KOTA KINABALU: Bekas naib presiden Umno dan menteri kabinet, Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah mencadangkan agar perjanjian penubuhan Malaysia disemak selepas kegagalan pada tahun 1973.
Kematian bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Abdul Razak Hussein dan timbalannya, Tun Dr Ismail Abdul Rahman menyebabkan urusan penyemakan perjanjian laporan antara kerajaan (IGC) diketepikan sementara waktu, katanya.
Dr Ismail meninggal dunia pada Ogos 1973 diikuti Tun Razak pada Januari 1976.
“Perkara-perkara yang terkandung dalam Perjanjian 20/18 Perkara seharusnya disemak semula selepas 10 tahun penubuhan Malaysia,” katanya dalam satu forum anjuran Angkatan Amanah Merdeka cawangan Sabah itu turut dihadiri Pengerusi Amanah Merdeka Sabah, Datuk Wifred Bumburing dan Pengerusi PKR Negeri, Datuk Lajim Ukin di sini kelmarin.
“Mungkin semakan semula itu harus dipertimbangkan sekarang selepas 50 ulang tahun Malaysia,” cadang beliau.
Menurutnya, Tun Razak telah menubuhkan jawatankuasa dalam tahun 1973 yang dipengerusikan Dr Ismail untuk mengkaji semula perjanjian IGC.
Katanya lagi, bagaimanapun jawatankuasa itu tidak bersidang pada tahun itu kerana Rang Undang-Undang Draf Akta Pembangunan Petroleum (PDA) sedang disediakan.
Tengku Razaleigh yang juga bekas Pengerusi Petronas menjelaskan bahawa kebijaksanaan pada waktu itu adalah untuk mengutamakan penerimaan PDA oleh Sabah dan Sarawak.
Menurutnya, , hasrat Tun Razak sebenarnya mencerminkan niat baik kerajaan Persekutuan dalam menjaga hubungan dengan Sabah dan Sarawak.
Tengku Razaleigh menambah, ketegangan mengenai isu-isu berkaitan penubuhan Malaysia berpunca daripada maklumat yang tidak mencukupi dan pengetahuan rakyat yang tidak jelas.
`Orang ramai mula sedar’
“Hari ini orang ramai mulai sedar tentang kemarahan penduduk Sabah dan Sarawak mengenai isu ini. Rasa tidak puas hati ini akan memuncak dengan kedatangan 16 September.
“Rungutan mengenai janji yang tidak ditepati akan memenuhi halaman media. Apa pun satu perkara yang pasti adalah kebencian dan rasa tidak puas hati apabila Sabah dan Sarawak dianggap dan disamakan dengan 11 negeri lain di Semenanjung,”katanya.
Apapun menurut bekas Menteri Kewangan itu, ketidakfahaman (salah tanggap) itu bukan disengajakan tetapi disebabkan oleh kedaifan ilmu pengetahuan.
“Saya yakin bahawa kebanyakan perselisihan ini tidak lahir daripada niat jahat atau prasangka buruk. Kesilapan lazim yang menganggap Sabah dan Sarawak adalah dua negeri di Malaysia adalah contoh terbaik. ,” katanya.
Menurutnya, ia adalah satu kesilapan yang mengundang kemarahan rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak.
“Kita mesti perbetulkan salah faham ini, dan sebagai permulaan, kita harus menyediakan fakta yang tepat mengenai penubuhan Malaysia.
Untuk memberikan kefahaman menyeluruh, bahagian sejarah yang penting ini patut dimasukkan dalam kurikulum sekolah kita” jelasnya lagi.
Beliau menambah rasa tidak puas hati ini kedengaran di awal 80-an lagi tetapi tidak pernah muncul di forum-forum yang rasmi.
Katanya lagi, namun demikian, ianya tetap kekal sebagai kudis yang mempunyai potensi untuk pecah dan memberi kesengsaraan.
Oleh Musli Oli
Why is everybody is so busy body about Sabah matters?
ReplyDeleteThe Agreement was freely entered into by the expanded nation's founding fathers. It has withstood the test of time, despite some clamour by some quarters from time to time for a vaguely defined "review" of points in the Agreement. Any call for a "review" may suggest some unhappiness over the terms of the Agreement but unless it is clearly spelt out if any dissatisfaction actually arises out of some breach or contravention of the Agreement and any attempts at seeking redress having been tried and found wanting, any "review" is at best premature.
ReplyDeleteWhatever dissatisfaction there may be over the so-called 20 points of the Malaysia Agreement in the case of Sabah and 18 points in Sarawak's case has not really amounted to any solid basis for a legal challenge over any breach or contravention of the Agreement so far. In fact, Sarawak has recently just got another reaffirmation of the state's rights when a legal challenge to its barring of a citizen from Peninsular Malaysia from entering the state filed in a court in the peninsula was thrown out for lack of competent jurisdiction by the said court.
ReplyDeleteAnother persistent matter of contention in Sabah and Sarawak has been over the five per cent petroleum royalty that each state receives from Petronas. Again, it must be recalled that the five per cent quantum was something freely and readily agreed to between Sarawak and the Federal Government after extensive negotiations. The Sabah government quickly followed in signing a similar agreement thereafter.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone should find fault with these particular agreements now, any blame must fall at least equally between the Federal Government and either state government unless it can be shown that the state or federal authorities then put pressure to bear on the other party to sign a pre-drafted agreement. The first recourse for anyone in either state must be to hold the state government to account and justify the basis for signing the agreement. Partnership, after all, must be a two-way street if it is to mean anything at all.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, the record thus far would suggest that the Federal Government has usually bent over backwards to accommodate the expectations and demands of the people in both Sabah and Sarawak. Najib brought up the concrete examples of how he readily approved the setting up of a university each in Kuching and Miri while education minister and now a university for Sibu has also been approved. All these universities had been state initiatives.
ReplyDeleteYet another loaded accusation has been a complaint that the autonomy enjoyed by both Sabah and Sarawak has somehow been eroded over time. General ignorance may be more at fault here, such as when even senior state officials mistakenly assume Islam to be the official religion for the entire country when constitutional provisions excluding Sabah and Sarawak from having any official religion remain in place.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the imperative of national integration will naturally have taken its course after almost half a century of Malaysia. This is largely for the greater good of the nation as a whole. But admittedly there will be some areas where the people in both Sabah and Sarawak quite firmly believe importing certain norms from the peninsula is unhealthy. Increasingly, even people in the peninsula realise as much and are actually advocating importing Sabah and Sarawak norms over to the peninsula.
ReplyDeleteIt is therefore somewhat mystifying that instead of re-affirming and seeking to strengthen the provisions of the Malaysia Agreement, the opposition sees fit to draw up its so-called "Kuching Declaration" committing the opposition parties to some ill-defined "equal partnership" agreement between state and federal governments and promising that it is a legally-binding document that will stand up in court should a future opposition-led Federal Government not live up to its provisions.
ReplyDeleteWill someone enlighten us as to what precisely may be wrong with the Malaysia Agreement to warrant an "alternative" agreement now and why, if indeed the original Agreement has its shortcomings, nobody bothered to legally test those shortcomings and the few who actually did find fault find that they themselves come up short?
ReplyDeleteAnd after this there are more coming up
ReplyDeleteCadang saja apa la tu
ReplyDeleteKu Li oh Ku Li balik2 nama dia saja ni
ReplyDeleteHe is nothing but a loser
ReplyDelete