By : NILAKRISNA JAMES
Xenophobia is a morbid fear
of foreigners. At the heart of Sabah and Sarawak lies a deep distrust of
foreign people, foreign cultures and foreign intrusion. It has formed the
backdrop of our policies and Federal-State relations the past half a century; a
crippling phobia that may never end and which may mar the judgments of all
present and future political representatives that we send to parliament. This
will be the downfall of the Borneo states.
It is this deep distrust of
foreigners that made us afraid of Malaya in the first place but when it came to
the White People ('Orang Putih'), we treated them as rajahs or masters. Yet,
one of the same colour and stock can never be our superior and to this day the
descendants of head hunters and migrants refuse to bow to a brown authority.
These descendants will
continue to demand autonomy and rights and a Borneo Agenda and some have gone
as far as asking for a similar exit as Singapore, even going so far as thinking
that our former colonial caretaker may still have pity for us and take our woes
seriously.
Federal Agenda Vs. Borneo
Agenda
I was asked whether Malaysia
is made up of three separate nations under one federation or a federation made
up of 13 states. Good question but I ask humbly, what difference does it really
make?
I stand by the premise that
the Malaysia Agreement stands paramount as the document which binds this nation
together and gives the country, known as Malaysia, legitimacy.
In its paramount status, it
can neither be revoked nor amended nor breached. In the Malaysia Agreement,
four separate territories stood on equal grounds to agree to an amalgamation
that respected the equality of these territories, neither one being less equal
than the other. Britain was merely a signatory to release her obligations as
caretaker. Singapore eventually exited.
Three separate territories
remain, with the United Nations clearly recognising that these three
territories have gained independence from Britain, with two independent
territories—Sabah and Sarawak—gaining their independence by joining Malaya, a
country that had already gained its own independence six years earlier.
The United Nations and the
Commonwealth now recognise these three separate territories as one nation,
which in 1963 agreed to call itself Malaysia. Sabah and Sarawak were officially
“swallowed” into one nation and henceforth lost their separate and independent
status as territories in their own right.
It is the Federal
Constitution, which has been amended no less than 650 times, which makes Sabah
and Sarawak merely “States” in the entire Federation. This officially and
legally makes us two separate States out of 13 in the Federation; an
arrangement agreed to by our forefathers; men who were clearly not in any
position to argue otherwise. Herein lies your answer.
We are a federation made up
of 13 states, nothing more, nothing less, because the Malaysia Agreement allows
us the freedom to determine our status via a Federal Constitution in accordance
with the recommendations made in the Cobbold Report of 1962.
It is even more chilling to
note that though the Borneo Agenda may have been a crucial part of the
negotiation process in 1962, Appendix F of the Cobbold Report of 1962
reinforced the recommendation that the principle of a strong Central Government
must never be prejudiced by the safeguards demanded by the Borneo territories
and I quote directly from that Memorandum:-
“The Committee, of course,
is of the opinion that whatever safeguards might be provided for the Borneo
territories must conform with the expressed wish of the Borneo people
themselves but that such arrangements should not prejudice the principle of a
strong Central Government or curtail the fundamental liberties of the nationals
of the Federation of Malaysia.”
Therein lies the true motive
of Malaya and the final scenario wherein the Federal Agenda must never be
compromised or prejudiced by the Borneo Agenda. In this respect, we have deliberately
drafted a Federal Constitution that would prioritise forever a situation that
would be very much in line with Prime Minister Najib’s 1 Malaysia concept. It
hopes for unity on the premise that the rules of the Federal Government are
complied with fully.
Way Forward: Increase Borneo
Parliamentary Seats
Of course, we could be
romantic and start a process of wishful thinking and hope that the fragile
nature of our Federal Constitution (which can be amended anytime) may one day
create a scenario where a new Government could reverse that whole motive and
bow to the demands of the Borneo States.
That will only happen if the
Borneo States end up in a better bargaining position because West Malaysia
remains so hopelessly divided that they have no choice but to look towards
Borneo for extra political leverage. We can’t always bank on West Malaysian
disunity though.
At some point, West
Malaysian leaders will tire of our Borneo demands and will learn to bridge
their own divides to keep Borneo MPs under control. Politics isn’t about
holding your peers and opponents to ransom. It is about negotiating your values
for the greater good.
I asked what difference this
all makes because ultimately the only way our fate in Borneo will take a turn
for the better is if we increased our parliamentary representation
significantly so as to be able to actually make a difference in policies and at
least protect further erosion of Borneo’s interests through unfair legislation.
We need AT LEAST 35% of MPs
to come from Sabah and Sarawak who could en bloc (it is hoped) exercise their
power of veto and at least think in one mind when it comes to Borneo’s
interests.
The current situation is
this: 222 seats in parliament; 56 for Borneo (25%) and 166 for West Malaysia
(75%). The total number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak do not even make up 35%
of parliament to allow us the right to veto a Bill or an Act of Parliament,
even if such legislation to be passed were to the detriment of the two Borneo
states.
Even if we were granted 35%
representation, our Borneo MPs are so deeply fragmented between political
parties whose interests and loyalties are so fundamentally rooted in the
Federal Agenda that it still ends up being a far-fetched dream. But it would be
the first step forward.
The Cobbold Report 1962
suggested that the number of MPs from Sabah and Sarawak, respectively, must be
determined by taking into account the population, size and potentialities of
the two States.
In 1963, the population of
Malaysia was 8.9 million. 13% lived in the Borneo States: 5% lived in Sabah and
8% lived in Sarawak.
In 2010, the population of
Malaysia was 28.2 million. 20% lived in the Borneo States: 11% lived in Sabah
and 9% lived in Sarawak.
60% of the total land area
of Malaysia is in Sabah and Sarawak but only 20% of the population live in
Malaysia’s Borneo States, an increase of 7% in population since 1963.
Logically, I would have
assumed that as 25% of parliament was allocated to Sabah and Sarawak since 1963
to date, they would have increased the seats to 7% by the 2013 General
Election. No other demographics have changed except the vast oil and gas
potential of Sabah and Sarawak and of course the population size.
So, you see, there really
isn’t any excuse to deny Sabah and Sarawak 35% of parliamentary seats in this
country.
Will The Borneo States Seek
Independence?
I read it now often in
various blogs and am often questioned by so many different people, who are so
sick of the political situation and lack of prospects for their families in
this country, if there is a way out of Malaysia.
There was a time when nobody
dared to raise this issue for fear of being thrown into indefinite detention
without a fair trial under the Internal Security Act. Lately though, people
have become bold, more vocal and more willing to risk their freedom to find a
solution because nearly all the people who ask me this question want to migrate
to another country but simply cannot afford it.
So, when left in a rut
without choices, these people feel angry, frustrated and dissatisfied. The
majority turn their anger towards new migrants who threaten their political
legitimacy and, probably, may also be doing better financially, but quite a sizeable
few are now taking their anger onto the streets, the NGOs and political
parties, and they will vent this anger towards the ruling government of the
day.
The thought of Sabah and
Sarawak being on their own in the hands of present leaders who are also accused
of corruption and wrong-doing quite frankly scares me more than an annoying
Malaysian environment. Within seconds of freedom, they would be at each other’s
throats trying to be the next Sultan!
In any event, even if these
angry people took their case to the International Courts, the United Nations
and the Commonwealth, the demands for independence would require the mandate of
the majority of the residents of Sabah and Sarawak by way of a State Government
led referendum.
This scenario may not be
entirely impossible but is highly unlikely to succeed given the fact that the
majority of the people of Sabah and Sarawak consider themselves to be secure,
financially stable and relatively at peace in the system that Malaysia has
built for them the past 50 years.
We can be frustrated with
the political chaos in this country but level headed people would understand
that this is a natural evolutionary process in politics when a civilised
bipartite system begins to form and not necessarily a situation that would
justify an exit from a country they have grown to love.
By nature, Sabah and Sarawak
people are unwilling to challenge the status quo they have grown accustomed to
since 1963 and though our native forefathers may have willingly chopped
people’s heads off, our natural instinct is to be a migrant like our ancestors
and run away from revolutions and wars by jumping on the next boat out to sea.
Ultimately, we just want to live a settled and prosperous life. We are no
different to the aliens.
In addition to this, the
voices of those who are angry are moderated by the voices of new migrants who
have happily settled down in the Borneo States. In Sabah, at least, the new
migrants are now apparently in the majority and they will not be voting in
favour of an exit from Malaysia.
We are angry because it is
alleged that these new migrants came through illegitimate channels in droves
for a more sinister political reason aimed at neutering our local political
voice. We can afford to be angry when these methods are illegal.
So, in recent months, we
have attempted to challenge their legitimacy in the Royal Commission of
Inquiry, yet I frankly believe that even if their status is confirmed to be
illegal, the Government would take years and millions of tax payers’ money to
resolve this situation. Their status as new migrants would probably not be
resolved in time for the next General Election.
And while we continue to
complain and bicker and blame these new migrants, the Federal and State
Governments would have amicably found a proper way to streamline and legitimise
migration into Sabah and Sarawak for more people to settle permanently in the
Borneo States. In the long run, new migrants will outnumber old migrants and
they will have a legitimate reason to cast their votes in future general
elections.
Our best option in Sabah and
Sarawak is to accommodate old and new migrants, legal or illegal, and increase
the population and power bargaining status of our two States so as to
eventually demand a reasonable increase in our parliamentary seats and our
Federal budget. With so many mouths to feed in Sabah and Sarawak we could
finally justify a bigger annual budget.
Many natives would not want
to be drowned by the political voices of groups from Indonesia or the Philippines
but the reality is that as our borders worldwide become more porous, humans
will move and migrate between various nations to seek a better life, more
economic opportunities and better infrastructure.
People only form political
parties in this country when they feel their racial groups need representation
or when they feel disenfranchised. So the more we reject new migrant groups and
insult their very existence or their religion the more likely they are to
retaliate and create descendants who are more than willing to form their own
vocal NGOS and political groupings. By then the native population would have
been reduced even further so as to render us completely irrelevant. This
ultimately is where the real danger lies when it comes to native xenophobia in
Borneo.
The future of Sabah and
Sarawak lies in peaceful co-existence with migrants. By treating them as stray
animals we deny our own humanity and risk our own future legitimacy.
If we therefore continue to
see ourselves as being separate from the rest of Malaysia by drawing upon our
racial divide, we run the risk of self-extinction. If we absorb new migrants as
one of us, we become a stronger political force and can continue to exercise
certain controls and demands even if the Borneo Agenda ceases to be relevant.
The End Of Racial Politics
And A New Malaysia
With these realities, Sabah
and Sarawak will remain in Malaysia and the racial demographics will change in
the next 50 years as racial groups continue to inter-marry as a matter of
economic and political survival.
The new racial demographics
will break down political barriers and eventually lead to a more acceptable
form of civilised politics that can transcend beyond race and religion.
One day only two parties
will be acceptable to the Malaysian people who see themselves first as
Malaysians, race as second. Those parties will have no necessity for component
race based parties and will have no place for racism.
They will be multi-racial,
multi-religious, multi-ethnic and above all, progressive and issue-based. If
mosquito parties should exist, they, too, will be issue-based to represent
policies which perhaps the two main parties are unwilling to resolve or
discuss. By then political racism will be passé, illegal and completely
unacceptable.
If we continue with racial
polarisation and refuse to react to the pulse on the ground and pacify the
budding seeds of discontent, this country will descend into anarchy and
revolution.
Everything we have worked so
hard to achieve will be demolished within a decade. It is this fear that has
driven millions of Malaysian talents to seek their fortunes overseas and,
ironically, it would be Malaysians who end up roaming the planet as new
migrants.
This country will one day
grow up and embrace the reality of happy citizens who were all once of migrant
stock; of white, of black, of brown, of bloods that bear one colour: Red. We
will eventually also honour the reality of their dual love and dual citizenship
for their country of origin and their country of adoption.
Until such time as we have
leaders of integrity and worth, the road continues to be a rocky one.
“Remember, remember always,
that all of us, and you and I especially, are descended from immigrants and
revolutionists.” –Franklin D. Roosevelt
(NOTE
: Nilakrisna James is a Sabah-based lawyer, writer and activist who co-founded
the apolitical NGO United Borneo Front (UBF) in 2010. She left the group in
2011 and remains a member of the ruling Barisan Nasional.)
No comments:
Post a Comment