KOTA KINABALU: The Court of Appeal has reserved its decision in the Federal Government's appeal against parts of a High Court ruling concerning Sabah's constitutional entitlement to a special grant under Articles 112C and 112D of the Federal Constitution.
A three-member bench comprising Justices Datuk Azhahari Kamal Ramli, Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid and Datuk Amarjeet Singh heard submissions on Thursday (Oct 29) from counsel for the Federal Government, the Sabah Law Society (SLS) and the Sabah government before adjourning the matter.
ALSO READ: Court of Appeal sets Nov 12 case management over Sabah revenue entitlement appeal (https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2026/10/29/court-of-appeal-sets-nov-12-case-management-over-sabah-revenue-entitlement-appeal)
The court fixed Nov 12 for e-review case management to set a date for the delivery of its decision.
During the hearing, Senior Federal Counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly @ Arwi argued that the High Court had erred in finding that Putrajaya breached its constitutional duties and in granting a mandamus order related to the review of Sabah's special grant.
The Federal Government maintained that the 1970 First Review Order remained legally in force until it was superseded by a 2022 Review Order, relying on Article 112D(3), and contended that payments made to Sabah between 1974 and 2021 were constitutional.
It also challenged the High Court's jurisdiction to hear the matter, arguing that the dispute had effectively become one between the federal and Sabah governments.
Representing SLS, David Fung Yin Kee defended the High Court decision, arguing that no constitutional review had been carried out between 1974 and 2021 as required under Article 112D.
He described the 48-year period as a constitutional gap and submitted that exchanges of correspondence and meetings between the two governments could not make up a review within the meaning of the Constitution.
ALSO READ: Sabah's 40% revenue entitlement affirmed by High Court
Fung also maintained that SLS was entitled to bring the judicial review in the public interest and that the court, as guardian of the Constitution, could intervene where constitutional obligations had not been fulfilled.
The Sabah government, represented by State Attorney General Datuk Brenndon Keith Soh and his team, broadly supported the High Court's finding that no review had been conducted since the first review in 1969.
However, the state opposed the quashing of the interim 2022, 2023 and 2024 review arrangements, arguing that those orders should remain operative while the constitutional issues are resolved.
