SLS says Sabah govt's support on 40% revenue rights review a morale booster

KOTA KINABALU: Sabah Law Society (SLS) welcomes the state government's move to drop its legal challenge to the society's bid to seek a judicial review on the state's rights to 40% revenue.

SLS president Mohamed Nazim Maduarin said the state government's decision to withdraw its objections to the right (locus standi) of the society in the case was a morale booster.

Nazim's statement comes after the state government withdrew its bid to be intervener and co-appellant in the federal Attorney General's appeal against the Nov 11, 2022 Kota Kinabalu High Court decision to give leave to SLS for a judicial review in regards to Sabah's Constitutional 40% revenue entitlement.

"SLS welcomes this latest development and is supportive of the state government's latest position, which is in line with the recent statement by the Chief Minister.

"SLS appreciates the moral support from everyone including members of the public that have engaged in this cause," he said in a statement following the Court of Appeal 's case management Friday (May 24) where the state withdrew its objections to SLS being granted leave.

Nazim said that the decision of the Court of Appeal on June 18 will determine whether SLS can continue to pursue Sabah's right to the 40% entitlement for the Lost Years (1974 to 2021).

"SLS trusts and respectfully submits to the discernment of the court to arrive at the necessary and just a decision.

"SLS remains non-partisan and independent of any political party," he added.

Earlier Friday during the Zoom session, Sabah Attorney General Nor Asiah Mohd Yusof informed the court that they were not appealing the High Court decision to give leave to SLS in the case.

The state government also retracted their May 16 submissions through their appointed lawyer Tengku Datuk Fuad Ahmad at the appellate court hearing on the issue of the locus standi of SLS as the State Government did not submit on this issue at the High Court.

The State Government also retracted its submission in relation to Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution as being "an aspiration" and not a mandatory or absolute right.

It was stated that this position can be confirmed by the SAG in person if the Court required.