Win-win for Petronas, Petros must pass commercial test

Samirul Ariff Othman from Global Asia Consulting contends that the Petronas-Petros agreement can't be termed "win-win" if commercial impacts on one party are disregarded.

Though the May 2025 Joint Declaration acknowledges Petros as Sarawak's gas aggregator, it also maintains Petronas's existing role, necessitating that commercial equilibrium be preserved.

The Federal Court has yet to settle Sarawak's rights, with hearings set for January 2027.

Samirul suggests a balanced model where Sarawak partakes more in investment and risks, aligning control, capital, risk, and returns, to ensure both Petronas and Petros can fulfill their roles without undermining each other.

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 9 — A Petronas-Petros settlement cannot credibly be described as “win-win” if the commercial consequences for one side are treated as irrelevant, one analyst says.

Samirul Ariff Othman from Global Asia Consulting was responding to Sarawak senator Datuk Ahmad Ibrahim’s statement that commercial considerations involving Petronas cannot override Sarawak’s constitutional rights. Ahmad was rebutting former law minister Datuk Zaid Ibrahim, who warned that Petronas could lose billions in business if Petros assumes a larger role in Sarawak’s gas sector.

Samirul said the latest argument also had to be read against the framework agreed by the federal and Sarawak governments in May last year.

Under the May 21, 2025 Joint Declaration signed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Sarawak Premier Tan Sri Abang Johari Openg, Petros was recognised as Sarawak’s gas aggregator, but it also recognises Petronas’ continued aggregator role and affirms Petronas’s continuing responsibilities under the 1974 Petroleum Development Act. The declaration further provided that Petronas’s existing arrangements with third parties for LNG would remain unaffected.

Abang Johari subsequently described the arrangement as a “win-win” for Petros and Petronas, saying it preserved Petronas’s existing role while recognising Petros as gas aggregator.

Samirul said this made it difficult to argue now that Petronas’s commercial position was irrelevant to the eventual arrangement.

“The May declaration was not simply an acknowledgement of Petros’s role. It was a balance. Petros was recognised as one of the aggregators, but Petronas’s existing business and responsibilities were also expressly preserved.”

“Saying commercial considerations cannot override rights is not the same as saying commercial considerations do not matter. But it is still moving away from the logic of the very agreement that was described as win-win.”

“This was agreed upon by both the federal and Sarawak governments. You cannot ignore the parts intended to protect Petronas’s existing commercial position.”

Court has not settled rights

Samirul said Ahmad’s argument assumed a legal position that had yet to be settled.

“If Sarawak has a legal right, then of course that right does not disappear simply because another party will bear commercial costs.”

“But what exactly are Sarawak’s rights now? That is precisely the issue still before the courts. You cannot say Sarawak is entitled to a particular outcome because of the law when the scope of that entitlement has not yet been decided.”

The Federal Court is set to hear the case in January 2027, with Samirul adding that all parties should allow that process to run its course.

“The proper thing is to let the court decide what the law actually requires. Until then, both sides are advancing legal claims. Neither side can treat its own interpretation as though it is already the settled legal position.”

What could a ‘win-win’ model look like?

In the spirit of the May 2025 framework, Samirul said one possible commercial model would be for Sarawak to take a larger role not only in the returns from the petroleum industry, but also in the investment and risks involved in creating that value.

Samirul said this could take the form of greater equity participation, co-investment, joint ventures and infrastructure ownership.

“Greater control should normally be accompanied by greater responsibility. Greater return should normally be accompanied by greater exposure to risk. This is what it means to do business.”

He said this would allow both sides to share the gains when projects succeed as well as the risks when they do not. Petronas and Petros had already shown that such cooperation was possible, including through potential gas development in the Lundu-Balingian area.

“The broader principle is that participation, investment, risk and reward can be shared rather than treated as mutually exclusive.”

“This converts the relationship from dividing rents into jointly creating value.”

Samirul said this was particularly important because Petronas still carries wider responsibilities, including upstream investment, maintaining production, LNG commitments and national energy security.

“If Petronas remains responsible for those functions, it must retain sufficient commercial authority and economic return to perform them. Petronas can perform several of these roles simultaneously. But it cannot do so without limits.”

Samirul said the challenge was therefore to enable Sarawak’s larger role without undermining Petronas’s ability to continue carrying its wider responsibilities. The ongoing dispute should also not be treated as a choice between a stronger Sarawak petroleum industry and a strong Petronas.

“A settlement that weakens either side would be a poor bargain. The real question is whether the eventual arrangement keeps control, capital, risk and returns aligned. Once those four become separated, the business model starts to weaken.”

Retired JKR man killed as Proton Wira veers into opposite lane, collides head‑on with Persona in Setiu

Food Act overhaul: Online sales, pesticide residues and unsafe packaging now under tighter watch

Tawau police arrest 14 boys after playground fight with weapons goes viral on social media

来自 Global Asia Consulting 的 Samirul Ariff Othman 认为，如果忽视对一方的商业影响，Petronas-Petros 协议就不能被称为“双赢”。

尽管 2025 年 5 月的联合声明承认 Petros 是砂拉越的天然气聚合商，但也保留了 Petronas 的现有角色，因此有必要保持商业平衡。

联邦法院尚未就砂拉越的权利作出裁决，听证会定于 2027 年 1 月举行。

Samirul 建议采用一种平衡的模式，让砂拉越更多地参与投资和风险，协调控制权、资本、风险和回报，以确保 Petronas 和 Petros 都能履行各自的职责，而不会互相损害。

吉隆坡，10 月 9 日——一位分析师表示，如果将一方的商业后果视为无关紧要，那么 Petronas 和 Petros 之间的和解就不能被可信地描述为“双赢”。

来自环球亚洲咨询公司的萨米鲁·阿里夫·奥斯曼回应了砂拉越州参议员拿督艾哈迈德·易卜拉欣的声明，即涉及马来西亚国家石油公司（Petronas）的商业考量不能凌驾于砂拉越的宪法权利之上。艾哈迈德反驳了前律政部长拿督扎伊德·易卜拉欣的警告，后者曾警告称，如果Petronas在砂拉越天然气行业扮演更重要的角色，该公司可能会损失数十亿的业务。

萨米鲁表示，最新的论点也必须结合联邦政府和砂拉越州政府去年5月达成的框架来解读。

根据2025年5月21日由马来西亚首相拿督斯里安华·易卜拉欣和砂拉越州行政长官丹斯里阿邦佐哈里签署的联合声明，Petros被认可为砂拉越的天然气聚合商，但该声明也承认Petronas继续作为聚合商的角色，并确认Petronas根据1974年《石油发展法》继续承担相关责任。该声明还规定，Petronas与第三方就液化天然气（LNG）达成的现有协议将不受影响。

阿邦佐哈里随后将该安排描述为对 Petros 和 Petronas 的“双赢”，称其保留了 Petronas 的现有角色，同时承认 Petros 作为天然气聚合商的地位。

Samirul表示，这使得现在很难辩称Petronas的商业地位与最终安排无关。

“五月份的声明不仅仅是对Petros作用的认可，更是一种平衡。Petros被认可为聚合商之一，但Petronas现有的业务和责任也得到了明确保留。”

“说商业考量不能凌驾于权利之上，并不等同于说商业考量无关紧要。但这仍然背离了当初被描述为双赢协议的逻辑。”

“这是联邦政府和砂拉越州政府共同商定的。你不能忽视其中旨在保护马来西亚国家石油公司现有商业地位的部分。”

法院尚未就权利问题作出裁决

萨米鲁尔表示，艾哈迈德的论点基于一个尚未定论的法律立场。

“如果砂拉越拥有合法权利，那么这项权利当然不会仅仅因为另一方承担商业成本就消失。”

“但砂拉越现在究竟有哪些权利？这正是目前法院仍在审理的问题。在权利范围尚未确定的情况下，你不能说砂拉越因为法律而有权获得某种结果。”

联邦法院定于 2027 年 1 月审理此案，萨米鲁尔补充说，各方都应该让这一程序按部就班地进行下去。

“正确的做法是让法院来裁定法律的真正要求。在此之前，双方都只是在提出法律主张。任何一方都不能将自己的解释视为既定的法律立场。”

双赢模式会是什么样的？

萨米鲁表示，按照 2025 年 5 月的框架精神，一种可能的商业模式是让砂拉越不仅在石油行业的收益中发挥更大的作用，而且在创造该价值所涉及的投资和风险中也发挥更大的作用。

Samirul表示，这可能采取增加股权参与、共同投资、合资企业和基础设施所有权的形式。

“更大的控制权通常应该伴随着更大的责任。更高的回报通常应该伴随着更大的风险。这就是经商的本质。”

他表示，这将使双方能够在项目成功时共享收益，并在项目失败时共同承担风险。马来西亚国家石油公司（Petronas）和马来西亚国家石油公司（Petros）此前已证明这种合作是可行的，包括在伦杜-巴林吉安地区潜在的天然气开发项目。

“更广泛的原则是，参与、投资、风险和回报可以共享，而不是被视为相互排斥的。”

“这使得双方的关系从瓜分租金转变为共同创造价值。”

Samirul表示，这一点尤为重要，因为Petronas仍承担着更广泛的责任，包括上游投资、维持生产、液化天然气承诺和国家能源安全。

“如果马来西亚国家石油公司（Petronas）继续承担这些职能，它必须保留足够的商业权限和经济回报来履行这些职能。Petronas可以同时履行其中几项职能，但这并非没有限制。”

萨米鲁表示，因此，挑战在于如何在不削弱马来西亚国家石油公司（Petronas）继续履行其更广泛职责的能力的前提下，使砂拉越发挥更大的作用。目前的争端也不应被视为在更强大的砂拉越石油产业和更强大的马来西亚国家石油公司之间做出选择。

“任何一方的妥协方案如果削弱了自身实力，都将是一笔糟糕的交易。真正的问题在于，最终的安排能否保持控制权、资本、风险和回报的一致性。一旦这四者分离，商业模式就会开始衰落。”

一名退休的JKR男子在Setiu因Proton Wira突然驶入逆行车道与Persona迎头相撞而丧生。

《食品法》全面修订：网络销售、农药残留和不安全包装将受到更严格的监管

斗湖警方逮捕了14名男孩，此前一段男孩在操场上持械斗殴的视频在社交媒体上疯传。