JULY 16 — Sarawak’s ambition to manage its own natural resources is legitimate. Yet on its flagship project, much of the highest value work has gone abroad, while key questions about transparency remain unanswered. Petros can resolve those questions — not with rhetoric, but with openness.

Petros’s legitimacy is clear — accountability remains the real test

Sarawak’s aspiration to play a larger role in managing and developing its natural resources is widely accepted. For more than fifty years, the state’s petroleum wealth has fuelled Malaysia’s national growth, making it reasonable for Sarawakians to ask how that wealth can secure greater opportunities for future generations. Petros was created as the institutional vehicle for that ambition.

Precisely because the ambition is legitimate, Petros should embrace scrutiny. Public confidence is built not only on ownership of strategic assets, but on performance, openness and accountability. A national champion is judged less by the flag it carries than by the results it delivers, the skills it nurtures and the information it is willing to disclose. Legitimacy is reinforced — not undermined — by accountability.

The flagship test: Miri’s gas plant

The most telling measure of Petros’s industrial strategy is its flagship undertaking — the RM2.5 billion, 500 megawatt combined cycle gas turbine power plant in Miri. As a newcomer to project development on this scale, it is entirely natural that Petros would turn to seasoned international partners for expertise.

There is nothing unusual in awarding engineering, procurement and construction responsibilities to PowerChina, or in sourcing advanced turbine technology and long term maintenance services from Mitsubishi Power of Japan. In fact, every resource producing nation has relied on foreign know how during the early stages of industrialisation. The real issue is not the presence of foreign companies, but whether Sarawak secures enduring capability in return.

In ventures of this magnitude, the greatest long term value rarely resides in the physical structures themselves. It is embedded in the engineering knowledge acquired, the proprietary technology transferred, the maintenance capacity built, the supplier networks developed and the gradual accumulation of industrial expertise. These are the assets that continue to generate economic value long after the turbines are installed and the plant is operational.

Globally, successful resource economies have made foreign participation conditional on strengthening domestic capacity. Norway, for instance, required international energy firms to cultivate local suppliers, build engineering expertise and foster industrial capability as a prerequisite for involvement in its petroleum sector. The aim was not simply to extract hydrocarbons, but to create a globally competitive oil services ecosystem. Malaysia adopted a similar philosophy through Petronas, which over three decades has nurtured Malaysian engineering companies, reinforced domestic supply chains and expanded local participation across the energy value chain. Government data also highlight substantial procurement opportunities channelled to Sarawakian businesses.

Measured against these examples, the question for Petros is straightforward. The company has yet to disclose the local content conditions attached to the Miri project, nor has it published details of any vendor development programme, procurement breakdown or subcontractor participation. Making such information public would strengthen confidence and demonstrate how this landmark investment contributes to building Sarawakian industrial capability beyond the completion of a single power station.

It is also worth noting that the Miri project is not expected to generate commercial revenue until the end of 2027. Petros therefore remains at an early stage of institutional development. Recognising this reality only reinforces the case for transparency: openness is most critical when institutions are young, ambitions are high and public trust is still being built.

Greater authority calls for greater transparency

Petros today occupies an increasingly strategic position in Sarawak’s energy landscape, particularly since assuming wider responsibilities as the state’s gas aggregator. Institutions entrusted with managing public resources of such scale inevitably face heightened expectations of transparency. This is not an accusation of wrongdoing, but a fundamental principle of sound governance.

By comparison with many international peers, Petros’s public disclosures remain limited. Beyond a sustainability report covering 2022–2023, the company has yet to publish consolidated financial statements, dividend records, procurement statistics, Sarawakian employment figures or detailed local content reporting. These omissions matter, because transparency is the currency of public confidence.

Two examples illustrate how simple disclosure could strengthen trust. In October 2024, Petros announced a RM40 billion five year capital expenditure programme. Given the magnitude of that commitment, periodic public updates on its implementation would naturally be of considerable public interest. Likewise, while the Sarawak government has spoken of Petros providing free gas to B40 households, Petros’s own materials have referred instead to free installation of affordable energy infrastructure. A straightforward clarification would remove unnecessary ambiguity and demonstrate consistency.

Importantly, transparency is not a costly burden. On the contrary, it reduces speculation, bolsters credibility and reinforces trust at a time when Petros is assuming greater strategic responsibilities. Leading national energy companies such as Petronas and Norway’s Equinor have long treated regular financial reporting, sustainability disclosures and procurement transparency as integral to corporate governance. For Petros, adopting comparable standards would be a natural step in its institutional maturation, not an exceptional demand.

The question that matters most: How do Sarawakians benefit?

The true measure of a national energy company is not the size of its assets or the number of projects it completes. Its enduring value lies in the opportunities it creates for ordinary citizens — jobs, education, procurement, and community investment that translate resource wealth into tangible social benefit.

Government data show that Petronas has built a substantial footprint in Sarawak over the past five decades. Its contributions span employment for thousands of Sarawakians, billions of ringgit in contracts awarded to local vendors, extensive education programmes, scholarships and community initiatives. This long record reflects the advantage of institutional maturity, a national balance sheet and a global commercial presence.

Petros, by contrast, is still at the beginning of its journey. As a much younger institution, it cannot yet match Petronas’s scale. Based on publicly disclosed information, Petros has reported lifetime corporate social responsibility spending of about RM14.5 million and announced two Master’s scholarships in 2025. When set against Petronas’s record, the difference in disclosed CSR expenditure is roughly forty to one. That disparity should not be read as failure, but as evidence of organisations at very different stages of development.

The more pressing question is whether Petros is laying the foundations to close that gap. Citizens are generally willing to accept that institutions take time to mature. What they expect is evidence of direction: clear targets, measurable milestones and a transparent roadmap that shows how Petros intends to expand its social and economic impact over time.

Ultimately, Sarawakians will judge Petros not by the symbolism of ownership, but by whether it delivers lasting opportunities — employment, skills, scholarships and community investment — that strengthen the state’s future.

What would settle the debate?

The debate over Petros need not be polarised. This is not an argument against Sarawak’s aspirations, nor against Petros itself. On the contrary, a stronger and more transparent Petros would ultimately serve both Sarawak and Malaysia.

Many of the questions raised can be resolved through straightforward measures. Publishing the local content conditions attached to the Miri project would show how industrial capability is being developed. Regular disclosure of dividend payments, Sarawakian employment figures and procurement expenditure would strengthen accountability. A clearly defined roadmap for scholarships, community investment and vendor development over the next five years would provide measurable benchmarks for public evaluation. Committing to annual financial reporting, sustainability reporting and internationally recognised transparency practices would reinforce Petros’s credibility as it takes on greater responsibilities.

None of these steps requires fundamental policy change. They demand only a commitment to openness.

Greater control must mean greater openness

The future of Petros should not be judged by symbolism alone. Its long term legitimacy will depend on whether it can convert Sarawak’s resource wealth into lasting industrial capability, stronger local enterprises and broader opportunities for its people.

Experience across successful resource producing economies points to a consistent lesson: public ownership of strategic resources carries an equally important obligation to demonstrate how those resources are governed, how value is created and how citizens ultimately benefit. Transparency is not an administrative burden. It is the foundation of legitimacy, public confidence and durable economic development.

Greater control over public resources should therefore bring greater openness, not fewer answers. That is a test Petros is fully capable of passing — and one it should welcome.

* Samirul Ariff Othman is an analyst of global politics, business and economics. He is an adjunct lecturer at Universiti Teknologi Petronas (UTP) and a senior consultant with Global Asia Consulting. He writes on global perspectives, strategy and statecraft, offering strategic insights for a complex world.

** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.