Search This Blog

Monday, May 28, 2012

Star says no Malaysia without 20 Points


KOTA KINABALU - The State Reform Party (Star) is taking the position that there's no Malaysia without four important constitutional documents and/or conventions viz. the 1963 Malaysia Agreement (MA63), the 20/18 Points, the Inter Governmental Committee Report (IGCR) and the Cobbold Commission Report (CCR).

It's not possible to ever ignore, drop, do away, annul and/or amend these documents or claim that they have already been incorporated in the Malaysian Constitution and/or alternatively overtaken by events, whatever that means, said the party in a statement.

"Whether or not the contents of the four constitutional documents and/or conventions have been incorporated in the Malaysian Constitution, the said documents/conventions continue to exist," said Star deputy chairman Daniel John Jambun in the statement after emergency consultations via telephone with party chairman Jeffrey Kitingan who’s away in Kuching for a party function in the Mas Gading parliamentary constituency.

Incorporation, reiterated Daniel, cannot do away with the four documents/conventions and advised those genuinely interested in the issue to research and study the development of the “unwritten” British Constitution.

"The aforesaid four are important historical, political and constitutional documents which supplement/complement the Constitution and must be read together with it,” he added. “Half-truths distort the true picture and does a grave disservice and injustice to our people.”

He was commenting on a statement by Sabah state assembly speaker Salleh Keruak in the local media on Sun on the 20 Points of Sabah.

Salleh claimed that the 20 Points are no longer valid as they have been incorporated in the Malaysian Constitution.

The same Salleh report in the local media went on to claim that many of the 20 Points were "annulled" under the Usno Government.

Daniel urged Salleh not to create a “constitutional crisis” by suggesting things which were not only untrue but not in the interest of the people of Sabah and Sarawak.

He asked how it would benefit the people of Sabah and Sarawak by denying the existence and/or validity of constitutional documents and/or conventions which provide the very basis for Malaysia to come into being in the transition from independence on 31 Aug 1963 to Federation just 16 days later.

The transition, he reminded, was “without so much as providing a decent breathing spell for self-determination to at least work for some time and the people enjoy the fruits of that very independence”.
"We know that Salleh is trying to please his political masters in Malaya," said Daniel. "But he should remember that these are the very people who have been squatting on us since Malaysia and claiming that we obtained independence through Malaysia."

If the suggestion is that we should be grateful for Malaysia, continued Daniel, “it’s certainly not true”.

Sabah and Sarawak, he stressed, were independent 16 days before Malaysia was rushed into being “and thereafter left in a limbo for us on this side of the South China Sea”.

The Star deputy chairman advised Salleh and other members of the parti parti Malaya operating in Sabah and Sarawak to leave the unresolved status of the two states in Malaysia to local parties and hold their peace on the issue.

“The vested interests in Malaya (Peninsular Malaysia) only want to pit us local people against each other so that they can continue to divide and rule us forever,” said Daniel. We must be careful not to continue swallowing the bait set by them for us or we will get nowhere.”

He warned that it would be counter-productive to accept that something that exists doesn’t exist as “that would mean that we are back to square one before the formation of Malaysia”.

Taking up the cudgels again on the issue, Daniel belaboured the point that the Federal Government’s non-compliance with the four constitutional documents and/or conventions makes Malaysia inoperable to the extent of the non-compliance “and merely further facilitates the internal colonization that we are experiencing”.

“Non-compliance cannot be half-hearted or a cherry-picking exercise,” said Daniel. “Either there’s compliance or there’s non-compliance.”

Asked whether his party was suggesting that the Federal Government has been in non-compliance on the said four documents/conventions, Daniel replied that “the evidence of non-compliance is all around us in internal colonization”.

For starters, he claimed that the proof of non-compliance lies in the fact that Malaysia was not functioning as a two-tier Federation i.e. one at a lower level among the states in Malaya (Peninsular Malaysia) and another at the higher level as a Federation of three equal partners viz. Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak.

“Singapore was also a partner but was kicked out in 1965 when it complained that Malaysia was not functioning as a Federation of equal partners,” said Daniel. “For example, Kuala Lumpur kept insisting that the Prime Minister of Singapore should call himself Chief Minister as in Sabah, Sarawak, Penang and Malacca and that there can be only one Prime Minister i.e. in Kuala Lumpur.”

The Star deputy chief, on a point of clarification, ventured that the head of government in Sabah should also be Prime Minister as in Singapore and the Australian states “but we were not allowed to follow this provision”.

He vowed that a Sabah state government initiated, formed and led by Star would refer to the head of government as Prime Minister and not Chief Minister as at present and, likewise, “there would other re-visitations on Malaysia in Sabah”.

“Non-compliance is a very long list and not related to just one or two matters,” said Daniel. “We are duty-bound to bring these matters to the attention of the people, the younger generation in particular, as they have been kept in the dark so long by the ruling party’s control of the media.”

Touching on Salleh’s suggestion that non-compliance, if any, be put on the back-burner while focusing more on bringing development to the people, Daniel said his party begs to disagree.

“This is a self-serving suggesting by leaders who are more interested in their pockets,” said Daniel. “Compliance should come first to ensure justice, democracy, self-determination and thereby bring about genuine development in the process.”

Daniel was also at a loss to understand what the ruling party means by development when the World Bank labelled Sabah in Dec 2010 in Kota Kinabalu as the poorest state in Malaysia, and Sarawak the second poorest.

“Putrajaya and its proxies in Sabah have been talking themselves hoarse about development since 1963 but we are still poor despite the wealth of our natural resources,” said Daniel. “So, that’s why we are harping on the theme that non-compliance and internal colonization go together. This is reflected in our grinding poverty brought about by chronic under-development as a result of internal colonization.”

Daniel John Jambun is Deputy Chairman, the State Reform Party (Star)

21 comments:

  1. 20 points agreement is to safeguard Sabahan rights during the Malaysia formation. It should be respected and fulfilled by the Federal Government.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tuesday, 29 May 2012 21:38 posted by ANTI-MALAYAN COLONIALISM!

      SABAH & SARAWAK ARE MALAYAN COLONIES

      MALAYA REPUDIATED MALAYSIA AGREEMENT & 18/20 POINTS AGREEMENT SO MALAYSIA IS NOT A LEGAL ENTITY


      Malaysia exists as an illegal entity for the following reasons:

      1. The separation of Singapore from Malaysia invalidated the Malaysia Federation. It is plainly illegal for Malaya to have governing authority over Sabah and Sarawak.

      Malaysia was supposed to be an "equal partnership" - by federating Malaya, Singapore, Brunei, Sabah and Sarawak. All “state” should have equal voting power- but not so.

      This British Malaysia idea had already fallen apart when Brunei opted out because the Brunei Sultan was smart enough to see that it was an unequal partnership since UMNO demanded control of Brunei oil and refused to let the Sultan have chance to become the Agong.

      The other reason was that the Brunei people carried out an anti-Malaysia armed uprising in Dec 1962. The Sultan decided to listen to the people's wishes and not "join Malaysia".

      Singapore was in Malaysia for less than 2 years when the UMNO and PAP leaders had a row over the issue of equal treatment. Mr. LKY (not as smart as the Brunei Sultan) had realized that UMNO Malay supremacists were not going to let him have a chance to become PM.

      So only Sabah and Sarawak were left. This in fact invalidated the Malaysia Federation. It was not the original idea.

      2. The Malaysia Agreement is an unequal treaty forced on Sabah and Sarawak. So from this point of view Malaysia was also illegally constituted.

      It was created in the face of open rebellion by the North Bornean (Kalimantan) people, with the anti-Malaysia Brunei Uprising 1962 and the independence war in Sarawak (1962 to 1990). The Brunei and Sarawak independence fighters denounced “Malaysia” as a neo-colonial plan to consolidate British interests in Malaya and the North Borneo colonies by the hand over of colonial government to UMNO.

      3. Malayan UMNO itself also has since 1963 repudiated the Treaty by its total disregard of and compliance with the intent of the document and also the 18/20 Points with Sarawak and Sabah.

      UMNO proceeded to colonized Sabah and Sarawak. Instead of Borneonization (using local officials to replace the former colonial administrators) of the local government administration, UMNO Malayanized everything. The only exception was the installation of puppet governments in the 2 colonies.

      The above points and current issues of UMNO plunder and pillage and impoverishment to the 2 territories have given rise to a groundswell of local anger and demands for independence.

      So Sabahans and Sarawakians don't waste time debating-just take your countries out of neo-colonial Malaysia as soon as possible!

      Delete
    2. IT IS SABAH SARAWAK OIL!

      THANK YOU DANIEL FOR DARING TO STAND UP FOR ALL OF US IN SABAH & SARAWAK!

      YOU & ALL PATRIOTS DEFENDING OUR RIGHTS HAVE OUR WHOLEHEARTED SUPPORT!

      We hope one day we will overcome all our fears and the obstacles placed before us to achieve our national independence.

      After 300 years of English domination, Scotland has just announced that it will be holding an independence referendum in 2014.

      East Timor (2002) and Southern Sudan (2011) had their independence referendums and their people chose independence. These new independent states also gained control of their oil resources.

      The Scottish case has similarities to Sabah and Sarawak.

      An excerpt from Wikipedia:

      "It's Scotland's oil" was a widely publicised political slogan used by the Scottish National Party (SNP) during the 1970s in making their economic case for Scottish independence. It was argued that the discovery of North Sea oil off the coast of Scotland, and the revenue that it created would not benefit Scotland to any significant degree while Scotland remained part of the United Kingdom.

      The SNP campaigned widely in both the February 1974 UK General Election and subsequent October 1974 UK General Election using this slogan. At the February election the SNP gained seven seats in the House of Commons and 22% of the Scottish vote, rising to eleven seats and 30% of the vote in the October election. The idea behind the slogan has proven to be controversial in discussions surrounding the financial viability of an independent Scottish state and still resonates to this day.[1]"

      In Sabah and Sarawak the Malayan colonial gov't stole our oil rights in the 1970s and impoverished our countries to develop Malaya. In Kuala Lumpur the Sabah Sarawak (Petronas/Patronage) Twin Towers built with our oil money stand as the symbols of Malayan colonization of our countries!

      Now is the time for us to stand up for our country's (Sabah or Sarawak) independence!

      Delete
    3. I am with you on this. We should start our own referendum for independence. The Scots have highlands, so do we. Only thing missing is our version of William Wallace!

      Delete
    4. we did have the Kinabalu Guerrillas... who fought the Japanese and gave their lives for the Sabah people.

      Delete
  2. Salleh Tun Said mentioned that the 20 points agreement issue will be given explanation so that the people can be clear about the actual status of the agreement.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The sooner the better. His statement caused confusion and anger among the people.

      Delete
  3. "Datuk Salleh tidak salah apabila berkata ada antara perkara dalam perjanjian 20 Perkara telah dimasukkan dalam perlembagaan. Pada masa yang sama, Maximus juga betul bahawa semangat 20 Perkara itu relevan selama-lamanya,"-Musa Aman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Salleh might need use proper words in order to make his statement clearer.

      Delete
  4. Perjanjian 20 Perkara ni harus diperjuangkan oleh pemimpin Sabah sehingga ia dipenuhi.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Setelah 49 tahun berada dalam negara Malaysia, rakyat Sabah sendiri ramai yang tidak tahu dengan jelas tentang sejarah Sabah dan pembentukan Malaysia. Apalagi dengan Perkara 20. I doubt that people will easily accept the Perkara 20 since we are accustomed with the Constitution of Malaysia which clearly does not fully include the Perkara 20. I mean, why we need to fear the federal government so much ? Look at our neighbour, the Sarawakians. We should blame the leaders, but we can't afford that now since we need unity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. rakyat Sabah seharusbaty didedahkan dgn sejarah sebenar sejarah Sabah dan pembentukan gagasan Malaysia. ia penting untuk memupuk semangat cintakan tanah air.

      Delete
    2. Kurangnya pengetahuan mengenai sejarah Sabah pasti akan lebih mengelirukan ramai rakyat Sabah

      Delete
  6. perjanjian 20 adalah asas penyertaan Sabah dalam pembentukan Malaysia. ia amat penting dan perlu dipertahankan.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Mungkin kita perlu tunggu respon CM mengenai hal 20 points. Sebab isu ni buat saya keliru. Maximus cakap lain, said salleh cakap lain...

    ReplyDelete
  8. Jadi 20 perkara ini perlulah dikekalkan.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Teruskan memperjuangkan 20 perkara yang telah lama dipersetujui. Ini demi masa depan penduduk Sabah dan juga hak mereka.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Penyakit orang sabah ialah masih ada virus tak percaya sejarah...kalau lah bapa saya masih hidup hari ini apabila seorang rakyat rakyat sabah berkata 20 PERKARA tidak sah tentu saja dia lah orang pertama memaki hamun saya...

    ReplyDelete
  11. kalaupun 20 perkara dilaksanakan, Star tetap akan cakap no.. sebab JK mahu jadi PM di Sabah..

    ReplyDelete
  12. kalau Star bersungguh2 memperjuangkan 20 Perkara, ajak la SAPP sekali saman kerajaan persekutuan.. tujukkan bahawa Star benar2 mahu menyelamatkan sabah.. bukan sekadar berani di media..

    ReplyDelete
  13. sama samalah memperjuangkan demi mencapai kemenangan besar dalam pilihan raya akan datang,dan ubahlah segala salah silap selama ini. ini kalilah bukan lain kali ya.habis kitani olehnya,ou banartunya.

    ReplyDelete