After Johor prince’s comments, lawyers say Constitution silent on secession
(MMO) – “Because it is silent in the Federal Constitution, unlike in Sabah where it specifically mentions in the Malaysia Agreement that it (the state) cannot secede”
The Federal Constitution does not provide for the secession of any state from Malaysia but legal experts are torn over what this means, following a Johor royal’s suggestion that the state’s place in the federation was not immutable.
Constitutional law practitioner New Sin Yew also stressed that the Federal Constitution does not specifically address the topic of secession one way or another, and that constitutional amendments were not impossible.
“Secession (in this case) is more political than legal,” he told Malay Mail Online when asked to comment on Johor crown prince Tunku Ismail Ibrahim’s recent remarks about the state’s right to secede from Malaysia.
“Because it is silent in the Federal Constitution, unlike in Sabah where it specifically mentions in the Malaysia Agreement that it (the state) cannot secede,” he said, referring to the 20-point memorandum signed between Malaya and Sabah for the formation of Malaysia in 1963.
The Johor crown prince had during an interview with local football portal Fourth Official this week said that the state could choose to secede if it finds a breach to the terms agreed upon its membership of the Federation of Malaysia.
Tunku Ismail also said that as the future Sultan of Johor, his responsibilities will always go to the state first and its people before Malaysia.
This is not the first time a member of the Johor royal family has mentioned secession, a topic that is classification as seditious was reinforced with recent amendments to the Sedition Act 1948.
