By : JOE FERNANDEZ
CURTAIN-RAISER There's going to be an International Conference on the Malaysia Agreement in Kota Kinabalu on Sept 13. Had the Malaysia Agreement been complied with, it would have been 50 years old this year.
The Conference, sponsored by the Borneo Heritage Foundation, will be moderated by Tan Sri Simon Sipaun who has been preaching all his adult life that "life was better in Sabah before Malaysia". He was even interrogated once on this after a police report was lodged against him.
He's not referring to materialism but, judging from his past presentations, land issues, Native status not being confined to Orang Asal, Malayans invading the Federal civil service in Sabah, unfair revenue sharing, no petrochemical industries worth speaking of, no Sabah/Sarawak representation in Petronas, issues with scholarships, racial discrimination, religious issues created by the National Registration Department, racial polarization, no living wage, higher prices in Sabah/Sarawak and a higher cost of living and lower standards of living; poor internet, telephone, road, rail, air and sea connectivity; poor infrastructure, low industrialization, locals being edged out by foreigners in jobs and businesses, gerrymandering, statelessness, the influx of illegal immigrants and the violation of human rights. The street children, abandoned by the illegal immigrants, are not in school as provided for under the UN Charter.
Tan Sri Simon was a former Sabah state secretary, vice chairman of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission and Advisor to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.
Malaysia is the only country in the world that doesn't teach the history of its formation, if any.
Instead, the history books claim in an outright lie that "Sabah dan Sarawak mencapai kemerdekaan mereka melalui Malaysia". How can that be when Malaysia was declared on 16 Sept, 1963 and Sabah and Sarawak became independent on 31 Aug, 1963 and July 22, 1963 respectively?
I am only interested in the issue from the Adat, historical, political, constitutional angle and from the viewpoint of jurisprudence.
This is the 21st Century. Look at what's happening in Turkey. No Army in the world can keep down a people who have stood up and are on the march.
Man does not live by bread alone. The GE13 results, for example, make that clear.
The people have rejected self-preservation being passed off as change. They want real change.
Several terms are important: no Referendum in 1963; Singapore; Security; the definition of Federation in the Constitution before and after Singapore left; the codified Constitution of Malaya; and the uncodified Constitution of Malaysia had there been a Referendum.
Cobbold Commission was not Referendum.
Sabah and Sarawak's pre-Malaysia self-determination status of 31 Aug, 1963 and 22 July, 1963 respectively remains undiminished for at least two reasons:
(1) there was no Referendum on Malaysia in Sabah and Sarawak and none in Brunei and Malaya;
(2) the idea of Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei being in Malaysia was to facilitate the independence of Singapore through merger with Malaya in the new Federation.
Brunei stayed out of Malaysia at the 11th hour and Singapore was expelled from the Federation two years later in Aug, 1965.
The oft-cited theory of security for Sabah and Sarawak in Malaysia is an afterthought. Sabah and Sarawak did not get the security promised them.
Sabah, like Sarawak, continues to be overrun by illegal immigrants who continue to enter the electoral rolls and marginalize and disenfranchise the locals, especially the Orang Asal.
A Constitution is not about law but politics. It's the ultimate political document although anything unconstitutional is unlawful, and therefore illegal.
An extraordinary event like Malaysia, had there been a Referendum, must have a Constitution.
There's no Constitution which incorporates all the constitutional documents on Malaysia and that's because there was no Referendum.
The fact that Jeffrey Kitingan is screaming himself hoarse on non-compliance of the Malaysia Agreement should tell us all something. No one can simply march in and steal other people's country. East Timor refers.
Under the UN Charter and international law, a people have the right to self-determination.
Again, Sabah became independent on 31 Aug, 1963 and Sarawak became independent on 22 July, 1963. That self-determination remains undiminished.
Sovereignty lies with a people.
I have often wondered how Sabah and Sarawak ended up in the situation that they find themselves in today after 50 years i.e. as colonies of Malaya.
God doesn't give everything to one person or one side.
I am sure that he provided many opportunities in the past for Sabahans and Sarawakians to seek redress.
If nothing happened, it could only be that some people capitalized on these opportunities to be co-opted by the corrupt system as proxies, stooges and rogue elements for their own narrow, selfish, self-serving ends.
The people have to be careful how they choose their leaders.