between United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore atWikisource | |
TheMalaysia Agreement,[a] or theAgreement relating to Malaysia between United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore (MA63) was alegal document which agreed to combineNorth Borneo (Sabah),Sarawak, andSingapore with the existing states ofMalaya,[3] the resulting union being namedMalaysia.[4][5] Signed in London, United Kingdom, the agreement has been in effect since 16 September 1963; Singapore was subsequently expelled from Malaysia not long after this agreement, becoming asovereign state on 9 August 1965.[6]
Prior toWorld War II,British Malaya consisted of three groups of polities: theprotectorate of theFederated Malay States, five protectedUnfederated Malay States and thecrown colony of theStraits Settlements.
In 1946, theMalayan Union was established in British Malaya which comprised theFederated Malay States ofPerak, Selangor,Negeri Sembilan, Pahang; theUnfederated Malay States ofKedah, Perlis,Kelantan, Terengganu,Johor; and theStraits Settlements ofPenang andMalacca. Meanwhile, Britain haddirect rule overSingapore as acrown colony. It came through a series of agreements between the United Kingdom and the Malayan Union.[7] The Malayan Union was superseded by theFederation of Malaya on 1 February 1948, and achieved independence within theCommonwealth of Nations on 31 August 1957.[5]
Throughout the 20th century, decolonisation became the societal goal of the peoples under colonial regimes aspiring to achieve self-determination. TheSpecial Committee on Decolonisation (also known as theU.N. Special Committee of the 24 on Decolonisation, reflected in the United Nations General Assembly's proclamation on 14 December 1960 of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples hereinafter, theCommittee of 24, or simply, theDecolonisation Committee) was established in 1961 by theGeneral Assembly of the United Nations with the purpose of monitoring implementation of theDeclaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples and to make recommendations on its application.[8]
The committee is also a successor to the former Committee on Information from Non-Self-Governing Territories. Hoping to speed the progress of decolonisation, the General Assembly had adopted in 1960 theResolution 1514, also known as the "Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples" or simply "Declaration on Decolonisation". It stated that all people have a right to self-determination and proclaimed that colonialism should be brought to a speedy and unconditional end.[9]
Under the Malaysia Agreement signed between the United Kingdom and Malaya, Britain would enact an act to relinquish sovereign control over Singapore, Sarawak and North Borneo (now Sabah). This was accomplished through the enactment of theMalaysia Act 1963, clause 1(1) of which states that on Malaysia Day, "Her Majesty's sovereignty and jurisdiction in respect of the new states shall be relinquished so as to vest in the manner agreed".[10]
The issue of self-determination with respect to the peoples of North Borneo, Sarawak, and Singapore formed the bedrock of yet another challenge to the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. Under the Joint Statement issued by the British and Malayan Federal Governments on 23 November 1961, clause 4 provided:Before coming to any final decision it is necessary to ascertain the views of the peoples. It has accordingly been decided to set up a Commission to carry out this task and to make recommendations ........
In the spirit of ensuring that decolonisation was carried in accordance with the wishes of the peoples of North Borneo, theBritish Government, working with the Malayan Government, appointed a Commission of Enquiry for North Borneo and Sarawak in January 1962 to determine if the people supported the proposal to create a Federation of Malaysia. The five-man team, which comprised two Malayans and three British representatives, was headed byLord Cobbold.[11] The Commission released its findings, report and recommendations on 1 August 1962. It concluded that the formation of Malaysia should be implemented. However, Lord Cobbold also stressed that all parties enter the federation as equal partners. Lord Cobbold had secretly,without disclosing in the report , written to British Prime MinisterHarold Macmillan on 21 June 1962: "I have supported Malaysia in the report on the assumption that Singapore also joins in ... if Singapore were to drop out, a federation between Malaya and the Borneo territories without Singapore would have few attractions.
In Singapore, thePeople's Action Party (PAP) initially sought merger with Malaysia on the basis of the strong mandate it obtained during the general elections of 1959 when it won 43 of the 51 seats. However, this mandate became questionable when dissension within the Party led to a split. In July 1961, following a debate on a vote of confidence in the government, 13 PAP Assemblymen were expelled from the PAP for abstaining. They went on to form a new political party, theBarisan Sosialis (BS), the PAP's majority in the Legislative Assembly was whittled down as they now only commanded 30 of the 51 seats. More defections occurred until the PAP had a majority of just one seat in the Assembly.
Given this situation, it would have been impossible to rely on the mandate achieved in 1959 to move forth with merger. A new mandate was necessary, especially since BS argued that the terms of merger offered were detrimental to Singaporeans – such as having reduced seats in thefederal parliament compared to its population, only being able to vote in Singapore elections,[12] and the obligation that Singapore contribute 40% of its revenue to the federal government. To allay these concerns, a number ofSingapore–specific provisions were included in the Agreement.[13] Singapore was ultimately expelled from Malaysia on 9 August 1965.
AlthoughBrunei sent a delegation to the signing of the Malaysia Agreement, they did not sign, as theSultan of Brunei wished to be recognised as the senior ruler in the entire federation and what had happened during theBrunei revolt.[14] It would continue to be aBritish protectorate until it became a sovereign state on 1 January 1984.
On 11 September 1963, just four days before the new Federation of Malaysia was to come into existence, the Government of the State ofKelantan sought a declaration claiming that the Malaysia Agreement and Malaysia Act were null and void, or alternatively, that even if they were valid, they did not bind the State of Kelantan. The Kelantan Government argued that both the Malaysia Agreement and the Malaysia Act were not binding on Kelantan on the following grounds that the Malaysia Act in effect abolished Malaya and this was contrary to the1957 Malaya Agreement that the proposed changes required the consent of each of the constituent states of the Federation of Malaya – including Kelantan – and this had not been obtained. This suit was dismissed by James Thomson, then Chief Justice, who ruled that the constitution had not been violated during the discussion and creation of the Malaysia Act.[15][16]
Over the decades after the agreement, many academics and politicians have argued that the promises made to Sarawak and North Borneo (Sabah) have been eroded over time by the federal government.[17][18][19] After the historic initial defeat of theAlliance/Barisan Nasional (BN) government in the2018 Malaysian general election, thePakatan Harapan (PH) government promised to look into Sarawak and Sabah's grievances in relation to the Malaysia Agreement which had been neglected.
After aproposed 2019 amendment to the Constitution of Malaysia to restore the status of Sabah and Sarawak according to the original content of Malaysia Agreement failed to pass a two-thirds majority, the federal government compromised to review the agreement to remedy breaches of the treaty with a "Special Cabinet Committee To Review the Malaysia Agreement".[20][21] The seven agreed issues were:
The first meeting about these issues was held on 17 December 2018.[21] Despite the willingness of the federal government to review the agreement, reports surfaced that negotiations between Sabah and the federal government had not been smooth, with the latter dictating some matters of the review, causing the perception that the review was a one-sided affair with the government appearing reluctant to relinquish control of affairs.[22]
In another2021 amendment to the Constitution of Malaysia, Article 160 (2) of the federal constitution was amended with the new definition of the term "federation" where the Malaysian federation is formed in accordance to the 1963 Malaysian agreement in addition to 1957 Malaya agreement.[23] In February 2022, the name of thehead of government of Sarawak was changed from "Chief Minister" to "Premier". In 2024, it was proposed that Sabah does the same.[24]
In March 2022, 11 people from Sarawak filedwrit into the High Court of Sarawak to declare the Malaysia agreement null and void because the people of Sarawak did not unconditionally exercise self-determination norreferendum was held before the formation of Malaysia. Therefore, Sarawak would not bind to the Malaysia agreement.[25] In April 2022, theGovernment of Sarawak tried to strike out the suit on reasons that the High Court had no jurisdiction to enforce or nullify an international treaty like MA63.[26] In May 2023, The high court in Kuching dismissed the suit because the FederalConstitution of Malaysia is the supreme law of the country and for Sarawak to leave the federation, the Federal Constitution needs to be amended.[27]
The Malaysia Agreement lists annexes of
| Annex A: Malaysia Bill |
| First Schedule—Insertion of new Articles in Constitution |
| Second Schedule—Section added to Eighth Schedule to Constitution |
| Third Schedule—Citizenship (amendment of Second Schedule to Constitution) |
| Fourth Schedule—Special Legislative Lists for Borneo States and Singapore |
| Fifth Schedule—Additions for Borneo States to Tenth Schedule (Grants and assigned revenues) to Constitution |
| Sixth Schedule—Minor and consequential amendments of Constitutions |
| Annex B: The Constitution of the State of Sabah |
| The Schedule—Forms of Oaths and Affirmations |
| Annex C: The Constitution of the State of Sarawak |
| The Schedule—Forms of Oaths and Affirmations |
| Annex D: The Constitution of the State of Singapore |
| First Schedule—Forms of Oaths and Affirmations |
| Second Schedule—Oath of Allegiance and Loyalty |
| Third Schedule—Oath as Member of the Legislative Assembly |
| Annex F: Agreement of External Defence and Mutual Assistance |
| Annex G: North Borneo (Compensation and Retiring benefits) Order in Council, 1963 |
| Annex H: Form of public officers agreements in respect of Sabah and Sarawak |
| Annex I: Form of public officers agreements in respect of Singapore |
| Annex J: Agreement between the Governments of the Federation of Malaya and Singapore on common and financial arrangements |
| Annex to Annex J—Singapore customs ordinance |
| Annex K: Arrangements with respect to broadcasting and television in Singapore |
This article incorporates text from this source, which is in thepublic domain.Articles related to Malaysia Agreement | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||||||||||||||
