Project Stability and Accountability for Malaysia (Projek Sama) views with grave concern the defence offered by the deputy minister in the Sarawak Premier’s Department responsible for labour, immigration and project monitoring, Gerawat Gala, regarding the arbitrary entry ban imposed on Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) president Meenakshi Raman at Miri Airport on 29 September.
What is in question here is not the Sarawak government’s rightful immigration discretion under the law, but whether this discretion is exercised accountably, transparently, reasonably and with integrity.
Premier Abang Johari Openg and his administration must recognise that weaponising immigration autonomy against environmental defenders is an affront to the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). It is also a betrayal of the true purpose of these special rights – which were granted to protect ordinary Sarawakians, not to insulate politicians from public scrutiny.
At a time when Sarawak aggressively positions itself as a green energy powerhouse, carbon trading pioneer, and environmental, social and governance (ESG) leader, barring a world-renowned environmental defender begs the question: What do the Sarawak authorities want to conceal from an environmental defender and by derivation, the wider public? What harm can it do by allowing her visit?
Projek Sama outlines its position on four fundamental counts.
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara (ALIRAN), Maybank a/c 507246118995 or CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a pledge or schedule an auto donation to Aliran every month or every quarter
- Become an Aliran member
First, the special immigration autonomy granted to Sarawak under MA63 and the Immigration Act 1959/63 was designed to safeguard the socioeconomic interests, local employment, security and unique demographics of ordinary Sarawakians from lopsided competition – in short, to protect the rice bowls of Sarawakians.
It was never intended as a political shield to insulate incumbent state administrations from legitimate checks and balances, which include civil society scrutiny.
Second, invoking section 66 entry restrictions in this case violates section 67 of the Immigration Act 1959/63. Section 67 – which reads “Subsection 66(1) shall not have effect in relation to a citizen entering the East Malaysian State for the sole purpose of engaging in legitimate political activity; but the burden of proof that a person is entitled to enter the East Malaysian State under this section shall lie on him” – explicitly exempts such entry restrictions under section 66 for any Malaysian citizen whose entry is for the sole purpose of engaging in “legitimate political activity.”
Environmental and Indigenous rights advocacy must surely fall squarely within this statutory exemption.
For any person to shoulder the burden of proof that the purpose of her or his entry is engaging in legitimate political activity, she or he must first be informed.
By not informing or refusing to state the grounds of banning Meena, is the Sarawak government deliberately and in bad faith preventing the operation of the legal exemption clause?
Third, Sarawak has positioned itself as a regional leader in climate action and sustainable development, enacting legislation such as the Environment (Reduction of Greenhouse Gases Emission) Ordinance 2023, while driving green energy transition under its Post-Covid Development Strategy 2030 and the Sarawak Sustainability Blueprint 2030.
However, treating environmental advocacy as a security threat signals insecurity rather than state maturity. Does this not harm Sarawak’s credibility, among international green investors and markets, in ESG transparency and its commitment to free, prior and informed consent for Indigenous peoples?
Fourth, this incident is part of a persistent, troubling pattern where internal immigration powers in both Sarawak and Sabah are weaponised against civil society actors.
Just recently, Sabah imposed entry bans on Bersih executive director Asraf Sharafi Azhar and Bersih chairperson Muhammad Faisal Abdul Aziz this year, and political artist Fahmi Reza from 2025.
Meanwhile, Sarawak continues to maintain long-standing entry bans on Ambiga Sreenevasan, Maria Chin Abdullah, Jerald Joseph, Thomas Fann and Professor Wong Chin Huat. These bans remain in force today without transparent justification.
Projek Sama calls upon Premier Abang Johari Tun and his administration to:
- Immediately rescind the entry ban against Meenakshi and allow SAM to carry out its legitimate public interest work in Marudi and across Sarawak
- Formulate clear, transparent and objective guidelines governing the invocation of section 66 entry restrictions against Malaysian citizens. These guidelines must be jointly developed by the Sarawak government, the federal Ministry of Home Affairs, the Immigration Department, and legal bodies such as the Advocates Association of Sarawak (AAS). They must explicitly operationalise the section 67 exemption for legitimate civic and political activities, incorporating strict tests of necessity and proportionality.
For Sarawak to solidify its national leadership in environmental governance while upholding the true spirit of MA63 – which was designed to safeguard the rights and dignity of Sarawakians – the Sarawak state government must match its green ambitions with institutional accountability and open governance. – Projek Sama
AGENDA RAKYAT - Lima perkara utama
- Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
- Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
- Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
- Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
- Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
