PUTRAJAYA – The government’s move not to appeal against Sabah’s entitlement to 40 per cent of its revenue is seen as a politically pragmatic decision that benefits the ruling coalition in the short term while risking long-term fiscal and legal implications.
Political analyst Mujibu Abd Muis said the decision could set a precedent and open the door for other states, such as Sarawak, Terengganu and Kelantan, to seek similar treatment under fiscal and constitutional grounds.
He said that from a legal perspective, the government’s move might be viewed as an acceptance of the court’s judgment, potentially weakening Federal Government’s position in future cases.
However, he added that it also reflected a shift towards negotiation and political resolution rather than prolonged litigation, which was an important step in strengthening federal-state relations.
Politically, Mujibu said the decision reduced the risk of confrontation with Sabah and helped counter the narrative that the Federal Government was denying the state’s rights.
He said this showed that the government was pragmatic and respected the courts.
He also added that the timing of the decision was likely influenced by the upcoming Sabah state election, serving to ease anti-Putrajaya sentiment and maintain voter confidence amid renewed discussions on state autonomy and the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).
For the Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS) state government, Mujibu said the move was a political advantage that strengthened their position among voters, as they could claim success in pushing the Federal Government to meet Sabah’s demands.
“At the same time, the Federal Government is able to project an image of openness and willingness to listen to the voices of the people of Sabah, but the impact depends greatly on what happens after the state election.
“If the negotiations and implementation do not yield tangible results, this decision may be seen as merely an election tactic,” he said.
Mujibu also stated that the government’s decision symbolised a wider shift in federal-state relations, from courtroom battles to collaborative negotiations and reflected growing recognition of decentralisation and the state’s constitutional rights under MA63.