Pages

Powered By Blogger

Sunday 31 December 2023

有话直说 1/1/24

有话直说 1/1/24

目前联邦席位分配必须是A 65%:HK 35%。这是沙砂傀儡政府最低要求。

这就必须减A议席;加HK以保持65%:35%。

沙砂人民真正要的是各三分之一,否则脱马独立去,向新加坡看齐。绝对是正确的。

请参考Cobbold Commission Report: Paragraph 236(a)(i) 幅员和潜能也必须是考量席位分配。

给沙砂35%,让他们决定怎么分配。

说砂席位从31增加到43,会促成该政党做大,不知道这些博士专家们是用哪一门的逻辑思维模式。

A邦国专家们恐慌的是A国无法任性尽情掠夺,剥削,打压,抢劫,霸凌和殖民沙砂吧!

一面唱KAH/AHK三国联邦平等伙伴关系;一面专干‘挂羊头卖狗肉’的丑恶行径了吧!

沙砂傀儡政府只要求35%联邦议席

沙砂傀儡政府只要求35%联邦议席却引发如此反弹。自1963年开始沙砂一直退让。因此早就今天马来亚联邦席位分配是75%而沙砂只有25%。

沙砂以国身份参组马联邦,所以是三国联邦平等伙伴关系。

可是,马霸权不遵守MA63, 在国阵巫统胡搞之下在1976年,违反国际法把沙砂贬成13州之一。

2021年复邦后,马霸权,还是我行我素殊不知,惹怒多少沙砂人民。

Malay(A); Saba(H)和Sarawa(K)各邦国身份代表。

议席分配和联邦拨款怎能是A+H+K总人口来计算?这岂不是致沙砂于死地或永远遭殃。

博士进发黄和Merdeka民调中心主任都同声同气认为应该是A+H+K的马联邦总人数来决定联邦席位。他们根本不尊重Cobbold Comission Report: Paragraph 236(a)(i)除了人口,还要考虑沙沙的幅员和潜能。

如果是以人口划分选区也必须是各邦国的人口。绝对不是A+H+K的总人口。

今天H K要求35%:A65%有什么过分或引起政治动荡?

其实,沙砂人民要各三分之一。

知识就是力量:Petroniaga 吸纳5000万

知识就是力量
Petroniaga 有限公司耗逾5000万吸纳

Petroniaga 有限公司进行投资5000多万加强供应商网络,提升存储能力,注入兑换煤气桶和强化物流管理。

Petroniaga 有布局65名经销商和280名次经销商供应网络。

对于MyGaz停止营业后其属下的经/次经销商或零售商几乎都过度进Petroniaga 而非砂火箭林财耀所言失业。

原本3个月才能达标的黄兑换红桶,就在短短3週就换了16.5万桶。其实,煤气桶兑换没有设时限。却在政客特意耍弄下,模糊不清,再加上人民本身无知,因此造成这模样的慌张。

大家包挂我对客服热线操作不习惯,所以,不知如何是好。

据报道Bintango有经销商卖RM29.00 Sarikei RM29.60说泗民成本高卖贵,这非事实因为Petroniaga 已经吸纳所有成本。

火箭队上议员黄秀励是否认同泗民商家的解释?

Friday 29 December 2023

知识就是力量---AHK

知识就是力量—AHK (Malaya, Sabah & Sarawak)
这Youtube 视频有关于“不合理增加砂州国会选区会让东马政党乘机做大?” Astro 本地圈 28/12/2023

选区重划每8年,可以重新检讨。上次是2015年到2023年,正8,砂政府要求符合Cobbold Commission 和IGC Report要求至少35%的联邦席位分配。有专家像黄进发博士和郑名烈就无知的发表说这可能会引起政治动荡。砂这次可能要求增加12个联邦席位。

马来亚人还是把砂看成马来亚13州之一,所有才这么说砂是全联邦拥有最多席位。Astro广播员口口声声中吠叫砂州,砂州,根本就是既无礼,又无知,没有一点丁愧疚感。2021年12月在联邦议会复邦算什么?所谓的国会决定,还有什么价值? 

Sarawa(K), Saba(H)和Malay(A) 堂堂正正的国被参组马联邦。马来西亚其实就是把马来亚更名伪装。砂沙贬成州,是违反国际法,马霸权照做,马来亚人有没有感到可耻。 今天像Astro广播员的马来亚人持着这种傲慢无礼,根本不懂尊重为何物应该不少吧! 

沙砂是跟马来亚联邦,绝对不是跟马半岛11州联邦。马来亚席位从1963年,不断的增加所谓的国会议席到今天是(马来亚)166:56(沙砂)是霸有75%。怎么不说这会造成沙砂两国都想脱马独立呢?

没错,现在,砂拉越华人圈有这种共识和共鸣:【脱马无罪,独立有理】。记得,独立也是砂人固有的权力。砂沙脱马独立是迟早的事.  

说真的,这所谓的‘国会’根本就是为马来亚11州共同体的,跟沙砂根本没有一点丁关系。 沙砂在这所谓的’国会’根本就是大错特错。

以人口来决定联邦席位分配和拨款根本就是违反MA63协议和是致沙砂于死地。马霸权不尊重MA63,一切以马霸权意愿来玩弄沙砂。今天沙砂政府无能,无奈,无心也无脑,活像傀儡,这并不代表沙砂未来的新政府的行为。

60年被殖民,一切都是以马来亚为重/中心,因此很多马来亚人自以为马来亚应该处处都要10份占9份的特权,是合该(应该的)。

Thursday 28 December 2023

到底谁在‘卖砂’?

以事论事,事实求是---到底谁在‘卖砂’?

谁在马联邦体系内,谁都在卖砂。马联邦的整个体系模型模式就是想尽办法殖民砂拉越。

自马联邦开端以来,他们就采取各种殖民手段。

他们以马联邦的名义掠夺,剥削,打压,抢劫,霸凌和殖民砂拉越。从来一点都不放松。1966年大陆架法令就是马霸权殖民的进行曲。

1974年,人联党加入砂国阵。砂国阵就是在联邦国阵大阵营内,以英国西敏式的操作:少数服从多数,否则就要面对党鞭。这就是陷阱。

1966年,砂发生宪法危机,马联邦就乘虚而入干预砂内政。第一任首长宁甘是被马的Tunku和砂的Taib Mahmud 和TunHaji Open推翻拉下台的。

即使,砂爱国义士群起反对抵抗不了英殖民者和马来亚狼豺虎豹的摧残下,失败告终。

1974年,石油发展法令和2012年领海法令都是至砂于死地。

2018年改朝换代后,砂火箭队所作所为也都是砂国阵当时走的同一套路。

请问邱先生,砂火箭队和当年砂国阵有差别吗?

今天砂政盟,一面谈自主权,一面接受殖民。砂天然气100%属砂,却自愿分49%股份给Petronas。怎么一回事?

Monday 25 December 2023

Allocation for religion in Sarawak

PRESS STATEMENT
Re: Allocations for religions in Sarawak

See The Star, Wednesday 20 December, 2023

Sarawak funding for religion should stop unless there is transparency and fairness over the matter. Over the years since Unit for Other Religions (UNIFOR) had been set-up, the Sarawak government under GPS had annual allocations to other religions. People of other religions, especially, the Buddhists or Christians seemed happy about it and for 2024 Premier had announced that he had allocated RM110 million for Sarawak’s Unit for Other Religions. 

Deputy Premier, Datuk Amar Douglas Uggah had disclosed that since 2017 the government had approved total allocations of RM341.8 million for various house of worship. 

Over the years, the GPS government was telling about allocations to UNIFOR but how about allocations to Islam or for the propagation of Islam? Was Islam not funded? If not funded, then this is against fairness and a discrimination against the muslims. If been funded, the GPS government is to disclose to the public how much allocations been given to Islam.

If been funded, it is here that I demand transparency and fairness from the GPS government to disclose how much had been allocated to religion of Islam since 2017. I demand transparency and fairness over this matter because the muslims may not feel happy if allocations were only meant for prayer houses under UNIFOR. Non-transparency and fairness in allocations of funds can create racial and religious tensions between the muslims and non-muslims in the state. I hope premier takes this seriously for the peace of the people of Sarawak.  

I also demand transparency in this area of allocations because taxpayers have a right to know where or how their money is spent. This is a legal demand. People should not be made to pay taxes unless they know how their money is spent. It should be legal not to pay taxes to the government when the government refused, failed or could not disclose to public where their money is spent. 

Again, such allocations, if any, to Islam or for projects for Islamic cause should not be more than that was allocated to Churches or to Christian because Christians are the majority in the state. If allocated, it should be more or less the same as received by the Buddhists because Buddhists and Muslims in Sarawak are more or less of the same numbers. If allocations for Islam are more than what Christians can get, this can also cause disharmony among the various races in the state.  

VOON LEE SHAN
PRESIDENT,  
PARTI BUMI KENYALANG 
23 December 2023

Sunday 24 December 2023

Mahathir created all these

WHAT MAHATHIR SAID ABOUT THE MALAYS IS TRUE. BUT MAHATHIR IS ALSO THE MAIN REASON WHY MELAYU TO DAY ARE MUDAH LUPA. LAZY AND RELIGIOUS EXTREMIST. 

Forwarding as received. I don't know who wrote this long and brilliant piece but it hits the nail on the head.

If I am the Prime Minister of Malaysia, I'd feel ashamed.

 In this country, the Malays have it all. The bulk exporters are Malays, the wholesalers of sugar and rice are Malays, there are many Malays in international trading companies, the petrol company President/PETRONAS station operators are all Malays, the highway operators are Malays, the bread and oil flour operators are Malays, almost all the importers are Malays, and the owners AP are All Malays.

Wholesalers and importers of vegetables, food, oil and vinegar are Malays, the vast majority of those with shallow/deep sea fishing licences are Malays, the owners of the largest square metres of rice paddies are Malays, transport and long-distance excursion buses are Malays, water, electricity and gas suppliers are all Malays. And, while professing to be Muslim, even the directors of casinos/gaming companies are Malays. What level of hypocrisy.

With the exception of the coffin, toddy, car workshops and pig related industries, almost all others are 100 percent controlled and occupied by the Malays. 

If I were prime minister, I would be extremely ashamed and self-conscious.

The 2022 budget allocates 97% of funds to the Malay people, and only 3% for other talents. The people are already protesting, especially the Chinese, and they are furious!

The management of the country's largest higher education practice programme, Mara, is Malay, the management of the Pilgrimage Foundation is Malay, the malays are in charge of the provident fund, the Malays are really in charge of the MCA, the country's largest bank is Malay, the train LRT operator is Malay, the owner of mining and manufacturing plants is Malay, and many factories and engineering contractors are Malays.

They are everywhere, occupying all the political and economic fields, what else do the Malays want? Why not, for a change, develop the economy well, unite the people, bring the country into a positive track, and be a good leader? And in the past 50 years, the New Economic Policy has moulded the Malays into first-class crutched citizens, and indeed it has reached the level of ludicrousity.

Why do you still need to look up to the Chinese and other ethnic groups, Prime Minister? Repeating the same mistakes, not using means to divide the people? Is this what the government wants to see?

As the largest ethnic group in the country, after independence, it has deprived the economic, political, cultural, and religious ownership positions, and the government has been cultivating the Malays without doubt, sleeping and forgetting to eat, and meticulously cultivating the Malays for 50 years, but it is still unable to meet, refuses to treat all ethnic groups fairly, and continues to hold power and deceive the law, resulting in corrupt officials and corrupt officials who corrupt all.

For 64 years, the people are yearning, and the government is deceiving itself and fooling the people. Now it is not a question of the Malays, the Chinese, the Indians or the other 30 nationalities, it has come to the moment of national refoection, it is the problem of Malaysia, the problem of the Malaysians, the people yearn for a new Malaysian spirit. Don't blame the other ethnic groups, it is actually the Malays in power who are deceiving the Malays.

If I were prime minister, I would be extremely ashamed and self-conscious.

The monarch of the country is Malay, the Prime Minister is Malay, most Ministers are Malay, and the heads of government agencies are all Malays. The concept of political governance has derailed, the name of the country has been markedly evil, and the spirit of the Malays has been used to blind the eyes of the Malay and hinder the development of the country.

The Malays are falsely rallied in the name of justice, protecting privileges, ethnic status, religion, and imperial power from exploitation and abolition. But the whole country is Malay in power; the deputy is Malay, the chief police officer is Malay, the chief of the army, navy and air force is Malay, the president of the Bank Negara is Malay, except for Penang, all ministers and state chiefs are Malays, the finance minister is Malay, 3/4 of the MPs are Malays, the district/city officials are Malays, and the civil servants are 97% Malays.
        
Malay supremacy is a racist creed that the Malays are the masters of Malaysia, and that the Chinese and Indians constitute ethnic minorities, which provide for the treatment of the Malays by recognizing Article 153 of the Constitution. Of the 32.17 million people, 69% are indigenous Malays and Ibans and Kadazan, 21% Are Chinese and 7% are Indian.

The Malaysian Constitution contains a number of provisions providing for Malay privileges that state that the special status of the Malays and the indigenous peoples of Sabah and Sarawak must be guaranteed. This provision has over the years been contrived, cajoled and downright manipulated to include dominance in Public services, scholarships or grants, and educational or training privileges and almost in every sphere of life in Malaysia. 

Any permit or business licence must be reserved for a certain share to malays and aborigines; unreasonable places for Malays and aborigines for further study in Malaysian universities or educational institutions; Islam as the state religion; control or restriction on the propagation of any other religious doctrine or belief to Islamists; continued retention of Malay reservations that existed before independence, which are distributed only to Malays or aborigines; the national language must be Malay, etc.

In 1970, the Government initiated the New Economic Policy to improve the economic status of the Malays, which referred to preferential policies for Malays and aborigines, including the need for indigenous peoples to have a 30 per cent stake in the economic sphere;

Enrollment in tertiary institutions was originally 55 per cent Indigenous and 45 per cent non-Indigenous, which later became 95 Per cent native; listed companies had to sell 30 per cent of their shares to natives; through privatization schemes, bumiputra businesses were given more access to business and management opportunities; indigenous joint venture programmes were encouraged to achieve the goal of economic restructuring; the Government guaranteed that Malay students would study abroad and cultivate more Malay professionals. Instead of a general upliftment of the country, the government made this a zero sum strategy: Uplift Malay (not necessarily the other indigenous population) at the expense in non Malay. A policy that eventually leads to a lose-lose situation.

The NEP lasted for 15 years and a number of preferential policies played a role in raising the level of education and economic status of the Malays and indigenous peoples. After the expiry of the 1990 period, the Malaysian government proposed a new development policy that never stopped, but it took a total of 40 years. Since the founding of the Malaysia, Chinese are the largest income tax payers in the country, with a total of up to 80% and Indians about 10%. Because of the preferential Zakat system, even millionaire Malays pay little tax. 

If I were prime minister, I would be extremely ashamed and self-conscious.

The Malays should not always seek protection so that they are unable to rely on themselves and hinder the competitiveness and sound development of the country. Many Malays, hyped up by the political sentiment of the opposition, are still desperately defending the preferential treatment and support of the nation. The Malays had in fact monopolized all the domains and, compared to other races, they still considered themselves marginalized and the Malays as weak. This is a big lie that the government propagates. 

Religion is guaranteed, and Muslims pray every day, but wealth does not fall from the sky. Half a century later, having been educated into good and bad work, it is time to change course and face reality and work hard in life.

Why are you afraid of other peoples? The answer is actually very simple, because the government has cultivated the laziness of the Malay people, waiting for the durian to fall down every day, getting it for nothing, and getting used to waiting for work. In order to achieve its ends, the government uses religion to spread racial hatred, to distort the truth, to deceive the small, to do whatever it takes, just to grasp the privileges of preferential treatment and support?

Prime Minister, are you not ashamed? You don't take other ethnic groups seriously at all, will we be a family? How long will it take for the Malays to honest themselves and stand up?

Remember to forward! ❤ ️ 🙏 🏻

Sunday 10 December 2023

Program Pengukuhan...Tahunan 2023

*Hello Comrades,*

*Re: Program Pengukuhan Pertubuhah Politik Tahunan 2023*

*Venue: Pullman Hotel Kuching*

In attendance with me were Vice President Dr. Richard Ibuh and Supreme Council Member, Mr Atet Diego

We have picked a few points from today's talk by ROS. There are 126 complaints last year to ROS about party mismanagement and about takeovers or tussles for control of party, especially, when there were elections in the party. As briefed by the Investigating Officer from PDRM some groups came like helicopters or from nowhere wanted to take over the party and this normally led to instability in the party. They wanted to highjack the party from old members/committees.

ROS don't welcome instability in party as matters could be brought to Court. We understand that well because if matters go to court, ROS could be named as a party in the Suit.

From the talk, it seems that political parties need to examine their party constitutions and any amendments to party constitutions have to be in accordance with advice of ROS and legal procedures in the Societies Act, else the amendments could not be approved by ROS. 

For party to sack and suspend members, it seems that the advice of ROS political parties should have proper provisions for this. PBK's constitution is clear on how to sack and to suspend party members and all amendments been approved by ROS as they were all in compliance with the law and as advised by ROS.

Be advised PBK party constitution was amended not long ago and all clauses were on advice and approval of ROS and in accordance with the relevant laws. I hope members and supporters understand this and we all have to put things to rest and move on.

When ROS answered a question from the floor about the rights of members to complain, ROS gave an important hint to me that PBK has to tighten the party constitution further although I feel it adequate in dealing with desperados or unhappy members in the party. I believe that party has to be stable before we could face our enemies. We could not afford to spend energies and time on internal matters.

Records by ROS showed PBK is among the parties in Sarawak that has a good Report Card and we have to thank our learned lady Secretary General being a good goalkeeper for the party. Secretary General's job is heavy and we need to appreciate efforts been made in "book-keeping" by our Secretary General.

In compliance with Societies Act and directives of ROS all political parties must have a Registered or Certified Accountant to prepare and audit their financial returns each year to ROS in which this been complied by PBK. All our returns never been subjected to any queries by ROS.

It was disclosed that there are political parties that did not comply with directives of ROS and Societies Act that led the party being investigated and been issued show cause letters and warnings by ROS.


God bless Parti Bumi Kenyalang, God bless Sarawak.

Yours respectfully,

VOON LEE SHAN
President
7 December 2023

"Race and Religion"

*Race and Religion Politics*

Sarawakians must understand race politics is a "Politics of Divide and Rule" taught by the British to elite Malays and UMNO. This became the mantra in Malay and Malaysian politics 

For this reason, when Malaysia was formed with UMNO leading or controlling the government, the federal constitution included Islam as the official religion of Malaysia, and the constitution also placed Malay rights as special rights in Malaysia although rights of other people are protected. 

These helped UMNO and Malays able to strengthen themselves against other Malaysian races. They can do this easily in Malaya because they have the numbers and they make sure they could stay together. In crucial times, the Malays could easily be united against other races because race and religion could help to unite them. 

It is hard to deny that Parti Bumiputera had not adopted this strategy to divide Sarawakians further. PB could survive because it has the support of Federal and UMNO over the decades. One could always guess that UMNO didn't want to see PBB be divided or fall and it could be for this reason the late Tan Sri Adenan Satem when he was chief minister, said Sarawak has no need for UMNO because there is already an UMNO in Sarawak. He was hinting PBB is proxy of UMNO or is UMNO for Sarawak 

We could read that the the real mentor of PB was Tun Razak who could have suggested Parti Bumiputra (PB) to merge with Parti Pesaka. Tun Rahman Yakub at that time was known to be very close to Tunku, Razak and Ghazali Shafie 

Jugah was supposed to work with SNAP and Razak could know this would not be good for PB in Sarawak. This was because Ningkan supported Jugah as Governor but Razak and Ghazali Shafie, if we could recall correctly, was against it. Tun Openg was then made the Governor - see the books by Prof Michael Leigh.

Jugah fell into the trap because he was offered to be the President when PB merged with Parti Pesaka to form PBB but not knowing that he has to pay the price that he later on was "forced" to retire from active politics. 

Jugah was made president for awhile only and Tawi Sli was also made CM in early days. This could be the strategy to please the Dayaks. 

After Jugah was no more president of PBB, Tun Rahman Yakub took over. Tawi Sli was also then removed! 

That completed the first phase of Dayak downfall. 

Are Dayaks still blind and deaf not to know the game played by race and religion politics? 

We could only be strong in Sarawak and pull down PBB/GPS, if Christians in Sarawak are united. 

We have to exploit Christian Supremacy in Sarawak and recognise Sarawak has one race only - the Sarawakian Race. 

We still have more than half Sarawakians who are Christians and we have to win the other 14% non Christians in Sarawak to form the government. There is no reason for this 14% non Christians be happy with what is going on in Malaysia and in Sarawak at the moment. They may also wish to agree for Sarawak independence from Malaysia.

If Sarawak could exit from Malaysia, PBB will be weak. At the moment PBB is strong because they know they can have support from UMNO always.

In a democracy, the rule is that minorities need to follow the majority but in Sarawak it was planned that the minority rules over the majority.

In Sarawak there are about 26-28 dayak majority seats out of 82. Even if Dayaks could be united and win all seats, Dayaks will still not be able to be Premier and Govenor of Sarawak. For this reason when you are not able to be in control of the government, you could not put your own people as head of government departments and government agencies.

For coming 13PRN more seats could be created but we doubt that there will be additional Dayak seats be given. This is a divide and rule tactic too. Can Dayak win when Dayaks are only fighting for Dayak interests only? If Dayaks still cling to Dayakism or Dayak interests only, Dayaks as Orang Asal would see themselves become squatters in their own land.

There are many Dayaks YBs who prefer to support PBB for their own survival. Their support for PBB will see Dayaks be split for long time to come and be left dry in their own land. 

*PBK is the only party pursuing the " Politics of Sarawakian Race & Supremacy of Christianity" in Sarawak*

*PBK deserves to be supported to fight against suppression and oppression of Malaya and to bring Sarawak to freedom and independence*



*Voon Lee Shan*
President Parti Bumi Kenyalang
11 December 2023

Thursday 7 December 2023

留马VS独立的拉扯战

留马Vs 独立 拉扯战
针对JamesChin/JC教授的新10点协议,非政府组织/NGOs –马婆罗洲困境基金会,SAS (Saya Anak Sarawak), 沙巴砂拉越澳洲新西兰权力组织/SSRANZ和肯雅兰党PBK便联合声明,评论JC教授在崩坏的马联邦成立60周年提出这新10点协议。

教授总结了沙砂/SS人民对马联邦无数次侵犯和不遵守MA63协议迟迟未实现SS人的梦想进步和繁荣国家的情景普遍不满。我觉得SS人一天比一天清醒,对不公平的对待也一天比一天感到愤怒。

在马联邦内,MA63所承诺的世俗, 多元化权力,婆罗洲化,自治,宗教自由,公民身份都一一被侵蚀。

SS的资源不间断的被掠夺和SS人不间断的被剥削的情况和马半岛不断的进步和繁荣是建立在SS的贫穷上。

马联邦(马半岛的伪装)一直以来,都不履行MA63原本宪法条款像每年向沙巴收税后,40%回馈,都没做到。

1971年推出的新经济政策,就制度化推崇马来族和回教主义至上完全破坏SS所推崇的世俗,多元流政经文教制度。这是无法挽救的冲突,SS唯一的途径就是寻求独立自主一切。

JC教授这10点协议证实马联邦从头到现在都未兑现创建时的承诺。所以,SS人民是时候以联合国赋予的人权1514号的自决权和1541号集体决议权来裁决SS更自由和快乐的美好和光明的未来。

Monday 4 December 2023

为了更自由,更幸福的婆罗洲

婆罗洲先锋报
为了更自由、更幸福的婆罗洲

非政府组织表示James Chin教授的“十点协议”反映了联邦政府未能兑现MA63

James Chin教授提出了“十点协议”。

非政府组织认为沙巴和砂拉越没有任何未来留在马来西亚

2023 年 12 月 3 日

这是沙巴、砂拉越非政府组织——即马来西亚婆罗洲困境基金会(Bopimafo)、澳大利亚新西兰沙巴砂拉越权利组织(SSRANZ)、我砂拉越儿女组织(SAS)和肯雅兰土著党(PBK)的联合声明:

三个非政府组织主席 Daniel John Jambun、Robert Pei 和 Peter John Jaban 以及 PBK 主席温利山发表联合声明,评论JamesChin教授呼吁“重新肯定”沙砂的“十点协议”以及在摇摇欲坠的联邦成立60周年之际,根据1963年马来西亚协议(MA63),沙砂的世俗和多元化权利。

“JChin的十点协议(一)要求立即实现马来西亚联邦对沙巴和砂拉越人民的梦想和承诺;(二)重申沙巴和砂拉越在组建马来西亚联邦时与马来亚是平等伙伴;并重申婆罗洲州属在联邦宪法第1(2)条下的独特地位,有别于1963年马来西亚协议所载的马来西亚半岛11个州属。


它还(三)寻求重申沙巴和砂拉越各自对其领土范围内的资源拥有专属领土权;(四)重申沙巴和砂拉越的每个社区都有权拥有其独特的文化和仪式表达、身份和语言;(五)重申沙巴和砂拉越是世俗国家、多元宗教社会,正如我们的祖先所承诺的那样;(六)并重申所有沙巴人和砂拉越人都是平等公民,并拒绝一切形式的种族主义、宗教不容忍和至上主义意识形态。” (引用:婆罗洲邮报 23 年 11 月 30 日)

他们指出,教授总结了人民对马来西亚联邦政府 60 年来多次持续侵犯其基本 MA63 权利的普遍不满。这些仍然是未实现的“梦想”和幻想。

其中包括非法改变MA63马来西亚的世俗、多元化和多元文化概念、婆罗洲化、自治、宗教自由、剥夺公民身份以及未能按照协议发展和推进沙巴和砂拉越。经济发展不平衡,尤其是马来亚凭借沙巴和砂拉越的资源,特别是石油和天然气而发展起来,而SS却落后和贫困,甚至在基本结构和便利设施方面也没有取得什么进展。

最近,砂拉越电视台的圣诞颂歌节目引发了不满,该节目拒绝了砂拉越教会协会(ACA)将歌曲《O Holy Night》纳入节目的要求,因为官方政策排除了“宗教元素”。 ACA拒绝参加庆祝活动,并发表声明强烈批评审查制度,并维护砂拉越社会的宗教自由和世俗本质。这得到了整个砂拉越的广泛支持,电视台管理层很快就接纳了这首歌。

在沙巴,也存在类似的不满,因为未能履行 MA63 的创始条款,例如 MA63 规定支付(第 121D 条)每年税收收入 40% 的权利,以及许多其他问题,特别是缺乏发展、贫困和“非法”问题。

然而,非政府组织和PBK主席表示,重新确认是否会对马来亚人产生任何影响值得怀疑,因为马来亚人60年来一直逃避遵守MA63,否认沙巴MA63 40%的税收回扣权利就是例证。

他们表示,世俗、多元和多元文化政治制度的概念是沙巴和砂拉越放弃马来西亚真正独立的几个关键基本或基础术语之一。然而,自1971年新经济政策实施以来,这一概念已被改变,并被制度化的种族宗教至上主义(Ketuanan Melayu)种族隔离所取代。

此外,即使联合政府同意这10点,它也不太可能获得反对党的任何支持,反对党由坚定的种族宗教原教旨主义者组成,发誓要废除世俗概念并取代马来西亚作为伊朗或阿富汗风格的伊斯兰教统治者和宪法。这些人还宣称“马来西亚属于马来人”。

他说,教授提出的重新确认沙巴砂拉越权利的10点呼吁实际上证实了马来西亚是在创建时做出的承诺从未兑现或已被删除,因此具有误导性和欺诈性。



Borneo Herald
For a Freer and Happier Borneo

NGOs say Prof James Chin's "10-Point Agreement" Reflects Failure of the Federation to Honour MA63

Prof James Chin proposed a "10-Point Agreement".

NGOs do not see any future for Sabah & Sarawak to remain in Malaysia

3rd December 2023

This is a joint statement by Sabah, Sarawak NGOs - namely Borneo Plight in Malaysia Foundation (Bopimafo), Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ), Saya Anak Sarawak (SAS) and Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK):

Mssrs Daniel John Jambun, Robert Pei and Peter John Jaban, the respective presidents of the 3 NGOs and PBK President Voon Lee Shan have issued a joint statement commenting on Professor James Chin’s “10-point Agreement” calling for “re-affirmation” of Sabah and Sarawak secular and pluralist rights under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) on the occasion of the 60 anniversary of the shaky federation.

“Chin’s 10-point agreement calls for the dream and promise of the Federation of Malaysia for the people of Sabah and Sarawak to be fulfilled without delay; reaffirm Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners with Malaya in the formation of the Federation of Malaysia; and reaffirm the unique status of the Borneo states under Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution, distinct from the 11 states in Peninsular Malaysia, as enshrined in the Malaysia Agreement of 1963.

It also seeks to reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak each possess exclusive territorial rights over the resources that are within their own territorial boundaries; reaffirm that every community in Sabah and Sarawak has the right to their distinct unique cultures and ceremonial expression, identity and language; reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak as secular states, multi-religious society as promised by our forefathers; and reaffirm that all Sabahans and Sarawakians are equal citizens, and reject all forms of racism, religious intolerance, and supremacist ideology.” (quote: Borneo Post 30/11/23)

They noted that the Professor had summed up the widespread dissatisfaction of the people with the multiple and continuing violations of their fundamental MA63 rights by the Malaysian Federal government over 60 years. These have remained unfulfilled “dreams” and illusions.

They include the illegal alteration of the MA63 secular, pluralist and multicultural concept of Malaysia, Borneonisation, autonomous self-government, religious freedom, denial of citizenship and failure to develop and advance Sabah and Sarawak as agreed. This is starkly heightened by the lopsided economic development whereby Malaya has been developed with Sabah and Sarawak resources particularly oil and gas, while they have been left backward and impoverished with little progress even in basic structures and amenities.

The unhappiness recently flared up over the TV Sarawak’s Christmas Carol programme which rejected the Association of Churches in Sarawak’s (ACA) request to include the song “O Holy Night” in the programme because of official policy excluding “religious elements”. The ACA declined to join the celebration and issued a statement strongly criticising the censorship and asserting the religious freedom and secular nature of Sarawak society. This received popular support throughout Sarawak and the TV station management quickly backed down on the exclusion of the song.

In Sabah, there is a similar dissatisfaction over the failure to honour MA63 founding terms such as the MA63 stipulated payment of (Art 121D) 40% entitlement to annual tax revenue among many other issues especially lack of development, poverty and the “illegals” issue.

The NGOs and PBK presidents said, however, that it is doubtful that the re-affirmation would have any impact on the Malayans who have evaded honouring the MA63 for 60 years as exemplified by the denial of Sabah’s MA63 40% entitlement.

They said that the concept of a secular, pluralist and multicultural political system was one of several key basic or foundational terms for Sabah and Sarawak to give up real independence for Malaysia. However, this concept has since the implementation of the New Economic Policy in 1971 been altered and replaced with an institutionalised race religion supremacist (Ketuanan Melayu) apartheid.

Further, it is unlikely that even if the Unity government agreed with the 10 Points, it would be able to gain any support from the Opposition which is made up of committed race religion fundamentalists sworn to dismantle the secular concept and replace Malaysia as an Iranian or Afghanistan style Islamic Caliphate and Constitution. The same people have declared that “Malaysia belonged to the Malays”.

Mr Voon the PBK president said that it was ironic the Professor had previously criticised PBK for seeking legal advice from a foreign lawyer who declared that Malaysia was a fraud. 

He said that the professor's 10-point call for re-affirmation of Sabah Sarawak rights in reality confirmed that Malaysia was created with promises which never fulfilled or have been removed and therefore were misleading and a fraud. 

He cited the British colonial office as having commented with concern in 1963 that the Malayans' promise that SS would have "accelerated development" in Malaysia was a "false prospectus". 

Mr Voon who filed a suit in the High Court of Borneo in 2021 to declare MA63 invalid, said the process of making MA63 was riddled with illegalities and deceit. 

Legal analysis of the making of MA63 has proven that it was, in fact, a null and void agreement from the beginning. This was because Singapore, North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak were still British-controlled colonies and not sovereign states with the legal capacity or competence to make international agreements. This view is supported by the International Court of Justice decision in the Chagos case 2019 and affirmed by the Mauritius vs. Maldives case iin 2021.

If MA63 was a validly made international treaty, it would have been terminated under International law, by the multiple violations of foundational and basic terms of the agreement and rendered it no longer binding. Either way, Sabah and Sarawak have the opportunity to seek independence which would free them to determine their own political destiny and social and economic development without foreign control.

The joint statement pointed out that the 20 and 18 Points were not binding agreements but just an expression of the people's desired terms for the federation. They said that there is no evidence of the agreements being signed with the UK or Malayan governments. According to the British colonial officials, the Sarawak 18 Points were never provided to them. They noted some of Sabah's Points like the "No State religion" stipulation was included in the Federal Constitution.

They questioned whether it was realistic to re-affirm the unfulfilled promises and prolong a union without meaning and benefit when it is so obvious that the agreed objectives of MA63 were never fulfilled but in fact, abandoned for 60 years. They said Sabah and Sarawak should look at the alternative solution of seeking an exit from the failed union.

They called on the respective Sabah and Sarawak state governments to seek a review of SS's position in Malaysia after the PAS party repeatedly rejected the concept of Malaysia as a secular country and the federation's failure to honour what was promised. It is widely anticipated that the PAS fundamentalist party will implement its Islamic Caliphate when it wins power and controls the Malaysian Parliament in a couple of elections time. The NGOs said the review of MA63 (if valid) would be timely and it was essential since it has already long been terminated by multiple breaches of fundamental terms for federation.

Sabah and Sarawak must seek lawful and peaceful means to Decolonise itself and work towards sovereign Independent nations. 

End of Statement  
Signed by 
Daniel John Jambun Bopimafo President 
Robert Pei SSRANZ President
Peter John Jaban SAS founder
Voon Lee Shan PBK President

3 December 2023

Friday 1 December 2023

Petronas 在砂的权限

石油发展法只赋予国油开采权 作者:LianCheng (2023)
古晋,11 月 23 日:1974 年石油开发法案 (PDA74) 并未将其经营或曾经经营的区域的土地所有权授予国家石油有限公司 (Petronas)。

砂拉越法律顾问拿督斯里JC Fong解释说,PDA74仅授予PETRONAS勘探、开采和拥有石油的权利,而没有将土地本身归属于该公司。

“PDA74 从未将土地归属于 PETRONAS。根据《砂拉越土地法》,大陆架上的土地被定义为(砂)国有土地。”

如果石油和天然气枯竭,则有义务将土地归还给砂拉越,为(砂)国家提供决定其未来用途的机会。

“然后我们就可以决定如何处理它。在这种情况下,我们希望利用废弃或枯竭的油井或油田来开发碳储存场所。”

砂拉越正在积极探索将其 1,665 口废弃油井开发为碳储存中心的潜力,这一举措符合砂拉越对绿色经济的承诺。

能源与环境可持续发展部副部长拿督Hazland Abang Hipni博士表示,这些废弃油井有能力储存至少90亿吨碳。

这个数字超过了砂拉越森林的碳储存能力,估计在 7500 亿吨至 10 亿吨之间。

他进一步解释说,上述容量不包括沿海含水层(渗透岩层)所带来的潜力,该含水层也可以作为碳储存介质。

这项碳储存计划预计将抵消该地区的碳排放,同时减少总计60万吨的碳排放,并为砂拉越带来额外收入。

Petroleum Development Act only vests in Petronas right to mine
By Lian Cheng 

KUCHING, Nov 23: The Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74) does not vest land ownership to National Petroleum Limited (PETRONAS) for the areas it operates or used to operate on. 

Sarawak Legal Counsel Dato Sri JC Fong explained that PDA74 only grants PETRONAS the rights to explore, exploit, and own petroleum, without vesting the land itself in the company. 

“PDA74 never vests the land in PETRONAS. The land in the continental shelf is defined as State land under the Sarawak Land Code,” Fong told DayakDaily. 

In the event of oil and gas depletion, the obligation arises to return the land to Sarawak, providing an opportunity for the State to determine its future use. 

“Then we can decide what to do with it. In this case, we want to develop the sites for carbon storage, by using the abandoned or depleted oil wells or oil fields,” said Fong

Sarawak is actively exploring the potential development of its 1,665 used oil wells as a carbon storage center, an initiative aligning with the Sarawak’s commitment to a green economy. 

Deputy Minister of Energy and Environmental Sustainability Datuk Dr Hazland Abang Hipni said these used oil wells have the capacity to store at least nine billion tonnes of carbon. 

This figure surpasses the carbon storage capacity of Sarawak’s forests, estimated to be between 750,000 million and one billion tonnes. 

He further explained that the mentioned capacity does not include the potential posed by coastal aquifer (permeable rock layer), which can also serve as a carbon storage medium. 
This carbon storage initiative is expected to offset carbon emissions in the region, while simultaneously reduce a total of 600,000 tonnes of carbon emissions, apart from raking in additional income for Sarawak. — DayakDaily

我对James Chin的10点看法

我对James Chin的10点协议的看法
James Chin提出的新的10点协议,好是好,想留马的砂人民肯定会认同。认同归认同,没有强大的民运当后盾,一切皆空。

想脱马独立的人,像我,认为砂需要更激进的新领袖设时限,严厉的要求实践这些协议,不然就上法庭。对付狼豺虎豹就是要用猎枪和围墙;对付马联邦霸权就是法律规范和法庭裁决一切。政治协谈很难。

眼前的情况,砂政盟如何坚持立场才是关键。以砂政盟现有的势力对付马联邦霸权是绰绰有余,可是这政盟都选择退让。 煤气拥有权100%属于砂拉越,可是砂政盟选择慷慨分权给Petronas 49% 股份,这是怎么一回事?砂总理AbangJo 带领的砂政府真的不行。

该做的事,他都没有好好的去做。在2012年前首相Najib撤销【内安法令】后,其实,1966年大陆架法令;1974年PDA74法令和2012年领海法令就马上失效。可是总理AbangJo 有去处理砂这些拥有权吗? 

是的,PDA74 法令在2019年后,已经受到局限和权限。据(Petroleum Development Act only vests in Petronas right to mine – DayakDaily By Lian Cheng) 他们只有开采权力,土地和矿物拥有权全属砂拉越的。
过去联邦霸道95% :砂5%的做法已经无法再新发现的油田用了。现在好像是30%盈利五五分账;70%是给承包商的。有请大家去查证。

1966大陆架法令和2012领海法令,处理好了吗?希望,大家去查证,还有砂人对砂政盟绝不能放松。

过去砂的18点,联邦霸权连想都没想去实践,因为砂人太无知,不够团结,国家和联邦关系也没搞得清楚。现在,James Chin提议的新10点,我认为只有砂民在乎,坚持,捍卫砂权益到底,一寸都不放过,这10点才算数。

我还是我,认为对付狼豺虎豹就是猎枪和围墙;对付联邦霸权就是设时限,法令规范和上法庭裁决一切,别的免谈,就这么办!

砂政盟该办的事

砂政党联盟政府将精力集中在天然气分配的垄断游戏上,而不是废除1974年石油发展法令以收回砂拉越石油和天然气所有权,并废除2012年领海法令以收回砂拉越海域和大陆架所有权(以便砂拉越人民可以恢复 300 海里而不是减少 3 海里)。 GPS政府是“砂拉越优先”吗?

据信,当前首相纳吉废除紧急法令时,马来西亚紧急时期制定的1974年石油开发法和2012年领海法已自动失效,不再具有执行力。砂拉越人民质疑砂政党联盟政府是否不愿与联邦政府对抗,并且为了个人利益而不敢收回砂拉越的所有权。

砂政党联盟的YB和国会议员必须告诉砂拉越人民收回砂拉越所有权的下一步是什么吗。如果他们愿意对此事保持沉默,那么现在是时候就不要再支持他们了。


Sarawak GPS government focus its effort in monopoly game of gas distribution instead of repealing Petroleum Development Act 1974 to get back Sarawak oil and gas ownership and repealing Territorial Seas Act 2012 to get back ownership of Sarawak Seas and continental shelf ownership (so that Sarawak people can get back 300 nautical miles Instead of reduced 3 nautical miles). Is GPS government for "Sarawak first"?

It is believed that when ex Prime Minister Najib Razak revoked Emergency Ordinance the Petroleum Development 1974 and Territorial Seas Act 2012 created during Malaysia emergency period has been automatically null and void and no longer enforceable. Sarawak people questioned whether GPS government preferred not to antagonise federal government and for personal interest is too scared to claim back Sarawak ownerships.

Will GPS YBs and MPs tell Sarawak people what's next on taking back Sarawak ownerships? If they prefer to remain silent on the matter, it is time not to support them.

James Chin 的10点协议

大学教授为沙巴和砂拉越提出新的10点协议

古晋(11月30日):砂拉越出生的学者提出了一项新的10点协议,以取代砂拉越现有的18点协议和沙巴的20点协议。

澳洲Tasmania大学亚洲研究教授 James Chin 表示,他提出的 10 点协议重申了该国祖先对沙巴和砂拉越的期望,以及这两个婆罗洲州对联邦政府的期望。

“2023年是马来西亚成立60周年,因此现在是一个非常独特的机会来回顾马来西亚人的经历。

“我们需要向前看,而不是回头看。如果我们都回顾过去,我们的国家就无法进步。”他告诉《婆罗洲邮报》。他强调,这10点建议是他以个人身份起草的,不代表任何组织。

“在我们前进的过程中,我尽可能多地了解沙巴和砂拉越人民的愿望。

他说:“我认为强调我们希望保留我们独特的文化、传统、语言,更重要的是,保持我们人口的多元化,这一点非常重要。”

钦的十点协议呼吁(一)立即实现马来西亚联邦对沙巴和砂拉越人民的梦想和承诺;(二)重申沙巴和砂拉越在组建马来西亚联邦时与马来亚是平等伙伴;(三)并重申婆罗洲州属在联邦宪法第1(2)条下的独特地位,有别于1963年马来西亚协议所载的马来西亚半岛11个州属。

(四)他还寻求重申沙巴和砂拉越各自对其领土范围内的资源拥有专属领土权;(五)重申沙巴和砂拉越的每个社区都有权拥有其独特的文化和仪式表达、身份和语言;(六)重申沙巴和砂拉越是世俗国家、多元宗教社会,正如我们的祖先所承诺的那样;(七)并重申所有沙巴人和砂拉越人都是平等公民,并拒绝一切形式的种族主义、宗教不容忍和至上主义意识形态

最后三点(八)促请沙巴和砂拉越领导人采取主动,按照开国元勋的承诺,在马来西亚联邦内履行国家自治权;(九)重申沙巴人和砂拉越人决定自己未来的基本权利;(十)并申明为所有沙巴人和砂拉越人建设现代、世俗、民主、进步和可持续的未来的承诺。

“我们不希望马来西亚半岛突然强加一个框架,使人口状况分为穆斯林与非穆斯林,或马来人与非马来人一样。这在沙巴和砂拉越行不通的。”他强调,沙巴和砂拉越必须在很大程度上摆脱宗教、民族和/或种族紧张局势。

“我们希望按照我们祖先的愿望保持世俗。我希望人们使用这个 10 点协议作为 18点协议的后续协议,”Chin 说。

Don proposes new 10-point agreement for Sabah, Sarawak

KUCHING (Nov 30): A Sarawak-born academician has come up with a new 10-point agreement to replace the existing 18-point agreement for Sarawak, and 20-point agreement for Sabah.

James Chin, a professor of Asian Studies at University of Tasmania, Australia said his proposed 10-point agreement reaffirms what the nation’s forefathers had wanted for Sabah and Sarawak, and also what the two Borneo states want from the federal government.
“As 2023 is the 60th anniversary of the formation of Malaysia, hence now is a very unique opportunity to look back at what Malaysians had experienced.

“Rather than looking back, we need to look forward. If we all look back, our country cannot progress,” he told The Borneo Post.
He stressed that he drafted the proposed 10-point in his personal capacity and not on behalf of any organisation.

“I have captured as much as possible what are the wishes of the people of Sabah and Sarawak as we move forward.

“I think it is very important to stress that we want to retain our unique cultures, traditions, languages and more importantly, to maintain our diverse population,” he said.

Chin’s 10-point agreement calls for (1) the dream and promise of the Federation of Malaysia for the people of Sabah and Sarawak to be fulfilled without delay; (2)reaffirm Sabah and Sarawak as equal partners with Malaya in the formation of the Federation of Malaysia; and (3) reaffirm the unique status of the Borneo states under Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution, distinct from the 11 states in Peninsular Malaysia, as enshrined in the Malaysia Agreement of 1963.

It also seeks to (4) reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak each possess exclusive territorial rights over the resources that are within their own territorial boundaries; (5)reaffirm that every community in Sabah and Sarawak has the right to their distinct unique cultures and ceremonial expression, identity and language; (6) reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak as secular states, multi-religious society as promised by our forefathers; and (7) reaffirm that all Sabahans and Sarawakians are equal citizens, and reject all forms of racism, religious intolerance, and supremacist ideology.

The final three points (8) urge the leaders of Sabah and Sarawak to take the initiative and fulfil the state’s autonomy within the Federation of Malaysia as promised by the founding fathers; (9) reaffirm the fundamental right of Sabahans and Sarawakians to determine their own future; and (10) affirm the commitment to build a modern, secular, democratic, progressive and sustainable future for all Sabahans and Sarawakians.

“We do not want Peninsular Malaysia to suddenly impose a framework where the population situation is like Muslims versus non-Muslims, or Malays versus non-Malays. This does not work very well in Sabah and Sarawak,” he said, stressing that Sabah and Sarawak must remain largely free from religious, ethnic and/or racial tension.
“We want to remain secular as per the wishes of our forefathers. I hope people use this 10-point agreement as a successor to the 20-point agreement,” said Chin.

该做的事,没做

砂政党联盟政府将精力集中在天然气分配的垄断游戏上,而不是废除1974年石油发展法令以收回砂拉越石油和天然气所有权,并废除2012年领海法令以收回砂拉越海域和大陆架所有权(以便砂拉越人民可以恢复 300 海里而不是减少 3 海里)。 GPS政府是“砂拉越优先”吗?

据信,当前首相纳吉废除紧急法令时,马来西亚紧急时期制定的1974年石油开发法和2012年领海法已自动失效,不再具有执行力。砂拉越人民质疑砂政党联盟政府是否不愿与联邦政府对抗,并且为了个人利益而不敢收回砂拉越的所有权。

砂政党联盟的YB和国会议员必须告诉砂拉越人民收回砂拉越所有权的下一步是什么吗。如果他们愿意对此事保持沉默,那么现在是时候就不要再支持他们了。


Sarawak GPS government focus its effort in monopoly game of gas distribution instead of repealing Petroleum Development Act 1974 to get back Sarawak oil and gas ownership and repealing Territorial Seas Act 2012 to get back ownership of Sarawak Seas and continental shelf ownership (so that Sarawak people can get back 300 nautical miles Instead of reduced 3 nautical miles). Is GPS government for "Sarawak first"?

It is believed that when ex Prime Minister Najib Razak revoked Emergency Ordinance the Petroleum Development 1974 and Territorial Seas Act 2012 created during Malaysia emergency period has been automatically null and void and no longer enforceable. Sarawak people questioned whether GPS government preferred not to antagonise federal government and for personal interest is too scared to claim back Sarawak ownerships.

Will GPS YBs and MPs tell Sarawak people what's next on taking back Sarawak ownerships? If they prefer to remain silent on the matter, it is time not to support them.