Autonomy without accountability won’t help Sabahans and Sarawakians, analysts say

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 27 — As Putrajaya opens up to greater leeway for Sabah and Sarawak to manage their state affairs, pundits warn that the interests of the people of Borneo may be jeopardised unless there’s a mechanism to check and balance this autonomous power.

Political observers acknowledged that granting autonomy to the two states is in line with what was initially agreed to under the Malaysia Agreement when the country was formed in 1963, but stressed that the erosion of their rights was as much the doing of state leaders as it was the fault of the federal administration.

“The problem is not so much a lack of autonomy. If you compare to other states, relatively Sarawak has autonomy. Of course it has reduced over the years but what have the state leaders been doing to help the ordinary Sarawakians?” said Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia’s Dr , who used the country’s largest state as an example.

Under the 1963 deal, Sabah, Sarawak, Malaya and Singapore were supposed to have come together as equal partners to form Malaysia.

Singapore, however, set out on its own after just two years, while Sabahans and Sarawakians have long complained that the original pact has not been respected by the federal administration.

Faizal stressed that in the case of Sarawak, state leaders can’t point the finger at their federal counterparts in many of the long-standing problems facing their constituents, such as the matter of native customary rights (NCR) land as it falls squarely under state jurisdiction.

“Who has failed to recognise NCR rights of the people? It’s not federal leaders, it’s the state leaders.

“If they fight for autonomy alone without restructuring the state? Basically that will give state leaders a monopoly over the lives of the people,” he said.

Universiti Malaysia Sarawak’s Dr Arnold Puyok echoed Faizal’s sentiments, stressing that calls for autonomy must come in tandem with an administrative revamp that affords better checks and balances to the powers of state leaders.

“Autonomy yes, but it must be accompanied by a special mechanism to prevent abuse of power. For me, it is autonomy equals accountability,” he said.

Dr Oh Ei Sun of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies in Singapore was less optimistic of the possibility of structural reform in either state, which he said are afflicted by the “resource curse” where the abundance of natural resources feeds greed.

He noted that if a resource-rich state continues to suffer a “lack of democracy”, corruption is unavoidable regardless of whether it is federally ruled or an autonomous region.

“But the opportunity to push for autonomy doesn’t come by often, so they should grab it whenever plausible!” he said.

Despite the clamour for autonomy by Sabahans and Sarawakians, Faizal pointed out that the onus falls on the people of the two states to keep a level head and make sure their leaders agree to be held to account when the time comes.

“People have gotten emotionally caught up in fighting for it, but I would argue that people overlook a lot of fundamental problems.

“When emotion takes over reason, people don’t see the bigger picture,” he said.

Source: The Malay Mail Online

Read More

Time to let Sarawak and Sabah decide what is best for them

PETALING JAYA: Leading the charge in Sarawak is the Chief Minister himself, Tan Sri Adenan Satem, who says Putrajaya-led policies have not kept faith with the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement and the rights and needs of the state have been neglected as a result. 

This sentiment is echoed in Sabah, and it is obvious to many observers that there is a growing demand in both states for greater autonomy to be given to Kuching and Kota Kinabalu. 

This is not an overnight phenomenon. Over the last few years, this sentiment has been articulated in many forums and over the internet. Clearly there has been a growing awareness of local identity among Sarawakians and Sabahans, and while cries of “Sarawak for Sarawakians”, for example, have not taken a distinctly anti-Putrajaya tone, they are at the same time an assertion by people in the two states that they, and not the federal govern­ment, are better placed to look after their own interests. 

The federal government is aware of this rising tide of unhappiness and has pledged to rectify errors of the past and bring more development to the two states. The Prime Minister himself has made many trips to the states to promise more money and more autonomy for the state governments. 

But critics of the federal government al­ready point out that what Datuk Seri Najib Razak is promising is nothing new. They have heard this refrain many times before, especially during the run up to a general election or when the federal government is under pressure from the Opposition. But the neglect has continued, year after year, decade after decade. 

Critics of the federal government focus on four main points. First, they argue that Sabah and Sarawak did not join the nine states of the Federation of Malaya to form Malaysia. Rather, they joined the entity known as the Federation of Malaya to form Malaysia in 1963, and therefore, have a status that is different from the states in the peninsula. However, they argue, Putrajaya has regarded them as having the same status as each of the nine states, which is wrong. 

Other criticisms of Putrajaya are focused on the issues of immigration, tariff and finance. Under the terms of the founding Agreement, entry into the two states needs the approval of the state governments. In the case of Sabah, clearly the state gov­ernment has limited or no control over the influx of illegal immigrants from Indonesia and the Philippines. 

Under the 1963 Agreement, Sabah and Sarawak would also retain control over its own finance, tariff and taxation. However, what has since happened is that the federal government has assumed total control over economic issues in the two states. 

In June, Adenan repeated Sarawak’s request for a 20% petroleum royalty. The figure is 15% more than the current 5% that Sarawak and Sabah receive annually. 

His request for autonomy in education has also received widespread support from Sarawakians and also academicians from the peninsula. 

Since the 1970s, education policies have been determined by the federal govern­ment, but many of these do not conform to the wants or needs of the people in Sabah and Sarawak. 

The sense of disdain towards federal management has now entered politics. A “Halau Parti Malaya” campaign was founded to kick out any peninsular-based political party from the Borneo states. 

Umno, MCA and MIC of the Barisan Nasional coalition are all directly related to the peninsula, as are PKR, DAP and PAS of the former Pakatan Rakyat coalition. 

DAP has established a foothold in both states. However, compared with elsewhere in Malaysia, the party in Sarawak and Sabah has been given a certain degree of independence in decision-making. 

“Can you imagine that there is not even a highway in Sabah or Sarawak? In the 11th Malaysia Plan, the Prime Minister mentioned a Pan-Borneo highway and that has been going on for years. But it has never been built,” says Zairil Khir Johari, the DAP MP for Bukit Bendera in Penang. 

Zairil says the two states should have autonomy over many areas which they currently do not have. These include edu­cation, healthcare and welfare. 

People have been voting for state gov­ernments, expecting the new government to provide better facilities. The fact is, the two state governments have little control over their affairs, he says. 

He calls for greater decentralisation, and says greater autonomy should be given to the two state governments to empower them. More importantly, he says, there should be revenue sharing, as currently, their taxes all go to the federal govern­ment and nothing is returned to Sarawak or Sabah. 

UK-based Borneo rights activist, Doris Jones, is a strong proponent for greater autonomy for Sabah. 

According to Jones, the government has long sidelined the existence of the 20/18 points memorandum, without which there would have been no Malaysia. 

According to her, the federal govern­ment has violated several points under the agreement. This includes immigration, education and finance. 

Jones highlights that the people of Sabah and Sarawak have long been prac­tising English as the medium of instruction, and they want the language to remain such. 

Critics have pointed out that Sabah and Sarawak are the richest states in Malaysia, yet 52 years after the formation of Malay­sia, they remain the poorest. 

For political analyst Prof Datuk Dr Moham­mad Agus Yusoff, a lot of the grieviences have been caused by differences in percep­tion over the Malaysia Agreement. 

According to some critics, the Agree­ment was supposed to be reviewed once every 10 years – and it has not happened. 

Prof Agus says that while this statement is true, the blame should be put on previous state leaders who did not raise the issue. He adds that a different understanding of the Agreement happens when there are linguistic misunderstandings. 

The debate, according to him, is wheth­er Sabah and Sarawak formed Malaysia as equal partners with Malaya and Singapore, or whether they joined Malaysia as equal partners of other states in Malaysia. 

Agus argues that while it is a painful fact that many Sabahans and Sarawakians remain poor, the blame should not be put on the federal government alone. “They should also point fingers at their local leaders whom they voted in to run the state. These leaders failed to deliver on their promises,” he says. 

Source: The Ant Daily

Read More

Catalonia vote: Separatists claim pro-independence mandate

Catalan separatist parties say their victory in regional elections on Sunday gives them a mandate to push for independence from Spain.

The Madrid government has reaffirmed its opposition to a vote on secession, noting that nationalists failed to get a majority of Catalonia's popular vote.

The main separatist alliance and a small pro-independence party won 72 of the 135 regional parliament seats.

Despite their parliamentary majority, separatists got 47.8% of votes cast.

Catalonia has 7.5 million people and provides about one-fifth of Spain's national output (GDP).

'Yes to independence'

"Catalans have voted yes to independence," Catalan regional President Artur Mas told cheering supporters.

"We have a clear, absolute majority in the Catalan parliament to go ahead," Mr Mas added.

His "Junts pel Si" (Together For Yes) coalition has vowed to implement a "roadmap" to achieve an independent Catalan state within 18 months.

The future of Catalonia is expected to be a crucial issue in Spain's general election in December.

The turnout of 78% was a record for a regional vote in Catalonia.

A spokesman for Spain's ruling conservatives, the Popular Party (PP), argued that the separatists had "failed" by not securing a majority of votes.

The PP's Pablo Casado said "this election should serve to end the independence debate once and for all".

Junts pel Si won 62 seats. It can secure a parliamentary majority by combining with the far-left separatist CUP party, which got 10 seats.

Pro-independence Catalans argue that their region gets an unfair deal, contributing too much tax to Madrid in return for insufficient state investment. In terms of GDP theirs is the richest region in Spain.

Analysis: BBC's Tom Burridge, Barcelona

The result was more ambiguous than the positive rhetoric suggests. The pro-independence camp continues to say they are ready to break away from Spain, even in the face of strong opposition from the Spanish government.

But they know that would be controversial and complicated. In truth, their aim is still to get a legally-recognised referendum.

So they will continue to pile the pressure on the government, safe in the knowledge that a Spanish general election is less than three months away.

A more fractured political landscape at the national level suggests there will either be a change in who holds power, or at least the position of the governing PP will be weakened. And that might lead to a change of stance over the Catalan question in Madrid.

Read also: Catalonia vote: Pro-independence parties win elections

Source: BBC

Read More

Victorious Catalan separatists claim mandate to break with Spain

Separatists on Sunday won a clear majority of seats in Catalonia's parliament in an election that sets the region on a collision course with Spain's central government over independence.

"Catalans have voted yes to independence," acting regional government head Artur Mas told supporters, with secessionist parties securing 72 out of 135 seats in the powerful region of 7.5 million people that includes Barcelona.

The strong pro-independence showing dealt a blow to Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, three months before a national election. His center-right government, which has opposed attempts to hold a referendum on secession, has called the separatist plan "a nonsense" and vowed to block it in court.

Spain's constitution does not allow any region to break away, so the prospect remains highly hypothetical.

The main secessionist group "Junts pel Si" (Together for Yes) won 62 seats, while the smaller leftist CUP party got another 10, according to official results.

They jointly obtained 47.8 percent of the vote in a record turnout of 78 percent, a big boost to an independence campaign that has been losing support over the last two years.

Both had said before the vote that such a result would allow them to unilaterally declare independence within 18 months, under a plan that would see the new Catalan authorities approving their own constitution and building institutions like an army, central bank and judicial system.

Addressing supporters of Junts pel Si in central Barcelona, Mas said a "democratic mandate" now existed to move forward with independence.

"That gives us a great strength and strong legitimacy to keep on with this project," Mas told the exultant crowd, which chanted "in-inde-independencia" and waved secessionist flags.

Albert Llorent, a taxi driver from Barcelona who had come to celebrate, said the result was one of historic proportions.

"What I think, what I feel, is that I belong to the best possible nation in the world. Long live Catalonia," he said.

CONSEQUENCES?

The vote in Catalonia, Spain's second-most populous region, is widely expected to influence the course of the Spanish general election in December.

Spain's two dominant parties - the ruling People's Party and the opposition Socialists - lost tens of thousands of votes compared with the last election in 2012, boding ill for their national ambitions, although the PP suffered a much deeper setback than its rival.

Anti-austerity Podemos also registered a disappointing score at 9 percent, sharply down from last May's nationwide regional and local elections.

Among parties opposed to independence, pro-market Ciudadanos, often cited as a national kingmaker, emerged as the only winner as it jumped to 18 percent of the vote.

Despite the separatist victory, analysts believe the most likely outcome of the election will be to force a dialogue between Catalan and Spanish authorities.

"Many have voted for Junts pel Si even if they don't favor secession because they saw the vote as a blank cartridge... and a way to gain a stronger position ahead of a negotiation," said Jose Pablo Ferrandiz from polling firm Metroscopia.

Opinion polls show a majority of Catalans would like to remain within Spain if the region were offered a more favorable tax regime and laws that better protect language and culture.

While investors do not see secession as an immediate material risk, financial markets may react negatively on Monday.

The gap between Spanish five-year bond yields and the higher yields on the Catalan equivalents has been hovering near its widest point in two years in the run-up to the vote.

Read also this article: Catalan separatists win election and claim it as yes vote for breakaway

Source: Reuters

Read More

Catalan separatists predicted to win absolute majority in regional elections

Junts pel Sí and CUP parties, which are expected to win up to 79 seats in 135-seat parliament, have promised to declare independence unilaterally.

Separatists were poised to win control of Catalonia’s regional government on Sunday, after exit polls suggested a result that could plunge Spain into a political crisis by forcing Madrid to confront an openly secessionist government at the helm of one of its wealthiest regions.

In an election that saw a record-breaking voter turnout, an exit poll by the Catalan broadcaster TV3 suggested that the nationalist coalition Junts pel Sí (Together for Yes) was on track to win 63 to 66 seats, leaving them just shy of the 68 seats needed for an absolute majority in the 135-seat parliament.

The far-left pro-independence Popular Unity Candidacy, known in Spain as CUP, was on track to win 11 to 13 seats, making the anti-austerity party the kingmaker in Catalonia’s new parliament. The two parties together received 49.8% of the vote, according to exit polls.

After attempts by Catalan leaders to hold a referendum on independence were blocked by the central government in Madrid, Artur Mas, the head of Catalonia’s regional government, turned the elections into a de facto plebiscite on the issue. If separatists won a majority of seats in the election, Mas pledged to lead a transitional government that would begin the process of seceding from Spain.

Sunday’s elections were billed as one of the most important votes in the region’s history, as voters queued for hours to cast a ballot on whether Catalonia should break away from Spain. Regional authorities said they expected the turnout to hit record highs, noting that turnout reached 63% with two hours left until polls closed, an increase of 7% over the same time period in the 2012 elections.

The probable result means Catalonia is now on a collision course with the central government, as any move towards independence will be blocked by Spain’s conservative governing party, the People’s party (PP). The Spanish prime minister, Mariano Rajoy, has called the push for independence “nonsense” and vowed to use the full power of the country’s judiciary to block any move towards independence.

In recent years, Rajoy has repeatedly turned to the country’s constitutional court to close down moves towards secession, backed by the Spanish constitution, which does not allow regions to unilaterally decide on sovereignty.

The PP recently gave Spain’s constitutional court the power to sanction elected officials and civil servants who failed to comply with its rulings.

As the bill, which imposes fines of up to €30,000 (£22,000) and suspensions from office, was presented before MPs, Xavier García Albiol, the PP leader in Catalonia, left little doubt that it was aimed at quelling Catalan separatism. “This is a very clear message for those who want to break up Spain: the joke is over,” he said. The PP is expected to use its absolute majority in parliament to have the bill approved in the coming days.

But the first hurdle for Catalan separatists will be to find common ground between Junts pel Sí, a coalition of parties from the right and left as well as grassroots activists, and the CUP.

“It’s not going to be easy,” said Josep Ramoneda, a political analyst. CUP has stated that the process of independence would only be legitimate if they won a majority of seats and votes. They have objected to the idea of Mas leading the transitional government, pointing to a string of corruption scandals that have plagued his party, Democratic Convergence, in recent years. CUP has also pushed for a more immediate break with Spain, rather than the 18-month timeline envisaged by Junts pel Sí.

Any alliance with CUP may also modify the route to independence envisioned by Junts pel Sí. Mas has said the transitional government’s first step would be a declaration, made within days of taking office, proclaiming the beginning of the process of breaking away from Spain.

From there, the priority of the government would be to hold talks with Madrid and European institutions, Mas said during the campaign. The focus of the talks would be issues such as the management of shared borders, the energy grid and the Ebro river basin.

Mas said the regional government was committed to making the split as amicable as possible. “If the yes vote wins today, the attitude of the Catalan public institutions will be to sit down at the table with the Spanish institutions, with the European commission, with the European countries, and try to deal with this big issue in the most positive way for all of us, not only for Catalonia,” Mas said as he cast his vote.

If Madrid refuses talks with the region, Mas warned that Catalonia could retaliate by walking away from its share of the public debt, accounting for roughly a third of Spain’s total debt.

Mas’s government plans to begin drafting a constitution for Catalonia, hoping to draw on citizen participation to inform its content.

The creation of state structures will also begin – from a diplomatic service to a central bank – to be ready in time for the proclamation of a new Catalan state. “We have some state structures right now,” Mas said during the campaign, pointing to the region’s public healthcare, education and police service. “But we lack others.”

Plans for the first of these new state structures, a regional tax agency modelled on that of Sweden and Australia, was halted by Spain’s constitutional court earlier this month after the court agreed to hear a challenge lodged by the central government in Madrid.

The same fate could befall many of the state structures envisioned by Mas. With just days left before polling, Rajoy said Madrid would continue to use the courts to block any move towards Catalan independence. “We would go to the constitutional court. And that’s the way it is. Full stop,” he told the broadcaster Onda Cero.

Source: The Guardian

Read More

Tentera Yang Berasal Dari Sabah dan Sarawak Dilarang Menyokong SSKM dan S4S

KOTA SAMARAHAN, 9 September 2015: Sebuah surat "Arahan Larangan Anggota Tentera Menampal Pelekat Kenderaan 'Sarawak For Sarawakian (S4S)' dan Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM)" telah dikeluarkan oleh Tentera Darat yang ditujukan kepada Kem Muara Tuang, Kota Samarahan, Sarawak.

Surat yang tarikhnya dipadamkan telah menjadi viral apabila Admin Page Facebook Sabah Sarawak Union - United Kingdom telah memposkan surat tersebut didalam Page Wall mereka untuk tujuan perkongsian dan perbincangan.

Melalui kenyataan didalam Page tersebut, admin Page telah menyatakan bahawa anggota-anggota Tentera yang berasal daripada Sabah dan Sarawak telah mendapat tekanan daripada pihak pentadbiran tentera untuk tidak memberikan sokongan seperti penglibatan diri terhadap pergerakan sosial daripada kumpulan Sarawak For Sarawakian (S4S) dan Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM).

Tambahannya lagi, jikalau tentera sendiri telah mengambil langkah seperti ini, "apakah maksud disebaliknya?"

Admin Page tersebut juga telah menimbulkan persoalan yang membuatkan pengguna-pengguna laman sosial Facebook berbincang tentang perkara ini. Didalam persoalan yang ditimbulkan ialah "adakah aura dan sentimen perjuangan SSKM-SSU(UK) dan S4S dikhuatiri akan mempengaruhi minda tentera-tentera yang berasal dari Borneo, Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak?"

Kesan terhadap kekhuatiran tersebut telah menyebabkan pemantauan yang ketat dilakukan oleh semua Pegawai Memerintah dan Pemerintah tertinggi Tentera di setiap Kem yang mana arahan tersebut berkuatkuasa serta-merta.

Maklumbalas daripada pengguna laman sosial Facebook terhadap surat larangan tersebut memberikan pelbagai pandangan peribadi dan rata-rata mereka memberikan respon kesedaran bahawa malaya kini kian menampakkan kerisauan akan kebangkitan bangsa Sabah dan bangsa Sarawak didalam menuntut Kemerdekaan bagi negara mereka.

Source: Bobohizan.com

Read More

Autonomi: Parti dari Malaya tidak lagi relevan di Sarawak?

FOKUS: Kekurangan Sarawak pada hari ini adalah parti pembangkang dan gabungan pembangkang yang berasal dari negeri ini sendiri.

Pembangkang yang kita ada hari ini adalah parti dari Malaya. Dengan seruan-seruan untuk autonomi yang lebih besar, penurunan kuasa kepada negeri, pemenuhan Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 dan Sarawak untuk orang Sarawak (S4S). Dengan mengambil kira hal-hal ini, DAP, PKR dan PAS – kesemuanya parti dari Malaya – akan mendapati mereka semakin terpinggir daripada sentimen umum warga Sarawak.

Sementara itu Ketua Menteri Adenan Satem akan terus memberi penekanan dengan kenyataannya seperti “kami mahu autonomi penuh dikembalikan”, “pencuri balak perlu dibanteras”, “kawasan hutan kekal perlu diperbanyakkan” dan “Putrajaya mengambil pendekatan yang salah dan kami lebih tahu situasi tempatan dan bagaimana untuk mentadbir negeri”.

Suka atau tidak, kenyataan-kenyataan ini selari dengan sentimen warga Sarawak kerana hanya Adenan yang berani bercakap tentangnya. Dan tanpa perlu menjadi populis.

Adenan bukannya menjadi populis. Beliau hanya berkata bahawa Sarawak satu ketika dahulu memiliki segalanya, namun telah dirompak selepas diperdaya bahawa Malaysia akan menjadikannya lebih makmur.

“Sebelum 16 September 1963 kita memiliki status autonomi penuh,” beliau dilaporkan berkata. Hari ini beliau memimpin perjuangan untuk mengambil semula apa yang menjadi kepunyaan negeri.

Inilah apa yang akan dilakukan anak Sarawak sejati. Memang kerajaannya adalah kerajaan Barisan Nasional. Tetapi ini kerana beliau tidak mahu menjadi kerajaan pembangkang.

Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) di bawah pimpinan Joseph Pairin Kitingan pernah menjadi kerajaan pembangkang. Lihatlah apa yang terjadi kepadanya dan negeri itu.

Sarawak boleh mengawal hal-ehwalnya sendiri, namun ia tidak akan dapat mengawal Parlimen. Dengan menjadi sebahagian daripada BN, Sarawak bukan sahaja dapat ditadbir secara sepatutnya, ia juga dapat memberikan tekanan kepada Putrajaya.

Putrajaya memiliki tanggungjawab memberikan dana kepada Sarawak. Ia juga bertanggungjawab untuk membantu membangunkan negeri. Itulah tugas kerajaan pusat.

Kerajaan Adenan memiliki pegangan dalam kerajaan pusat melalui keahlian BN-nya. Ia memudahkan komunikasi dan persefahaman antara Sarawak dan Putrajaya.

Permainan Adenan adalah permainan untuk orang Sarawak dari orang Sarawak, dan dengan gaya Sarawak.

Bukankah beliau telah mengatakannya? “Kita lebih tahu tentang situasi tempatan dan bagaimana untuk mentadbir negeri dengan lebih baik.”

Saya ingin melihat pengusiran MP DAP Petaling Jaya Utara Tony Pua daripada negeri sebagai sebahagian daripada keseluruhan perjuangan Adenan bagi Sarawak untuk orang Sarawak.

Mesej Adenan nampaknya adalah orang Sarawak perlu mempunyai keyakinan untuk melaksanakan perjuangannya sendiri. Orang Sarawak tidak boleh bergantung kepada pihak Malaya untuk kekuatan fizikal dan moral.

Ketika era Darurat, warga Sarawak telah berjuang menentang komunis di Malaya. Ada yang terkorban. Orang Malaya tidak akan dapat menyekat komunisme dengan sendiri, tanpa renjer dan pengesan dari Sarawak.

Manakala askar Malaya yang berhadapan serangan Indonesia di Tebedu ketika penghujung konfrontasi Malaysia-Indonesia hanya meninggalkan ingatan-ingatan melucukan. Menurut cerita orang tempatan, mereka menembak ke atas pokok! Ada yang berlawak bahawa mungkin askar-askar ini merasakan orang Indonesia juga tinggal di atas pokok!

Secara ringkasnya, warga Sarawak sentiasa mampu berdikari, ketika zaman perang dan juga aman. Mengapa pada masa ini pihak Malaya seperti Pua dianggap seperti wira pula?

DAP Sarawak tidak akan mendapat simpati daripada warga negeri ini dengan terlalu bergantung kepada rakan mereka di Malaya.

DAP Sarawak perlu berjuang seperti orang Sarawak dan untuk orang Sarawak. Bukan untuk Malaya.

Apa yang negeri ini perlukan adalah parti atau gabungan pembangkang Sarawak yang sebenar, yang lahir dan bertapak di negeri ini.

DAP Sarawak boleh menjadi parti itu jika ia adalah Parti Tindakan Demokratik Sarawak, dan bukannya Parti Tindakan Demokratik Malaya cawangan Sarawak.

Source: The Ant Daily

Read More

S4S collected 30,000 signatures calling for full autonomy

KUCHING: A petition conducted by Sarawak for Sarawakians (S4S) proposing for full autonomy has so far received 30,000 signatures from across the state.

Person-in-charge of the S4S south, central and north zones, KC Tan, told a press conference yesterday that the response towards the petition was very encouraging since it was launched on Sept 16.

“Honestly, the response is very positive and we collected over 300 signatures on the launch day itself.

“Bumiputeras account for 55 per cent of the supporters and the rest are Chinese,” he added.

The statewide three-month long petition drive targets to collect 300,000 signatures by Dec 31.

The objective of the petition is to seek an enactment of a Referendum Ordinance to protect the rights of Sarawak and wants the Federal Government to honour the Malaysia Agreement signed on Feb 23, 1963.

Tan said numerous changes had been made to the many safeguards of the state’s rights since it signed the Malaysia Agreement in 1963, affecting issues such as religious freedom, immigration control, the special position of Sarawak natives, state ownership over natural resources, the use of English as the official language of the state and education.

Tan also made clear that an online petition, in which many have claimed to have supported, was not opened by them.

“Many came and told us they have signed online. But we have yet to create an online petition site. If we did, we would have publicised it widely through various channels to inform the public.”

Tan thus urged members of the public to personally come forward to pen their signatures at various booths set up across Kuching, Serian and Samarahan.

“Go to the official booths to pen your signatures. The public can recognise us with our petition working ID card.

“We will create an online petition site in due time to allow Sarawakians living outside Sarawak and Malaysia to support the referendum,” he said.

Two weeks from now, he added, the group was planning to go into the rural areas and villages to promote their mission and collect more signatures.

At the end of the campaign, Tan said the petition would be handed over to Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Adenan Satem for further action.

“We will continue to pursue our mission in other ways even if we fail to gather 300,000 signatures by end of the year,” he said.

The various signature collection points are at the mooncake festivals sites at Batu Kawah old bazaar and Carpenter Street, Hui Sing (weekend only from 10am to 5pm), Premier 101 (daily from 7.30pm to 11pm), eMart in Matang, Ang Cheng Ho (QZ Cafe on Sunday 9am to 5pm only), the big food court at Samarindah in Muara Tuang (daily from 7pm to 10pm) as well as Serian, Mile 17 and Sri Aman.

Source: The Borneo Post Online

Read More

S4S sets its 300,000-signature drive in motion

KUCHING: Sarawak for Sarawakians (S4S) yesterday rolled out its three-month petition drive that seeks to enact a Referendum Act or Ordinance to safeguard the state’s rights.

S4S said they were targeting getting 300,000 signatures from Sarawakians aged 21 and above.

The move was a follow up to its rally on July 22, 2015.

S4S have set up many booth and counters to collect signatures. They are in places such as Foodtaste Coffee Shop in Hui Sing, which can be reached at 018-8861810 on Saturdays and Sundays from 10am to 5pm; Shirly (016-8863342) in Sungai Moyan, Batu Kawah; Andrew Chong (010-9878882) at Premier 101; Kuet You (010-9714838) at Matang; Andy Lai (019-8667942) at Kota Samarahan; Alex Ngui (016-8901530) at Ang Cheng Ho; and also Jonny and Voon (016-8933520) at Bau.

Its teams would also go to the rural areas.

Once the signatures are all in, the petition would be submitted to Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Tan Sri Adenan Satem.

Source: The Borneo Post Online

Read More

Harris: M’sia Agreement 1963 not ‘legally’ binding

Putrajaya should tell the truth and not jump every time the Opposition says Bang! Bang! with an imaginary pistol.

KOTA KINABALU: Former Sabah Chief Minister Harris Salleh, responding to recent statements by several experts, feels compelled to address the basis on which Sabah and Sarawak came together with Malaya and Singapore in a Federation in 1963.

“It’s high time that the Federal Government told the people of Sabah the truth,” said Harris who was Chief Minister from 1976 to 1985. “The 20 Points (18 Points in Sarawak), Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63), the Inter Governmental Committee Report (IGC) and Batu Sumpah (Oath Stone) are all not legally binding.”

The contents of these documents, he added, have been incorporated in the Federal Constitution and the state constitutions. “It’s high time to speak the truth.”

“If the Federal Government does not speak to the people straight and honestly, the Opposition will continue to claim that it has been in breach of these documents. They would continue to claim that Putrajaya has been in non-compliance on MA63.”

He was commenting on de facto Law Minister Nancy Shukri saying that both MA63 and the IGC Report were still valid. “She’s also falling into the Opposition’s trap.”

“I was surprised to read her statement that both documents were still legally binding.”

DAP leaders in Sabah, he continued, are also harping on Batu Sumpah.

Harris lamented that the Federal Government was on the defensive in Sabah and Sarawak on the issue of Borneo rights. “The Opposition’s weapons in the two Borneo states are nothing but imaginary ones and Putrajaya has fallen into their trap.”

“The Federal Government should not get carried away and jump every time the Opposition draw their imaginary pistols and say Bang! Bang!”

The former Chief Minister conceded that the Opposition was capitalising on good issues, “but to promote ignorance in the rural areas”, and argued that he felt duty-bound to stress that the Federal Constitution was the Supreme Law of the Land. “We don’t have to refer to these other documents,” he said. “For example, if we want to import belacan from Brunei into the state, do we have to refer to the 20 Points?”

“It’s crystal clear that Parliament is sovereign and not any other document or body championed by the Opposition.”

Harris appeared to gloss over the fact that the 20 Points was not about imports or related issues but sets out, together with other constitutional documents and the Federal Constitution and state constitutions, the relationships, the nature of relationships, and the governing institutions of state.

Nancy, in her statement, said that she wanted to see evidence on non-compliance before taking up the matter with the Federal Government. She added that she was entrusted with the task which comes under her portfolio. “This matter should be brought to the attention of Parliament rather than the Court.”

Source: Free Malaysia Today

Read More

“Transfer of Management is Not Autonomy – Dr. Jeffrey”

KOTA KINABALU: “The Sabah Committee to study the devolution of power from the federal government should be bipartisan and should appreciate the difference that transfer of management or devolution of power, while helpful in terms of efficiency, is NOT autonomy per se...but merely a delegation of powers. Real autonomy will be reflected in the Federal and state constitutions as well as in the allocation of legislative powers under the State, Federal and Concurrent Lists” said Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan, in response to CM Musa’s announcement that the Cabinet has agreed to set up the Committee to be headed by the State Secretary and made up of top government officials.

There appears to be a general feeling of hide and seek being played by the federal government and the Sabah leaders on the return of autonomy to Sabah.

CM Adenan of Sarawak has made it clear that Sarawak is seeking the return of its autonomy as Sarawak formed Malaysia with Malaya and that Sarawak and Sabah and were different from the 11 States in Malaya.

Sarawak’s recent announcement of the Chinese school UEC which is equivalent to the national school SPM is a case of exercise of autonomy in education by Sarawak.

PM Najib’s response to Adenan’s request for return of autonomy is couched in vague terms of devolution of federal power while Sabah leaders appear to be talking about management and administration of federal projects so that they are better and more efficiently managed.

The restoration of full autonomy for Sabah and Sarawak long sought by the Borneo nationalists and activists has reached a critical stage after years of unanswered demands with recent moves for such restoration.

Therefore, it is imperative that the Sabah Committee should be bipartisan and comprise representatives of all stakeholders including the opposition and civil society. The need for such bipartisan support is more so given that the Umno-led Sabah government do not enjoy the confidence of large segments of civil society in Sabah to safeguard Sabah rights and autonomy.

Previous denials by Sabah government leaders including from Barisan components on Sabah’s autonomy rights have added to the suspicions that these leaders do not have the guts to stand up for Sabah rights and cannot be trusted in negotiations with the Umno-led federal government.

The Committee should also be clear that it is ultimately full autonomy and not project administrative management that is to be returned to Sabah and certainly not half-measures to hoodwink the people.

The details of the transfer of the autonomy as prepared by the Sabah Committee should then be tabled for debate and endorsement by the State Legislative Assembly before being presented to the federal government for implementation and transfer of the autonomy. Where necessary, amendments of the law and the Federal Constitution should also be passed and adopted.

Project management with ultimate power and authority still retained by Putrajaya is not transfer of autonomy back to Sabah. For instance, building of schools and roads being decided in Putrajaya and federal ministries with implementation to be handed over to the Sabah government is transfer of management and not transfer of autonomy.

If it is to be transfer of autonomy, there is no need for a federal JKR or federal education department to be in Sabah. All the federal government is to hand over the financial allocations to the Sabah government and let the government and its departments and agencies including JKR Sabah to handle the projects from A-Z including which school, which road, and all the necessary details down to the nitty-gritty.

The federal government can retain audit and oversight to ensure that there is no corruption, abuse of funds or power, mismanagement and wrongdoings. If there is any wrongdoing, then the full brunt of the law should be imposed on the culprits in Sabah right down from the Sabah government and its leaders.

Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan

Chairman

STAR Sabah

25 September, 2015

Source: STAR Sabah

Read More

Sabah to set up panel on transfer of federal power

Committee will be chaired by state secretary and made up of top government officials in state departments and agencies, says chief minister.

KOTA KINABALU: Sabah Chief Minister Musa Aman said today the state cabinet will set up a committee to study areas of the federal government’s administration that should be transferred to the state government.

He said this was on top of what he announced recently on giving the state government greater control over rural development projects to expedite their planning and implementation.

“This is also in line with the recent announcement by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak on the devolution of power from the federal government to the state government,” he said after chairing the state cabinet meeting, here, today.

Musa said the committee would be chaired by state secretary Sukarti Wakiman and made up of top government officials heading key state departments and agencies.

He said those in the committee would work closely with their federal counterparts to identify areas that needed to be decentralised to allow more decision-making powers at the state level.

“This needs to be done because there were many instances of delay in the planning, channelling of funds and project implementation because of too many agencies involved at the federal level, bureaucracy and politicking,” he said.

Musa said with the committee set up, he hoped key areas of the government’s delivery system would be identified, studied and a system set up to empower the state to exercise control over planning, funding and implementation of government projects and programmes.

“The BN government at the federal and state levels have a common objective, which is to bring more development to Sabah and the nation as a whole.

“We believe the devolution of power will enable us to achieve this objective in a timely and more efficient manner,” he said.

BERNAMA

Source: Free Malaysia Today

Read More

HARRIS SALLEH: MALAYSIA AGREEMENT NOT BINDING

NATIONALISTS CALL FOR DE-COLONIZATION OF SABAH & SARAWAK

Former Sabah Chief Minister Harris M Salleh has openly declared that the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) the Inter Government Committee (IGC) Report and Sabah's 20 Points are not legally binding.

He said it was that is the authority in Malaysia.

A lawyer (who asked that his name be withheld) said Malaysia was created by the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and if MA63 was invalid then the Malaysia Parliament was an illegal body and the Federation of Malaysia was also illegal.

The effect is that Malaya has illegally ruled and control Sabah and Sarawak for 52 years without any legal authority.

The lawyer said this was indeed a great boost to the nationalists who are championing for decolonization of Sabah and Sarawak independence from Malaya.

He said Sabah and Sarawak were never granted independence under any Parliamentary Act by their former colonial master Britain as was the required process to relinquish and vest sovereignty in all former colonies for independence. This means British de-colonization was never completed when Britain had merely handed over Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak as colonies to Malayan rule.

Malaysia existed as "de facto" state by Malaya illegally acquiring 3 new colonies with UK assistance.

It follows that everything done in the name of Malaysia since 1963 is illegal.

The lawyer opined that Malaya effectively occupied Sabah and Sarawak with its army and approaches should be made to the United Nations to call for their de-colonization.

Source: Borneo Wiki

Read More

Shad Faruqi: 57 MPs can make or break Putrajaya

Malaysia’s survival hinges on the Malaysia Agreement 1963, an International Agreement on Full Autonomy and Federation for Sabah, Sarawak.

KOTA KINABALU: Emeritus Professor Shad Saleem Faruqi, a constitutional law expert who is with the UiTM Faculty of Law, has stressed during a closed door discussion in the Sabah capital that Full Autonomy and Federation was the basis on which the two Borneo nations came together with Malaya and Singapore in 1963. “They came in on the explicit condition that their autonomy would be safeguarded in full and that Malaysia would be a Federation,” said Shad Faruqi during his talk, “Constitutional issues in Federal-State Relations” at the Malaysia Federalism and the Way Forward closed door discussion.

The discussion was arranged by Sabah Empowerment and Economic Development (Seed), a think tank, over the weekend.

“The peninsula would be better off if they recognize this,” said Shad Faruqi. “At the same time, Sabah and Sarawak should accept the Federal Constitution as the Supreme Law of the Land.”

“The situation warrants the need for discussion given the fact that 57 MPs in the Malaysian Parliament are from Sabah and Sarawak. This could make or break future governments. How far the Malayanisation and Islamisation of Sabah and Sarawak would be tolerated remains to be seen.”

When Sabah and Sarawak entered into Federation with Malaya/Singapore, it was clear that they were culturally and historically distinct, said the Professor. “They were not Malay and Muslim.”

“Besides, they have enormous economic potential and despite this they are the poorest states in the Federation.”

He attributed the poverty of the two Borneo states to bias on the part of the Federal Government in Putrajaya and the fact that Malaysia was not a true Federation. “One result of this has been the loss of the two-thirds majority that the ruling coalition used to have in Parliament highlighting the plight of Sabah and Sarawak.”

For every ringgit the Federal Government collects in revenue, said Shah Faruqi, the state gets 10 sen. “This is very disappointing and needs to be addressed. This is not how a Federation should work.”

He conceded that it would be for the people to decide whether a unitary system, as at present, was better than a Federal system. “It’s a fact that it’s the unitary system which led to the loss of the two-thirds majority in Parliament.”

All this should be read within the context of the on-going talks on “more powers” for the Sabah and Sarawak Governments, he added. “The Federal, Sabah and Sarawak Governments should sit down and discuss and negotiate if they are serious about restoring the Full Autonomy status the two Borneo nations were promised in 1963 and the Federation.”

The Professor said that devolution, more powers and empowerment, the terms used by Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, were inaccurate. “It’s not about devolution. Many of the powers of Sabah and Sarawak are already in the Constitution. It’s not empowerment. It’s about giving back what was pledged in 1963.”

The Malaysia Agreement 1963 is an International Agreement, pointed out Shad Faruqi, and cannot be treated as an internal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between states.

The 20 Points (Sabah) and 18 Points (Sarawak), he stressed, was not law at all but gentleman’s agreements which the Federal Government should honour. “There should be discussions between the people of Sabah and Sarawak with leaders in the peninsula to iron out these Agreements to investigate how many points have been incorporated in the Federal Constitution or otherwise.”

‘Many of the 20 Points and 18 Points have not been incorporated into law and hence they may have no legal status.”

There’s no legal duty (to incorporate the points into law), he argued, but it’s a moral issue. “Politically, it’s important in terms of honouring a gentleman’s agreement for us to listen to their concerns and also for the survival of the Federation.”

Source: Free Malaysia Today

Read More

Catalan leader vows independence in 2 years should secessionists win snap vote

Catalonia won't need a referendum to secure independence if Sunday's regional election proves a success for secessionist candidates, the region's leader Artur Mas says. And if Spain does not agree, Barcelona will not pay its debts.

The situation in the country has been heating up for some time now. Just recently, some 1.4 million Catalans showed their support for independence from Spain by taking to the streets, waving the region’s flag.

READ MORE: Gateway to Catalan Republic: 1.4 million rally for independence in Barcelona

Earlier Artur Mas, Catalonia's President of the Generalitat, promised to push for secession from Madrid if pro-independence parties take victory in the snap elections this month. In an interview to AFP he reaffirmed that commitment, promising independence within 18 months or two years.

"Clearly, if we get a majority of the votes on September 27, then that's the referendum done," he said.

Mas further warned that if Spain does not agree, Catalonia would not help Madrid repay its financial debts. This, he said, was a defense move against any independence opponents waging a “campaign of intimidation.”

Madrid is understandably attached to the northeastern region, which is an economic powerhouse accounting to almost a fifth of the whole country's GDP. High-ranking officials and banks alike have warned of economic and financial disaster should Catalonia quit.

Mas says he wants Catalonia to have an independence referendum the way Scotland did last year - despite the secession move failing back then. But Madrid has blocked the initiative to hold the popular vote, so Mas moved to hold the snap elections in late September as an added, indirect demonstration of the region’s desires.

"If we won a majority of seats but not a majority of votes and the Spanish government offered us a binding referendum on independence – though I am very skeptical about whether it would do so – then we would listen," he further clarified, adding that he hopes for a friendly break between the two entities.

He also hopes for the region to stay within the EU but said that this agreement must be reached before a decision on independence is made. If successful, the leader promised Catalonia would take its share of Spain’s financial debt. In the event that no decision is made, “we will have no obligation to pay Spanish debt.”

"If it does not make an agreement with Catalonia, how will Spain be able to pay back its debts, which will rise to 120 percent of its output, while it loses the most productive part of its economy?" he pondered.

"If things get as complicated as that - and there is no reason why they should – it is the whole of Spain that will have a problem."

The latest polls show parties favoring independence winning nearly half of the vote, as well as an absolute majority in the Catalan parliament.

Mas hopes that in the event of victory, Catalans would be voting on a new Catalan constitution within the 18-month to two-year period he proposed.

Source: RT.com

Read More

Sense of alienation evident in Sabah, Sarawak, even after 52 years, say analysts

Lopsided development, perceived marginalisation in major decision-making processes and a "Malaya-centric" way of doing things have been cited by analysts as among the reasons why East Malaysians still feel alienated from their Peninsular counterparts, 52 years after the formation of Malaysia.

With the nation celebrating Malaysia Day today, observers said such discontentment was worsened by the fact that Sabah and Sarawak were far richer in resources than states in the peninsula, and yet this was not reflected in the march towards development.

Dr James Chin (pic, right) said the sense of alienation persisted because the people of Sabah and Sarawak felt that Putrajaya has failed to live up to its promise of a better life as well as autonomy for the two states.

In his concluding remarks on his write up on Federal-East Malaysia relations, Chin said many East Malaysians think the collaboration with the peninsula has not benefitted them and they feel the Umno-led federal government is trying to impose its political framework, essentially an Umno-led Malay-Islam first political system.

He said the pattern can be seen by direct federal intervention to ensure that the post of chief minister in both states can only be filled by Muslims, and increasingly, Islamisation of both states.

"The largely non-indigenous KDM in Sabah and Dayaks in Sarawak are increasingly frustrated at their inability to stop or hinder the mirroring of Umno-led BN power politics in East Malaysia," he said in using the acronym for Kadazan-Dusun-Murut communities.

"There is a sense that the non-Muslim indigenous people will never be able to assume political power under the BN model. They are worried that the Malay-first Islam-first policy will lead to a destruction of their cultural heritage and divide the state along religious lines.

"The big fear among East Malaysians is that, after half a century of the federation, their entire socio-political environment is mirroring what is happening in Malaya. Prior to independence, Sabah and Sarawak had one of the most plural populations with little or no racial and religious tensions," he wrote.

Malaysia Day is celebrated every September 16 to commemorate the joining of then Malaya with Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore into the Federation of Malaysia on the same date in 1963 although the island republic of Singapore was booted out from Malaysia two years later due to idelogical differences.

Chin (pic, right) said other factors that contributed to the undercurrent of unhappiness included the slower development rate.

"Sabah and Sarawak are still way behind in terms of infrastructure and other indicators, Sabah has one of the highest poverty rates (in Malaysia).

"In recent times, they are worried about the import of racial politics from West Malaysia into East Malaysia," said the University of Tasmania Asia Institute director. 

The only way forward, he said, was to grant the two states full autonomy, but he felt Putrajaya is not likely to do that, fearing that this could pave the way for other states to make the same demand.

"The Federal government cannot grant them full autonomy because other states such as Kelantan and Johor will ask for the same deal sooner or later," he added.

Analyst Dr Oh Ei Sun attributed the feelings of alienation to the fact that politics and businesses in Malaysia are still very much "Malaya-centric", with the East Malaysian states often relegated to "afterthought or 'dan lain-lain'".

"Despite being the most resource-rich states in the federation, we are in a sense smitten by the so-called 'resource curse', with widespread feelings that most of our resources have been used for developing Malaya, which outstripped us in development by leaps and bounds," he said in using the older term to describe Peninsular Malaysia.

Worst, the Sabahan who is currently a senior fellow with Singapore's Nanyang Technological University S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies said such feelings are not likely to go away as long as there is no equitable development that is on par with that of the peninsula.

"The government should place equal developmental emphasis on both East and West Malaysia. Peninsular Malaysians should take more effort to learn about their East Malaysian brethrens, and respect their cultural and religious differences," Oh said.

To mitigate the current feelings, analyst Dr Arnold Puyok proposed closer cooperation between leaders from the two Borneo states and their peninsula counterparts.

"Increase contacts between the Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah, Sarawak leaders, increase inter-regional understanding, reduce development gap and increase sense of belonging," the head of Universiti Malaysia Sarawak's International Relations and Politics department suggested as possible solutions to closer ties.

However, political scientist Dr Zaini Othman of Universiti Sabah Malaysia felt it was "rather extreme" to arbitrarily summarise that sense of alienation still persists after 52 years, saying that not all quarters have such feelings.

While not denying such feelings exist among certain sections in the two East Malaysian states, he said focus should be on the physical and intellectual mind to consolidate the federated framework of the Malaysian federation.

"Malaysian federation is still very much a 'work in progress', meaning after 52 years of her existence, the true meaning of federation, both philosophical and practical, has yet to be fully in place.

"Thus, it is timely that after 52 years, all segments within federated Malaysia re-examine their federated politico profile such as the sociological meaning and practices of the federation itself; the nature of federation Malaysia, whether it is in accordance with the political spirit of the federation as stipulated and agreed upon; the culture of the federation of Malaysia, if it is suitable and parallel with the culture of the Malaysian public.

"Therefore, the so-called 'feeling alienated' is very much associated with the 'work in progress' case of the Malaysia Federation and very much 'technical' types of 'alienated feeling' in nature rather than sociological," said the senior lecturer at Universiti Malaysia Sabah. – September 16, 2015.

Source: The Malaysia Insider

Read More

Ada Apa Dengan Perjanjian Malaysia? 1/2

Salam sejahtera kepada semua Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak. Saya Doris Jones daripada Kumpulan Sosial didalam Facebook yang bernama Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM) yang kini sudah berdaftar secara SAH dibawah Bidang Kuasa Perundangan Kerajaan United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) dengan nama Kumpulan NGO Sabah Sarawak Union-United Kingdom (UK) ingin membuat kenyataan RASMI berhubung dengan Perjanjian Malaysia untuk Bahagian Pertama.

Satu persoalan yang nampaknya sangat mudah untuk dijawab namun sebenarnya ia merupakan satu persoalan yang penuh dengan lebih daripada 1001 jawapan. Disini, pihak kami, SSKM-SSU(UK) akan mematikan semua jawapan yang tidak tepat kepada satu sahaja jawapan agar satu kefahaman yang tepat dapat diperolehi hasil daripada kajian yang telah dilakukan yang berdasarkan kepada bukti yang kukuh dan sahih.

Sebelum pembongkaran kebenaran ini dilakukan, adalah lebih baik untuk kita fahami dahulu luaran perjanjian ini mengikut kefahaman pemimpin-pemimpin tempatan kita yang terdahulu. Pemimpin-pemimpin Borneo daripada Negara North Borneo (kini dikenali sebagai Sabah) dan Negara Sarawak telah "difahamkan" dan "diyakinkan" bahawa mereka akan membentuk satu "Persekutuan Baru" yang dikenali sebagai "Malaysia". Persekutuan Baru ini akan dianggotai oleh "Negara Sabah, Negara Sarawak, Negara Singapura dan Negara Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya)" dengan status "Rakan Kongsi yang sama taraf". Ini adalah satu "jaminan yang telah diberikan oleh pemimpin malaya pada ketika itu yang diketuai oleh Tunku Abdul Rahman, yang merupakan Perdana Menteri Persekutuan Tanah Melayu".

Tunku Abdul Rahman juga menjamin bahawa North Borneo dan Sarawak akan mencapai "Kemerdekaan" yang "lebih cepat" melalui pembentukan Persekutuan Baru ini. Selain itu juga, jaminan telah diberikan olehnya bahawa pembentukan "Persekutuan Baru" ini yang bakal dikenali sebagai Malaysia bukanlah satu bentuk "Penjajahan Baru ataupun Neo-Colonialisme". Tunku juga telah memberi keyakinan dan jaminan yang kuat dan penuh lagi bahawa pembentukan "Malaysia" ini juga bukanlah satu bentuk "Pemindahan Kuasa Kedaulatan (Sovereignty), Perundangan (Legislation), Kehakiman (Juridicial) dan Pentadbiran (Executive)" dari London ke Kuala Lumpur. Pemimpin Malaya ini telah menafikan dakwaan bahawa Malaya ingin mengambil alih kuasa Pentadbiran Tanah Jajahan British di Borneo ini dengan sekeras-kerasnya. Atas jaminan dan janji itu, Donald Stephens dan Stephens Kalong Ningkan bersama-sama dengan pemimpin-pemimpin yang lain, yang pada mulanya menentang keras pembentukan Malaysia ini akhirnya telah termakan kata lalu berhempas pulas untuk berkempen bagi mendapatkan sokongan rakyat dinegara masing-masing agar memberikan sokongan padu kepada "Gagasan Malaysia" ini. Inilah sebenarnya yang telah difahamkan kepada mereka oleh pemimpin-pemimpin Malaya pada ketika itu.

Didalam penerangan Perjanjian Malaysia ini, pihak kami telah memasukkan grafik-grafik ataupun gambar-gambar yang sesuai dengan maksud artikel tersebut untuk memudahkan proses kefahaman yang jelas agar anda dapat melihat dengan lebih terang lagi bersuluh tentang wajah sebenar keseluruhan Perjanjian Malaysia ini.

Didalam Perjanjian Malaysia ini juga, ia mengandungi 11 Artikel. Setiap Artikel didalam Perjanjian Malaysia ini mempunyai kefahaman, niat dan maksud yang sangat berbeza. Diakhir kepada penerangan ini sebelum pendedahan yang sebenar dilakukan pada artikel yang lain, tanyakan soalan ini kepada diri anda sendiri nanti. Adakah Perjanjian Malaysia ini sebenarnya untuk memberikan keuntungan, kelebihan dan keutamaan kepada Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak? Ataupun sebenarnya hanya memfokuskan keuntangan, kelebihan dan keutamaan sepenuhnya kepada Negara Singapura dan Malaya?

Penerangan dan huraian yang kami berikan bukanlah dalam bentuk penulisan akademik kerana ia memerlukan penggunaan gaya linguistik (bahasa) yang tinggi dan mendalam. Pihak kami melakukan penerangan ini adalah dalam bentuk bahasa yang termudah untuk difahami oleh semua orang-orang kebanyakan. Mari kita lihat bersama-sama tentang apakah sebenarnya maksud kepada intipati (kandungan) yang terdapat didalam Perjanjian Malaysia yang telah ditandatangani pada 9 Julai 1963 di London.

Melalui gambar diatas ini, anda dapat melihat dengan sendiri bahawa terdapat lima (5) buah Negara melalui Jata Negara masing-masing yang telah menandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia pada 9 Julai 1963 di London.

Didalam Perjanjian Malaysia, ia adalah Perjanjian berkaitan dengan Perlembagaan Negara Sabah, Negara Sarawak dan Negara Singapura. Selain itu juga, ia adalah berkaitan dengan Imigresen Malaysia, Perjanjian diantara Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dan Kerajaan Singapura tentang Pasaran Bersama (Common Market) dan Persetujuan Kewangan (Financial Arrangement).

Hari Pembentukan Malaysia yang dijadualkan pada 31 Ogos 1963 telah dipindahkan kepada 16 September 1963. Pindaan tersebut ditandatangani pada 28 Ogos 1963 di Negara Singapura.

Sudah tentu Perjanjian ini juga adalah berkaitan dengan kepentingan Kerajaan British dan Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya).

Gambar ini memperlihatkan dengan jelas negara-negara yang terlibat didalam upacara menandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia.

Lima (5) buah negara ini telah bersetuju untuk menyimpulkan Perjanjian yang berkaitan dengan Malaysia. Ia kesemuanya mengandungi sebelas (11) Artikel.

Pihak kami juga telah menyediakan penterjemahan bahasa Melayu mengikut penterjemahan bahasa yang telah ditulis didalam sebuah buku yang bertajuk "Perjanjian & Dokumen Lama Malaysia" bagi kesemua sebelas (11) Artikel tanpa sebarang tokok tambah mahupun edit.

Diharapkan melalui usaha ini, orang ramai akan bertambah faham tentang apakah sebenarnya isi kandungan didalam Perjanjian Malaysia ini.

Mari lihat Artikel I (Pertama) dibawah ini.

Didalam Artikel I (Pertama), ia memfokuskan kepada Kerajaan Borneo Utara (North Borneo), Sarawak, Singapura dan Malaya. Artikel ini menyatakan dalam bahasa Melayu bahawa;

"Tanah Jajahan Borneo Utara dan Sarawak dan Negeri Singapura akan disekutukan dengan Negeri-negeri Persekutuan Tanah Melayu sedia ada sebagai Negeri Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura mengikut surat cara Perlembagaan yang dilampirkan kepada Perjanjian ini dan Persekutuan ini hendaklah selepas ini dinamakan "Malaysia"". 

Didalam kefahaman pemimpin-pemimpin kita yang terdahulu melalui Artikel I (Pertama) ini, ia menampakkan maksud bahawa ia seolah-olah adalah satu Persekutuan yang "Sama Taraf" dan sebagai "Rakan Kongsi". Kefahaman mereka dapat diterjemahkan seperti gambar dibawah ini. Dan kita juga selama ini menyangkakan seperti ini, sepertimana yang difahami oleh pemimpin-pemimpin Borneo yang terdahulu.

Perlu difahamkan bahawa didalam bahasa Englisah "State" membawa maksud "Negara" manakala "state" pula membawa maksud "negeri". Perbezaannya adalah pada huruf besar "S" dan huruf kecil "s".

Namun realitinya, status kita sebenarnya adalah tidak sama dengan Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya) ketika menandatangani Perjanjian Malaysia. Mengapa? Sila rujuk kepada gambar dibawah ini untuk melihat dengan jelas semasa upacara menandatangani Perjanjian tersebut pada 9 Julai 1963.

Petak Biru adalah mewakili British Commonwealth. Negara North Borneo, Sarawak, Brunei, Singapore dan Malaya adalah berada didalam British Commonwealth. Petak Hijau mewakili kategori Status Tanah Jajahan (Crown Colony Status) dan warna Jingga/Oren pula mewakili kategori Status Naungan (Protectorate Status). Manakala garisan merah putus-putus menunjukkan bahawa Negara-negara didalamnya adalah masih dibawah kuasa jajahan British yang belum mencapai status "Merdeka" daripada British kecuali Malaya (Fasa III - Terakhir). Pada tarikh 9 Julai 1963 ketika Upacara Tandatangan Perjanjian Malaysia dilakukan di London, sebenarnya Negara North Borneo (Sabah) dan Negara Sarawak belum mencapai status "Self-Government ataupun Berkerajaan Sendiri" (Fasa II - Kedua). Status ini dipanggil "Non-Self-Governing ataupun Belum Berkerajaan Sendiri" (Fasa I - Pertama) berbanding dengan Negara Singapura, mereka sudah mencapai status "Full Internal Self-Government" pada tahun 1959 (Fasa II - Kedua). Penjelasan lanjut tentang perkara ini akan diberikan pada artikel yang lain.

Seterusnya kita beralih kepada Artikel II (Kedua).

Didalam Artikel II (Kedua), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan Malaya. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu akan mengambil apa-apa langkah sesuai dan yang boleh diambilnya bagi mendapatkan penggubalan oleh Parlimen Persekutuan Tanah Melayu suatu Akta dalam bentuk yang dinyatakan dalam Lampiran A Perjanjian ini dan ia akan mula berkuat kuasa pada 31 Ogos 1963 (dan tarikh Akta itu mula berkuat kuasa dirujuk selepas ini sebagai "Hari Malaysia")".

Dalam Artikel ini, Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu akan berusaha untuk membuat pindaan dan menggubal undang-undang mereka selari dengan isi kandungan dokumen didalam Lampiran A (Annex A) dan akan berkuatkuasa pada 31 Ogos 1963 (pindahan tarikh telah dilakukan dan ditetapkan pada 16 September 1963 dan ia akan dikenali sebagai Hari Malaysia).

Apakah yang terdapat pada Lampiran A (Annex A)? Sila rujuk kepada dokumen Perjanjian Malaysia yang telah disertakan didalam artikel ini dengan mengklik >>>Download Perjanjian Malaysia<<< ini.

Jikalau anda semua ada mengikuti dan membaca artikel tentang Pendedahan >>>Malaya adalah Malaysia dan Malaysia adalah Malaya<<<, anda akan tahu bahawa Penentangan Kerajaan Kelantan terhadap Penubuhan Malaysia adalah disebabkan oleh Pindaan Perlembagaan pada Artikel II (Kedua) ini. Hasil daripada penentangan Kerajaan Kelantan, Peguam Negara Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya) pada waktu itu telah membuktikan bahawa Artikel II (Kedua) tidak mengubah Struktur Doktrin Asas Perlembagaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu malah tidak terusik langsung, tidak diubah dan masih lagi mengekalkan identiti Asal sebagai Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dibawah Perjanjian 1957. Dalam erti kata lain, mesej yang ingin disampaikan kepada Kerajaan Kelantan pada waktu itu ialah "Tiada Persekutuan Baru" yang dibentuk. Hanya pertukaran nama daripada "Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya)" kepada "Malaysia", Pindaan dan kemasukan beberapa Akta sahaja yang telah dilakukan. Namun, perkara ini tidak diketahui oleh pemimpin-pemimpin Borneo dan Singapura.

Didalam Artikel III (Ketiga), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan British. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Kerajaan United Kingdom akan menyerahkan Perintah dalam Majlis Ke Bawah Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Queen Great Britain sebelum Hari Malaysia bagi maksud memberi kuat kuasa undang-undang kepada Perlembagaan Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura sebagai Negeri-negeri Malaysia yang dinyatakan dalam Lampiran B, C dan D Perjanjian ini".

Artikel III (Ketiga) ini menerangkan bahawa Perlembagaan Negara Sabah, Perlembagaan Negara Sarawak dan Perlembagaan Negara Singapura telah dibuat oleh Kerajaan British dan diberikan Kuasa Undang-Undang untuk menggerakkan Kerajaan mengikut Perlembagaan yang telah disediakan untuk digunapakai didalam Malaysia. 

Sila lihat gambar dibawah ini.

Ini bermaksud, Kuasa Perlembagaan yang menggerakkan Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak sekarang adalah berasal daripada Kuasa Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Queen Great Britain.

Sekarang mari beralih kepada Artike IV (Keempat) pula.

Didalam Artikel IV (Keempat), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan British. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Kerajaan United Kingdom akan mengambil apa-apa langkah sesuai dan yang boleh diambilnya bagi mendapatkan penggubalan oleh Parlimen United Kingdom suatu Akta yang memperuntukkan, dari Hari Malaysia, pelepasan kedaulatan dan bidang kuasa Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Queen Great Britain berkaitan dengan Borneo Utara, Sarawak dan Singapura supaya kedaulatan dan bidang kuasa tersebut apabila dilepaskan sedemikian akan terletak hak menurut Perjanjian ini dan surat cara Perlembagaan yang dilampirkan kepada Perjanjian ini".

Untuk pengetahuan anda semua, sebenarnya terdapat penentangan dikalangan Pegawai-pegawai British terhadap pembentukan Malaysia ini kerana mereka mengetahui bahawa ia akan memberikan kesan yang negatif terhadap Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak namun mereka telah dilarang dan ditegah untuk menentang kerana ia melibatkan kepentingan bersama diantara Kerajaan British dan Kerajaan Malaya. Artikel penuh tentang perkara ini akan dikongsikan kepada anda semua nanti.

Gambar diatas menerangkan maksud Artike IV (Keempat). Didalam Artikel IV (Keempat) inilah Akta Malaysia 1963 (Malaysia Act 1963) diwujudkan di Parlimen British untuk membolehkan North Borneo, Sarawak dan Singapura yang masih berstatus Tanah Jajahan Makhota (Crown Colony) disekutukan dengan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu yang sedia ada untuk membentuk Malaysia.

Gambar diatas ini adalah Akta Malaysia 1963 yang telah diwujudkan di Parlimen British seperti yang dinyatakan didalam Artikel IV (Keempat).

Didalam Artikel V (Kelima), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan Malaya. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu akan mengambil apa-apa langkah sesuai dan yang boleh diambilnya sebelum Hari Malaysia bagi mendapatkan penggubalan oleh Parlimen Persekutuan Tanah Melayu suatu Akta dalam bentuk yang dinyatakan dalam Lampiran E Perjanjian ini bagi maksud memperluas dan menyesuaikan Ordinan Imigresen 1959, Persekutuan Tanah Melayu untuk Malaysia dan bagi membuat peruntukan tambahan berkaitan dengan kemasukan ke dalam Negeri Sabah dan Negara Sarawak; dan peruntukan lain Perjanjian ini hendaklah menjadi syarat dalam penggubalan Akta tersebut".

Artikel V (Kelima) ini adalah kesinambungan dengan Artikel II (Kedua) yang memfokuskan kepada hal Perundangan dan Perlembagaan. Dalam Artikel V (Kelima) ini juga, ia memfokuskan kepada Perundangan Imigresen yang merangkumi Hak Keistimewaan Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Disinilah kuasa terhadap Imigresen Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak diberikan seperti mana yang dipersetujui didalam Laporan Suruhanjaya Cobbold dan Inter-Governmental Committee. Keistimewaan ini yang memberikan kuasa kepada Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak untuk mengawal kemasukan orang luar yang bukan rakyat Negara Sabah dan rakyat Negara Sarawak. Dalam konteks ini, ia memfokuskan untuk mengawal kemasukan bangsa Malaya ke Borneo.

Ini kerana, pemimpin-pemimpin Borneo tidak mahu bangsa Malaya membanjiri Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Ia juga jelas tercatat didalam Memorandum 20 dan 18 Perkara, pada Perkara 6.

Didalam Artikel VI (Keenam), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan British dan Malaya. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Perjanjian Pertahanan Luar dan Bantuan Bersama antara Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dengan Kerajaan Unitead Kingdom pada 12 hari bulan Oktober 1957, dan lampirannya hendaklah terpakai kepada semua wilayah Malaysia, dan dalam Perjanjian itu apa-apa rujukan tentang Persekutuan Tanah Melayu hendaklah disifatkan sebagai terpakai kepada Malaysia, tertakluk kepada proviso bahawa Kerajaan Malaysia akan memberi Kerajaan United Kingdom hak bagi terus mengekalkan pangkalan dan kemudahan lain yang pada masa ini diduduki oleh pihak berkuasa Perkhidmatan (tentera) mereka di Negeri Singapura dan akan membenarkan Kerajaan United Kingdom menggunakan pangkalan dan kemudahan itu sebagaimana yang difikirkan oleh Kerajaan itu perlu bagi maksud membantu dalam pertahanan Malaysia, dan bagi pertahanan Komanwel dan bagi memelihara keamanan di Asia Tenggara. Pemakaian Perjanjian tersebut hendaklah tertakluk kepada peruntukan Lampiran F Perjanjian (terutamanya yang berhubung dengan tanah Perkhidmatan {tentera} di Singapura)".

Artikel VI (Keenam) pula adalah berkaitan dengan Kerjasama Ketenteraan diantara Kerajaan British dan Kerajaan Malaya. Jikalau terdapat sebarang konflik antarabangsa yang berpotensi untuk mencetuskan Peperangan, Kerajaan British mempunyai hak untuk menggunakan pangkalan ketenteraan yang ada diseluruh Malaysia pada bila-bila masa tanpa sebarang halangan. Disamping itu juga, kerjasama ketenteraan akan dihulurkan kepada anggota-anggota Komanwel jikalau keadaan memerlukan. Dalam konteks ini, ia merujuk kepada Malaysia.  

Oleh itu, adalah satu dakwaan yang tidak benar apabila ada pihak yang mengatakan bahawa tidak akan ada bantuan ketenteraan yang akan diberikan jikalau Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak berpisah daripada Malaysia nanti. Ini kerana, setelah perpisahan Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak menjadi realiti, bantuan ketenteraan Komenwel akan diberikan kepada Negara-negara anggota iaitu Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak bagi menguatkan ketenteraan yang mungkin belum mencukupi untuk menjaga keselamatan Negara. Pada waktu itu, Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak sudah menjadi ahli anggota British Commonwealth of Nations.

Mulai hari ini, persoalan dan ugutan tentang perkara ini sudah dimatikan dan dihapuskan melalui jawapan pihak kami ini.

Gambar diatas menujukkan Perjanjian Keselamatan yang merujuk kepada Lampiran F (Annex F).

Didalam Artikel VII (Ketujuh), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan British dan Malaya. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"(1) Persekutuan Tanah Melayu bersetuju bahawa Duli Yang Maha Mulia Baginda Queen Great Britain boleh membuat, sebelum Hari Malaysia, Perintah dalam Majlis dalam bentuk yang dinyatakan dalam Lampiran G Perjanjian ini bagi Maksud membuat peruntukan pembayaran pampasan dan faedah persaraan kepada sesetengah pegawai seberang laut yang berkhidmat, sebaik-baik sahaja sebelum Hari Malaysia, dalam perkhidmatan awam Tanah Jajahan Borneo Utara atau Tanah Jajahan Sarawak

(2) Pada, atau secepat yang boleh dilakukan selepas Hari Malaysia, Perjanjian Pegawai Awam dalam bentuk yang dinyatakan dalam Lampiran H dan I Perjanjian ini hendaklah ditandatangani bagi pihak Kerajaan United Kingdom dan Kerajaan Malaysia; dan Kerajaan Malaysia hendaklah memperoleh persetujuan Kerajaan Negeri Sabah, Sarawak atau Singapura, mengikut mana-mana yang perlu, setakat mana yang termanya mungkin menjejaskan tanggungjawab atau kepentingan Kerajaan Negeri itu, dalam penandatangan Perjanjian itu oleh Kerajaan Malaysia".

Artike VII (Ketujuh) ini terbahagi kepada dua bahagian. Bahagian Pertama (1) adalah berkaitan dengan Kerajaan British mahu membuat pembayaran pampasan kepada pegawai-pegawainya yang akan bersara setelah berkhidmat di Tanah Jajahan Borneo Utara dan Sarawak sebelum Hari Malaysia (16 September 1963). Sila lihat gambar dibawah.

Manakala bahagian Kedua (2) pula adalah berkaitan dengan Perjanjian Pegawai Awam seperti yang dinyatakan didalam Lampiran H dan I (Annexes H and I). Kerajaan Malaysia perlu terlebih dahulu mendapatkan persetujuan dan kebenaran daripada Kerajaan Negara Sabah, Kerajaan Negara Sarawak dan Kerajaan Negara Singapura untuk menjadi wakil bagi pihak mereka untuk menandatangani dokumen Perjanjian Pegawai awam dengan Kerajaan British. Sila lihat gambar dibawah.

Mari beralih pula ke Artikel VIII (Kelapan).

Didalam Artikel VIII (Kelapan), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan Malaya, Borneo Utara dan Sarawak. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu, Borneo Utara dan Sarawak akan mengambil apa-apa tindakan perundangan, eksekutif atau tindakan lain sebagaimana yang diperlukan bagi melaksanakan jaminan, atau janji dan syor yang terkandung dalam Bab 3, dan Lampiran A dan B Laporan Jawatankuasa Antara Kerajaan yang ditandatangani pada 27 hari bulan Februari 1963, selagi ia tidak dilaksanakan melalui peruntukan nyata Perlembagaan Malaysia".

Persoalan yang perlu dibangkitkan didalam Artikel ini ialah "Dimanakah sudah Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu?" Seperti yang anda semua sudah sedar, ia sebenarnya tidak hilang tetapi hanya bertukar nama sahaja. Kini, dunia mengenali Malaya dengan nama "Malaysia". 

Kerajaan Malaysia telah gagal dalam melaksanakan rekomendasi yang ada didalam Inter-Governmental Committee. Perkara ini akan didedahkan pada artikel lain.

Didalam Artikel IX (Kesembilan), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan Malaya dan Singapura. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Peruntukan Lampiran J Perjanjian ini berhubung Pasaran Bersama dan perkiraan kewangan hendaklah membentuk Perjanjian antara Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dengan Kerajaan Singapura".

Artikel ini tidak ada kena mengena dengan Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak. Namun, sehingga ke hari ini ia masih tertera didalam Perjanjian Malaysia. Bagi pendapat anda, adakah perlu bagi Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak untuk mengkaji Perjanjian Malaysia ini? Ya. Itu sudah pasti!

Walau bagaimanapun, mari kita cuba fahamkan mengapa Perjanjian tentang "Pasaran Bersama (Common Market)" in dibuat. Apabila sesuatu Perjanjian dibuat, ia bermaksud bahawa perkara tersebut adalah sangat penting.

Untuk pengetahuan anda semua, salah satu punca kepada berlaku Perpisahan Negara Singapura daripada Malaysia adalah disebabkan Kerajaan Persekutuan telah mengganggu dan melanggari Perjanjian ini. Segala lesen Perniagan yang pada mulanya dibawah kuasa Kerajaan Negara Singapura telah dimansuhkan dan dipindahkan ke Kerajaan Persekutuan. Ini bermaksud lesen perniagaan perlu mendapatkan kelulusan daripada Kerajaan Persekutuan dan ini telah membangkitkan kemarahan Kerajaan Singapura kerana perbuatan Kerajaan Persekutuan ini telah "Menjahanamkan Ekonomi Negara Singapura" sehingga menimbulkan konflik yang serius yang menjurus kepada perpisahan pada 9 Ogos 1965.

Sila jadikan perkara ini sebagai isu yang serius didalam Kerajaan Negara kita. Ini kerana "Dasar Kabotaj" yang telah dilaksanakan oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan sebenarnya telah "Menjahanamkan" ekonomi Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Pertumbuhan ekonomi yang lembab dan taraf hidup yang tinggi adalah disebabkan harga barang yang terlalu mahal kesan daripada dasar ini. Kerajaan Persekutuan lebih mengutamakan kepentingan "Perkapalan" mereka berbanding dengan hidup rakyat Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak yang berjumlah sekitar 6 juta. 

Jikalau Kerajaan Persekutuan tidak mahu menghapuskan Dasar Kabotaj ini dan kononnya telah memberikan subsidi bagi menampung barangan-barangan yang dihantar ke Borneo, itu hanyalah alasan semata-mata. Maka ia akan menjadi salah satu faktor utama yang bakal dicatatkan didalam sejarah kerana ia telah menjadi punca kepada Perpisahan Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak daripada Malaysia.

Didalam Artikel X (Kesepuluh), ia memfokuskan kepada usaha Kerajaan Malaya dan Singapura. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dan Kerajaan Singapura akan mengambil apa-apa tindakan perundangan, eksekutif atau tindakan lain sebagaimana yang diperlukan bagi melaksanakan perkiraan berkaitan dengan penyiaran dan televisyen yang dinyatakan dalam Lampiran K Perjanjian ini selagi ia tidak dilaksanakan melalui peruntukan nyata Perlembagaan Malaysia".

Artikel ini juga tidak ada kaitan dengan Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak dan sehingga ke hari ini ia masih lagi wujud didalam Perjanjian Malaysia. Namun ia adalah sangat berbaloi untuk dikaji dan difahami.

Kerajaan Negara Singapura sangat pintar didalam perkara ini. Ini kerana mereka faham bahawa Penyiaran Televisyen sangat penting didalam memberikan informasi yang tepat kepada rakyat mereka tanpa tapisan daripada Kerajaan Malaysia.

Seperti yang anda semua sedar, sebelum dunia ini berubah menjadi zaman teknologi yang mempunyai aplikasi internet, rakyat bergantung sepenuhnya daripada televisyen kerajaan yang menyiarkan rancangan TV1, TV2, TV3 dan NTV7 dalam mendapatkan maklumat. Namun, Kerajaan Persekutuan telah menyalahgunakan tujuan ini saluran rancangan tersebut daripada siang dan malam untuk menghasut rakyat agar membenci mana-mana pemimpin yang berjuang demi kebenaran. Tidak juga ketinggalan bahawa doktrin umno-bn diterapkan didalam minda rakyat melalui fakta-fakta yang bodoh. Ucapan rasis yang tidak pernah kesudahan menjadi tajuk utama bagi setiap program rancangan.

Atas sebab itulah Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak perlu mendapatkan hak ini seperti mana yang telah diperjuangkan oleh Kerajaan Negara Singapura dahulu. Ini adalah hak kita.

Didalam Artikel XI (Kesebelas), ia memfokuskan kepada penggunaan bahasa. Artikel ini menyatakan bahawa;

"Perjanjian ini hendaklah ditandatangani dalam bahasa Inggeris dan Melayu kecuali Lampirannya hendaklah dalam bahasa Inggeris sahaja. Jika timbul apa-apa keraguan teks Inggeris Perjanjian ini hendaklah mengatasi yang lain".

Akhir sekali, Artikel ini adalah satu bentuk peringatan bahawa jikalau terdapat sebarang keraguan teks ketika membuat interpretasi, rujukan didalam bahasa English perlu dijadikan rujukan utama. 

Atas sebab itulah Bahasa English sangat penting untuk dipelajari dan dikuasai oleh semua rakyat Negara Sabah dan rakyat Negara Sarawak.

Setakat ini terdapat sebarang persoalan yang timbul? 

Sudah tentu ada!

1. Adakah Perjanjian Malaysia masih Sah?
   
   Jawapan: Menurut Peguam Robert Pei, Perjanjian Malaysia ini adalah TIDAK SAH. Ini kerana Perjanjian ini telah ditandatangani oleh pihak yang tidak mempunyai status kelayakan yang setaraf dengan Kerajaan Malaya. Beliau merujuk kepada Kerajaan Negara North Borneo (Sabah), Kerajaan Negara Sarawak dan Kerajaan Negara Singapura kerana pada waktu tersebut, Negara-negara ini masih lagi berstatus sebagai "Tanah Jajahan Makhota" dan belum mencapai Kemerdekaan. Perjanjian Antarabangsa mewajibkan bahawa "Penandatangan" mesti memiliki status yang sama dengan pihak lain yang bersama-sama menandatangani Perjanjian Antarabangsa untuk mana-mana dokumen rasmi. Dalam konteks ini, ia merujuk kepada Dokumen Perjanjian Malaysia. Bagi pihak SSU-UK, satu artikel khas akan dibuat untuk perkara ini untuk menerangkan hal yang sebenar dan juga pihak SSU-UK bersetuju dengan Peguam Robert Pei. Sila rujuk >>>Artikel ini<<< untuk membaca dan memahami hujah beliau.
2. Ada apa dengan Perjanjian Malaysia?
   
   Jawapan: Ada Penipuan dan Ketidakadilan yang Jelas. Jikalau difikirkan betul-betul setelah memahami status "keahlian Malaysia" di United Natios (UN), Perjanjian Malaysia sebenarnya membawa maksud "Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya)" diantara Negara North Borneo (kini dikenali sebagai Sabah), Negara Sarawak, Negara Singapura dan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu itu sendiri sebelum menjelma menjadi Malaysia! Hal ini baru sahaja diketahui dan didalam kajian antarabangsa, Pengkaji-pengkaji akademik mengenali Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya) melalui "Pertukaran Nama" mereka daripada "Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya)" kepada "Malaysia" pada 16 September 1963 setelah "Tiga Negara-negara Baru" iaitu Negara Sabah, Negara Sarawak dan Negara Singapura kononnya "menyertai atau masuk" ke Persekutuan Tanah Melayu. Hal ini sangat bertentangan dengan kefahaman dan jaminan yang telah diberikan kepada pemimpin-pemimpin Borneo dan Singapura pada ketika itu yang mana mereka diberitahu bahawa mereka akan membentuk "Persekutuan Baru" tetapi rupa-rupanya ia adalah satu PENIPUAN yang jelas, terang lagi bersuluh!

Sebelum anda  bertanyakan soalan lebih banyak, mari lihat dahulu analisis pihak SSU-UK tentang Perjanjian Malaysia ini.

Berdasarkan kepada penelitian, daripada 11 Artikel ini, Empat (4) daripada Artikel ini menunjukkan bahawa Perjanjian TIDAK DIPATUHI, TIDAK DIHORMATI, TELAH DILANGGARI dan SUDAH TIDAK BERKAITAN.

Artikel I (Satu): Ia sudah tidak berkaitan kerana Negara Singapura sudah tidak berada didalam Malaysia. Dan lagi, menurut Peguam Robert Pei, ia adalah satu Perjanjian yang tidak sah kerana Perjanjian ini telah dilakukan pada keadaan yang tidak sah yang mana Negara North Borneo, Negara Sarawak dan Negara Singapura masih lagi berstatus Tanah Jajahan Makhota British dan bukan sebagai sebuah negara-negara yang merdeka seperti Malaya. Sila lihat gambar yang telah disertakan dibawah Artikel I tersebut dan anda akan pasti memahaminya. Ini kerana daripada aspek kedudukan, ia jelas sangat berbeza dan tidak setaraf.

Artikel VIII (Kelapan): Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu sudah menukar namanya menjadi Kerajaan Malaysia dan TIDAK MEMATUHI, TIDAK MENGHORMATI DAN TELAH MELANGGARI Perjanjian Malaysia dengan menurunkan status Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak menjadi "negeri-negeri didalam Persekutuan Tanah Melayu atas nama Malaysia dengan kedudukan negeri yang ke-12 dan ke-13" setelah Negara Singapura berpisah daripada Malaysia secara rasmi pada 9 Julai 1965. Selain itu juga, Kerajaan Malaya yang telah bertukar menjadi Kerajaan Malaysia tidak melaksanakan sepenuhnya rekomendasi dalam Laporan IGC.

Artikel IX dan X (Kesembilan dan Kesepuluh): Artikel sudah tidak berkaitan dengan Malaysia mahupun dengan Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak kerana Negara Singapura sudah tidak lagi berada didalam Malaysia. Namun sehingga kini, ia masih lagi tertera didalam Perjanjian Malaysia tanpa sebarang perubahan.

Kesimpulan: Empat daripada Sebelas Artikel sebenarnya telah TIDAK DIPATUHI, TIDAK DIHORMATI, TELAH DILANGGARI dan SUDAH TIDAK BERKAITAN. Selain itu juga, Kerajaan Malaya yang telah bertukar menjadi Kerajaan Malaysia tidak melaksanakan sepenuhnya rekomendasi dalam Laporan IGC. Kerajaan Malaya yang telah menukar identitinya sebagai Kerajaan Malaysia juga telah menurunkan status Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak menjadi "negeri-negeri didalam Persekutuan Tanah Melayu atas nama Malaysia dengan kedudukan negeri yang ke-12 dan ke-13" setelah Negara Singapura berpisah daripada Malaysia secara rasmi pada 9 Julai 1965 yang mana penurunan status tersebut dilakukan pada 27 Ogos 1976. 

Maka, dapat disimpulkan secara menyeluruh bahawa Satu Perjanjian Baru mesti dilakukan semula dengan syarat Kemerdekaan Penuh MESTI diberikan kepada Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak dan SATU "Persekutuan" yang benar-benar "Baru" diwujudkan untuk mempersekutukan Kerajaan Malaya, Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak dengan nama "Malaysia". Ini hanya jikalau Kerajaan Malaya yang bertopengkan Kerajaan Malaysia benar-benar ingin menyelamatkan "Persekutuan" ini. Jikalau tidak, Perpisahan Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak sudah PASTI menjadi NYATA yang mana ia akan dilakukan oleh Generasi-Generasi Muda dengan sokongan vateran-vateran yang berjiwa Nasionalisme dan Patriotik di Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Itu adalah Muktamad!

ANALISIS TAMBAHAN

Analisis Tamabahan telah dilakukan untuk melihat dengan lebih jelas tentang sejauh manakah Perjanjian Malaysia ini berpihak kepada Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Hasil penemuan daripada pihak SSU-UK mendapati bahawa sebenarnya ia lebih berpihak kepada Kerajaan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dan Kerajaan Singapura. Sila lihat gambar dibawah ini.

Artikel XI (Kesebelas) dikecualikan daripada pengiraan ini kerana ia tidak memberikan sebarang kesan kepada Perjanjian Malaysia secara langsung. Maka, jumlah kesemua Artikel ini dihitungkan sebanyak Sepuluh (10) Artikel. Daripada Sepuluh Artikel ini, hanya terdapat Tiga Artikel sahaja yang mempunyai kaitan secara langsung dengan Borneo, Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak iaitu pada Artikel I, III dan VIII (Pertama, Ketiga dan Kelapan). Apabila diterjemahkan didalam bentuk peratusan, sebanyak 30% (3/10) sahaja kepentingan telah diberikan kepada Borneo. Manakala Negara Singapura pula mencatatkan sebanyak 40% (4/10) dan peratusan yang dicatatkan bagi Kerajaan Malaya adalah yang tertinggi iaitu sebanyak 90% (9/10). Dalam erti kata lain, Perjanjian Malaysia ini telah memberikan kelebihan yang lebih banyak kepada Kerajaan Malaya dan Singapura berbanding dengan Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak. Sekarang, anda faham? 

Untuk melihat dengan lebih jelas lagi, sila lihat pada gambar Graf Carta Pai dibawah.

Apabila dimasukkan ke dalam Graf Carta Pai, ia jelas menunjukkan bahawa sebanyak 56% kelebihan keutamaan hasil daripada Perjanjian Malaysia ini berpihak kepada Kerajaan Malaya manakala Kerajaan Negara Singapura mendapat kelebihan keutamaan sebanyak 25% yang lebih tinggi berbanding dengan Negara-negara di Borneo iaitu Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak yang hanya mampu mendapat kelebihan dalam keutamaan sebanyak 19% sahaja.

Satu persoalan yang perlu anda jawab dengan jujur setelah mengetahui perkara ini. Perlukah anda, rakyat Negara Sabah dan rakyat Negara Sarawak mempertahankan Perjanjian Malaysia ini? Dengan mempertahankan Perjanjian Malaysia, anda sebenarnya sedang berusaha untuk mempertahankan kelebihan Kerajaan Malaya.

Buka Mata dan Minda anda untuk memahami keadaan ini!

Mohon anda semua untuk sebarkan artikel pendedahan ini demi membangkitkan kesedaran semua Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak. Mari lakukan perubahan secara mutlak demi Masa Depan Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak yang lebih terjamin dan cerah!

Artikel lebih terperinci tentang disebalik Perjanjian Malaysia ini akan didedahkan tidak lama lagi. Sila ikuti perjalanan perjuangan SSKM-SSU(UK) dengan semangat Pejuang Bangsa yang SEJATI!

Read More