Only Sabah and Sarawak don't have a monarch? Why?
2006-12-31 17:24:21 · 9 answers · asked by John Paul L 1 in Travel ➔ Asia Pacific ➔ Malaysia
they dont need one and yet they are doing fine
2007-01-02 19:52:12 · answer #1 · answered by Sarah 5 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Sabah was under malay Sultanate of Sulu, covering north borneo (sabah) and some parts of southern philippines island including(that's why the philippines want to claim sabah) before the british come and conquer following few treaties, land leases and purchases, and dirty political games. As a result, the monarch had lost the power over the territories.
North Borneo had been given an independence and 'handed over' to a new nation called Malaysia and became one of states in 1963
2007-01-01 03:59:32 · answer #2 · answered by ¥op 6 · 6⤊ 2⤋
Sabah and Sarawak were not part of Malaysia originally. They are more like natives' states, and the people there are in tribes. They are catagorised as "Malays" when the merger was proposed so as to raise the ratio of Malays to Chinese in Malaysia in order to keep Malays as the majority, since it is a Malay state. About the merger? It was inclusive of the Peninsula of Malaysia (called Malaya then), Singapore, Borneo island (which is Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei). However, as terms were not agreed between Malaya's government and Brunei's government then, Brunei withdrew from the merger. In conclusion, Sabah and Sarawak were traditionally different from the Peninsula of Malaysia, so that's why they do not have a king. Hope this helps! :)
2007-01-01 01:37:09 · answer #3 · answered by Melody 3 · 9⤊ 3⤋
Because the descendants of the Sultan of Sabah is in the Philippines. Sabah was once part of the Philippine Territory and was claimed by Malaysia.
2007-01-01 14:18:23 · answer #4 · answered by Dave Star 4 · 5⤊ 2⤋
cause Sabah & Sarawak are the 'king of the jungle'. So they dont need any king that takes our money ..(i.e. tax, toll, interest etc..) all this goes to the king... anyway these kings dont show good example for the country anyway. They marry young artists, and those dumb artist fall for their money and title, and being a muslim country a kings wife should be like a traditional malay women like wearing scaf of their heads...but i see many of the kings wife dont cover their heads and even dye their hair...and all the datins gather for gossip ...not a good role model for the country. So its better if the country dont have a king ...
2007-01-03 20:49:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 2⤋
originally they were not part of malaysia, Sarawak was part of Kalimantan and Sabah is part of Philipines untill they decide to join malaysia because of better government ( just an excuse ) and the government paid to the leader of both states to join malaysia because of their rich timber and oil.
2007-01-03 04:25:08 · answer #6 · answered by minimumdefect 3 · 6⤊ 2⤋
the sultanate covered only West Malaysia.
Sabah and Sarawak are part of Borneo which is mainly tribal. no sultans there before the Brits came and conquered.
2007-01-01 01:33:33 · answer #7 · answered by SHIH TZU SAYS 6 · 7⤊ 2⤋
because sabah is more considerate and smarter then the rest of malaysia,they know having more kings means more malaysians tax money get gobbled up..and not just by one king, but all NINE of them, and their wives,kids,cousin,2nd cousins,2nd wives..
sabah knows malaysian can't afford to spend more of their tax money on their kings that sits on their throne, **** himself while eating keropok all day and play polo in the evening
2007-01-02 04:26:03 · answer #8 · answered by adila 1 · 5⤊ 4⤋
they do have before..same like penang,melaka,negeri sembilan..
2007-01-01 02:43:18 · answer #9 · answered by kampong boy 2 · 6⤊ 3⤋