Pemimpin Persekutuan memperbodohkan Sabah dan rakyatnya

SAYA yang sudah tua pada umur menjangkau 74 tahun ini semakin merasa sangat rimas dengan tingkah-laku pemimpin-pemimpin Persekutuan Malaysia yang melayan amat buruk sekali rakyat Sabah.

Terlalu banyak perbuatan buruk mereka terhadap kita sehingga kertas pun mungkin tidak cukup untuk menyenaraikan kejahatan mereka.

Apa tidak jahat lihatlah hasil Sabah telah dihisap habis oleh Malaya sampai kita yang kaya ini telah menjadi yang termiskin di antara 13 negeri dalam Malaysia, walhal Sabah adalah sebuah negara asalnya.

Laporan RCI yang dikeluarkan kepada umum di Kota Kinabalu semalam adalah salah satu bukti kerajaan Persekutuan memperbodohkan Sabah.

Semua kita tahu kebanjiran pendatang haram dari Indonesia dan Selatan Filipina di Sabah adalah angkara jahanam Persekutuan.

Pihak keselamatan seperti askar, polis dan imigresen gagal sama sekali menampan kemasukan pendatang haram. Bukan setakat gagal beberapa kali, tetapi gagal setiap saat selama berpuluh tahun!

Bukankah ini telah memperbodohkan rakyat Sabah?

Apabila pendatang ini yang majoritinya orang Islam sudah berada di bumi Sabah, maka sekali lagi pihak-pihak berwajib yang sepatutnya menjaga keselamatan Orang Asal, gagal pula menangkap para pendatang ini.

Mereka bebas berkeliaran di sana sini, berniaga malah mengancam keselamatan penduduk tempatan dan pengunjung ke Sabah.

Jabatan Imigresen tidak dapat berbuat apa-apa, manakala Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara Malaysia pula sibuk mendaftarkan penadatang sebagai warganegara sehinggalah hari ini.

Didaftarkan lagi sebagai pengundi. Kalau dulu mereka ini dibiarkan mendirikan rumah-rumah setinggan di pesisir pantai, pulau-pulau dan tepi bandar, sekarang sudah ada kalangan mereka ini membeli rumah pangsa murah yang dibina kerajaan pusat di Sabah.

Mereka ini sudah beranak-pinak, beratus ribu mereka di sini, penduduk tempatan Kadazandusun, Murut, Rungus, Bajau, Sungai, Cina dan lain-lain pula hanya berdiam diri malah ada yang mengambil kesempatan menyewakan rumah mereka kepada pendatang, syukur saja dapat duit sewa.

Inilah kerja kerajaan persekutuan Malaysia, menambahkan penduduk Islam di Sabah tak kiralah kalau Sabah ini dan Malaysia ini akhirnya di"Indonesiakan".

Maka tidak hairanlah menteri-menteri persekutuan pun dari Indonesia dan begitulah para pegawai kerajaannya.

Orang tempatan seperti saya sebut tadi pula terus dipinggirkan. Anak-anak mereka sukar mendapat pekerjaan, akibatnya banyak keluarga Orang Asal merosot pendapatannya dan tidak stabil kehidupan mereka. Senanglah lagi diperbodohkan.

Inilah yang saya katakan kerajaan pusat memperbodohkan rakyat asal Sabah, Anak Negeri Sabah. Hanya Tuhanlah yang tahu membalas kejahatan dan kezaliman mereka yang semakin bertimbun dan semakin meningkat sekarang.

Dalam pandangan saya sebagai seorang yang berumur 74 tahun, mereka ini telah merosakkan negara Malaysia. Mereka telah menghancurkan Malaysia yang sebenarnya. Tiada keadilan di sini.

Mereka pasti menerima balasan dari Tuhan tak lama lagi. Bau kejahatan mereka sudah sampai ke syurga, menunggu masa bala menimpa mereka yang lebih berperangai seperti Setan "walaupun salah, mereka tak mengaku kesalahan, terus menafikan, malahan seakan-akan mereka ini langsung tidak takut lagi kepada Tuhan yang Maha Kuasa". Nanti mereka menerima tulah mereka. 

Source: http://www.borneoherald.com/2014/12/pemimpin-persekutuan-memperbodohkan.html

Read More

Adakah Malaysia sudah Hapus – Pertanyaan kepada SEEDs

Perkara yang paling bahaya dalam dunia ia lah kenyataan yang separuh betul. Sekiranya tidak di tegur penghujungnya kenyataan akan menjadi satu PEMBOHONGAN. Apabila SEEDs mengatakan begini:

“What transpired in the British Parliament to give effect to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 was: The Malaysia Act 1963 was passed in the British Parliament on July 31, 1963 to relinquish sovereignty and jurisdiction over Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore and to vest jurisdiction in the Government of Malaysia on Malaysia Day”

Alih bahasa kepada Bahasa Malaysia Ertinya:

“Apa yang berlaku di Parlimen British untuk memberi kesan kepada Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 adalah: Akta Malaysia 1963 telah diluluskan di Parlimen British pada 31 Julai 1963 untuk melepaskan kedaulatan dan bidang kuasa ke atas Sabah , Sarawak dan Singapura dan untuk meletak hak (Vest) pada Kerajaan Malaysia pada Hari Malaysia “

Penjelasan dan Soalan kami pula berbunyi begini:

Pertama:

Perkataan “Meletak hak” atau “Vest” ialah mengamanahkan ertinya membentuk satu Amanah ia itu Malaysia. Dengan Akta ini pihak British membentuk sebuah AMANAH yang di panggil Malaysia. Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dan bukan Malaysia sebagai Pemegang Amanah. Pewarisnya pula ia lah PERSEKUTUAN Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura.

Apa yang di nyatakan dalam keratan akhbar ini seakan-akan sengaja untuk mengelirukan rakyat supaya menerima bahawa Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura di serahkan bulat bulat kepada Persekutuan Tanah Melayu – untuk mereka berbuat sesuka hati mereka.

Ini tanggapan salah – Malaysia adalah satu AMANAH yang di bentuk oleh United Kingdom – Persekutuan Tanah Melayu adalah Pemegang AMANAH dan PERSEKUTUAN Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura adalah PEWARIS (Beneficiaries) untuk AMANAH tersebut.

Sebagai PEWARIS PERSEKUTUAN Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura tidak boleh di serapkan sebagai Pemegang AMANAH !!!! Sekiranya ini berlaku AMANAH tersebut pecah – ertinya Malaysia juga HAPUS !!!!!

Saya menggunakan perkataan “Persekutuan” oleh kerana British melalui Akta ini mengiktiraf bahawa Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura adalah “Persekutuan” – bererti sebuah Negara yang Merdeka dan Berdaulat – hanya kita belum lagi memegang PENTADBIRAN dan belum mendapat pengesahan Dunia.

Kedua:

“to vest jurisdiction in the Government of Malaysia on Malaysia Day” ini satu kesalahan kerana Malaysia ia lah satu AMANAH bukan “Government”, Persekutuan Tanah Melayu di amanahkan oleh Kerajaan United Kingdom.

Perkataan “Malaysia Day” atau “Hari Malaysia”, dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan ada di sebut dalam tidak kurang daripada 14 Artikel (Perkara), namun TAFSIRAN “Hari Malaysia” tidak ada di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan ini. Sekiranya TAFSIRAN “Hari Malaysia” tidak ada dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan bererti tindakan mengamanahkan oleh British kepada Persekutuan Tanah Melayu tidak pernah berlaku – ADA KAH MALAYSIA WUJUD sejak 1963 ??

Saya berharap cerdik pandai dan pakar undang-undang dalam SEEDs boleh menjawap soalan ini – Silakan Jawap.

Jangan Buyuk Sabah ….. Bah !!!!

Source: http://janganbuyuksabah.wordpress.com/2014/12/14/adakah-malaysia-sudah-hapus-pertanyaan-kepada-seeds/

Read More

Sabah dan Sarawak Berstatus Negara

MALAYSIA 1963 adalah persekutuan 4 kerajaan – Sabah, Sarawak, Malaya dan Singapura. Singapura keluar persekutuan tahun 1965, tinggal Sabah, Sarawak dan Malaya dalam Malaysia: Sabah satu wilayah, Sarawak satu wilayah dan Malaya satu wilayah. Maka, sebetul-betulnya kata, sewaras-warasnya minda, sejitu-jitunya istilah, Sabah, Sarawak dan Malaya adalah Rakan Kongsi dalam Persekutuan Malaysia.

Secara dasarnya MALAYSIA 1963 mengilhamkan Sabah dan Sarawak sebagai dua daripada tiga negara dalam Persekutuan Malaysia (Singapura tidak diambil kira sudah). Maksudnya di sini, tuan-tuan dan puan-puan, Sabah atau Sarawak bukan salah satu daripada negeri-negeri dalam Malaysia. Negara-negara di Borneo ialah kerajaan dia sendiri dalam pentadbiran Malaysia sama seperti Wales kerajaan dia sendiri dalam pentadbiran United Kingdom dan France Guinea dalam pentadbiran Perancis.

Borneo masa tu tak kenal pun Kelantan atau Pahang, apatah lagi Langkawi.

Kedah, N9, Pahang, Kelantan, Johor, Perak, Perlis, Selangor, Terengganu, Pulau Pinang, Melaka dan Kuala Lumpur adalah 12 negeri-negeri dalam Malaya.

Tawau, Sandakan, Sepitang, Kundasang, Kota Kinabalu dan sebagainya adalah negeri-negeri dalam Sabah. Kuching, Sibu, Bintulu, Miri, Limbang, Lawas dan sebagainya adalah negeri-negeri dalam Sarawak.

Dalam ertikata lain, 12 negeri-negeri Malaya bergabung masih tak setanding Sabah dan Sarawak. Seharusnya, kerja-kerja pembangunan sosio-politik, ekonomi, dan infrastuktur di Sabah dan Sarawak mesti dibuat lebih pesat daripada mana-mana satu, dua, empat atau 12 negeri-negeri di Malaya bergabung.

Kalau Malaysia boleh upgrade-kan Negeri Perlis dari negeri-dunia-ketiga sehingga boleh jadi negeri-membangun dan sekarang negeri-maju, dunia Malaysia seharusnya boleh bangunkan Sabah atau Sarawak dengan usaha 12-kali-Perlis. Pasal Sabah atau Sarawak bukan negeri; ianya satu negara dalam Persekutuan Malaysia. Begitu maksud MALAYSIA 1963.

Paham dah korang?

Sebaliknya apa yang berlaku ialah kepentingan-kepentigan Sabah dan Sarawak diperlekehkan setiap kali – kecuali masa pilihanraya Parlimen. Pembangunan di Malaysia, samada budaya pop atau politik nusantara, hanya berlangsung di sepanjang garisan tiga bangsa-bangsa di Malaya – Melayu, Cina dan India. Seolah-seolah dasar ekonomi baru tak pandang langsung rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak. Kalau ada pun, setakat tempias-tempias dasar pembangunan.

Seperti dakwaan mendiang Sim Kwang Yang, Sabah dan Sarawak sangat mundur dari segi pembangunan sosio-ekonomi dibandingkan Malaya; antara negeri paling miskin di Malaysia, terletak di kedudukan sedikit atas dari Kelantan.

Ini kerana Sabah atau Sarawak dibangunkan sebagai sebuah negeri dalam Malaysia, bukannya sebagai sebuah negara dalam Persekutuan Malaysia. Di situ silapnya pentadbiran Malaya.

Dan itulah yang kita sebagai anak-anak Borneo mahu betulkan sekarang. Kita kena betulkan. Kita kena juga buat. Kalau tak sekarang bila lagi? Kalau bukan kita siapa lagi? Adenan Satem dah buat dah. Jeffrey Kitingan dah buat dah. Mereka nak kembalikan status “Negara” kepada Sabah dan Sarawak.

Ini perlu, supaya agihan kekayaan Persekutuan Malaysia dapat dilakukan dengan betul dan adil. Malaya dapat satu bahagian, Sabah dapat satu bahagian, dan Sarawak dapat satu bahagian. Dah namanya Rakan Kongsi jadi kita kena berkongsi sama rata lah — bahagi tiga.

Jangan lah bagikan bahagian Sabah dan Sarawak tu kepada daerah-daerah dalam Malaya seperti Perlis dan Pahang. Kalau nak bagi juga, ambil dari bahagian Malaya lah. Kan Perlis dan Pahang tu termasuk dalam Malaya.

Kerajaan persekutuan Malaysia, melalui Petronas, mengagih-agihkan kekayaan pembangunan kepada negeri-negeri di Malaysia, termasuk Labuan. Yang pelik nya tu, hampir semua pembangunan bertumpu di Malaya sahaja, siap ada Twin Towers lagi diaorang. Dah Malaya banyak sangat duit, diaorang senang-senang jer buat by-election di sana-sini. Itu duit Borneo tu diaorang guna.

Orang Malaya bukan tahu pun dari mana datangnya semua duit tu. Diaorang cuma tahu bedal jer. Lepas tu pandai pulak tunjuk lagak kat orang Sabah dan Sarawak. Malaya naik angkasa guna duit Borneo, diaorang tahu ke?

Semua kepincangan ini berlaku kerana Malaya sudah pecah amanah dalam mentadbir Persekutuan Malaysia. Pakcik ingatkan sekali lagi, ini berlaku kerana Sabah atau Sarawak dibangunkan sebagai sebuah negeri dalam Malaysia, bukannya sebagai sebuah negara dalam Persekutuan Malaysia. Di situ silapnya pentadbiran Malaya.

Dan itulah yang kita sebagai anak-anak Borneo mahu betulkan sekarang. Kita kena betulkan. Kita kena juga buat. Kalau tak sekarang bila lagi? Kalau bukan kita siapa lagi? Adenan Satem dah buat dah. Jeffrey Kitingan dah buat dah. Mereka nak kembalikan status “Negara” kepada Sabah dan Sarawak.

Kalau awak adalah anak jati Sabah atau Sarawak sepatutnya awak turut serta perjuangkan perkara ini. Status penting. Kalau awak nak Sabah dan Sarawak jadi maju, desak supaya status “Negara” dikembalikan kepada Sabah dan Sarawak. Status penting. Status perempuan simpanan tidak sama dengan status isteri yang sah. Kalau awak rasa status tak penting, semoga awak bahagia sebagai perempuan simpanan Malaya selama-lamanya.

Siapa bilang? Haji Julaihi Haji Suut yang bilang.

Read More

Malaysia Boleh Terburai

Bagaimana boleh Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 tidak pun di sebut di dalam Perlembagaan Malaysia – cuba cari, TIADA !!!!

Jadi bagaimana Perlembagaan ini boleh di panggil Perlembagaan Malaysia?

Mengikut Perkara 1(1) Perlembagaan Malaysia menyebut “Persekutuan” dinamai Malaysia dalam Bahasa Ingeriss dan dalam Bahasa Malaysia (Melayu).

Dinamai saja – ertinya tukar nama saja supaya dapat nama glamor “Malaysia” – Jadi siapa sebenarnya yang bernama “Malaysia” ini? Sudah tentu bukan si Beda.

Sebenarnya “Malaysia” ini adalah Persekutuan Tanah Melayu yang di bentuk melalui Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957. Ini di tafsirkan didalam Artikel 160 Perlembagaan Malaysia sebagai “Persekutuan”.

Kenapa boleh jadi begini? Mana dia Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 di dalam Perlembagaan Malaysia? Sabah dan Sarawak tidak pernah menandatangani Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957 – Sabah dan Sarawak hanya tandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia 1963.

Jawapannya kita harus berterima kasih kepada Kerajaan Kelantan !!!

Disebabkan pada saat akhir sebelum Malaysia dibentuk, Negeri Kelantan mencabar Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu di mahkamah dengan tuduhan bahawa Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu “tiada kuasa” dan “tidak boleh” membentuk Malaysia tanpa persetujuan Negeri-Negeri Persekutuan Tanah Melayu.

Hasilnya untuk Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu “berkuasa” dan “boleh” membentuk Malaysia – “Persekutuan” dengan hanya dinamai “Malaysia" dan Persekutuan masih ditafsirkan sebagai Persekutuan yang dibentuk melalui Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957. Hanya dengan Perjanjian 1957 ini saja yang boleh mengikat 11 Negeri-Negeri Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dengan Kerajaan Persekutuan. Tanpa ikatan Perjanjian 1957 ini setiap Negeri boleh berpisah daripada Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu.

Timbul persoalan penting – Apa yang mengikat Sabah dan Sarawak kepada Persekutuan Tanah Melayu oleh kerana Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 TIADA didalam Perlembagaan Malaysia?

Jawapan ringkas – Pada masa ini Sabah dan Sarawak tiada ikatan dengan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu.

Ini bererti Sabah dan Sarawak di ikat atas penipuan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu yang bertopengkan NAMA Malaysia.

Kecuali Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 dimasukkan kedalam Perlembagaan Malaysia.

Sekiranya Perjanjian Malaysia dimasukkan kedalam Perlembagaan Malaysia, yang mana satu daripada Perjanjian ini yang mendapat keutamaan?

Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957; dan Perjanjian Malaysia 1963.

Ini membuat Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanahh Melayu PENING Kepala. Mana saja di pilih Malaysia Boleh Terburai …….

Rakyat Sabah menunggu jawapan ……

Jangan Buyuk Sabah ……bah !!!!

Read More

Kuasa Berpisah DiTangan Sabah

Persoalan ADA kah SABAH mempunyai KUASA BERPISAH?

Untuk menjawapnya kita lihat Singapura pada tahun 1965 – bagaimana Singapore boleh keluar daripada Malaysia pada 7 August 1965 sebelum Parlimen Malaysia meluluskan atau “Tendang” Singapore keluar pada tahun 9 August 1965 dan tarikh ini menjadi “National Day” Singapura.

Ini Perjanjian mereka.

Alasan utama Singapura ia lah, Singapura tidak pernah menandatangani Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957 – Singapura hanya menandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 – oleh yang demikian tidak betul Singapura di masukkan sebagai “Negeri Negeri Persekutuan” dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan. Memandangkan Kedudukan Singapura tidak betul di dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan – mereka Keluar.

Singapura menandatangani Perjanjian keluar daripada Malaysia pada 7 Ogos 1965 dua hari sebelum perkara ini di bentangkan di Parlimen Malaysia pada 9 Ogos 1965 dan pada 21 September 1965 Singapura di terima sebagai ahli Bangsa Bangsa Bersatu (United Nation).

Sabah dan Sarawak tiada pun di bawa berunding. Mengikut Artikel 76 Perlembagaan Malaysia sendiri Kuala Lumpur tidak boleh mengambil tindakan seperti ini bagi pihak Sabah dan Sarawak – TANPA Rundingan.

Jadi sekarang kita soal:

Kalau Singapura boleh keluar sebelum mendapat kelulusan Parlimen Malaysia – Kenap Sabah perlu mendapat kelulusan Parlimen Malaysia KALAU mahu KELUAR? Sama seperti Singapura, Sabah juga tidak pernah menandatangani Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957 – kenapa Sabah di masukkan sebagai salah satu “Negeri-Negeri Persekutuan”?. Sabah hanya menandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 untuk MEMBENTUK Malaysia.

Ini satu pembohongan besar terhadap rakyat Sabah – siapa yang bertanggungjawap?

Jangan Buyuk Sabah ….. bah !!!!

Source: http://janganbuyuksabah.wordpress.com/2014/12/17/kuasa-berpisah-ditangan-sabah/

Read More

Jawapan Asas Perlembagaan

Ada orang cakap begini... (Sila klik link dibawah untuk membaca artikel penafian mereka)

http://www.fitnahsabah.com/2014/12/asas-pelembagaan-malaysia.html

Kami jawap begini ……

Kita harus menerima hakikat bahawa Persekutuan Tanah Melayu, Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura telah di bentuk melalui Perjanjian Malaysia 1963, ini pula di saksikan oleh Negara United Kingdom – ini di buat pada 9 July 1963.

Namun apabila rang undang-undang Malaysia di luluskan oleh Parlimen Persekutuan Tanah Melayu atau Malaya, mereka tidak menukar tafsiran “Persekutuan” didalam rang undang – undang tersebut. Perkataan “Persekutuan” mengikut tafsiran Perlembagaan Malaysia bermaksud “Persekutuan yang di bentuk melalui Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957”. Ini bererti mengikut tafsiran Perlembagaan Malaysia yang ada sekarang Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura di masukkan sebagai “Negeri-Negeri Persekutuan”.

Singapura keluar daripada Persekutuan Malaysia dalam tahun 1965 oleh kerana Singapura tidak pernah menandatangani Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957 – Singapura hanya menandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia 1963. Seperti mana Singapura – Sabah dan Sarawak juga tidak pernah menandatangani Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957 – mengapa Sabah dan Sarawak di masukkan sebagai sebuah daripada negeri-negeri Persekutuan Tanah Melayu??

Kita tidak cuba untuk mengelirukan para pembaca oleh kerana para pembaca boleh melihat sendiri buktinya dalam Perlembagaan Malaysia seperti berikut:

Perkara 1(1) Persekutuan hendaklah dikenali , dalam bahasa Melayu dan bahasa Inggeris, dengan nama Malaysia.

Perkara 1(2) Negeri-Negeri Persekutuan hendaklah Johor, Kedah , Kelantan , Melaka , Negeri Sembilan , Pahang , Penang , Perak , Perlis , Sabah , Sarawak , Selangor dan Terengganu.

Namun dalam Perkara 160 tafsiran Perlembagaan Malaysia mentafsirkan “Persekutuan” sebagai berikut:

“Persekutuan” ertinya Persekutuan yang ditubuhkan di bawah Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu 1957.

Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu di meterai pada tahun 1957 sementara Perjanjian Malaysia di tandatangani pada tahun 1963 – dimana kekeliruan ini sekiranya ada?

Seperti dalam Perkara 1(1) Perlembagaan Malaysia hanya nama Malaysia saja di ganti dan bukannya menggunakan nama Persekutuan Malaysia seperti yang terkandung dalam Perjanjian Malaysia 1963. Ini bermakna Persekutuan Tanah Melayu menggunakan nama Malaysia sebagai topeng, namun pada zahirnya ia masih lagi Persekutuan Tanah Melayu yang di bentuk pada tahun 1957.

Ini satu penipuan besar yang telah berlarutan selama 51 tahun sejak tahun 1963 lagi. Seperkara lagi tiada terdapat perkataan Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 terkandung di dalam Perlembagaan Malaysia.

Jadi kenapa ada juga orang di Sabah yang masih mahu menegakkan benang yang basah?

Jangan Buyuk Sabah ….. bah!!!

Source: http://janganbuyuksabah.wordpress.com/2014/12/06/jawapan-asas-perlembagaan/

Read More

Workshop on ‘Sabah cannot ditch peninsula’

If “no secession” was the “intention” of the founding fathers, it’s subject to international law on self-determination.

A workshop in the Sabah capital, Historical Truth Behind the Formation of Malaysia and the Way Forward, degenerated into rhetoric and polemics in meeting its apparently pre-determined objective of proving that “Sabah cannot secede from Malaysia”.

This is in line with the recent declaration by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, and echoed by his deputy Muhyiddin Yassin, that “Sabah belongs to Malaysia”. The immediate response in the social media then was that “Sabah belongs to the people of Sabah”.

Prof. Emeritus D.S. Ranjit Singh of Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM), senior practising lawyer S. Vanugopal and Arnold Puyok, CEO of Centre for Society Empowerment & Democratic Studies (Seeds), presented papers during the workshop.

They were unanimous that it was the intention of the founding fathers in Borneo that there would be “no secession” for their two nations from “Malaysia”. They don’t explain how this could be interpreted as “intention” since sovereignty resides with the people. If “no secession” was the “intention” of the founding fathers, it’s subject to international law on self-determination.

The workshop, organised by Seeds, failed to distinguish between Rule of Law (laws rule, not men) and Rule by Law (men rule, now laws), the first being a democracy and the latter dictatorship and authoritarianism.

It glossed over the fact that the constitutional documents providing the basis for North Borneo and Sarawak to be in equal partnership with the peninsula has an implied Basic Features Doctrine i.e. that they cannot be amended.

Vanugopal, during his presentation, referred to his book “The Constitutional Rights of Sabah and Sarawak”, which touched on, among other things, two major amendments made to the Sabah Constitution in 1973 in violation of constitutional documents.

These were to make Islam the State religion and to make Malay an official language in the State Cabinet and Assembly (First Bill).

The Second Bill (National Language (Application) Enactment, which was also passed, extended the National Language Act 1963/67 to Sabah, and this had the effect of terminating the use of English.

The 20 Points and 18 Points, constitutional documents, state that there would be no religion in North Borneo and Sarawak. Vanugopal did not refer to Batu Sumpah, a constitutional document in stone in Keningau, which echoes this declaration.

The participants in the workshop claim that 20 Points and 18 Points, both constitutional documents, are not legally binding because they are not part of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

Article 160 in the Federation Constitution which defines “Federation” as that set up by the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948 and the Federation of Malaysia Independent Act 1957 was not mentioned during the workshop. In short, the Malaysian Federation is the Malayan Federation, despite the name change.

The participants in the workshop do not mention that it was not the intention of the founding fathers that North Borneo and Sarawak be the 12th and 13th states in the Malayan Federation, subsequently renamed the Malaysian Federation.

North Borneo, in particular, did not have the security promised in 1963.

Also missing from the workshop was the declaration by Malayan Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman that “Malaya would not colonize the two Borneo nations after the British left and the latter would be developed to be on par with the peninsula”.

Tunku, and the British, also pledged that North Borneo and Sarawak would be equal partners with the peninsula under MA63.

All the pledges by Tunku did not materialize.

The intention of the British in mooting the idea of North Borneo and Sarawak being in Federation with a Malaya merged with Singapore wasn’t mentioned by any of the participants during the workshop.

The British, in retrospect, wanted to shed their defence burden in Borneo and Singapore under MA63 by transferring it to the Malayan Government.

This could only happen, the British reckoned, by the Borneo nations facilitating the merger on demographic grounds between Chinese-majority Singapore and multiracial Malaya where there was a fine balance between the non-Malays and the Malays, the latter under an umbrella term codified by the British for Muslims in the peninsula from Sulawesi, Java and Sumatra.

There was also the British intention to bring their commercial and economic empire in Borneo, Singapore and Malaya under one administrative framework through the 1963 arrangement.

North Borneo, in particular, did not have the security promised in 1963.

Instead, the Orang Asal in particular have been disenfranchised by demographic changes, apparently engineered by the Federal Government in the territory, through the massive influx of illegal immigrants driven by the push-pull factors of poverty and war in the southern Philippines and the prospects of a better life across the Sulu Sea.

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/sabahsarawak/2014/12/13/workshop-on-sabah-cannot-ditch-peninsula/

Read More

M'sia a permanent marriage, workshop told

KOTA KINABALU: The formation of Malaysia is a "marriage" forever, so the question of secession from the federation does not arise.

That was how the organisers of the Workshop on the Historical Truth Behind the Formation of Malaysia and the Way Forward summed up the discussion at the end of the day.

Another way of putting it is that legally speaking, Sabah cannot secede from Malaysia as the Federal Constitution does not allow it. It is unconstitutional as reiterated by constitutional law experts in the country.

The workshop was organised as an academic exercise by the Centre for Society Empowerment & Democratic Studies (Seeds), chaired by Datuk Badil Zaman Fazul Rahman.

Several guest speakers at the workshop concluded that "No Secession" was the wish of the founding fathers of Malaysia.

Prof. Emeritus Dr D.S. Ranjit Singh of Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) pointed out that even Point 7 (Right of Secession) of the 20-Point Memorandum itself clearly indicates no secession from Malaysia.

"There shall be no right to secede from the Federation of Malaysia," he said.

Senior practising lawyer S. Vanugopal stressed that the 20-Point Memorandum has always been referred to as the basis of the pre-conditions for participation of Sabah and Sarawak (18-Point Memorandum) in Malaysia.

"So if the 20-Point Agreement is to be honoured as part of the constitutional documents on the formation of Malaysia, particular attention must be accorded to the wishes of the founding fathers to be in Malaysia forever. Secession is not possible," he said.

A Daily Express check with the State Attorney-General's Office did not find anything to this effect.

A revisit of the 20-Point Memorandum and Malaysia Agreement 1963 made it clear that the 20-Point is not legally binding (contrary to what certain leaders have told the rakyat) because it is not part of the Malaysia Agreement. These were constitutional safeguards for Sabah in Malaysia.

One contention is that the country as a whole cannot operate by referring to the 20-Point Memorandum. No country can operate that way as it has to function on the Constitution. CEO of Seeds, Dr Arnold Puyok, could not agree more.

"Definitely not on the Malaysia Agreement and neither on the 20-Point Memorandum but on the terms agreed upon (pertaining to Sabah and Sarawak joining Malaya and Singapore to form the Federation of Malaysia).

"And these are enshrined in the Federal Constitution. It's already incorporated into the Federal Constitution," he said.

In his presentation on Formation of Malaysia: Revisiting the IGC Report, the 20-Points and the Malaysia Agreement 1963, Prof. Emeritus Dr Ranjit Singh said five political parties of Sabah submitted a memorandum on the 20-Points to the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC).

"These parties were Unko, Usno, U.P, D.P and Pasok Momogun," he said.

According to the historian, one of the reasons for the formation of Malaysia was the do-colonisation theory.

"It was mooted as a solution to problems of British decolonisation. Apart from Tunku Abdul Rahman's willingness to help the British solve those problems, it was his desire for territorial expansion, and this led to the historic announcement on May 27, 1961," he said.

Prof. Dr Ranjit defended his action of revisiting the Malaysia Agreement 1963 when a participant felt that we should focus on "The Way Forward".

"Why can't we revisit for clarification? If you don't, there is no basis also to fall back on.

What is important is actually to present the correct, factual information to the people of Sabah.

"All we want to do is give the correct perspective. My job as a historian is to see that this is done. So, if there is some misinterpretation somewhere, we have to go back to see what was the right thing based on historical documents," he asserted.

At the academic exercise (also regarded by the organisers as an intellectual discourse), several other related questions and doubts were raised for clarification.

For instance, participants posed the question as to whether the last Governor of British North Borneo (now Sabah), Sir William Goode, left on Aug 31, 1963 after the declaration of Sabah's independence from the British. Or did he leave only on Sept 16, 1963? Some insisted that he left Sabah on Aug 31 while others disagreed.

The argument was: If Goode left on Sept 16, then what was Sabah's status during the period from Aug 31 to Sept 16? Was Sabah truly independent or was it still under the control of the British or did we have self-government?

A Daily Express check with the State Archives found that Goode left at midnight on Sept 15, 1963 after the lowering of the Union Jack for the last time. The event was published in the Kinabalu Sabah Times. It is also illustrated on Page 154 in the history book entitled Sejarah Sabah Dalam Gambar.

Did Sabah become independent on July 31, 1963 or Aug 31, 1963 and remain independent till Sept 16, 1963? The answer is "No" from senior practising lawyer S. Vanugopal.

Going by historical records, the Malaysia Agreement 1963 was signed in London on July 9, 1963 by the Governments of United Kingdom, Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore to form Malaysia.

l By Article II of the Malaysia Agreement, Malaysia was to be brought into effect on Aug 31, 1963 (Malaysia Day) by an Act, that is, Malaysia Act 1963.

l What transpired in the British Parliament to give effect to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 was: The Malaysia Act 1963 was passed in the British Parliament on July 31, 1963 to relinquish sovereignty and jurisdiction over Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore and to vest jurisdiction in the Government of Malaysia on Malaysia Day.

l Malaysia Act 1963 was passed in the Malayan Parliament on Aug 20, 1063 to bring Malaysia into being on Aug 31, 1963.

l However, what many (including History teachers, young historians and young lawyers for that matter) may not know is this – Owing to unavoidable circumstances resulting in the Manila Accord 1963, the Malaysia Agreement was amended on Aug 28, 1963 to change Malaysia Day from Aug 31, 1963 to Sept 16, 1963.

l Orders-in-Council were made by Her Majesty on Aug 29, 1963 to give force to State Constitutions to take effect immediately before Malaysia Day.

l Proclamation of Malaysia on Sept 16, 1963.

All this was revealed by Prof. Dr Ranjit and Vanugopal in his paper on "Legal Aspects of the Formation of Malaysia and Constitutional Issues in Federal-State Relations".

"In the signing of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 in London, Sabah was represented by Tun Fuad Stephens, Tun Datu Mustapha Datu Harun, WKH Jones, Datuk Khoo Siak Chiew, Colonial State Secretary Stephen Holley and Datuk G.S. Sundang," Prof. Dr Ranjit said.

"The Malaysia Agreement 1963 has 11 articles. The consequential amendment is that the effective date of Malaysia Act shall be on Sept 16, 1963.

"Therefore constitutionally, Sabah was never independent on Aug 31, 1963. To argue otherwise is to ignore the constitutional documents," said Vanugopal, adding that the 20-Point Memorandum and Malaysia Agreement 1963 are only two of the many constitutional documents relating to the formation of Malaysia.

As a matter of intellectual discourse, one oft-repeated question was raised at the workshop. Have the constitutional powers of Sabah and Sarawak eroded?

"Yes," said Vanugopal. "You cannot deny that."

How did the dilution of some constitutional powers come about?

He attributed it to the voluntary surrender by the State Government of Sabah that gave away the rights enshrined and protected in the Constitution (for example, the State religion and use of English).

His book entitled "The Constitutional Rights of Sabah and Sarawak", touched on, among other things, two major amendments made to the State Constitution in 1973.

These were to make Islam the State religion and to make Malay an official language in the State Cabinet and Assembly (First Bill). The Second Bill (National Language (Application) Enactment, which was also passed, extended the National Language Act 1963/67 to Sabah, and this had the effect of terminating the use of English.

Source: http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news.cfm?NewsID=94964

Read More

'Seeds' to counter negative sentiments

KOTA KINABALU: The need for a platform to address issues relating to Sabah and Sabahans in an intellectual and logical manner led to the establishment of the Centre for Society Empowerment & Democratic Studies (Seeds).

The timing is right, given that people in Sabah and Sarawak are now more aware of political developments in Malaysia and have begun to actively voice their opinions about issues that matter to them.

Seeds is therefore the answer to a non-governmental "think tank" that is dedicated to the ideal of creating a modern, moderate and progressive society through its research and outreach programmes.

One of its challenges is to address situations where people are more interested in raising sentiments rather than finding valid solutions to real world issues.

Among the key people behind the conception and birth of Seeds are the Chairman Badil Zaman Fazul Rahman and protem CEO Dr Arnold Puyok, both Sabahans.

Badil Zaman said Seeds is of the view that rational and unemotional discourse is an imperative way in any attempt to address issues that relate to Sabah and Sabahans.

"Our rationale is simple. Dwelling on what went wrong only creates chaos and negativity. Which is why we must shift our focus to what we must do next.

"Only by redirecting our focus to solutions that are rooted in objectivity and solid research will we be able to bring about positive outcomes.

Through this approach, we will be able to move even mountains," he said when interviewed. The Chairman encouraged the people in Sabah and Sarawak to make their voices heard.

Dr Arnold, a political scientist by training, hails from Sipitang.

His collaboration with 10 young, talented and highly-educated Sabahans of different backgrounds paved the way for the formation of Seeds.

According to him, they share a common desire to contribute to the country's progress and to exorcise the current racial, religious and regional tensions that exist today from our socio-political landscape.

He welcomes more progressive and moderate Sabahans and Sarawakians to join this non-governmental organisation (NGO) in making Malaysia a better place to live.

"It is high time for the country to move forward. We cannot afford to sit idly and do nothing. The future of Malaysia depends on the resilience, unity and active participation of its citizens in building the country," he said.

Seeds is headquartered at Lot 21, 1st Floor, Lorong Grace Square, Jalan Pantai Sembulan, 88100 Kota Kinabalu. Those who subscribe to the ideals of the Centre may contact Dr Arnold at 088-270637 (telephone) or 088-256613 (facsimile).

It is scheduled to be officially launched in the first quarter of 2015. For starters, Seeds conducted a workshop on Historical Truth Behind the Formation of Malaysia and the Way Forward at Magellan Sutera Hotel recently.

Dr Arnold said its aim was to increase awareness among Malaysians, especially Sabahans and Sarawakians, on the founding of our country from the nation-building perspective.

"The topic is important because the younger generation must know the reason why Malaysia was formed and what needs to be done to keep the spirit of Malaysia alive," he said.

"The process of building the country is an ongoing one as we think of ways for the country to move forward."

To a question, Dr Arnold said information on the real situation and what ought to be done will be documented and packaged in pamphlets, for example, for dissemination to the public at a later stage.

Meanwhile, Badil Zaman said the inaugural workshop was purely an academic exercise to clear one's doubts through an intellectual, fact-based discussion, rather than political rhetoric, and the initiative would not stop here.

"People tend to get carried away by political interpretation of history versus factual history. There may be bias or misrepresentation of facts by unscrupulous politicians.

"So there will be more forums, seminars, roundtables and other outreach programmes in the future to enlighten the public. Seeds will take that initiative," he added.

On the outcome of the workshop, Badil Zaman said the participants have a better understanding of the basic parameters about the formation of Malaysia and the way forward.

"Members of Seeds need to form a credible opinion first about Malaysia and its future as well as issues affecting Sabah and Sabahans before venturing out to engage people in rational discussions," he said.

Answering a question, Badil Zaman said the younger generation cannot be blamed for their ignorance about the historical perspective of Malaysia because they have not been given enough historical information.

"So this is what we (Seeds) are trying to do. Unlike in bygone days, the historical truth about the formation of Malaysia is not included in history books today," he lamented.

The guest speakers at the workshop were former Berjaya Minister Tan Sri Majid Khan, Prof. Emeritus Dr D.S. Ranjit of Universiti Utara Malaysia and Sabah's senior lawyer S. Vanugopal.

Caption: Participants of the workshop with the organisers and guest speakers.

Source: http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news.cfm?NewsID=93718

Read More

Lion: King of the Jungle Crushed to Death By Buffalo

Lyle Gregg, a game ranger, has captured one of the most timely photos of a remarkable event that happened in the animal kingdom. Call it revenge or retaliation but these pictures were captured at the moment when a fearless herd of 300 buffalo took it out on the ferocious king of the jungle, crushing him to death.

This occurred at South Africa’s Kruger National Park where the lion was earlier forced out or its pride. The vulnerable lion was trailed by an agitated group of buffalo which went after it while it was resting among the grasses. It made a failed attempt to escape the advancing herd of buffaloes but he was injured from a previous fight over the control of the pride so he was too slow and had to pay with his life.

Whether the herd of buffaloes decided to make the lone lion a “scape goat” and take out all their grievances for previous attacks on their specie or that they wanted to send a message to the big cats remains known only to this group of buffaloes which trampled and gored the big cat to death.

Source: http://listabuzz.com/lion-crushed-to-death-by-buffalo/

***When we are united, we can crush anything***

Read More

Perjuangan SSKM

"Kalau setakat menyedarkan Rakyat Negara Sarawak dan Rakyat Negara Sabah melalui Facebook, ia tidak akan ke mana...", sebenarnya merupakan satu kenyataan yang dibuat tanpa sebarang siasatan ataupun kajian. 

Group SSKM ini yang pada mulanya setakat "takkan ke mana" ini telah berkembang daripada "Open group" yang kecil, kemudian membentuk "Closed" group dan tetap utuh berkembang sehingga ke hari ini. Group lama SSKM telah di "HACKED" dan kini berpindah ke Group Baru tetap berjaya dan juga apa yang disebarkan semakin kuat dihati rakyat Negara Sarawak dan juga rakyat Negara Sabah khususnya dikalangan Generasi Muda. Ini kerana masa depan adalah ditangan golongan ini.

KEBENARAN TETAP UTUH

Warga Negara Sarawak dan Negara Sabah, hari ini semakin banyak yang telah sedar akan hak mereka kerana SSKM yang pada tahun 2011 hanyalah group yang dianggap "omongan kosong" (borak kosong) telah berjaya menarik hati Generasi Muda di kedua-dua Negara Borneo untuk menyangangi kembali Negara mereka iaitu Negara Sarawak dan Negara Sabah.

Kami yang sudah lama berada bersama SSKM dari zaman awal penubuhannya, melihat betapa derasnya orang luar mahu memfitnah dan menjatuhkan usaha murni SSKM tapi SSKM tetap utuh dan kukuh sehinggalah misi dan objektifnya tercapai. Makin banyak anak watan Negara Sarawak dan Negara Sabah yang semakin mendapat banyak maklumat sebenar sejarah tanah air negara mereka masing-masing yang tidak mungkin diajar mahupun didedahkan oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan Malaya yang telah menyamar menjadi Kerajaan Persekutuan Malaysia untuk satu tempoh yang lama iaitu 51 tahun. 

Group yang telah berkembang lagi maju wujud selepas munculnya SSKM. Sebelum SSKM, ada juga group begini tapi tidak berjaya menarik perhatian dan sokongan Generasi Muda. Tetapi dalam SSKM, kami bukan berhujah kosong, tapi disokong dengan bukti yang berfakta. Tiada kaitan dengan mana-mana parti politik seperti group yang lain yang hanya memperjuangkan politik mereka kerana mereka rasa dengan politik mereka, Negara Sarawak dan Negara Sabah boleh merdeka.

SSKM berpegang pada perjuangan membawa segenap pelusuk rakyat Negara Sarawak dan Negara Sabah untuk merdeka. Tiada halangan dari segi politik dan agama mahupun etnik. SSKM mahukan semua orang SEDAR bahawa didalam mereka mengejar matlamat parti, matlamat sebenar yakni MERDEKA kita semakin disisih dan dipinggirkan.

By Muhammad Amirul Ismail

Read More

Sejarah yang tidak di "Sejarah" kan dalam Buku Sejarah Sekolah

Credit to : Pengerindu.com

Sesungguhnya inilah realiti yang berlaku di sekolah rendah, menengah, kolej mahupun di universiti awam/swasta. Kebenaran yang berusaha untuk disembunyikan agar ia tidak diketahui oleh Generasi Muda Negara Sabah, Negara Sarawak dan termasuk malaya. Apakah kebaikan untuk berbuat demikian?

Ini adalah bertujuan untuk mengelak tindakan kotor mereka (pemimpin malaya) dihidu yang telah menurunkan status "Negara" Sabah dan "Negara" Sarawak sebagai hanya berstatus "negeri". Ini juga adalah untuk mengelak konsep federasi ataupun persekutuan asal itu diketahui umum kerana ia mampu untuk menyekat mahupun menghalang niat mereka untuk menguasai sosial, ekonomi dan politik Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak.

Dengan mengetahui kebenaran, akan terbongkar kudis hina dan perbuatan terkutuk pemimpin dan kerajaan malaya selama ini kepada Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak.

Untuk menghangatkan lagi pemahaman ini, sila bantu untuk senaraikan segala perbuatan terkutuk pemimpin dan kerajaan malaya terhadap Bangsa Borneo, Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak...

Read More

Terjaga Tetapi Terkeliru...

Sabah Untuk Sabahan

Sarawak Untuk Sarawakian

Dua kalimah keramat itu seringkali dilaungkan senada dengan kebangkitan rakyat Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Kita telah bangun daripada lena yang panjang. Kita juga telah mula menolak "gula-gula" yang dihulur oleh pemerintah. Kita senada, sehati, sejiwa dan bergerak sama langkah untuk menolak pemerintahan Barisan Nasional. Barisan Nasional sudah terlalu lama memerintah negara dan selama pentadbiran mereka, BN sentiasa memperbodohkan masyarakat Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Bahkan pemimpin Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak cuma berperanan sebagai boneka dan bersikap pengecut.

Justeru itu, SSKM yang diketuai oleh saudari Doris Jones berperanan penting sebagai satu batu loncatan untuk mengemblengkan seluruh tenaga dan buah fikiran bijak pandai Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak, bagi menyokong Gerakan Pembebasan Borneo. Malahan saudari Doris Jones sendiri bergadai tenaga untuk membawa isu ini ke House of Lords, Westminster Parliament di London, UK. Ini adalah bukti yang teramat jelas dan sebagai satu WARNING kepada kerajaan malaysia, bahawa rakyat Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak mahukan kebebasan untuk memerintah Tanah Air sendiri.

Sekian lama, sejarah Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak terpadam dari tinta sejarah negara. Malahan, banyak perkara tersembunyi telah dilakukan oleh pemimpin-pemimpin BN terdahulu sehingga kini untuk mengawal tindak-tanduk masyarakat Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Bahkan, mereka mencabuli perkara 18/20 sewenang-wenangnya tanpa memikirkan hati dan perasaan penduduk Borneo. Daripada segi agama, mereka banyak kali mempersoalkan cara anutan Kristian seperti isu penyebaran agama Kristian dan isu kalimah Allah, di mana Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak sentiasa menerima tempias isu-isu tersebut. Padahal, isu-isu agama di malaya sepatutnya tidak membabitkan tanah Borneo selari dengan perkara 18/20 yang telah lama termetrai.

Begitu juga dengan perkara 8, Borneonisation, di mana pada masa sekarang, sepatutnya penjawat awam di Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak diketuai oleh orang-orang tempatan dan bukan pegawai dari malaya. Malangnya pada sesi soal jawab parliamen baru-baru ini, masih terdapat lebih 30 peratus penjawat awam Negara sabah dan Negara Sarawak yang masih lagi dikuasai oleh orang dari malaya. Malahan usul untuk mengkaji perjanjian malaysia oleh MP Penampang, Darell Leiking telah ditolak mentah-mentah seolah-olah tiada ruang dan peluang untuk suara kita berkumandang di parliamen malaysia.

Sebab itulah, mengapa rakyat Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak sudah reti untuk menzahirkan rasa benci dan dendam terhadap keseluruhan pimpinan BN. Rakyat mula berdiskusi/berbincang secara ilmiah dan professional untuk bersatu menolak regim BN dan sekutu-sekutu mereka. Jika kita menolak BN, jadi parti apakah yang kita akan undi selepas itu? Senang sahaja bagi yang masih kurang faham tentang erti sebenar perjuangan SSKM, undi mereka akan beralih kepada Pakatan Rakyat. PR baru-baru ini sudah mula memancing hati penduduk borneo. DAP, PKR dan juga PAS sudah mula menawarkan "bantuan" untuk mengembalikan hak hak borneo termasuklah royalti minyak.

Jika ada yang tertipu, maka golongan inilah diantara "pengkhianat" perjuangan SSKM yang terkeliru. Ideologi SSKM ialah mahu Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak berupaya memerintah sendiri ataupun mempunyai kuasa autonomi sepenuhnya. Jika mahu mencapai hasrat itu, satu perkara penting yang mesti orang Borneo ketahui, kita mesti menolak kesemua parti politik daripada malaya. Jika tidak, kita boleh diumpamakan seperti keluar dari mulut harimau, masuk pula ke dalam mulut buaya dan perjuangan SSKM akan menjadi sia-sia. Biarpun, kita belum pernah diperintah PR, tiada sebab untuk kita membazir masa semata-mata mahu mencuba nasib.

Buat masa ini, lagi bijak jika penduduk borneo cuma memangkah parti yang memperjuangkan hak hak Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak ataupun mana-mana parti yang tidak dipengaruhi oleh ideologi parti daripada malaya. Sebagai contoh, bolehkah kita memangkah undi untuk pemimpin BN yang menyuarakan sokongan terhadap perjuangan SSKM? Jawapannya, tidak boleh! Jika kita masih memberi undi kepada mereka, kita seperti masih mahukan BN menang dan memerintah. Jika benar mereka mahu berjuang bersama kita, mengapa mereka tidak keluar daripada parti BN yang tidak menghormati ketinggian nilai perkara 18/20?

Bagaimana pula dengan mengundi PR? Pendapat peribadi saya mengatakan, dengan memberi undi kepada PR, kita seolah-olah mencipta sebuah jalan yang samar samar. Secara rasionalnya, PR tidak akan membantu kita untuk menjadikan Sabah dan Sarawak sebagai sebuah Negara. Mereka cuma boleh membantu kita dari segi royalti minyak. Kesimpulannya, buat apa mereka mahu membantu kita, jika satu hari nanti, jika mereka memerintah, mereka akan kehilangan besar sumber kewangan yang selama ini kita telah sumbangkan dari tanah Borneo in. Jadi, kita patut memberi undi kepada Parti Tempatan jika tiada pilihan lain. Parti STAR adalah antara parti tempatan yang patut diberi peluang. Buat masa sekarang, ideologi mereka masih lagi senada dengan misi SSKM dan memberi peluang kepada parti tempatan, ini bermaksud kita boleh "membeli" masa untuk SSKM mengumpul petition yang secukupnya sebelum SSKM membawa misi ini ke peringkat yang lebih tinggi.

Note:

1. Gambar kedua diambil dari FB saudari Doris Jones.

2. Sila lapangkan diri untuk sign petition: http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/sabah-sarawak-rights/sign.html

Source: http://hatiborneo.blogspot.com/2013/11/terjaga-tetapi-terkeliru.html

Read More

Constitutional change in sarawak 1963-1988: 25 years as a state within the federation of Malaysia

Introduction

When Sarawak joined the Federation of Malaysia on 16 September 1963, it was a secular state with its own constitution, which was integrated into the Federation's constitution, with provisions and exceptions to reflect the special rights of Sarawak within the Federation. This article seeks first to provide the background on how Sarawak's constitution came to be and how it was developed to enable self-government as an independent state just prior to Sarawak joining the Federation. Second, it seeks to investigate the amendments made to the Federation's constitution during Sarawak's first twenty-five years within the Federation that altered or detracted from Sarawak's rights. All this is based on the premise that a constitution embodies "the fundamental political principles of a state." 

(1) Historical background From 1476 to 1841 the northwest coast of Borneo comprising the present state of Sarawak was part of the independent Malay Sultanate of Brunei, with indigenous native groups practicing forms of animism and maintaining their own cultures and languages. On 24 September 1841, Raja Muda Hashim granted James Brooke tutelage over Sarawak Proper and James was proclaimed Rajah of Sarawak in Brunei on 1 August 1842. 

(2) A century of independence for aterritorially-expanding secular Sarawak under Brooke rule followed, (3) during which, in addition to pre-existing Islam and animism, virtually all other major religions became firmly established through Chinese, European, and Indian immigration and missionaries. (4) English and Malay were widely used by the administrative officers, and by usage English became the accepted official language. 

(5) Sir Charles Vyner Brooke, the third Rajah, proclaimed Sarawak's first written constitution on 24 September 1941, ending a century of Brooke sole sovereignty. (6) The first clause of the proclamation bound the Rajah and his heirs or successors "to ensure that our beloved subjects shall ultimately enjoy their inherent right to control their own lives and destinies." Under the constitution, almost complete authority was transferred to the executive--the Supreme Council of no less than five members, and the legislature--the Council Negri with twenty-five members. 

(7) Other than Cardinal Principle 7 stipulating that "Subjects of whatever race or creed shall be freely and impartially admitted to offices in Our Service," religions or religious beliefs are not mentioned in the 1941 Constitution, consistent with Brooke rule of Sarawak as a secular state. The constitution envisaged Sarawak continuing as an independent sovereign state, but with Britain responsible for defense and foreign affairs in accordance with the 1888 and 1941 bilateral treaties. 

(8) With the arrival of the Japanese on 25 December 1941, Sarawak came under military administration which worked to some extent through those community leaders willing to cooperate, with Japanese becoming the de-facto official language. After liberation on 11 September 1945, the state came under Allied military administration until 15 April 1946, when the re-commencement of civil government under the 1941 constitution was proclaimed. 

(9) Sarawak's Legislative List: Muslim Law, Native Law and Customs, land, agriculture and forestry, local government and services, electricity, state works and water, state machinery, state holidays, turtles and riverine fishing. Concurrent Federal and Sarawak Legislative List: social welfare, scholarships, national parks, animal husbandry, town and country planning, public health and sanitation, and drainage and irrigation. The Council Negri passed the first amendments to the Sarawak Constitution by the required two-thirds majority on 25 June 1964. One of these enabled another person to perform the functions of the Speaker should the latter be unable to do so. The other removed the impractical stipulation that indirect elections be held within 60 days in all situations. Opposition Council Negri member Chart Siaw Hee claimed the amendment showed that the State Government had no intention of holding a direct election before 16 September 1968, the latest date given in the IGC Report. Initially, direct elections were to be held in 1967, but setting up new electoral boundaries each with approximately the same number of voters delayed the projected date of elections until May 1969. 

(20) To prolong the life of the Council Negri due to be dissolved in September 1968, the Federal constitution had to be amended. For this, the [Federal] Constitution (Amendment) Act, 1968 was enacted. During the debate on this act in the Dewan Rakyat (House of Representatives), on 21 August Stephen Yong Kuet Tze, Secretary-General, Sarawak United People's Party (SUPP), suggested that the Federal Government had deliberately delayed delimiting constituencies and registering voters because it feared defeat at the polls. Criticizing the wording of the amendment, Yong took the opportunity to say that "if the arbitrary arrest and detention of [his SUPP colleague] SUPP member Chan Siaw Hee ... was in accordance with the law, then let us see [whether] the proposed amendment ... is also in accordance with the law." 

(21) Polling finally began on 10 May 1969. Five days later polling was suspended, following a proclamation of emergency over racial riots that broke out in Kuala Lumpur on 13 May 1969.

(22) An appeal by a man sentenced to death for possessing firearms in 1969 led to an interesting ruling by the Federal Court on the Federal Constitution. On 21 August the Court ruled that the Dewan Rakyat had the power to make constitutional amendments, even if those amendments were inconsistent with existing provisions in the constitution. Lord President Tun Mohamed Suffian said many provisions in the constitution showed that it was intended to be a living document, which, if the need arose, could be amended in any way thought fit. His comments were put to the test in 1983 when the Dewan Rakyat was forced to reverse some constitutional amendments already approved before Royal assent would be given. 

The Federal Constitution (Amendment) Act 1983 passed by the Dewan Rakyat in August 1983 contained some controversial amendments that curtailed the powers of the head of state, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. These amendments were: Article 150 (l) that transferred the power to proclaim an emergency from the Agong to the Prime Minister; Article 66 (5) that made a Federal bill law if the Agong's assent had not been given after 15 days; and 8th Schedule 11(3) that made a state bill law if [in Sarawak's case] the governor's assent had not been given within 15 days. 

(29) Royal assent was withheld until 15 December after Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir gave a written undertaking that a new bill would reverse those amendments. A special joint session of the Dewan Negara (Senate) and the Dewan Rakyat (House of Representatives) approved the Constitution (Amendment) Act 1984 that reversed the contentious amendments and the Act received Royal assent on 19 January. All the other amendments in the 1983 Act remained, including another of direct relevance to Sarawak, the abolition of appeals in civil cases to the Privy Council in Britain. That connection was finally severed at the beginning of i 985 when the Federal Court was renamed the Supreme Court and all remaining appeals to the Privy Council were abolished.

Comments

Both Sarawak and Sabah had a well-developed sense of identity and individuality before both agreed to become part of the Federation of Malaysia. Their different ethnic, economic, and religious mix, and their past histories compared with the states of Malaya, coupled with their distance from the federal capital, Kuala Lumpur, were all sources of friction when those states became part of the Federation. The special safeguards and conditions given to Sarawak and Sabah, such as control over education, immigration, and land, enabled both states to retain much of their own identity, without being completely overwhelmed by the mores of mainland Malaysia. However, those safeguards came under pressure from time to time and were indeed completely overridden during the 1966 Ningkan crisis. 

Easier relationships were established post-1966 after state governments in the image of the ethnic Malay Muslim-dominated Federal Government had been installed. This muted resistance to the special status of Malays and Indigenes embodied in the Constitution helped to overcome serious opposition to changing the official language from English to Malay. it also enabled the Federal parliament to provide special financial aid for Muslim institutions and instruction in Islam to Muslims in Sarawak without the consent of the governor of Sarawak, removing the need for a two-thirds majority in the Council Negri to approve any bill controlling or restricting propagation of any doctrine or belief to Muslims. 

By 1988 the basic tenets of the Federation of Malaysia, Malay as the national language and the pre-eminence of Islam, had been firmly entrenched in Sarawak by amendments to the 1963 constitution. Federal power to alter the constitution unilaterally had been established and Sarawak had been completely integrated as a state within the Federation of Malaysia. 95D. Exclusion for Borneo States and Singapore of Parliament's power to pass uniform laws about land or local government.

In relation to a Borneo State and in relation to Singapore Clause (4) of Article 76 shall not apply, nor shall paragraph (b) of Clause (1) of that Article enable Parliament to make laws with respect to any of the matters mentioned in Clause (4) of that Article. 95E. Exclusion of Borneo States and Singapore from national plans for land utilisation, local government, development, etc.

(3) Under Article 92 no area in the State shall be proclaimed a development area for the purposes of any development Plan without the concurrence of the Governor. 110. Assignment of taxes and fees to the States. (1) Subject to Clause (2), each of the States shall receive all proceeds from the taxes, fees and other sources of revenue specified in Part 11I of the Tenth Schedule so far as collected, levied or raised within the State. 111. Restriction on borrowing.

(2) A State shall not borrow except under the authority of State law, and State law shall not authorise a State to borrow except from the Federation or, for a period not exceeding five years, from a bank or other financial source approved for that purpose by the Federal Government.

112. Restriction on alterations in establishments of States. 161A. Special position of natives of Borneo States.

(1) Subject to Clause (2), the provisions of Clauses (2) to (5) of Article 153, so far as they relate to the reservation of positions in the public service, shall apply in relation to natives of any of the Borneo States as they apply in relation to Malays. (2) In a Borneo State Article I53 shall have effect with the substitution of references to natives of the State for the references to Malays, but as regards scholarships, exhibitions and other educational or training privileges and facilities Clause (2) of that Article shall not require the reservation of a fixed proportion for natives.

(3) Before advice is tendered to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as to the exercise of his powers under Article 15319 in relation to a Borneo State, the Chief Minister of the State in question shall be consulted. (5) Article 89 shall not apply to a Borneo State, and Article 8 shall not invalidate or prohibit any provision of State law in a Borneo State for the reservation of land for natives of the State or for alienation to them, or for giving them preferential treatment as regards the alienation of land by the State.

(6) In this Article "native" means-- (a) in relation to Sarawak, a person who is a citizen and either belongs to one of the races specified in Clause 7 as indigenous to the State or is of mixed blood deriving exclusively from those races; and (3) By 1905 the Brookes had extended Sarawak to some 48,250 square miles by annexing territory from the Sultanate of Brunei. (4) This is a simplification of a long, protracted process.

(5) The Sarawak Gazette, the government's official publication, was printed in English with the occasional translation into Malay. (6) Sarawak Order No. C-21 (Constitution) 1941. For an exhaustive background to how the Constitution came about, see Alex C. Castle, The Constitutional and Legal History of Sarawak: Documents and Commentaries: Volume 1: Peoples 'Law Making and Brooke Rule, Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Historical Society Sarawak Branch, 2003, pp. 251-279.

(7) Council Negri and Supreme Council members were nominees of the Rajah and top-rank administrative officers. Section 4(iii) of the constitution retained the right of the Rajah to appoint any new non-ex officio members to the Supreme Council.

(8) "Agreement between Her Majesty's Government and Charles Brooke, Second Rajah of Sarawak," 5 September 1888, and "An Agreement between His Majesty's Government and the Rajah in Council of the State of Sarawak," 22 November 1941. (9) English was reintroduced as the administrative language immediately after the occupation ended. 

(10) For a full account of cession at the wish of the Rajah which was ratified by a controversial vote in the Council Negri, see R. H. W. Reece, The Name of Brooke: The End of White Rajah Rule in Sarawak, Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1982, pp. 198-245. (29) L. A. Sheridan & Harry E. Groves, The Constitution of Malaysia, Singapore: Malayan Law Journal Pte. Ltd., 1987, pp. 178-9, 372-5,493 and 501. (30) L. A. Sheridan & Harry E. Groves, The Constitution of Malaysia, New York: Oceana Publications, Inc., 1967, p. 228. (31) Sarawak Tribune, 24 August 1976. (32) Sheridan in note 5 on page 152 states "the number was raised from 24 by ... section 2 (c), with effect by virtue of ... from 24th February 1986."

COPYRIGHT 2007 Borneo Research Council, Inc

COPYRIGHT 2008 Gale, Cengage Learning

Read More