Sabah Sarawak Union - United Kingdom

KUNDASANG, 31 Ogos 2015: Satu program perayaan menyambut Hari Kemerdekaan Negara Sabah kali ke-52 tahun bakal diadakan di Pekan Kundasang, Ranau.

Program ini yang dipengerusi oleh En.Japiril Suhaimin mengatakan bahawa ia adalah anjuran Perikatan Sabah Bersatu (United Sabah Alliance - U.S.A) yang dianggotai oleh beberapa pertubuhan parti-parti politik iaitu STAR, SAPP, PCS dan NGO Politik seperti APS dan beberapa lagi.Beliau juga mengatakan bahawa program ini adalah untuk memperingati dan mengingatkan kepada semua rakyat Sabah bahawa pada 31 Ogos 1963, Sabah telah mencapai Kemerdekaan.

Program ini telah mendapat sokongan daripada banyak NGO-NGO pro Sabah yang akan turut bersama-sama didalam perayaan ini iaitu United Borneo Front (UBF), Sabah Youth Solidarity (SYS), Semangat Satu Perjuangan Rakyat (SSPR), North Borneo Friendship Movement (NBFM), Sabah Sarawak Union (SSU-UK), Gen-Y, Bangkit Anak Negara Sabah (BANSA), Sunduvan Sabah (Sunduvan), I Am Sabahan (IAS), Northern Club, Jesselton Friendly Club (JFC), Pasukan Pembela Hak Rakyat Sabah (PEMBELA), Momogun Movement For Self-Determination (MOSIK), Proton Iswara Saga Club Sabah PT (PISCS), Sandakan Friends Team (SFT), The Brotherhood of Sabah (The Bos), Angkatan Warisan Anak Sabah (AWAS), Persatuan Orang Asal Malaysia (POAMAT), Persatuan Rumpun Etnik Suluk Sabah (PRESS), Sabah Freedom Movement (SFM), Persatuan Anak Negeri Sabah (PANAS), Kumpulan Bertindak Samah Sabah (KBSS), Sabah 4 Sabahan (S4S).

Berdasarkan informasi yang diterima, terdapat sudah sejumlah ramai rakyat Sabah yang telah bergerak sehari lebih awal ke Kundasang untuk menghadiri program tersebut. Mereka adalah dari beberapa Zon di Sabah iaitu Zon Pantai Barat, Zon Pantai Timur, Zon Pantai Utara dan Zon Pedalaman.

Terdapat juga konvoi berkereta yang telah memilih untuk bergerak pada hari ini yang kini didalam perjalanan daripada Zon Pantai Barat, Zon Utara dan Zon Pedalaman Sabah.

Presiden SSPR, En.Jalibin telah memaklumkan kepada pihak wartawan Bobohizon bahawa beliau akan memimpin sejumlah ramai peserta daripada Ranau yang akan bertolak pada jam 8.00am untuk program berjalan kaki ke kundasang untuk bersama-sama memeriahkan sambutan Kemerdekaan tersebut. Jangkaan beliau untuk tiba di Pekan Kundasang adalah sekitar jam 11.00am.

Pada tahun lepas juga, NGO beliau telah mencatat sejarah baru berjalan kaki daripada Ranau ke Tg.Aru, Kota Kinabalu yang telah mengambil masa selama seminggu perjalanan. Selain itu juga, NGO Sabah Freedom Movement (SFS) yang dipimpin oleh En.Tony Minggir dan MOSIK oleh mendiang En.Daniel Jebon pula telah mengambil cek poin masing-masing di Kudat dan Kota Marudu turut bersama menjayakan program berjalan kaki yang telah memakan masa seminggu dan berakhir dipertemuan penamat di Tg.Aru.

Demikian juga aktiviti yang serupa telah dilakukan dibahagian pedalaman Keningau, Tenom, Sook dan Bingkor pada tahun lepas.

Pihak wartawan bebas Bobohizon akan terus memberikan anda liputan berita terkini tentang program Hari Kemerdekaan Sabah di Kundasang, Ranau.

Source: Bobohizan

1. Saya menghargai dan ucapkan terima kasih atas jemputan melalui panggilan telefon dan mesej facebook oleh pihak penganjur. Namun saya memohon maaf kerana tidak dapat memenuhi undangan ini.

2. Selain daripada sudah ada program yang telah lama dirancang, buat masa ini saya masih tidak bersedia 'bekerjasama' dengan UMNO untuk bercakap soal MA63 apatah lagi melalui forum-forum kerana saya sudah lama melaluinya sebelum ini. Ada yang mungkin beranggapan saya prejudis, tetapi tolong baca hujah saya.

3. Saya berpendirian begitu bukan semata-mata kerana prinsip politik melawan UMNO sebagai parti pemerintah yang korup dan zalim, tetapi berdasarkan kepada hujah bahawa UMNO sebagai parti pemerintah yang ada kuasa tidak perlu buat forum untuk sekadar sebuah pemahaman sejarah dan dokumen. 

4. Sebagai parti pemerintah, bukan sahaja dalam Kerajaan Sabah tetapi menguasai Kerajaan Persekutuan Malaysia maka menjadi tugas mereka sepatutnya merangka dasar dan polisi untuk melaksana dan mengimplementasi sistem berdasarkan perjanjian yang telah dibuat pada tahun 1963 antara Persekutuan Tanah Melayu, North Borneo/Sabah, Sarawak dan Singapura sebagai bekas koloni British, bukannya sekadar cakap-cakap di dalam dewan untuk memperlihatkan bahawa UMNO juga memperjuangkan HAK SABAH.

5. Jika tujuannya hanya untuk pemahaman, sebagai kerajaan yang berkuasa, ia boleh dimulakan secara nyata di sekolah2, IPTA/IPTS dan yang lebih mudah melalui JABATAN PENERANGAN DAN RTM serta media perdana yang dikuasai kerajaan. Tidak hanya dibuat dalam forum yang dihadiri oleh seratus atau seribu orang.

6. Saya beri satu analogi, jika saya seorang anggota polis yang memiliki gari dan pistol di tangan, melihat seorang pencuri sedang merompak, apakah saya sekadar bercakap kepada masyarakat bahawa saya sepatutnya boleh menangkapnya atau saya terus bertindak/merangka tindakan untuk menangkapnya? Sudah tentu tindakan lebih penting kerana umumnya masyarakat memaklumi kuasa anggota polis.

7. Itulah yang sedang dibuat oleh Ketua Menteri Sarawak, iaitu mendasari langkah implementasi kuasa autonomi, berdasarkan MA63 dan bukannya bercerita apakah yang terdapat dalam MA63 yang secara umumnya kita tahu ada HAK SABAH yang telah diabaikan di dalamnya. 

8. HAK SABAH sebenarnya bukan hanya dalam MA63 sahaja, bahkan semua dokumentasi sama ada keratan akhbar, ucapan pemimpin dan paling utama semua proses yang berlaku sehingga akhirnya MA63 ditandatangani termasuklah Perkara 20 dan Batu Sumpah. Oleh kerana itu, sering saya sebutkan bahawa apa yang kita perjuangkan ialah HAK SABAH BUKANNYA DOKUMEN TERTENTU. Dokumen hanya rujukan dan bahan sokongan. Bahkan menurut pandangan peribadi saya, MA63 SEPATUTNYA sudah BATAL selepas Singapura dikeluarkan daripada PERSEKUTUAN dan satu perjanjian baru wajar dibuat antara wilayah yang masih bersekutu iaitu Sabah, Sarawak dan Tanah Melayu. Bahkan pemimpin Sabah terdahulu ada menyebutkan soal ini sebaik sahaja Singapura disingkirkan.

9. Namun ini tidak bermakna saya mengatakan penganjuran ini salah, saya juga tidak menghalang penyokong2 saya untuk menghadirinya. Saya cuma berpandangan bahawa jika UMNO ikhlas, maka melaksanakan tindakan lebih utama daripada sekadar bercakap kerana kuasa ada di tangan mereka. Pakar2 ekonomi, pakar sistem pentadbiran, ahli akademik dalam bidang bersesuaian boleh dipanggil untuk memperhalusi rangka implementasi dan bukannya ahli politik yang tiba-tiba jadi pakar dokumen. Jika hanya bercakap, maka rakyat akan menilai bahawa kerajaan pimpinan UMNO/BN gagal dan perlu diganti dengan kerajaan yang BERTINDAK.

Hasmin Azroy Abdullah.

Pihak kami berasa hairan dengan kebodohan pensyarah-pensyarah malaya... Jikalau apa yang kami sebarkan, fakta sejarah yang disembunyikan sebagai satu penipuan, maka beritahukanlah rakyat apa yang sebenar-benarnya... Mengapa takut dengan kebenaran? Adakah kerajaan malaya berada di pihak yang salah sehingga tidak mampu bertahan dengan segala pembongkaran penipuan, muslihat yang keji, hina, berbau dan berkudis itu oleh pihak kami? Mengapa takut dengan sejarah jikalau benar kamu, kerajaan malaya di pihak yang benar???

Bukti yang ada didalam pegangan tangan kami telah membuktikan bahawa kamu telah menipu, mengkhianati dan memperbodohkan pemimipin-pemimpin Borneo diawal sebelum dan selepas pembentukkan malaysia. Buktinya juga dapat dilihat sehingga pada masa sekarang.

Mengapa kamu hei pemimpin-pemimpin malaya begitu bongkak dañ tidak bermaruah keatas tindakan lalu?

Kamu berak (buang air besar) lalu menuding jari kearah kami seolah-olah kami yang telah melakukannya. Apakah kamu ingat kami begitu bodoh untuk mengiyakannya? Mungkin benar jikalau itu anda tuding kearah pemimpin-pemimpin bn-umno Sabah kerana mereka telah biasa membersihkan najis kamu. Tapi tidak sesekali kami, yang bermaruah, berjiwa merdeka dan berdaulat ini untuk tunduk kepada ancaman mahupun ugutan walau nyawa menjadi pertaruhan. Biar ia melayang dengan jiwa yang merdeka dan berdaulat sebagai pejuang bangsa tetapi tidak sesekali sebagai pengkhianat bangsa!

Selama ini, kamu juga telah menggunakan teknik perang saraf untuk menakutkan bangsa Negara Sabah dan bangsa Negara Sarawak. Siang dan malam kamu menyebarkan fitnah untuk menjatuhkan pemimpin-pemimpin tempatan yang Pro Sabahan dan Pro Sarawakian. Maka, teknik ini juga yang akan digunakan untuk menyerang balik kepada kamu. hei pemimpin-pemimpin malaya yang dusta dan keji! Sumpahan dan makian ini adalah wajar untuk dicemuhkan keatas kamu setelah apa yang dilakukan selama ini tidak mungkin dapat memberikan pujian kepada kamu. Pembangunan yang berlaku sekarang tidak setimpal dengan hasil kekayaan yang dirobek dan dirampas oleh kamu. Maka, jangan pula kamu pandai memarahi kami. Seharusnya kamu dapat meramalkan akibatnya jikalau kebenaran terbongkar. Sekarang, terimalah akibatnya!

Kamu berak, kamu bersihkan sendiri!

KUCHING: Sarawak Chief Minister Adenan Satem, giving an update in the Sarawak Assembly on the status of his government’s Full Autonomy talks with Putrajaya, said that he will work for starters on ten areas which he feels needs to be decentralized. “I have discussed this matter with the Prime Minister and he has agreed in principle.” 

“The details on the types of empowerment that can be handed over to the Sarawak Government are being discussed between the Chief Secretary to the Government of Malaysia and the Secretary of the Sarawak Government.” 

Under the Full Autonomy plan outlined earlier by the Chief Minister, the Federal Government was asked to confine itself in Sabah and Sarawak to defence, internal security and foreign affairs in line with the letter and spirit of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 which envisages the Federation as an Equal Partnership of Sabah, Sarawak and Malaya. 

The Sarawak Government was also in negotiations with the Federal Government and Petronas, the national corporation, on oil royalty, added Adenan. “Although the oil and gas sector is a major component, 38.3 per cent of the Sarawak economy, the irony is that it does not necessarily contribute to the incomes of our people.” 

The ten areas, resumed Adenan in outlining the case for Full Autonomy, include “the powers relating to prosecution for criminal offences under state laws”, and matters relating to finances, shipping, public works, environment, sports, shipping, and education. 

“The tenth matter involves matters related to health, welfare, tourism, fisheries, heritage and housing,” said Adenan. “Empowerment is a necessity considering that 52 years after the 1963 arrangement, 94,000 households in Sarawak are without potable water and about 46,000 households without 24 hours electricity. These are just some examples.” 

Hence, he added, extending water and electricity supplies to them is a big challenge unless the Sarawak Government has the necessary financial resources.

 As another example, he cited the fact that in 2012, the average rural household income was just RM2,754, just half of the average urban household income of RM5,517. “To reach the World Bank defined threshold of USD15,000 per capita Gross National Income (GNI) high income status by 2020, the Sarawak economy needs to grow at 8.5 per cent per annum between now and 2020.” 

The prognosis, he conceded, was not good. “The Sarawak economy slowed down from 10.6 per cent in the period 1967 to 1990 to 4.4 per cent for the period 1991 to 2014.” 

Source: Free Malaysia Today

Adenan (pic, right) told the state legislative assembly in its special one-day sitting that one of the problems faced by the state in relations to education was the frequent “flip-flop” of policies, particularly on the use of English as a medium.

Education was an autonomy given to Sarawak under the Malaysia Agreement 1963, but the state partially gave up in the late 1970s.

“Every time we have a new (education) minister, we will have new policies,” he said.

In the 18-point agreement, a list drawn up by Sarawak proposing terms for its incorporation into the Federation of Malaysia stated that even though Sarawak had agreed that Bahasa Malaysia should be the national language of the federation, “English should be an official language of North Borneo (Sarawak and Sabah) for all purposes, state or federal, without limitation of time”.

In Sarawak, the judiciary and the state assembly still use English.

“I'm glad we emphasised in English.

“Only now do they (Putrajaya) know that it is important,” said Adenan.

He said instead of flip-flopping, Putrajaya should have promoted the English language together with Bahasa Malaysia.

“Now they want to follow us,” he said.

Adenan said another reason for wanting education back was the need to focus on the maintenance of schools in the state, particularly those in rural areas.

“Promises were made every now and then. Promises (were also) not made every now and then.”

Adenan said despite the promises, very little was being done.

He also told the assembly that it was his priority to ensure that the people and the state benefited from a more efficient and effective implementation of some matters presently under the federal and concurrent lists.

He said among the matters for decentralisation that he would discuss with the federal government included powers related to prosecutions for criminal offences under state laws, administration of sports in the state and the environment.

Adenan said talks would also include devolution of powers over financial matters, such as collection and management of fees and licences for services and matters within the purview of the federal government, as well as a review of special grants to the state under Article 112D.

Other matters included health, welfare, tourism, fisheries, heritage and housing, shipping and management of public works in the state for federal purposes.

“Why do we need the federal Public Works Department to manage federal works when we have our own Public Works Department which existed long before the federation?" he asked.

Adenan said details on the types of empowerment that could be handed over to the state government were still being discussed between the chief secretary to the government and the Sarawak state secretary.

He added that a committee chaired by the state secretary had been formed, comprising four sub-committees on constitutional rights, financial and funding, administration matters and development planning and implementation. – August 17, 2015.

Source: The Malaysia Insider

QUICK TAKE: Newly appointed Sabah State Legislative Assembly Speaker Syed Abas Syed Ali raised some eyebrows recently over his decision to ban the word “secession” in the House.

According to The Rakyat Post, one lawmaker that was disappointed by this move was Bingkor assemblyman Dr Jeffrey Kitingan. 

The State Reform Party (STAR) Sabah chairman, in a statement, said the banning of the word “secession” is unlawful, unconstitutional and against all parliamentary norms and conventions. 

He argued that there should be freedom of speech in the state legislative assembly and debates on secession should be allowed in any mature democracy. 

“Why is the new Speaker so fearful of the word “secession”? Is it because he is bowing to the wishes of the federal government or the Sabah chief minister or Umno?” 

Jeffrey said Syed Abbas should find out why certain groups were unhappy and disillusioned over non-compliance of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and wanted to secede. 

He added the banning of the word “secession” only gave rise to the beliefthat the federal government and Umno are treating Sabah as a colony and afraid of the people’s wishes for compliance of the terms of the formation of Malaysia.

“I hope that by the next assembly sitting, the new Speaker would have understood his position and is able to defend the assembly’s role in our democracy and act in the best interests of Sabah and Sabahans and not to his political party or his political masters.” 

Firstly, let’s make something clear. This writer is against any move to separate Sabah and Sarawak from Malaysia.

Jeffrey has rightly pointed out that censorship or obstructions to freedom of speech do not bode well for democracy and more importantly do notaddress the issue. 

As a Sabahan, this writer wants Sabah to continue to be part of Malaysia but at the same time, wants to see the rights and status of the East Malaysian states upheld and the 20 and 18 point agreements honoured and reinstated. 

This is our right. 

Decades ago, these rights were traded away by foolish politicians. Now these politicians have become irrelevant. 

Sadly, it is the later and current generations who are the ones who have had to live with their ill-conceived decisions of trading away rights which our founding fathers had the foresight to fight for. 

If these rights were never part of the Malaysia Agreement 1963, it would be safe to say that Sabah and Sarawak more likely than not, would not have joined Malaya and Singapore in forming Malaysia. 

While secession is illegal, it does not mean it should not be discussed. 

If it is not discussed by the representatives of the people, talk and discussions of secession will only be pushed further underground. 

This is not only unhealthy, but might have severe repercussions down the road. 

On the topic of secession, discussing it in the state assembly will provide lawmakers with a chance to understand the issues that lead to secession talk, how these issues can be resolved and so on. 

In facing these challenges, unity can be ensured by encouraging open and mature discourse on issues, not curtailing it.

Source: http://www.theantdaily.com/Main/Why-ban-secession-talk-in-state-assembly-asks-Jeffrey#sthash.tWKGamoq.dpuf

Go Addy: "malaysia" is not one country. It is a federation of 3 Nations (Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak) - every Nation is independent of each other as seperate legal entity. That is the Federation of 'malaysia" (in accordance with the Malaysia Agreement 1963 - if still valid)

Instead of complying with the Federation arrangement, Malaya is changing the rules in the middle of the game to turn "malaysia' into a " Unitary State " by taking away of the autonomous rights of Sabah Sarawak and make them states as parts of Malaya.

This has created irreparable damage and irreversible complications. "malaysia" is now at a lost - cannot go forward and cannot go backward : STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE!!!

"malaysia" cannot exist based on the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957. ( because this agreement does not include Sabah and Sarawak) This Agreement 1957 should have been abolished on 16 September 1963 and replaced with the Malaysia Agreement 1963. This replacement cannot be done because to do so will dissolve the Malayan Union of 11 states and everyone will become independent states ( Kelantan, Trengganu, Johore, Penang and Malacca are ready to opt out at anytime now). In fact in 1963 - 4 days before the proclamation of "malaysia", Kelantan made a Court Application to challenge that the they are not consulted when the Malaysia Agreement was signed in 1963 and are therefore not bound by it.

So the danger of adopting the Malaysia Agreement 1963 as rhe basis to legitimise the formation of "malaysia" cannot be done. 

This explains the reason why Sabah Sarawak legally and constitutionally are by default still remain outside the constitution's definition (Article 160).

NOW - "MALAYSIA" CANNOT GO FORWARD AND CANNOT GO BACKWARDS.

--- STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE ---

-----NEITHER HERE NEITHER THERE-----

Lina Soo: so precise, thank you Addy. may i add if Malaysia is a new country, then Malaya will have to cease as a member state of United Nations, and Malaysia to re-apply as a new member of UN. 

so quit saying msia is a new nation and all are equal partners. dont believe the spin and propaganda of britain and malaya promoters of malaysia scam. we have been taken for a ride for 52 years, so wake up now

Borneo Wiki: "Malaya" renamed "Malaysia" as stated in MA63. Go Addy --- But, wait...... MA63 was abrogated when S'pore left & the original "Malaysia" agreed to by 4 countries ceased to exist...

So that means SS are not legally part of Malaysia and there is nothing to negotiate except de-colonization!

***In order to get better understanding about this matter, please read these articles, "Defining Malaysia: Is Malaya Masquerading as Malaysia?" and "Is Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) a Valid International Agreement?" Once you finish your reading, you will know the truth. Don't forget to share these articles to your friends.***

They said instead, statutory declarations (SD) from majority elected representatives to remove the government was constitutional as declared by the highest court of the land in 2010.

Lawyer Edmund Bon said a five-man Federal Court bench led by current Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria had approved this procedure in the Perak case of Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin versus Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Barisan Nasional (BN) had in 2009 submitted 31 SDs from 28 BN assemblymen and 3 opposition representatives who were BN-friendly to convince the ruler of Perak that Nizar, who was then the mentri besar, had lost the majority support of the assemblymen.

  

"The chief political executive (prime minister, mentris besar and chief ministers) can be removed if the appointing authority finds the incumbent no longer enjoys the confidence of the majority," he told The Malaysian Insider.

Bon, who was in the legal team that appeared for Nizar, however, said that most constitutional lawyers and academics was still of the opinion that the better option was to take a vote of no-confidence in the legislature.

He said this in response to Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's revelation earlier today that an Umno leader was behind a plot to topple the government with the support of opposition lawmakers.

Zahid, who is also home minister, said he had learned that they were preparing statutory declarations (SDs) ‎to remove the government of Datuk Seri Najib Razak. – August 15, 2015.

Source: The Malaysia Insider

Salam Sejahtera, Salam Hormat dan Salam Perpaduan untuk Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak. Saya Doris Jones mewakili kumpulan sosial didalam Facebook yang bernama Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM), yang kini sudah berdaftar secara SAH sebagai sebuah NGO dengan nama Sabah Sarawak Union (SSU-UK) dibawah bidang kuasa perundangan United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) ingin membuat kenyataan rasmi berhubung dengan kenyataan Datuk Syed Abas Ali tentang Larangan Penggunaan "Perpisahan (Secession)" didalam sidang Dewan Undangan Sabah.

Didalam kenyataannya di Daily Express Online yang bertarikh 11 Ogos 2015, mengatakan bahawa dia akan memberikan amaran untuk tidak membenarkan perkataan "Perpisahan (Secession)" dibangkitkan didalam Dewan Undangan (DUN) Sabah [1]. Walau bagaimanapun, dia memberitahu bahawa jika perkara ini dibincangkan diluar, ia adalah diluar kawalannya [2]. Selain itu, Syed Abas mengatakan yang dia hanya boleh melarang penggunaan perkataan tersebut didalam sidang DUN sahaja kerana ingin wakil rakyat untuk memfokuskan kepada pembangunan. Sabah adalah sebuah "negeri" yang besar dan memerlukan kewangan untuk jalan-raya, bekalan air dan infrastruktur yang lain. Sedangkan beberapa daerah disini lebih besar daripada negeri-negeri di semenanjung. Jadi, ini adalah perkara yang saya harap wakil bangkitkan [3]. Dia juga telah memberikan pembayang dengan mengatakan bahawa mereka seharusnya tidak memikirkan satu pokok sahaja tetapi semua pokok-pokok didalam hutan. Justeru, berharap mendapat kerjasama daripada wakil rakyat dikedua-dua pihak, kerajaan dan pembangkang [4].

Pertama [1], Dewan Undangan Negeri (Negara) Sabah merupakan satu platform perdebatan yang kebal daripada sebarang tindakan undang-undang. Ia adalah tempat membincangkan, membahaskan dan mendebatkan isu-isu semasa samada isu ringan, berat mahupun sensitif. DUN Sabah juga memainkan peranan dalam menentukan halatuju kerajaan melalui polisi dan dasar yang akan diluluskan. Segala yang berlaku di bumi Sabah adalah dibawah kuasa DUN Sabah untuk menentukan tindakan yang perlu diambil seterusnya. Perancangan tindakan yang ingin diambil oleh Syed Abas Ali untuk melarang penggunaan perkataan "Perpisahan (Seccession)" adalah satu idea atau perancangan yang perlu dikecam sekeras-kerasnya. Ini kerana didalam 20 Perkara, Perkara 7 jelas mencatatkan perkara tersebut. Dengan tidak membincangkan perkara ini, adakah Ketua Dewan Speaker baru ini yang juga merupakan ahli umno ingin menyampaikan satu mesej halus untuk menafikan kewujudan 20 Perkara? Apakah dengan keinginannya untuk melarang perkataan ini digunakan dan dibangkitkan secara tidak langsung mahu mendiamkan peranan 20 Perkara Sabah yang selama ini menjadi rujukan kepada Pentadbiran Kerajaan Negara Sabah?

Kedua [2], Samada isu ini dibincangkan didalam DUN ataupun diluar, itu adalah hak rakyat dan juga wakil pemimpin yang dipilih semasa pilihan-raya. Tugas seorang Dewan Speaker adalah untuk mengawasi persidangan supaya berjalan dengan lancar, mengatur debat supaya tidak menyimpang daripada isu-isu yang dibahaskan, membuat keputusan mengenai aturan urusan mesyuarat sekiranya berlaku perbalahan serta memeriksa samada petisyen, rang dan pindaan perlembagaan boleh diterima ataupun tidak. Tugas Dewan Speaker bukan untuk membuat peraturan sendiri tetapi lebih kepada menjadi orang perantaraan (orang tengah) kepada dua pihak yang sedang berdebat dan berbahas iaitu daripada pihak kerajaan dan pembangkang. Anda sendiri mengakui bahawa anda adalah orang yang masih baru didalam bidang ini. Maka, janganlah berlagak hebat dengan melarang perkara-perkara seperti ini dibangkitkan. Itu adalah hak dan tanggungjawab ahli-ahli DUN Sabah untuk membangkitkan apa-apa isu yang sedang hangat diperbualkan atau dibincangkan di negara Sabah dan disampaikan ke dalam DUN untuk memperhalusikan faktor-faktor perbualan ini berlaku, mengkaji punca, merancang penyelesaian dan menilai keberkesanan penyelesaian yang telah dilakukan. 

Ketiga [3], Anda telah memberikan justifikasi kepada keinginan larangan anda namun ia adalah pandangan peribadi yang sangat bertentangan dengan tugas dan peranan sebagai seorang Dewan Speaker. Selama umno-bn Sabah memerintah Kerajaan Negara Sabah setelah berjaya menumbangkan Kerajaan PBS pada tahun 1994 melalui cara yang kotor, mengapa tidak pernah isu seperti pembangunan infrastruktur seperti jalan-raya, bekalan air dan sebagainya selesai? Ditempat kawasan DUN anda sendiri, apakah selama anda menjadi wakil rakyat bn-umno, terdapat pembangunan yang boleh dibanggakan? Tanya kepada diri anda sendiri, apakah puncanya? Saya pasti anda mampu menjawabnya dengan lebih baik berbanding dengan mana-mana pihak. Apabila perkara seperti isu pembangunan ini tidak menemui jalan penyelesaian yang tepat, ia adalah disebabkan oleh ahli-ahli DUN Sabah tidak pernah berusaha untuk menyelesaikan punca yang sebenar. Apakah punca sebenarnya? Sumber kewangan dan pembangunan Kerajaan Negara Sabah berada didalam genggaman Kerajaan Persekutuan. Ini adalah puncanya. Atas sebab faktor ini, peruntukan tahunan tidak pernah mencukupi untuk negara Sabah kerana peruntukan yang disalurkan itu tidak pernah selari dengan keperluan kos pembangunan. Negara Sabah menjana kewangan berpuluh bilion ringgit namun hanya mendapat satu jumlah yang sangat kecil. Adakah anda ingin menafikan perkara ini? Ingin menjadi seperti musa yang berbangga dengan segala sumbangan kerajaan persekutuan yang hanya beratus-ratus juta sahaja walhal itu adalah hasil duit negara Sabah sendiri? Jikalau anda tetap menafikannya dan berkeras bahawa peruntukan diberikan sangat mencukupi selama ini, maka punca kepada permasalahan ini adalah disebabkan oleh pentadbiran dibawah kerajaan umno-bn telah gagal didalam membuat pengagihan peruntukkan dengan betul. Atau adakah kemunduran pembangunan ini bersangkut paut dengan kekayaan yang dimiliki oleh ahli-ahli wakil bn-umno Sabah?

Keempat [4], Perumpamaan ataupun bayangan yang anda berikan itu sebenarnya merupakan satu punca kepada permasalahan Kerajaan Negara Sabah dari dahulu sehingga sekarang. Ia umpama seperti sebuah keluarga. Anda sanggup membelakangkan kepentingan keluarga semata-mata mahu menjaga kepentingan orang luar. Dimanakah logik pemikiran anda itu? Walaupun terdapat nilai kebaikan didalam perumpamaan atau bayangan anda itu, namun ia tidak sesuai dipraktikan oleh Kerajaan Negara Sabah lebih-lebih lagi  didalam keadaan seperti sekarang ini. Kepentingan seharusnya diberikan sepenuhnya kepada Kerajaan Negara Sabah terlebih dahulu. Setelah isu dan permasalahan dalaman Kerajaan Negara Sabah selesai, barulah Kerajaan Negara Sabah boleh memfokuskan kepada isu luar. Ketika pihak pembangkang membawa usul untuk penambahbaikan jentera Kerajaan dan cadangan penyelesaian kepada isu-isu Negara Sabah, dimanakah suara anda untuk menyokong usul tersebut? Anda diam dan mengkritik mereka. Tetapi apabila dilantik menjadi Dewan Speaker, anda kini mengimpikan perkara tersebut? Jikalau anda ikhlas terhadap perubahan yang ingin dibawakan didalam DUN Sabah, buktikan melalui keadilan dalam mengendalikan isu-isu yang dibangkitkan termasuk dengan isu "Perpisahan (Secession)". Ia adalah tanggungjawab anda untuk menyelesaikan secara professional dan matang agar isu ini menemui jalan penyelesaian yang tepat dan bukan melarang  daripada isu ini dibangkitkan.

Pihak kami sentiasa mengikuti perkembagan perjalanan politik Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak serta Malaya. Pemerhatian dan kajian dalam aspek pentadbiran politik dan negara diperingkat antarabangsa juga dilakukan oleh pihak kami untuk memahami permasalahan yang dihadapi oleh Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak. 

Akhir kata, ingin saya kongsikan satu cerita yang benar berlaku diluar negara. Seorang pemimpin daripada negara luar telah berjaya membawa pembangunan pesat kepada negaranya dibawah pentadbiran parti politiknya. Apabila ditanya tentang bagaimana beliau mampu membawa pembangunan pesat sejak mengambil-alih pentadbiran negara itu, beliau menjawab dengan satu jawapan yang ringkas, "saya tidak mengambil duit rakyat".

Doris Jones

KUCHING: Sarawak’s main frustration is not the lack of power therefore extra power or empowerment given to Sarawak will not address the people’s frustration, says Land Development Minister Tan Sri Datuk Amar Dr James Masing.

“The main cause of frustration is the non-compliance or the perception of non-compliance of the Malaysian Agreement 1963.

“The Malaysian government must revisit the agreement and find out where the non-compliance are if any, to address the issue.

“If indeed there is deviation or non-compliance of the agreement, the government must correct them immediately,” he said yesterday, cautioning that procrastinating in solving the non-compliance would strengthen and give credibility to the cry of secession.

“The agreement is the basis for the creation of the Federation of Malaysia. The basis must be honoured for the federation to survive.

“We must remember that Sarawakians of today are not the same as Sarawakians of 1963. They are now more educated and well read. So procrastination and playing ignorance in addressing their frustration will not work.

“Sarawak For Sarawakians (S4S) is the messenger of the message of frustration. Don’t kill it. Listen to it,” he said.

Source: http://www.theborneopost.com/2015/08/13/sarawaks-main-grouse-is-non-compliance-of-the-malaysian-agreement-masing/#ixzz3iiNAM5ET

KOTA KINABALU, Aug 12 — Several opposition representatives have deemed as inappropriate and premature the ban on secession talk in the State Assembly, and have pledged to challenge the speaker in the next sitting.

Kepayan assemblyman Dr Edwin Bosi said that the speaker has started his first day on the job on the wrong footing by pre-emptively banning the word “secession” before presiding over an actual sitting.

“The speaker should decide during the sitting if the word is used, how it is used. Is it unparliamentary? He has to show that it is unparliamentary.

“I will challenge him in the coming sitting on this during my speech,” said the DAP secretary to The Malay Mail Online.

Api Api elected representative Christina Liew said that the prohibition was premature and that the Speaker should not ban the lawmakers from raising issues from the people.

“The speaker must not make such hasty statements. It’s too premature for him to say that. Let’s wait and see as the events turn,” she said.

“Since when are the elected representatives forbidden to raise issues concerning the people’s issues in the dewan? The dewan is the place we raise issues concerning the people’s interests and welfare. How can he stop us?” said the PKR Sabah vice-chairman.

Sabah legislative assembly Speaker Datuk Syed Abas Syed Ali who clocked in for the first time on Monday, had banned the word “secession” from being uttered during sittings and warned lawmakers against discussing the north Borneo state’s separation from Malaysia.

Secession has been a hot topic in the state among politicians, the public and especially on social media since the Facebook group “Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia” gained traction last year.

The group, led by UK-based activist Doris Jones, plays on local sentiments by raising issues on native land, oil royalty rights, racial and religious tension and erosion of rights among other things.

Secession is considered treason in Malaysia and a warrant of arrest has been issued for Jones.

Likas state assemblyman Junz Wong said that the speaker should not hide behind the ban and instead “take the bull by its horns” and delve into the issues surrounding the secession calls in the state.

“Talks of secession should not be seen as a threat to leave the federation but Sabah should take the bull by its horns and find out, understand and review the needs of Sabahans, “ he said adding that Sabahans has been feeling marginalised and discriminated by various policies and decisions by both the state and federal government.

Calling the ban “unconstitutional,” he urged the government to deal with the issues rather than ignore the sentiments by pushing the blame to “certain quarters” and accused them of politicising the issue.

“I challenge the speaker not to ban the word ‘secession’ or ‘secession talks’ in Dewan but instead move a motion to discuss the sentimental issues surrounding the word ‘secession’ ” he said.

Yesterday, Penampang MP Darell Leiking said that the ban was “illogical” and “undemocratic, showing the immaturity of a state that it should be afraid of discussing issues relating to its constitution.”

He said that he would understand banning the usage of profanity during the sitting but words such as “secession” should be used inherently along with “devolution” or “decentralisation” in line with issues related to the development of a country.

“So why is the state government so afraid to discuss issues like ‘secession’, ‘devolution’ and hosts of issues agreed to in the Malaysia Agreement 1963? It is a curtailment of our rights, especially the right of the people’s representative to debate for and on behalf of their constituents,” Leiking said.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/opposition-reps-to-challenge-secession-ban-in-sabah-assembly

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Kota Kinabalu: “The new Speaker of the Sabah Legislature has certainly started on the wrong footing and appears to affirm Dr. Mahathir’s declaration that “Democracy in Malaysia is dead” said Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan, commenting on the new Speaker’s ban on the word “secession” in the Assembly while reporting for duty on his first day at the Assembly.

The banning of the word “secession” is unlawful, unconstitutional and against all parliamentary norms and conventions.

Even in recent times, the British Parliament has debated on the independence of Scotland and secession from the United Kingdom.

The open discussions on Scotland’s independence and secession has resulted in the Scottish nationalists winning 56 out of 59 parliamentary seats in Scotland and the British government devolving greater autonomy and rights to Scotland than before. Even before this devolution, Scotland enjoyed many autonomous powers including having its own autonomous government and its own currency in the Scotland Pound.

There should be freedom of speech in the State Assembly and debates on secession if it come to such a situation should be allowed to be debated openly as in any mature democracy.

“Why is the new Speaker so fearful of the word “secession”?”

“Is it because of bowing to the wishes of the federal government or the Sabah Chief Minister or Umno?” asked Dr. Jeffrey.

The new Speaker should take it upon himself to find out why certain groups are voicing out the people’s unhappiness and disillusion over non-compliance of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and wanting Sabah out of the Federation or a dissolution of the merger that formed Malaysia.

By banning “secession” the Speaker will only lend credence and credibility that the federal government and Umno are treating Sabah as a colony and afraid of the people’s wishes for compliance of the terms of the formation of Malaysia.

The new Speaker has failed to comprehend that as the Speaker he should detach himself from his position as Umno Balung Assemblyman and remain independent and neutral as envisaged in the Westminster system of government that Sabah and Malaysia adopts.

As the head of the Legislature, the Speaker’s position is the equivalent to the Chief Minister and the head of the Judiciary in Sabah which is the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak.

The Legislative Assembly is not an extension of the Sabah government and the Speaker is not answerable or subservient to the Chief Minister.

“I hope that by the next Assembly sitting, the new Speaker would have understood his position and is able to defend the Assembly’s role in our democracy and act in the best interests of Sabah and Sabahans and not to his political party or his political masters” said Dr. Jeffrey.

The concept of 1Malaysia brilliantly espoused by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak can be appreciated when we look at the birth of Malaysia. Ours is a unique country in so many ways. Besides being a melting pot of various races, we are one of the few countries in the world where one half of the country is physically separated from the other by sea — the South China Sea. By looking at history, you will understand how difficult the challenge was for there to be a Malaysia and that the country be one.

Last week, we looked at the build-up to the constitutional crisis in Sarawak involving Stephen Kalong Ningkan expressed in five letters.

On June 16, 1966, the Governor of Sarawak received a letter signed by 21 members of the Council Negri to the effect that the writers no longer had any confidence in Stephen Kalong Ningkan, as their Chief Minister.

The Governor thereupon wrote on June 16 that from representations he had received, he was satisfied that the plaintiff had ceased to command the confidence of the Council Negri and invited Ningkan to resign.

In his reply of June 17, Ningkan informed the Governor that the Governor’s views as to the loss of confidence of the members of the Council Negri in him was not supported by the meeting of the Council Negri held on the June 14 and he requested the names of those who had signed the representations.

In reply to this letter, the Governor on the same date informed Ningkan as he had refused to tender the resignation of members of the Supreme Council, the Governor declared that Ningkan and other members of the Supreme Council had ceased to hold office and appointed Tawi Sli as Chief Minister forthwith. The Governor also forwarded a list of those who had signed the representations and Ningkan commenced proceedings in the Sarawak High Court against the Governor as the first defendant and Tawi Sli as the second defendant.  On Sept 7, 1966, the ruling Chief Justice of Borneo, Justice Harley, delivered his decision on Ningkan’s suit: “Has the Governor in Sarawak power at all to dismiss the Chief Minister? In considering this question, we may start with section 21 of the Interpretation Ordinance, the general effect of which is that where there is power to appoint (and it is not disputed that the Governor has power to appoint a Chief Minister) there is power to dismiss. However, where the appointment is ‘subject to the approval of some other person, the power of dismissal shall only be exercisable subject to the approval of such other person’. If the appointment of a Chief Minister is subject to the approval of Council Negri, then by this section 21 dismissal also would be subject to its approval.

“In Sarawak, the Chief Minister’s dismissal is quite simply beyond the powers of the Governor unless (a) the Chief Minister has lost the confidence of the House, and (b) the Chief Minister has refused to resign and failed to advise a dissolution.

“I do not think that the Chief Minister of Sarawak was ever given a reasonable opportunity to tender his resignation or to request a dissolution. He was never even shown the letter on which the dismissal was based until court proceedings started, although it is true that at the moment of dismissal a list of signatories was sent to him with the letter from the Governor dated 17th June. That list and that letter were typed on the same date as the publication in the Gazette of the dismissal of the plaintiff, who was given no time at all to consider the weight or effect of the move against him. Plaintiff did not refuse to resign: he merely expressed doubts whether in fact he had ceased to command a majority and requested ‘that the matter be put to the constitutional test’.

“My task is simply to interpret the written word of the Constitution. On such interpretation the case presented in the statement of claim is unchallengeable. There will be judgement for the plaintiff as prayed.”

Judgment for Stephen Kalong Ningkan.

Conclusion

And so Stephen Kalong Ningkan had finally won the day. But victory was short-lived. The Federal Government at that time was facing fierce opposition to the concept of Malaysia. Brunei refused to join, and Singapore – the original partner to Malaysia – had seceded from the Federation. Indonesia started the Confrontation Wars. The Philippines still kept alive their claim to Sabah.

There was internal racial tension, which in 1969 culminated in the May 13 riots. The new nation of Malaysia was under immense pressure after its baptism of fire in the world of nations. The loss of Sarawak would have been the knockout blow for the new nation.

It was inevitable that the Federal Government declared a state of emergency which legally ended Ningkan’s reign as Chief Minister of Sarawak. In a strange way, Ningkan was sacrificed to ensure the survival of Malaysia.

Ningkan challenged the emergency declaration right up to the Privy Council, but on each occasion he was defeated. After that his political career descended into oblivion and outside Sarawak he is hardly known or ever mentioned, even though he was the first Chief Minister of Sarawak. You can hardly find his images, even on the Internet.

However, there has been a unique revival of his name through an unusual way. Whenever any student studies or researches the constitutional law of Malaysia, or whenever there is a leading constitutional case before the Malaysian courts, there will be reference to the leading case law authorities involving Stephen Kalong Ningkan or bearing his name.

His cases are standard text book material on Malaysian constitutional law. A most recent example was the recent constitutional crisis in Perak last year, where the Malaysian Courts had to decide whether the legal Menteri Besar is Nizar or Zambry.

Yet few people know or appreciate this statesman of Sarawak and Malaysia who fought a lonely battle in the face of overwhelming odds and had a never-say-die spirit even when the odds were heavily stacked against him.

History is fraught with stories of men who never give up no matter how great the odds against them. I hope that my maiden articles the last three weeks will revive your memory of him and make him a less forgotten hero of Borneo and Malaysia. Have a productive week.

Read more: The Borneo Post

KUCHING: Senior Minister James Masing thinks that Putrajaya may have misread what Sarawak means by Full Autonomy. “We are not talking about the Sarawak Government taking over Federal Government Departments in Sarawak or having these departments handed over to the control of locals.”

“When we say Full Autonomy, we are referring to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) where the Federal Government has been in non-compliance.’

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak passing off the handover of Federal Government Departments in Sarawak as Full Autonomy, he added, would not help address the situation, the frustration among the people. “Putrajaya must address the issue of non-compliance on MA63.”

“The Sarawak4Sarawakians movement is the messenger of the message of frustration. Don’t try to kill it. Listen to them.”

Any further procrastination on addressing the non-compliance issue on MA63, he warned, would simply strengthen and give credibility to those certain groups pushing for secession. “So, procrastination and playing ignorance in addressing the frustration of the people will not work. They people are now well-educated. They read.”

“MA63 was the basis for Sabah and Sarawak to be in Federation with Malaysia. This basis must be honoured for the Federation to survive.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/12/masing-full-autonomy-not-about-govt-depts/

Saying the call for secession was “stupid talk,” Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced today that Sabah and Sarawak will be given more autonomy.

Najib said he had instructed chief secretary to the Government Tan Sri Ali Hamsa to thrash out the autonomy details with the state secretaries of the two Borneo states, which will include streamlining of the administration.

“There is too much duplication (in work and decision making processes in state and federal governments).

“I will give the empowerment to Sabah and Sarawak,” he said at the launch of the National month and fly the national flag programme today at Padang Merdeka in Kuching.

He labelled the call for secession “stupid talk”, echoing a sentiment Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem said in his address earlier.

The prime minister said the decision of Sarawak's forefathers to become an independent state within Malaysia was apt as it had given Sarawak a lot of benefits like security and economic prosperity

The Sarawak chief minister had raised the question of giving Sarawak more autonomy on decisions to administer the state last June when the prime minister made a trip to Kuching. – August 10, 2015.

Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/najib-promises-sarawak-and-sabah-the-autonomy-they-requested#sthash.3482cBM1.dpuf

KOTA KINABALU, Aug 12 ― Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is well aware of the demands in Sabah for increased autonomy for the state and will soon address these concerns, a senior Umno leader here said in urging for an end to calls for secession.

State Umno deputy chairman Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak said the prime minister knows that these demands ― an increase in oil royalty payments and better compliance of the 20-point memorandum on the 1963 Malaysia agreement ― are issues closest to the hearts of Sabah natives.

“The prime minister knows that these are issues to Sabahans and that is a matter that can be achieved through negotiations rather than through armed conflict like secession from Malaysia.

“I am confident that all these issues will be addressed in due time,” he told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

The newly-appointed communications and multimedia minister also insisted that the majority of Sabahans still believe in the ruling government and would not likely warm to idea of the state’s secession from Malaysia.

He pointed out that many are already wary of the numerous incidences of security breaches along the state’s porous east coast.

“Despite harping on these issues in the previous general elections, the opposition parties still failed to win the hearts and minds of the people as was evident in the 13the general election results,” he said.

In Kuching on Monday, Najib reportedly pledged to empower Sabah and Sarawak, saying he had instructed Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Ali Hamsa to touch base with the state secretaries of both Borneo states and look into their demands for more autonomy.

Talk of secession become rife last year after a social media group called “Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia” began gaining traction, especially among the rural youth of east Malaysia.

The group has taken up issues emotive to Sabahans such as the alleged grabbing of native customary land, the influx of illegal immigrants, the lack of infrastructure and development in the state, distortion of historical facts regarding Malaysia’s formation and oil royalty rights.

The movement, which claims to be under a UK-based non governmental organisation “Sabah Sarawak Union”, has been campaigning for a review of the 1963 Malaysia agreement.

It has also played up sentiments against the federal government and promoted an online petition urging for a review of the Malaysian Agreement.

Sabah police have issued a warrant of arrest for its founder, UK-based Doris Jones, but UK does not recognise sedition as a crime.

However, four volunteers of the movement are awaiting trial this September for allegedly promoting secession, which is deemed a crime under the Sedition Act.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/pm-will-address-sabah-woes-soon-no-need-for-secession-talk-umno-leader-says#sthash.FJWoaRRw.dpuf

KOTA KINABALU, Aug 11 ― Newly-appointed Sabah legislative assembly Speaker Datuk Syed Abas Syed Ali has banned the word “secession” from being uttered during sittings.

Syed Abas, who clocked in for work as Speaker for the first time yesterday, warned state lawmakers against discussing Sabah’s secession from Malaysia, saying he would not tolerate such talk in the assembly as he only wants to concentrate on matters beneficial to the state.

“I forbid its usage during the sitting, but it is out of my control outside,” he was quoted by The Borneo Post today as saying.

Syed Abas, who took over from Communications and Multimedia minister Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak as the 9th Sabah Speaker said he wanted the elected representatives to discuss issues that would bring development and help the people of Sabah.

Secession has been a hot topic in the state among politicians, the public and especially on social media since the Facebook group “Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia” gained traction last year.

The group, led by UK-based activist Doris Jones, plays on local sentiments by raising issues on native land, oil royalty rights, racial and religious tension and erosion of rights among other things.

Secession is considered treason in Malaysia and a warrant of arrest has been issued for Jones.

However, some groups have argued that the voice of the group represents Sabah’s rural youth and will only get worse if these issues are not tackled.

Meanwhile, Syed Abas said that the assembly should concentrate on finding ways to develop a state as big as Sabah, which needs a lot of funds for road construction, water supply and other infrastructure.

“Some districts like Kiulu, is bigger than the state of Pahang in the peninsular… so these are the things that I hope our assemblymen will raise during the sitting. They need to think not about one tree but about all the trees in the forest.”

Syed Abas, who has been active in politics since the 1970s, said he was surprised at his appointment, having not been one of the speculated candidates.

“I was, initially, told that I would probably be offered an assistant ministerial post, so this new responsibility is indeed a real a surprise for me,” he said, adding that he was prepared to learn with the support of his two deputies, Datuk Johny Mositun and Datuk Johnson Tee.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/in-sabah-assembly-even-mention-of-secession-now-banned#sthash.0wYce6HD.dpuf

KOTA KINABALU: The UK-based Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (Bopim), a Borneo rights NGO, takes issue with Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak describing “secession” talk in Sabah and Sarawak as “stupid talk”.

Bopim President Daniel John Jambun also noted that Sarawak Chief Minister Adenan Satem, apparently echoing Najib’s remarks, was quoted in the media as saying that, “there’s no need to leave Malaysia, it is a stupid talk. More power to Sarawak, yes, but secession – no”.

“If Najib’s idea of autonomy by way of working through the Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak goes through, the rights activists in Borneo will step up their respective campaigns ranging from harping on the Federal Government’s non-compliance on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) to Full Autonomy and secession to independence.”

However, if Adenan’s idea of Full Autonomy takes off, added Daniel, some rights activists in Borneo may be persuaded that he has cut the Gordian Knot on the Federal Government’s non-compliance on MA63, the issue of Malaysia having no legitimacy in Borneo, and in addition being party to further illegalities as in the case of the illegal immigrants in Sabah in particular.

“Adenan has a point when he lauds the benefits of a Federation but the fact remains that the Federal Government was being monopolised by Malaya and not shared with Sabah and Sarawak as the equal partners envisaged by MA63.”

Leaving aside for the moment the question of Malaysia’s legitimacy in Borneo, and being party to further illegalities as contained in the RCI Report, the fact remains that both Adenan and Najib are not on the same page on the status of Sabah and Sarawak in the Federation with the peninsula, pointed out Daniel.

“Adenan has been quoted as saying in the media last month that the Sarawak Government was engaged in talks with the Federal Government for Full Autonomy,” recalled the Bopim Chief. “He envisages the Federal Government, under the Full Autonomy Plan, confining itself to defence, foreign affairs and internal security.”

For starters, added Daniel, it’s wrong of the Sarawak Government to engage in talks with the Federal Government for Full Autonomy without the participation of the Sabah Government as well and/or for the Federal Government to entertain the notion of such talks with Sarawak only. “Both Sabah and Sarawak are in the same plight vis-a-vis Malaya. So, the question of Sarawak going solo on Full Autonomy talks should not arise. This is the result of Umno being in Sabah”

It’s interesting meanwhile, continued Daniel, that the language coming from Najib on Sabah and Sarawak rights was not the same as that used by Adenan. “Najib makes no mention of the Full Autonomy being preached by Adenan.”

Najib, said Daniel, sees autonomy — the word Full is missing from his vocabulary — in terms of the presence of Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak. “In that sense, he keeps referring to the duplication and waste between the Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak and the respective Governments in the two Borneo nations.”

“Going by Najib’s previous statements as well in the media, not so long ago in Sarawak, he sees autonomy and more powers in terms of handing over control of some – not ALL — of the Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak either to locals or handing them over to the respective state governments.”

It has not been stated by Najib, stressed Daniel, where the Budget will come from if the said Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak are handed over to the respective Governments in the two Borneo nations. “If the control of the said Government Departments was merely handed over to the control of locals, how does that address the problem of duplication and waste mentioned by Najib?”

“Would the Sabah and Sarawak Governments have to stop duplicating what these Federal Government Departments in the two Borneo nations have been doing once they are handed over to the control of locals?”

It’s an open secret in Borneo, said Daniel, that despite the Sabah and Sarawak Governments being members of the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN), all three governments have been competing with each other, almost trying to outdo each other on the same things when it comes to the civil service administration.

Source: Free Malaysia Today

SINGAPORE: Mountain guides Ricky Masirin and Valerian Joannes who died trying to bring to safety several Singapore primary schoolchildren from the earthquake-stricken Mt Kinabalu in June were honoured by the Singapore government yesterday.

The two guides were posthumously awarded Commendation Medals during Singapore’s National Day Awards for their efforts in trying to guide Tanjong Katong Primary School pupils to safety.

The citation for the guides read: “(for their) Devotion to duty and exemplary conduct during the Sabah earthquake,” The Straits Times and Asia News Network reported.

Muhammad Danish Amran, another Sabah guide who brought several pupils down the mountain to safety, was also honoured together with Malaysian Mountain Torq trainers Hajiris Sulomin, Hilary Hendry Augustinus and James Maikol.

The Malaysians were among 16 others who were honoured.

Among the Singaporeans given the medal were Tanjong Katong School teachers Mohamed Faizal, Joshua Tan, Nur Uzaimah Fadzali, Lee Hui Jun, Carolyn De Souza and Roushan Amir Hussain.

Faizal, who teaches English and physical education, said modestly: “We weren’t doing anything extra. We were doing what is required of us as teachers, which is taking care of the kids under our charge.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/10/mt-kinabalu-guides-honoured-on-singapore-national-day/

KOTA KINABALU: The Sabah Progressive Party (Sapp) wants to educate the Gen-Y in particular that Sabah was once a country on its own before 16 Sept 1963 when it came together in a Federation with Sarawak, Singapore and the peninsula. “Brunei stayed out at the 11th hour,” noted Sapp Vice- Youth Chief Yong Yit Yoong.

“Now, Sabah like Sarawak is a nation within the Federation. Full Autonomy is our Constitutional right. The Federal Government has also reneged on the Borneonisation of the civil service.”

He was explaining the purpose of the Black Sunday 2.0 Gathering on Sunday along Gaya Street, the venue of the packed weekly Sunday Market, in Kota Kinabalu, during which the participants held blank papers. “Friends in the police warned us that we can’t speak up on certain things. So, that’s why we held black papers in protest against such restrictions.”

“We have the right to speak up on Sabah rights. If we don’t have the right to speak up, even in the social media, the Ministry of Communications and Multimedia Commission should close down.”

The Sabah Independence Day celebrations on August 31 to be held in Kundasang this year by the party, added Yong, would stress that independence began in 1963 and not 1957. “In the case of Sarawak, independence came on 22 July 1963 and they observed the anniversary last month for the second time since 1963.”

“The Federal Government should start counting the Federation with Sabah and Sarawak as beginning from 1963 and not from 1957, the Independence Day for the peninsula, or even from 1948 when the Federation of Malaya Agreement was signed in London.”

The history of the Federation in 1963, charged Yong, was being ignored or down-played by the Federal Government as evident in school text books. “We cannot forget out history. We need to educate the Gen-Y so that they will know their true history, not the one put out by Putrajaya.”

Yong, delving into the history since 1963, lamented that the status of Sabah and Sarawak had diminished since Singapore’s departure in 1965 from being equal partners of Malaya incorporating Singapore, to the 12th and 13th states in the Federation. “There has been very little public education on Sabah and Sarawak’s real status in the Federation.”

Semangat kian marak untuk menghapuskan penjajahan malaya diatas bumi Borneo melalui kebangkitan Nasionalisme! Sabah Merdeka! Join The Fight!

KOTA KINABALU: Bingkor assemblyman and longtime rights activist Jeffrey Kitingan has mixed feelings on the 50th Anniversary of Singapore ending its merger with Malaya and exiting the Federation with the peninsula, Sabah and Sarawak. “When I asked the late Lee Kuan Yew once what his greatest regret was in relation to Sabah and Sarawak, he hung his head, and tears rolled down his face. He was so choked with emotion and regret that he could not speak.”

“Sabahans and Sarawakians need to wake up from their trance-like state induced by Umno and the Barisan Nasional (BN) and their links with the peninsula where the Federal Government has refused to comply with the Malaysia Agreement 1963.”

While extending greetings on the Golden Anniversary joy for Singapore, he can’t at the same time resist pointing out that the city state abandoned Sabah and Sarawak which facilitated its merger with Malaya through their Federation with the peninsula and the island. “Otherwise, multiracial Malaya refused to have Chinese-majority Singapore merge with it.”

“What might be the status of Sabah and Sarawak today had the two Borneo nations left the Federation in 1965 at the same time as Singapore?” asked Jeffrey on the road not taken. “Just as Lee Kuan Yew fought hard to persuade Sabah and Sarawak leaders to agree to Federation in 1963, Singapore should have fought equally hard for the two Borneo nations to leave the Federation at the same time as it left.”

Moving forward, said Jeffrey, it was clear that Sabah and Sarawak could no longer rely on Umno and Malaya and pointed out that Singapore’s success illustrated Malaysia’s failure. “If Singapore can do it, and Brunei can do well on its own by keeping out of the Federation at the 11th hour, Sabah and Sarawak can also do well if they stand on their own two feet.”

“The Singapore economy in GDP terms is larger than that of Malaysia, the currency almost RM3 to S$1, and it has the world’s third highest per capita income. All these were achieved in a tiny land area, without water or natural resources and without Umno and BN.”

The only thing going for Singapore was its strategic location, human resources, and its commitment to the brightest and best leading the way for all, added Jeffrey. “Sarawak today is better off than Sabah because it has no Umno.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/10/jeffrey-spore-abandoned-sabah-and-sarawak/