Pertikaian Petronas-Petros tak sama isu Tabung Haji, kata senator

Sarawak Senator Robert Lau dismissed comparisons between the Petronas-Petros dispute and the Tabung Haji (TH) controversy, stating that the two issues fundamentally differ. Robert Lau explained that the Petronas-Petros issue revolves around constitutional rights, legislative power, and federal execution, rather than allegations of corruption, embezzlement, or mismanagement of public funds.

He responded to tax administration expert Walter Sandosam, who was quoted by Malay Mail the previous day, who cautioned that resolving the Petronas-Petros matter could face criticism if viewed as a political compromise instead of a decision made for the nation's benefit. Sandosam, former president of the Malaysian Institute of Internal Auditors and a former member of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission's investigation and prevention panel, drew parallels with TH and Felda, where previous decisions were re-examined due to concerns about governance and oversight.

Lau pointed out that comparisons are lacking in terms of the fundamental nature of the Petronas-Petros dispute. "TH fundamentally relates to institutional governance and financial management," he said. The recently established Royal Commission of Inquiry has raised serious concerns about TH's governance and investment, including execution of power by those responsible for managing the institution.

"The same applies to Felda and other federal agencies, which have been mismanaged," Lau emphasized that concerns regarding TH and Felda involve institutional governance and their impact on the national economy, but they do not touch upon the national constitutional position. "The issue of Petronas-Petronas has a completely different constitutional nature," he added.

"It relates to the constitutional and legal relationship between Sarawak and the federation. It involves the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), the Federal Constitution, the position and boundaries of the federation's states, and each federation and state government's power concerning petroleum resources." Lau stressed that the political dimension does not automatically render an issue as a failure of accountability.

"In a federation, constitutional disputes can and often require judicial determination and political negotiation," he said, citing Canada and Australia as examples of federations using political resolution to resolve such disputes. "The judiciary has a role in determining legal matters. Political leaders have a role in resolving issues affecting the federation's intergovernmental relationships."

Lau said that a politically balanced solution consistent with the Federal Constitution and MA63 should not be dismissed as an unacceptable political compromise.