Anger outside Kuching court as MA63 suit postponed again


Desmond Davidson

Lawyer Peli Aron says the frequent postponements of the MA63 case is getting costly for plaintiffs who have to travel to Kuching each time. – The Malaysian Insight pic, May 5, 2023.

TEMPERS were frayed among Sarawak separatists outside the Kuching High Court this morning when the decision on the federal and Sarawak governments’ bid to strike their Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) suit was postponed yet again. 

They were among 11 Sarawakians who, on March 15 last year, filed the suit seeking that the court declare the MA63 null and void, therefore removing the state from the Malaysian Federation.

They named Putrajaya and the governments of the United Kingdom and Sarawak as defendants. The UK government has not responded to the suit.

Today’s episode was the third postponement by the court on the federal and state governments’ bid to strike the suit.

Voices were raised when a court clerk informed them of the delay.

Special counsel to the Sarawak government J.C. Fong was also present. His legal aide said no one was informed about the postponement beforehand.

“The reason for the postponement… nobody could explain to us,” Peli Aron, a member of the plaintiffs’ legal team, told reporters.

Aron, who is deputy president of the pro-independence Parti Bumi Kenyalang, said the group got angry as many plaintiffs had to travel to Kuching for the case. 

“They’re really disappointed. Some of them came from Sibu, some from Miri, and that incurred some expenses,” Aron said.

Aron, whose journey included a three-hour drive from Bandar Simanggang, about 200km from Kuching, said the frequent postponements are getting costly.

“We deserve to be treated better.”

He said the general rule is that parties involved in court cases are informed a week before any postponement.

The first postponement was on March 30, the second on April 28, and the third today. 

The group of 11, led by Dorus Katan Juman, are seeking for the court to declare MA63 “null and void from the beginning”.

In their application, they argued MA63 is not a binding international agreement as it fails to comply with the requirement of international law for making treaties: that only sovereign states can make binding agreements with each other. 

The other 10 plaintiffs are Hugh Lawrence Zehnder, Nor Nyawai, Xavier Ginafah Sidop, Jemain Uji, Belayong Nyandang, Kalai Sibok, Yu Chin Liik, Chieng Kung Chiew, Ahmad Awang Ali and Alim Giovanni Adlim. – May 5, 2023.



Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments