Mr. PEH Pike wrote before MA63 that neither North

Borneo nor Sarawak could be parties to MA63 and

should be excluded from the agreement.

国际法的基本要求， 如果条约不符合既定的法律要求（由 1969 年《维也纳公约》编纂），则该条约从一开始就无效。 国际法承认只有独立的主权国家（和某些国际组织）有能力签订具有约束力的国际协议或条约。 砂拉越殖民地总检察长派克先生在 MA63 之前写道，北婆罗洲和砂拉越都不能成为 MA63 的签署方，应被排除在协议之外。 英国和马来亚知法犯法用强硬手段的逼迫殖民地人民接受这协议，目的是将他们的主权移交给马来亚，这是违反联合国规则 UN GAR 1514 XV。这议决案反对外国干涉殖民地的独立进程。

VALIDITY OF TREATIES  契约的有效性
(3rd Oct, 2021)

ESSENTIAL REOUIREMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
WHY MA63 WAS VOID AB INITIO
国际法的基本要求
为什么 MA63 从头开始是无效的？

A treaty is null & void from the beginning if its fails to comply with established legal requirements (codified by the Vienna Convention on Law of Treaties 1969):
如果条约不符合既定的法律要求（由 1969 年《维也纳公约》编纂），则该条约从一开始就无效： 

-- Contracting parties must have legal capacity to enter into an international
   agreement or treaty.
        签署协约的各方必须具有法定能力去签署国际协定或条约。

--  Consent must be properly given to agreement.
     协议必须有正当的人民意愿和授权。

--  Object of agreement must be permissible
    对协议的目的必须受到允许的。

THE LEGAL CAPACITY RULE: 
International law recognises that only independent sovereign States (& certain international organisations have capacity to enter into binding international agreements or treaties (affirmed by icJ in Chagos Case 2019). The UK creation of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 was flawed by its failure to comply with all the basic rules for making valid treaties.
法律能力规则：
国际法承认只有独立的主权国家（和某些国际组织）有能力签订具有约束力的国际协议或条约。（国际法院在 2019 年在查戈斯案中得到确认）。而英国制定的 1963 年马来西亚协议存在缺陷因为他们没有遵守联合国所制定有效条约的所有基本规则。

--  This principle of capacity greatly concerned the British colonial administrative officials of North Borneo (Sabah) & Sarawak in the making of the Malaysia Agreement 1963(MA63). This was because they knew that the 2 colonies & Singapore were not independent States and did not have capacity or competence to enter into the Agreement with the UK and Malaya in 1963.
 英国殖民地行政官员制定 1963 年马来西亚协议（MA63）大大的触及到北婆罗洲（沙巴）和砂拉越的法定能力的原则。这是因为他们知道这两个殖民地和新加坡不是独立国家，所以没有法定能力或权力在1963 年跟英国和马来亚签署MA63协议.

-- The colonial Attorney-General of Sarawak Mr. PEH Pike wrote before MA63 that neither North Borneo nor Sarawak could be parties to MA63 and should be excluded from the agreement.  However, he said for "presentational" reason, they should be included. Thus the uk knowingly breached international law to create an illegal treaty.
砂拉越殖民地总检察长派克先生在 MA63 之前写道，北婆罗洲和砂拉越都不能成为 MA63 的签署方，应被排除在协议之外。他（派克）说，然而，出于“现存”的原因，它们却被包括在内。因此，英国是故意违反国际法，而制定非法MA63条约。

-- Consent was not properly given by the 2 colonies as there was no proper compliance with the people's wishes and mandate freely given in a referendum to enter into MA63 UN GAR1541 XV. This was underlined by the fact that the respective colonial Attorney Generals also signed the treaty.
MA63完全没有适当遵守UN GAR1541 XV，在全民公投中，决定是否加入马来西亚，它是没有得到两个殖民地人民适当的意愿和授权。各殖民地总检察长也签署了该条约突显这事实。

--The UK and Malaya had wrongfully imposed an agreement on the people with the object to transfer their sovereignty to Malaya in breach of un rules UN GAR 1514 XV against foreign interference in their independence process and had prior to MA63 secretly colluded to deny the colonies independence by agreeing to set up Malaysia.   （ first Posted 2802019 )
英国和马来亚知法犯法用强硬手段的逼迫殖民地人民接受这协议，目的是将他们的主权移交给马来亚，这是违反联合国规则 UN GAR 1514 XV。这议决案反对外国干涉殖民地的独立进程，并且在 MA63 之前秘密勾结马来亚否决砂沙独立，强硬成立马来西亚。  
( 发表于2802019 ，2021重修 )