The defining movement of PDA 1974 and Government of Malaya is now exposed

The defining movement of PDA 1974 and Government of Malaya is now exposed

In Petroleum Development Act 1974 Act 144, and stated in Definition 10. For the purpose of this Act, the expression “petroleum” means any mineral oil or relative hydrocarbon and natural gas existing in its natural condition and casing head petroleum spirit including bituminous shales and other stratified deposits from which oil can be extracted

Definition of petroleum (Merriam-webster) since 1828 : an oily flammable bituminous liquid that may vary from almost colorless to black, occurs in many places in the upper strata of the earth, is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons with small amounts of other substances, and is prepared for use as gasoline, naphtha, or other products by various refining processes

Definiition of Petroleum (the Advanced Learner’s Dictionary of current English) London Oxford  University Press 1963 is mineral oil. Definition is defining and defining is explain the meaning of (e.g. words) and/or state or show clearly

Definition of Petroleum  (Chambers Encyclopedic English Dictionary 1994)  noun a naturally occurring oil consisting of a thick black, brown, or greenish liquid mixture of hydrocarbon and definition is “a statement of the meaning of a word or phrase and the quality of  having clear, precise limits or form.

So the issues before us are that the questioned clear meaning of the words “ definition” and “petroleum” used in the said Act of Parliament in the context of natural gas .

As the word “definition” is used in substantive error based on the dictionaries in the Act, the Act is an illegality null and void ab initio in the extraction of petroleum and natural gas in Sabah.

Petroleum is the substance that can be extracted if PDA 1974 Act 144 valid and in this case as the said Act is faulty hence illegal and extraction of natural gas is also illegal.

So do we need to go to Malaysian Judiciary to settle the PDA 1974 in terms such as financial, legal, power and nation building?

Or is it for the Parliament to decide on this Act and act accordingly to handle the illegal act of extracting massive amount of petroleum (liquid) and natural gas illegally since 1976 in Sarawak and Sabah or any other states in Malaysia?   

A top practising lawyer who is now retired from Judiciary recently had told me once that he could win court cases by finding faults with a word or two. Here we have grave dispute with definition, petroleum and natural gas.

In the same veins of illegalities aplenty if properly scrutinised in Malaysia, isn’t it an illegal act for the Government of Malaya to be “defunct” by design after signing the Malaysia Agreement 1963 on 9^th July, 1963? How can a signatory to a very important agreement MA63 go missing without notice for so long after signing the said Agreement? Isn’t it MA63 like any partnership agreement that can have litigation subsequently?

Lets say now MA63 is in grave and great dispute and the partners in Borneo decides to file a legal case in Court against Malaya, and who can be the defendant? If the defendant is Malaysia, isn’t it an irony that Sabah and Sarawak as part of the Government of Malaysia with parliamentarians suing itself in any internal disputes? What would be the stand of the Judiciary in wrong party?  Again if the decision of such legal case be decided in favour of the states in Borneo, any such financial compensation and damages would be shared by the three states/entities Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak making a mockery of justice.

Would these cases especially PDA 1974 be settled amicably or otherwise?

Joshua Y C Kong 27/10/2019

Copyrights reserved.