Pages

Powered By Blogger

Tuesday, 4 March 2025

 

实事&真相

张庆信:卫长高度关注 》》巫医师短缺将获解决

 

不好意思,问诗巫3位联邦部长们为什么允许联邦卫生部无限拖延到这么危急要崩溃的水平,才获得卫长高度关注?

 

得罪了,YB张,你大人在所谓的“国会”三番两次诉求联邦政府拨款改善提升诗巫医院。可是,他们都把你大人的话当着耳边风, 你怎么也没辙呢?结果和成果,所以不知在哪儿?

 

今天,诗巫医院的状况跟YB林财耀和YB刘强燕已经做三届的砂联邦议员无能无脑无用脱不了关系。

 

YB张吗?是Bintulu联邦议员,砂DUS议员,很多诗巫人都很看好他。做砂DUS都东区议员也有三年了。在这危急和危机时刻站出来要求联邦卫生部长来,他不忘提醒大家是他的功劳能邀请来这么“尊贵“卫生部长亲临来咱们诗巫医院和各别诊所视察。恶心!

 

心理有病才会有这么设想和想像假像敌。不难猜他心中最大的敌人是谁:人联党或脱马党?

 

多少领袖和人民已经对联邦政府每年在砂拉越从各种税收掠夺至少RM3,000亿后,对于砂邦各种基本设施不足要求足够拨款,一直拖延。

 

每次,看到,政客们要求平民百姓捐赠和捐助医疗设备和仪器,我真的感到很不屑。这次到处水灾,多少无能的政客们还是向老百姓要求捐助。

 

就诗巫医院严缺的器材,YB张,像以往,一贯作风,请求人民捐款。看,他又打人民的主意“寻求私企合作买器材“。医疗的大事绝对是联邦政府的大事,他无法向联邦卫生部要求更大的数的拨款。所以,来这一招。同胞们,别再被骗了。                                                       

对不负责任的联邦拨那一点点小款R910万,何必如此感恩不尽?这些拨款,还不是每年向砂拉越刮走RM3,000亿中的小鼻屎。还要替他们怠慢不良的行为擦屁股。

 

对不起,这是够贱的,所以, 联邦马来亚官爷们才敢如此野蛮傲慢对待咱们和大胆违反联合国规章殖民砂拉越。就是咱们这些砂政客养出来的。这是我长久下来的观察,觉察和洞察的结论。

 

自己不断的捞政治成本,深怕他人,尤其是人联党邀功,威胁到他的官途和在人们心目中的地位。谁心中有鬼?所以总是见鬼!

5//25

Saturday, 22 February 2025

An open Letter to Premier AbangJo

*An Open Letter to Premier Abang Zohari and the Sarawak GPS Government: A Betrayal of Trust, A Failure of Leadership*  

Dear Premier Abang Zohari Openg and the Sarawak GPS State Government,  

Trust you are keeping well and safe.

We, the people of Sarawak, write to you not with malice, but with profound disappointment and anger. 

For decades, Sarawakians have been fed promises of *"restoring, defending, and protecting Sarawak’s rights"* under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). 

Yet, the recent capitulation to Putrajaya over the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74) and the ownership of Sarawak’s oil and gas resources reveals a truth we can no longer ignore: *your words ring hollow, and your actions betray Sarawak*.  

*Broken Promises, Broken Trust*  
You pledged to continue the legacy of the late Chief Minister Adenan Satem (“Tok Nan”), who declared that *"Sarawak’s relationship with the Federal Government must be “constitutionally correct.”* 

Tok Nan’s defiance against federal overreach inspired hope that Sarawak would finally reclaim what is rightfully ours under MA63: *autonomy over our resources*.  

Yet, today, we witness the opposite. 

By conceding to Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s assertion that PDA74 remains unchallenged and “business as usual,” you have surrendered Sarawak’s constitutional leverage. 

Law Minister Azalina Othman’s revelation—that Sarawak *“acknowledged and recognized”* PDA74 during closed-door talks—confirms this betrayal. 

How can you reconcile this with your own legal advisors’ stance that PDA74 was enacted *“in secrecy,”* *“unconstitutionally,”* and in violation of MA63?  

*The Petros Mirage: A Symbol of Surrender* 
The creation of Petros was hailed as a breakthrough, a vehicle for Sarawak to reclaim control of its oil and gas. 

Instead, it has become a fig leaf, masking Sarawak’s subservience to Petronas. 

*PM Anwar’s statement—that Petros is merely a “gas aggregator” (excluding LNG, Sarawak’s most lucrative resource)—exposes the grim reality: Sarawak remains a spectator rather than a gladiator in its own house*.  

*You claim PDA74 and the Sarawak Oil Mining Ordinance 1958 (OMO58) can “co-exist,” but this legal ambiguity serves only Petronas and Kuala Lumpur.*

*By refusing to pursue a definitive judicial resolution or parliamentary repeal of PDA74, you have chosen political convenience over constitutional justice*.  

*NATO Leadership: No Action, Talk Only*  
Your partners/colleagues' defense—that opposition figures like Chong Chieng Jen “did nothing”—is a red herring. 

Sarawakians entrusted *you* with an overwhelming mandate. GPS dominates the state assembly and holds pivotal federal influence. Yet, when leverage mattered most, you folded.  

Worse, you dismissed critics as “politicizing the issue,” while offering no substantive rebuttal to Azalina’s damning admission. 

If PDA74 is unconstitutional, why not challenge it in court? 

If MA63 guarantees our resource rights, why concede ownership to Petronas? 

*Silence is complicity.*  

*A Legacy of Failure*  
Tok Nan warned: *“Do not underestimate the people’s intelligence.”* 

Sarawakians are not fools. We see through the theatrics. 

The late Chief Minister fought to delist Sarawak as a “state” in federal documents, asserting our equal partnership. Today, you have reduced Sarawak to a supplicant, begging for crumbs from Petronas’ table.  

Your predecessors traded Sarawak’s resources for “thirty pieces of silver.” You, however, have done worse: *legitimizing theft by validating PDA74*. This is not leadership—it is submission.  

*Our Demands: Action, Not Apologies* 
Sarawakians do not seek hollow slogans or blame games. We demand:  
1. *Immediate legal action* to challenge PDA74’s constitutionality in court, as your own legal advisors insist it violates MA63.  
2. *Parliamentary motion* to repeal or amend PDA74, leveraging GPS’s influence in the unity government.  
3. *Transparency* in all negotiations with Putrajaya—no more secret deals that sell out Sarawak.  

Premier Abang Zohari, you once vowed that GPS would *“fight to the death”* for Sarawak’s rights. Today, your words are ashes. If you will not act, please graciously step aside for leaders who will.  

*Sarawak’s oil and gas belong to Sarawakians. This is non-negotiable.* 

*We will not forget the betrayals of Fairland Sarawak*  
 
*Fairland Sarawak*  
*On behalf of Sarawakians Who Believe in Justice as 'an equal founding partner in the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia'.*

*If not now, when ?*
*If not us Sarawakians, who else ?*

*WE ❤️ SARAWAK !!!*
*Jaga Sarawak bait-bait*

*Anak-Anak Sarawak*
*LAK-SA63*
*21/2/2025*

*Note: This letter is a collective expression of frustration from Sarawakians who expected their leaders to prioritize the state’s constitutional rights over political expediency.* 

*The fight for MA63 is not partisan—it is existential.*
In our political arena 🐍are everywhere.

Thursday, 13 February 2025

Legal issues whether PDA74 can be extended to Sarawak

Here are pertinent legal issues
 
Whether PDA1974 extended to Sarawak?

Emergency proclamation was declared by YDPA for the whole of Malaysia in 1969 including SS (EO 1969).

At all material times, Sarawak has its own laws to regulate mining, including oil & gas activities in Sarawak, which is Oil & Mining Ordinance 1958.
 
Then came Petroleum Development Act, a statute, passed by Parliament in 1974 (PDA1974) to vest all oil & gas activities in Malaysia exclusively to Petronas.

Since, the establishment of PDA1974 by Parliment done while EO1969 still in force in Malaysia, it was too extended Sarawak by virtue of Article 150 of the Federal Constitutuon (FC) without the need for it to be adopted by Sarawak bypassing the requirement of Article 76 FC. 

However, the position was changed in 2011 when the Fed Govt under Najib's administration was under pressure to abolish the Internal Security Act (ISA). In 2011, the Fed Govt agreed to abolish ISA, and in doing so, the EO1969 was also revoked.

Blessing to Sarawak, Federal Govt at that time did not realise the detrimental big effect of revoking the EO1969 to the application of PDA1974 to Sarawak.

What is the effect of that revocation of EO1969 to PDA1974?

It simply means the "special pass" given to PDA1974 by virtue of EO1969 to extend its application to Sarawak bypassing Sarawak DUN as required by Article 76 of FC was no longer exist or valid.

It follows, for PDA1974 now to extend its application to Sarawak, it would need to be adopted by Sarawak DUN as required by Article 76 of FC. DUN Sarawak has not adopted the application of PDA1974. As it stands now, PDA1974 has no application to Sarawak.

The argument that the then Chief Minister Tun Rahman had consented and surrendered such oil & gas rights to Petronas exclusively must fail for reason that it was not resolved or passed by DUN Sarawak as required by the Constitution. It is plainly unconstitutional for a person, be it a Chief Minister, to unilaterally surrender Sarawak's rights without being resolved or passed by Sarawak DUN. 

Further, to support Sarawak's stand, Sarawak Oil Mining Ordinance, 1958 (OMO1958) a pre-Malaysia law has never been repealed and it shall continue to be valid and effective as State law on equal standing with Federal law under the provisions of Malaysia Act.

OMO1958 established Sarawak's authorities over oil & gas activities in Sarawak. All mining, including oil & gas activities, are under the State List and subject to OMO1958 that regulate the issuance of permits and licenses for such activities.

Sea Territorial Act 2012 ia another statute passed by Parliament to supressed Sarawak's rights. It has the effect of reducing the Sarawak's sea territorial boundaries to only 3 nautical miles from the original 200 nautical miles from the coast.

Since this STA2012 affects the right of Sarawak and for it to be applicable to Sarawak, it must be adopted and passed by Sarawak DUN as required by Aritcle 76 of FC. Sarawak DUN never adopts and does not recognise STA2012.

To conclude, oil & gas activities in Sarawak are under Sarawak's authorities, and this is not open to negotiation with Federal Govt or Petronas.

Hope this will clarify.

Tq.

Sunday, 9 February 2025

砂政府接受PDA74被质疑为错误理由

*砂拉越政府接受1974年PDA《石油发展法令* *》被质疑为错误的理由* 
( *深度探索* 09-02-2025)

砂拉越政府接受1974年《石油发展法令》(PDA)的争议主要涉及法律效力、州权与资源分配的复杂博弈。以下是这一决策被质疑为“错误”的核心原因:

 1. **法律效力存疑:PDA的制定背景与合法性争议**
   1974年PDA通过时,马来西亚仍处于1969年“513事件”后延续的紧急状态(直到2011年才解除)。砂拉越政府认为,PDA在紧急状态下制定,其合法性可能因紧急状态的结束而受到挑战。砂首席部长阿邦佐哈里明确表示,紧急状态解除后,PDA是否仍然有效需重新讨论。此外,砂拉越主张其1958年《石油开采条例》(OMO)在PDA颁布前已赋予其资源管理权,而PDA作为联邦法律并未完全取代州法律,两者应“并存”。

 2. **经济利益受损:资源控制权与收入分配不公**
   - **液化天然气(LNG)控制权丧失**:尽管2025年砂拉越与联邦达成协议,承认砂石油公司(Petros)为天然气聚合商,但液化天然气的管辖权仍归国油(Petronas)。由于LNG是砂拉越油气收入的主要来源(占出口的90%),砂拉越仅能控制液化石油气(LPG),这被视为对经济主权的重大让步。
   - **石油税比例过低**:砂拉越长期仅获得5%的石油开采税,远低于其要求的20%。尽管砂拉越贡献了全国大部分的石油和52.7%的天然气储量,但PDA框架下资源收益大部分流向马来亚联邦,加剧了经济不平等。

 3. **砂拉越领土领海权与联邦宪法争议:领海边界与资源主权**
   - **领海边界争议**:砂拉越依据1954年《砂拉越(边界调整)枢密令》主张其领海范围包括大陆架(延伸至200海里),而联邦政府通过2012年《领海法案》将砂领海限制为3海里。PDA赋予国油对大陆架资源的专有权,直接削弱了砂拉越的宪法权利(联邦宪法规定州边界变更需州议会同意)。
   - **联邦与砂拉越权益冲突**:砂拉越认为PDA违反了联邦宪法中“州对土地和资源拥有立法权”的原则,尤其是颁发勘探许可的权力。砂盟领袖多次强调,砂拉越加入马来西亚时的权益在联邦化过程中被逐步侵蚀。

 4. **政治妥协与民意反弹**
   2025年砂拉越与联邦达成的协议中,砂政府承认PDA的有效性,并同意国油在砂作业无需额外准证。这一妥协被反对党批评为“第二次出卖权益”(第一次为1974年PDA通过)。砂拉越民间舆论指出,协议未解决核心问题,反而巩固了国油的垄断地位,引发民众对政府“政治交易”的质疑。

5. **历史权利与国际法的挑战**
   砂拉越主张其大陆架资源主权基于殖民时期的法律文件,而联邦政府则以国际法(如1982年《联合国海洋法公约》)为据,强调资源归属国家整体。法律专家指出,砂拉越的诉求需通过法院裁决明确,但联邦政府倾向于谈判而非司法途径,导致争议悬而未决。

 *总结* 
砂拉越接受PDA的争议本质是联邦与砂拉越在资源控制、法律解释及历史权利上的深层矛盾。批评者认为,接受PDA不仅损害了砂拉越的经济利益和宪法权利,也未能解决其作为马来西亚成立时的“平等伙伴”地位被削弱的根本问题。未来,这一争议可能继续通过法律诉讼或政治谈判寻求平衡。

Monday, 3 February 2025

Was the Cobbold Commission a scam?


Borneo Herald
For a Freer and Happier Borneo

Was the Cobbold Commission a scam?


              Voon Lee Shan, a Sarawak lawyer

By Voon Lee Shan, 28-9-2024
WITHOUT the Cobbold Commission, there is no Cobbold Commission Report. Without the Cobbold Commission Report, there is no Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). Without the Malaysia Agreement 1963, there is no Malaysia. However, the issue is Whether the Cobbold Commission was a scam – a scam to deceive the people of the British Borneo Territories to agree to the Malaysia Plan. 

Members of the Cobbold Commission which was set up in January 1962.

The United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 is to allow or to have all colonies in the world to be decolonized and achieve independence from their colonial masters. This Resolution was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 14 December 1960. 

But, the Malaysia Plan by the British was not motivated by the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514. 

It has to be noted that the Malaysia Plan was motivated by the need by United Kingdom, to release their colonies from their burden in maintaining their colonies. Records show that the British planned Malaysia since 1953 and therefore, I repeat, it has nothing to do with the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514. 

It was the plan of the British in 1953 that their colonies in South East Asia has to join together to form a federation or a country. Hence, came the Malaysian Plan.


In order to ensure that the Malaysia Plan be executed smoothly and in compliance with the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 and international protocols, the British constituted the Cobbold Commission in 1962 headed by Lord Cobbold. Lord Cobbold was a former Bank Governor of Bank of England. 

In the Cobbold Commission, there were three British and two Malayans. The two Malayans were Dato’ Wong Pow Nee from Malayan Chinese Association (MCA) and Chief Minister of Penang and Ghazali Shafie, Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Malaya. 

There is no evidence that members of the Cobbold Commission could speak the local or native languages of the Borneo People. Without able to speak native language of Borneo people how could the members of the Cobbold Commission came to the conclusion that the people of Sarawak and Sabah wanted Malaysia to be formed? It could not be denied that this Cobbold Commission was to also to overcome the need for a referendum to determine the wishes of the people of Borneo Territories as required by UNGAR 1514.

The Cobbold Commission published its report on 1 August 1962 concluded that roughly only one-third of Sarawak’ population enthusiastically supported forming Malaysia, another one-third vehemently opposed, and the crucial remaining third of the population, though open to the idea, was yet to be convinced of the merits of independence through merger. The published report seems not correct because from available records, only 4,000 odd people were interviewed by the Cobbold Commission. Commonsense tells us that this is devoid of democracy! How could these people who were only about 4,000 odds were able to represent the voice of over a million people of North Borneo and Sarawak at that time to decide the fate or destiny of their countries?

From records and books by a several researchers, it is difficult to convince the people of Sarawak and Sabah not to come to the conclusion that the Cobbold Commission was not a scam that took away the intrinsic rights of peoples of Sarawak and Sabah to determine the fate of their countries and to gain independence.  

Besides two books by Professor Michael Leigh, The Rising Moon and the other ones Deals, Datus And Dayaks, there are two other books that we all in Sarawak, need to read concerning the creation of Malaysia. These two books are one, by Dr Matthew Jones “Conflict and Confrontation in South East Asia 1961-1965, Britain, the United States and the Creation of Malaysia (2001) and the other ones is by Dr Stanley S. Bedlington’s Malaysia and Singapore: The Building of New States (1978). 

Of course, the research work of AJ Stockwell and The Genesis of Konfrontasi: Malaysia, Brunei and Indonesia 1945-1965 by Dr Greg Poulgrain are “goldmines” that we all Sarawakians should read to find out the secrets on how Malaysia was created.

Dr. Bedlington mentioned that “local leaders in Sabah and Sarawak reacted strongly and adversely” to the Malaysia Plan.

Dr. Bedlington also mentioned that the Cobbold Commission as a “British contrivance activated and organized by British officials.” He said that the “Commission was an Anglo-Malayan exercise was immediately obvious from the fact that it did not include a single Bornean representative.”

The Cobbold Commission did not conduct any referendum in either British North Borneo or Sarawak to measure objectively the wishes and inclinations of the people on the issue of the “Malaysia” merger to assist in its enquiry. Bedlington added that the population of the two States was subjected to “sustained pressure” by British colonial officials to accept the merger. Records showed that those who opposed the Malaysia Plan were considered “subversives” and were arrested, assaulted and battered and many for fear of arrest and physical injuries had to run away and hid in the forests and took arms to resist their arrests. Many were branded as communists and terrorists and were shot dead. Those who are still alive said that they were forced by circumstances to join the clandestine organisation in their struggles to fight against Malaysia Plan.

Matthew Jones in his book noted that the Governors of the two crown colonies were sceptical of the Commission, with Governor Goode of British North Borneo calling the exercise “a farce’.

Therefore, it is clear that the true wishes of the majority of the populations of the two Borneo territories were seriously subverted, if not deliberately misconstrued and ignored. The voices of opposition to the merger were traduced. 

Surprising facts that have been censored or hidden from the public all these years, were revealed by Dr Greg Poulgrain, and, in the process, cast the whole project of Malaysia itself in a fundamentally different light. Poulgrain was able to combine archival research at the Colonial Office, U.K. with interviews of surviving protagonists of the formative era of Malaysia who had played various roles in that period, thereby challenging the conventional version of the formation of Malaysia. 

Poulgrain referred to a classified Colonial Office paper, “Political Objectives in British Territories of South East Asia” of 10th March, 1953, reveals that the British government (Her Majesty’s Government, or HMG) was “engaging in deliberate deception” for, while paying lip service to the Third Rajah’s aspiration for self-government for Sarawak which is embodied in the preamble to the 1941 Sarawak Constitution, Her Majesty’s Government was already planning for “some form of constitutional association” for the Borneo Territories and the Malaya/Singapore bloc coming together as a “British South-East Asia Dominion” in the early fifties. 

Commissioner-General Malcolm MacDonald On April 2, 1955, informed the British Secretary for the Colonies, Alan Lennox-Boyd, that “the Bornean leaders are perhaps less aware than those in Malaya of our grand design.” 


Despite that, Alan Lennox-Boyd on November 29, 1956, informed the Governor of North Borneo, Sir Roland Turnbull, “The possibility of a federation of North Borneo and Sarawak and indeed of all three Borneo territories ... is a matter for the people of the territories themselves to decide.” It was noted by Poulgrain that, at no time did Her Majesty’s Government envisage self-government by the people of Sarawak. 

However, it must be noted that the colonial officers in the two territories were initially adverse to the idea of a merger of the Borneo states with Malaya and Singapore which they considered premature. 

More concerned with their populations of different ethnicities living in harmony, they had in mind a more gradual move towards independence with the possibility of first forming a Borneon federation before a merger with their more politically savvy neighbours across the South China Sea, Malaya and Singapore. The “Borneo Proposal” was put forward in 1958, but, as Poulgrain notes, it was already foreshadowed by the 1953 paper. The Borneon proposal was in fact disparaged by the noted historian on South East Asian history, K.J. Tregonning as “a disguised MI5 exercise”. 

Despite that, it is still widely believed and propagated that the proposal for the “Malaysia” merger with the Borneo territories was made by then Prime Minister of Malaya, Tunku Abdul Rahman, on May 27, 1961, to the Foreign Correspondents’ Association Club in Singapore. The British allowed Tunku take the credit for what was in fact the British brainchild, given the potential of the material benefits at stake for Britain. 

It may be noted here that after the war, British interests in Malaya in the form of investments exceeded those that they had in India and the revenue from rubber and tin was sorely needed for post-war debt payment and reconstruction. The financial stake in having a peaceful merger of the Borneo territories and Singapore with Malaya was, therefore, huge. 

Lee Kuan Yew, having been elected the Prime Minister of Singapore, then assisted the British to push forward the idea of Malaysia, while at the same time, consolidating his own party’s position against that of the Barisan Socialis [Socialist Front] whom he characterised, together with the Chinese opposition in Sarawak, as having been directed to oppose the Malaysia plan by outside powers, namely, Indonesia and China. Lee between September 13 and October 9, 1961, made twelve radio broadcasts (published as The Battle for Merger) in favour of the merger. It seemed that Lee Kuan Yew had his own political agenda to have Malaysia formed.

The research work by Poulgrain, however, pointed to that the primary purpose for forming Malaysia was oil, not ethnicity, even though much was made in the press then and in the mainstream books since of the Tunku’s insistence in having the Borneo colonies aboard in order to balance out the large Chinese population in Singapore with the indigenous populations in the Borneo territories. 

The interviews by Poulgrain’s in 1991 with both Captain D.R. Gribble, and Captain Albert Young confirmed that the huge oilfield was known to the authorities in 1958, years before its “official discovery” in 1963. 


The British at that time were prepared to surrender the oil in Sarawak territory to the new federation under control of Malaya. Sir Anthony Abell, then Governor of Sarawak, in April 1956 observed in a communication to the Colonial Office that “the politicians in both Malaya and Singapore were showing considerable interest in the Borneo territories “including its empty spaces, its potential wealth, and its oil”. 

Poulgrain inexplicably added that it is “noteworthy” that the Governor could admit that Malaya had “imperialistic design” on the Borneo territories, and then to treat this as a reason for merger. 

It is also noted that Tunku Abdul Rahman in a series of conversations with Abdullah Ahmad, which was later published in 2016 in a book entitled, Conversations with Tunku Abdul Rahman candidly admitted thus: 


“Yes and they [the British] gave us Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore and so many other things in 1963 [with the formation of Malaysia]. The British could have given Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak independence, but they did not. Instead, they handed them to us”.

That’s how Cobbold Commission was used by the British to deny Sarawak the right to independence and to allow, in the words of, Tunku Abdul Rahman, to be handed to Malaya. From the words of Tunku Abdul Rahman, it should be clear to Sarawakians that 22 July is not Sarawak Independence Day as Sarawak had never been granted independence but was given to Malaya by the British.  

It was all because of empty spaces, potential wealth and oil that made Sarawak now be part or an enlarged Federation of Malaya, renamed the Federation of Malaysia. Therefore, the Federation of Malaysia is not a new federation or country. This new name was conveyed to the United Nations Secretariat by Dato’ Ong Yoke Lin of Malaya after Malaysia Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak became part of the federation of Malaya effective 16 September, 1963 by way of Malaysia Agreement 1963.
The people of Sarawak needs to know the Truth because it is the Truth that sets us free. May God Bless this Land of Sarawak and her people. 


Voon Lee Shan is President of Parti Bumi Kenyalang of Sarawak

Sunday, 2 February 2025

For a freer and Happier Borneo


Borneo Herald
For a Freer and Happier Borneo

Petronas decommissioning Kimanis-Bintulu pipeline is systemic failing of Sabah, Sarawak by the Federal

                         Daniel John Jambun 

                                 Robert Pei


The full Statement:

PRESS STATEMENT BY BOPIMAFO AND SSRANZ
1st February 2025 

CALLING ON PETRONAS TO DECOMMISSION ITS OPERATIONS IN SABAH AND SARAWAK AND RETURN OIL AND GAS WEALTH TO THE PEOPLE  

We, the Borneo Peoples’ Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BOPIMAFO) and the Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ), strongly condemn the continued exploitation of Sabah and Sarawak’s oil and gas resources by Petronas and the federal government of Malaysia. The recent reports of Petronas decommissioning the $4.6 billion Kimanis-Bintulu gas pipeline, merely 10 years after its construction, is a stark reminder of the mismanagement and disregard for the rights and well-being of the people of Sabah and Sarawak.  

This pipeline, built using wealth siphoned from Sabah and Sarawak, is a symbol of the systemic plunder of our resources. Instead of benefiting the people of Sabah and Sarawak, the profits from our oil and gas have been used to develop Peninsular Malaysia and enrich its elites, leaving our territories impoverished and underdeveloped. This is a blatant violation of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) and the promises made to the people of Sabah and Sarawak when Malaysia was formed. The decommissioning of the pipeline is not just a technical decision; it is a symbol of the federal government’s failure to honour its promises and its continued colonial-style exploitation of our lands.  

Malaysia was established to develop Sabah and Sarawak, not to turn them into colonies for resource exploitation. However, the federal government has consistently centralised control over our territories, undermining our rights and autonomy. The illegal dismissal of Sarawak’s Chief Minister, Stephen Kalong Ningkan, in 1966 marked the beginning of this erosion of our rights. This was followed by the introduction of oppressive and unconstitutional laws such as the Continental Shelf Act 1966 (CSA66), the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74), and the Territorial Seas Act 2012 (TSA2012) which stripped Sabah and Sarawak of control over our natural resources.  

 The Plunder of Sabah and Sarawak’s Wealth  

Petronas, as the federal government’s instrument, has been at the forefront of this exploitation. The oil and gas extracted from Sabah and Sarawak have fueled Malaya’s development, building its cities, highways, and industries, while our regions remain among the poorest in Malaysia. The Kimanis-Bintulu pipeline is just one example of how our resources are used to enrich others while we are left with environmental degradation, neglected infrastructure, and broken promises.  

It is estimated that 95% of Sabah and Sarawak’s oil and gas revenues are taken by the federal government, with only a pittance returned to our regions. This systematic theft has perpetuated underdevelopment, poverty, and inequality in Sabah and Sarawak, while Malaya thrives on our stolen wealth.  

Our Demands 

We call on Petronas to:  
1. **Immediately decommission all its operations in Sabah and Sarawak** and cease the exploitation of our oil and gas resources.  
2. **Hand over all assets and investments** created using the wealth of Sabah and Sarawak to the rightful owners – the people of Sabah and Sarawak.  
3. **Provide a full account of all revenues** generated from our resources and compensate Sabah and Sarawak for decades of exploitation.  
4. **Pay reparations for the decades of environmental damage, economic exploitation, and underdevelopment** caused by its operations.  

We also call on the federal government of Malaysia to:  
1. **Restore the rights of Sabah and Sarawak as enshrined in MA63**, including full control over our natural resources.  
2. **Repeal oppressive and unconstitutional laws** such as the **Continental Shelf Act 1966, the Petroleum Development Act 1974, and the Territorial Seas Act 2012**, which stripped Sabah and Sarawak of their rights.  
3. **Compensate Sabah and Sarawak for the trillions of dollars in oil and gas revenues stolen over the past six decades.**  

A Call for Justice and Independence 

The people of Sabah and Sarawak have endured **six decades of exploitation, marginalisation, and broken promises** in Malaysia. We are treated as colonies, not equal partners, in a federation that was supposed to bring us development and prosperity. Instead, we have been left impoverished, while our resources are used to develop Malaya and enrich its elites.  

Our struggle for **justice and independence** is not just a political issue; it is a moral imperative. We stand in solidarity with all oppressed peoples around the world who fight for their rights, dignity, and self-determination. Just as the world supports the Palestinian struggle for freedom, we call on the international community to **recognize and support the legitimate aspirations of the people of Sabah and Sarawak**.  

The time has come to end the colonial exploitation of Sabah and Sarawak. **We demand the return of our stolen wealth, the restoration of our rights, and the freedom to determine our own future.**  

Enough is enough!

**Signed:** **01/02/2025**  

**Danial John Jambun**  
President, Borneo Peoples’ Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BOPIMAFO)  

**Robert Pei**  
President, Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)



Berikut adalah terjemahan dalam Bahasa Malaysia:



**KENYATAAN MEDIA OLEH BOPIMAFO DAN SSRANZ**  
**1 Februari 2025**  

### **MENYERU PETRONAS UNTUK MENAMATKAN OPERASINYA DI SABAH DAN SARAWAK SERTA MENGEMBALIKAN KEKAYAAN MINYAK DAN GAS KEPADA RAKYAT**  

Kami, Yayasan Penderitaan Rakyat Borneo di Malaysia (BOPIMAFO) dan Hak Sabah Sarawak Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ), dengan tegas mengecam eksploitasi berterusan terhadap sumber minyak dan gas Sabah serta Sarawak oleh Petronas dan kerajaan persekutuan Malaysia. Laporan terbaru mengenai tindakan Petronas untuk menamatkan operasi paip gas Kimanis-Bintulu bernilai USD 4.6 bilion, hanya selepas 10 tahun pembinaannya, adalah bukti jelas salah urus serta pengabaian terhadap hak dan kesejahteraan rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak.  

Paip gas ini, yang dibina dengan hasil kekayaan yang disedut keluar dari Sabah dan Sarawak, adalah simbol rompakan sistematik terhadap sumber daya kita. Sebaliknya, keuntungan daripada minyak dan gas kita digunakan untuk membangunkan Semenanjung Malaysia serta memperkayakan golongan elitnya, sementara wilayah kita terus kekal miskin dan tidak berkembang. Ini adalah pelanggaran nyata terhadap Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 (MA63) dan janji-janji yang dibuat kepada rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak semasa pembentukan Malaysia. Penamatan operasi paip ini bukan sekadar keputusan teknikal; ia adalah bukti kegagalan kerajaan persekutuan untuk menunaikan janji-janjinya serta meneruskan eksploitasi gaya kolonial terhadap tanah air kita.  

Malaysia ditubuhkan dengan tujuan untuk membangunkan Sabah dan Sarawak, bukan menjadikan kami sebagai koloni untuk dieksploitasi. Namun, kerajaan persekutuan terus memusatkan kawalan ke atas wilayah kami dan menindas hak serta autonomi kami. Penyingkiran tidak sah Ketua Menteri Sarawak, Stephen Kalong Ningkan, pada tahun 1966 menandakan permulaan kepada hakisan hak kami. Ini diikuti dengan pengenalan undang-undang yang menindas dan tidak berperlembagaan seperti **Akta Pelantar Benua 1966 (CSA66), Akta Pembangunan Petroleum 1974 (PDA74), dan Akta Laut Wilayah 2012 (TSA2012)** yang telah merampas kawalan Sabah dan Sarawak ke atas sumber asli kami.  

### **Rompakan Kekayaan Sabah dan Sarawak**  

Petronas, sebagai instrumen kerajaan persekutuan, berada di barisan hadapan dalam eksploitasi ini. Minyak dan gas yang diekstrak dari Sabah dan Sarawak telah digunakan untuk membangun Semenanjung Malaysia – membina bandar-bandar, lebuh raya, dan industri-industri mereka, sementara Sabah dan Sarawak kekal antara wilayah termiskin di Malaysia. Paip Kimanis-Bintulu hanyalah satu contoh bagaimana sumber kita digunakan untuk memperkayakan orang lain sementara kita ditinggalkan dengan kemusnahan alam sekitar, infrastruktur yang diabaikan, dan janji-janji kosong.  

Dianggarkan **95% daripada hasil minyak dan gas Sabah dan Sarawak disedut oleh kerajaan persekutuan**, dengan hanya sedikit yang dikembalikan ke wilayah kami. Kecurian sistematik ini telah menyebabkan kemunduran berterusan, kemiskinan, dan ketidaksamaan di Sabah dan Sarawak, sementara Semenanjung Malaysia menikmati kekayaan hasil daripada sumber kita yang dicuri.  

### **Tuntutan Kami**  

Kami menyeru Petronas untuk:  
1. **Segera menamatkan semua operasinya di Sabah dan Sarawak** serta menghentikan eksploitasi terhadap sumber minyak dan gas kami.  
2. **Menyerahkan semua aset dan pelaburan** yang telah dibina menggunakan kekayaan Sabah dan Sarawak kepada pemilik sebenar – rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak.  
3. **Mendedahkan sepenuhnya rekod hasil pendapatan** yang dijana daripada sumber kami dan membayar pampasan kepada Sabah dan Sarawak atas eksploitasi selama beberapa dekad.  
4. **Membayar ganti rugi atas kerosakan alam sekitar, eksploitasi ekonomi, dan kemunduran pembangunan** akibat operasi Petronas di Sabah dan Sarawak.  

Kami juga menuntut kerajaan persekutuan Malaysia untuk:  
1. **Mengembalikan hak Sabah dan Sarawak seperti yang termaktub dalam MA63**, termasuk kawalan penuh ke atas sumber asli kami.  
2. **Membatalkan undang-undang yang menindas dan tidak berperlembagaan** seperti **Akta Pelantar Benua 1966, Akta Pembangunan Petroleum 1974, dan Akta Laut Wilayah 2012** yang telah merampas hak Sabah dan Sarawak.  
3. **Membayar pampasan kepada Sabah dan Sarawak atas trilion dolar hasil minyak dan gas yang telah dicuri selama enam dekad terakhir.**  

### **Seruan Kepada Keadilan dan Kebebasan**  

Rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak telah menanggung **enam dekad eksploitasi, peminggiran, dan janji-janji yang dimungkiri** dalam Malaysia. Kami dilayan seperti koloni, bukan sebagai rakan setara dalam persekutuan yang sepatutnya membawa pembangunan dan kesejahteraan kepada kami. Sebaliknya, kami dibiarkan miskin sementara sumber kami digunakan untuk membangunkan Semenanjung Malaysia dan memperkayakan golongan elit mereka.  

Perjuangan kami untuk **keadilan dan kebebasan** bukan sekadar isu politik; ia adalah satu tuntutan moral. Kami berdiri teguh bersama semua bangsa yang tertindas di seluruh dunia dalam perjuangan mereka untuk hak, maruah, dan penentuan nasib sendiri. Seperti mana dunia menyokong perjuangan rakyat Palestin untuk kebebasan, kami menyeru masyarakat antarabangsa untuk **mengiktiraf dan menyokong aspirasi sah rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak**.  

Sudah tiba masanya untuk menghentikan eksploitasi kolonial terhadap Sabah dan Sarawak. **Kami menuntut pemulangan kekayaan kami yang dicuri, pemulihan hak kami, dan kebebasan untuk menentukan masa depan kami sendiri.**  

**Cukup sudah!**  

**Ditandatangani:** **01/02/2025**  

**Danial John Jambun**  
Presiden, Yayasan Penderitaan Rakyat Borneo di Malaysia (BOPIMAFO)  

**Robert Pei**  
Presiden, Hak Sabah Sarawak Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)
Share
No comments:
Post a Comment
Home
View web version
Powered by Blogger.

Sunday, 19 January 2025

The Tussles of Oil and Gas between Sarawak GPS government and Petronas

PRESS STATEMENT
19 January, 2025
Re: The Tussle of Oil and Gas between Sarawak GPS government and PETRONAS

Nowhere was there any agreement by Sarawak before Malaysia was created, that Sarawak had agreed that the federal government could take over the control and ownership of Sarawak’s oil and gas resources. It was in 1974 with the passing of the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74) that Sarawak lost this right. 

Sarawak has the right to take her oil and gas back because this had been “robbed” by the federal government from Sarawak and had these resources vested in PETRONAS by passing the PDA74. It is not morally and politically right for the federal government or the government of Malaya, to continue to control and exploit these resources through PETRONAS. I say government of Malaya because United Nations Record showed Malaya changed her name to Malaysia after Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak were acquired as her territories by Malaysia Agreement 1963 on 16 September, 1963.

It has been estimated some years ago that Sarawak lost roughly RM110 billion annually of her crude oil pumped by PETRONAS from sixty oil wells off the shores of Sarawak after the passing of PDA74. It was disclosed by a past CEO of PETRONAS that Sarawak was producing at least 850,000 barrels of crude oil daily pumped by PETRONAS.

Source: By Bernama - August 18, 2017 @ 9:58pm (BUSINESS TIMES) KUCHING: Petroliam Nasional Bhd (Petronas) currently has 60 oil and gas- (O&G) producing fields in Sarawak producing an average of 850,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, said its President/Group Chief Executive Officer, Datuk Wan Zulkiflee Wan Ariffin.

What Sarawak used to get back annually was always less than RM5 billion as development fund. 

The Sarawak GPS government should take steps to reclaim these oil and gas resources back by seeking the federal parliament to repeal the Petroleum Development Act 1974(PDA74) and other relevant Acts. At the same time, PDA74 should be declared in Dewan Undangan Negri as not applicable to Sarawak as we did not consent the passing of PDA74 to take away our rights. This is to let people know the stand of the Sarawak government concerning these resources. 

I am of the opinion that the taking of our oil and gas resources is illegal, wrong or unconstitutional because Article 13 of the federal constitution mentions that there could not be any acquisition of property without adequate compensation. In legal term, the meaning of “person” in Article 13 includes any legal entity who could act and who are capable of possessing legal rights and liabilities and this could mean to include Sarawak and/or Sarawak government. 

So far, no record could be traced to prove that Sarawak had been compensated by the federal government for the loss of these resources.

Therefore, from what the public could adduce at the moment concerning the recent tussle concerning the oil and gas resources in Sarawak, between Sarawak GPS government and PETRONAS is that, with Sarawak government agreeing not to interfere with Petronas’ role under the Petroleum Development Act 1974, the Sarawak GPS government is considered by Sarawakians to have effectively surrendered Sarawak’s lawful right to the control and possession of Sarawak’s oil and gas resources to the federal government. 

Please see Benar News dated 16 January, 2025

Prime Minister Dato Anwar Ibrahim disclosed, “Petronas will retain its national authority over oil and gas even as Petros takes control of gas distribution in Sarawak.” This means, the ownership of oil and gas still rests with the federal government but vested in the hands of PETRONAS, while Sarawak is to take the role as a “delivery boy” or as distributor of oil and gas in Sarawak only. 

By agreeing not to interfere or to let Petronas to continue its operations under the Petroleum Development Act 1974, the state government is viewed by public to have compromised Sarawak’s sovereignty and the economic potential of its resources.

This clearly shows that Sarawak had lost her battle in the control, return and/or acquisition of her own oil and gas resources, which rightly belonged to Sarawak. The federal government and Petronas continue to profit significantly from Sarawak’s oil and gas reserves, while the people of Sarawak see limited returns and benefits. This arrangement perpetuates an imbalance of power and wealth, where Malaya benefits at Sarawak’s expense.

VOON LEE SHAN
President, Parti Bumi Kenyalang.

Friday, 17 January 2025

MA63 null and void

MA63 is a null and void agreement. All parties need to realise this and Malaysia could not be formed in the first place because MA63 was a null and void international agreement.

Even if MA63 was a valid agreement at the time it was signed, the fundamental breaches of the agreement had caused the Agreement to collapse. Further, when Singapore was no more part of Malaysia, the foundation of the agreement collapsed. The pillars that supported the agreement had collapsed when Singapore being one of the pillars of the agreement is no more part of Malaysia effective 1965.

Therefore, there is nothing to negotiate about the seats in parliament. Sabah and Sarawak should find ways on how to declare leaving Malaysia. The first thing to do is that parties should recognise that MA63 is a void and an invalid agreement and therefore, unenforceable. Parties should part ways. After that , parties may wish to work and decide on how or whether a new Malaysia need to be formed with new terms agreeable to all parties.

But we need to understand Sabah and Sarawak should insist all its oil and gas resources and sea territories be returned to Sabah and Sarawak. It was estimated Sarawak lost about RM110 billion while Sabah lost RM90 billion annually of their crude oil wealth to the federal government with these resources vested in the hands of PETRONAS. 


Some years ago, of I could recall correctly, Datuk Sharifah Hasidah disclosed that the federal government owed Sarawak RM630 billion of the five percent oil royalty. Had this been paid to Sarawak? So far I didn't hear anything about it 

Voon Lee Shan 


https://vt.tiktok.com/ZS69tRu8k/






 n












..





https://vt.tiktok.com/ZS69tRu8k/

Sunday, 12 January 2025

Sarawak and Sabah as free and independent countries

*SARAWAK AND SABAH AS FREE AND INDEPENDENT COUNTRIES*

*Imagine the wealth of resources and opportunities that could be liberated from Malaya's apartheid-like governance and foreign domination if both Sarawak and Sabah were free and independent!*

List of the economic and social advantages for Sarawak & Sabah gaining independence from Malaya, incorporating the aspect of financial strength through control of oil and gas resources:

### Economic Advantages

**Economic and Social Advantages of Independence for Sarawak and Sabah**
1. **Sovereign Resource Control**: With independence, Sarawak and Sabah would have complete authority over their rich oil and gas reserves, allowing them to manage these assets locally and maximise revenue directly for state development. We no longer contribute all our resources to develop Malaya and enrich its elites.

2. **Financial Autonomy**: Control over oil and gas production and other resources would generate significant revenue, funding robust public services, infrastructure projects, and economic initiatives, free from federal redistribution.

3. **Diverse Economic Growth**: Independence would allow Sarawak and Sabah to reinvest resource profits into sectors like tourism, agriculture, and technology, reducing dependency on resource extraction and boosting overall economic resilience.

4. **Tailored Trade Relations**: Free from federal constraints, an independent Sarawak or Sabah could form trade agreements that better reflect local needs and create more favourable conditions for exports and economic partnerships.

5. **Increased Investment**: Independence could attract targeted investments from foreign and local entities, focusing on the unique economic opportunities of Sarawak and Sabah, fuelling sustainable growth.

6. **Localised Development**: Greater economic control would support development initiatives focused on specific local needs, driving inclusive growth and regional empowerment.

### Social Advantages

1. **Cultural Revival**: Independence could allow Sarawak and Sabah to protect and celebrate their diverse cultural heritage, fostering a society that honours indigenous traditions free from the pressures of a dominant racial or religious narrative.

2. **Community Empowerment**: Independent governance would enable policies that support local community autonomy, amplifying grassroots participation and enhancing local decision-making.

3. **Education Reform**: Sarawak and Sabah could create an education system that aligns with local values, addressing unique regional needs and ensuring equitable access for all ethnic groups.

4. **Social Equity and Justice**: Independence offers an opportunity to address historical grievances and guarantee fair representation for marginalised communities, building a more inclusive society.

5. **Strengthened Identity**: Self-governance would enable Sarawak and Sabah to cultivate a stronger, unified identity, fostering social cohesion and pride among diverse populations.

Independence could unleash Sarawak and Sabah’s full potential, creating a self-reliant, culturally vibrant, and prosperous society free from external race-religion domination.

Robert Pei
Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand
04/011/2024

Tuesday, 7 January 2025

The Nine Cardinal Principals of Rajah

CARDINAL PRINCIPLES OF THE RULE OF THE ENGLISH RAJAHS[1]

1. That Sarawak is the heritage of Our Subjects and is held in trust by Ourselves for them.
2. That social and education services shall be developed and improved and the standard of living of the people of Sarawak shall steadily be raised.
3. That never shall any person or persons be granted rights inconsistent with those of the people of this country or be in any way permitted to exploit Our Subjects or those who have sought Our protection and care.
4. That justice shall be freely obtainable and that the Rajah and every public servant shall be easily accessible to the public.
5. That freedom of expression both in speech and in writing shall be permitted and encouraged and that everyone shall be entitled to worship as he pleases.
6. That public servants shall ever remember that they are but the servants of the people on whose goodwill and co-operation they are entirely dependent.
7. That so far as may be Our Subjects of whatever race or creed shall be freely and impartially admitted to offices in Our Service, the duties of which they may be qualified by their education, ability and integrity duly to discharge.
8. That the goal of self-government shall always be kept in mind, that the people of Sarawak shall be entrusted in due course with the governance of themselves, and that continuous efforts shall be made to hasten the reaching of this goal by educating them in the obligations, the responsibilities, and the privileges of citizenship.
9. That the general policy of Our predecessors and Ourselves whereby the various races of the State have been enabled to live in happiness and harmony together shall be adhered to by Our successors and Our servants and all who may follow them hereafter.

Open Letter to the Premier of Sarawak

OPEN LETTER TO THE PREMIER OF SARAWAK

The Need for Stronger Advocacy for Sarawak's Rights


Dear YAB Premier,

With utmost respect, I write as a concerned Sarawakian to express my profound disappointment with Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu (PBB) in its role in championing Sarawak’s rights and development within the Malaysian Federation. 

Despite its dominant position in the state government, PBB has repeatedly failed to assert Sarawak’s rightful place and autonomy, often yielding excessively to the federal government to the detriment of our people. 

Many Sarawakians feel betrayed by this failure. I do not hesitate to say out loud PBB has failed us.

Before 2014, PBB acted as little more than a proxy for UMNO, reigning supreme only within Sarawak's coalition.  

At the federal level, it is a lame duck, so whatever UMNO / Barisan Nasional (BN) wants, they get it. 

PBB's actions were dictated by UMNO and Barisan Nasional (BN), toeing their party line without dissent. 

Instead of serving the people of Sarawak, PBB served UMNO and Barisan Nasional. 

This compliance undermined Sarawak’s position, relegating us to a secondary role and subjecting us to policies and legislation that stifled our growth and progress. 

While we acknowledge that PBB has a limited presence in Parliament, this does not excuse its failure to effectively represent Sarawak's interests and prevent the enactment of oppressive policies that have left Sarawakians burdened by their consequences. 

Because of a weak PBB, Sarawak and Sarawakians are treated like a bunch of patsies. 

Today, we see your administration expending significant resources and time to undo these injustices amidst strong federal resistance. 

These are our concerns that have happened and remain unresolved under the watchful eyes of PBB. 

These matters are not only critical to Sarawak’s progress but also pivotal in ensuring the trust and confidence of your leadership. 

1. Unresolved Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63)

The failure to fully resolve the promises of MA63 is a glaring betrayal. 
It symbolizes unfulfilled commitments to Sabah and Sarawak, perpetuating feelings of marginalization, undermining national unity, and hindering equitable development. 

We are expecting your administration to be more forceful in getting MA63 resolved as soon as possible.

2. Development Disparities

Sarawak lags far behind Peninsular Malaysia in infrastructure, healthcare, education, and digital connectivity. 

Rural areas remain underserved, with impassable roads, under-resourced healthcare facilities, and limited access to quality education and internet services. 

Given Sarawak's vast contributions to the national economy, such disparities are unjustifiable.

3. Sovereignty Over the Continental Shelf

Sarawak’s rights to manage its natural resources, particularly oil and gas, have been stripped under the Continental Shelf Act 1966 and the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA 1974). 

These laws centralize control of our resources under federal authority, leaving Sarawak with only a fraction of the revenue despite being a major petroleum producer. 

The creation of Petronas compounded this injustice, reducing Sarawak to a minor beneficiary of its own wealth. 

Reclaiming full sovereignty over these resources is essential to respect Sarawak's constitutional rights and economic potential. 


4. The Cabotage Policy

This policy perpetuates exorbitant shipping costs, making goods more expensive in Sarawak than in Peninsular Malaysia. 

It stifles economic growth and competitiveness. 

I highlighted only four critical issues that affect us most profoundly. 

While there are numerous matters deserving attention, addressing all of them would make this letter overly lengthy. 

We appreciate the efforts of your administration in striving for favourable solutions. 

However, we regret to note that, as of now, we have not observed tangible or significant changes that address these pressing concerns.     

Sarawakians have shown patience and resilience, but our patience is finite. 

We expect our leaders to act with courage and decisiveness to safeguard our rights and secure a brighter future for all. 

We expect your administration to take a more assertive stance and expedite the resolution of MA63 to restore the rights and autonomy of Sarawak. 

A more balanced budget is imperative. We call on your administration to be firm and not allow the yearly budget to pass without addressing Sarawak’s development needs adequately. 

Nothing short of full sovereignty over Sarawak’s continental shelf and all the natural resources will appease us. 

The complete removal, not just an exemption of the cabotage policy is necessary to ensure economic fairness and unlock the full potential of Sarawak’s trade and industry. 
   
With Perikatan Harapan now in power, PBB must avoid repeating past mistakes of being overly submissive to UMNO and Barisan Nasional. Instead, PBB must prioritize the interests of Sarawak and its people, ensuring that its voice is strong, independent, and reflective of the state's unique needs and aspirations. 

This approach will ensure that Sarawak’s rights and development remain at the forefront of national priorities.

The ball is now in your court, YAB Premier. The people of Sarawak await your leadership in correcting the wrongs of the past and charting a course towards fairness, justice, and prosperity. 

These are not mere requests but expectations that resonate deeply with the people of Sarawak. 

Be reminded Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) holds a trump card with its significant number of parliamentary seats granting it the role of a “kingmaker”. 

As a “kingmaker”, GPS should ensure every move aligns with the vision for our future legacy. 

To achieve this objective, I am proposing in the future, we should secure these strategic ministerial portfolios, namely: Finance Minister, Economic Minister, Rural Development Minister and Public Works Minister.  

I conclude this letter with a quote from Prof. Tajuddin in his article “Who will command the Malay vote at GE16: Anwar, Hadi or Zahid”. 

It is both patronising and condescending, dismissing our ability to play a significant role in the nation’s politics and development. 

He writes “The Borneo block will just sit and wait. 
This block will never control Malaysia by just sitting in the safety of its own geographical and political boundaries”. 

I hope this statement provokes some serious reflection.

With hope and determination,
Anak Sarawak
Winter 2024/2025

Sunday, 5 January 2025

A Federation built on broken promises

*A FEDERATION BUILT ON BROKEN PROMISES*

How Did Sabah and Sarawak Become the "ATMs" of Malaya?

The history of Malaysia's formation and its political trajectory since independence has led to Sabah and Sarawak being systematically exploited for their natural resources, while the promises made to their peoples under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) remain largely unfulfilled. 

The reality of how Sabah and Sarawak came to be marginalized, exploited, and relegated to the status of "ATMs" for Malaya stems from several historical, legal, and political facts.

1. *The Unlawful Transfer of Sovereignty (1963)*
*On 16 September 1963,* the newly formed Federation of Malaysia included Sarawak and North Borneo (now Sabah), with the territory effectively handed over from British colonial rule to Malaya. This transfer was carried out under extraordinary circumstances, without a clear legal or democratic basis, amidst a state of emergency where opposition to the formation was heavily suppressed. 

The legitimacy of this transfer was compromised by the failure to honour the self-determination rights of the Indigenous peoples of these territories.

The political process leading to Malaysia’s formation was rushed, and the people of Sabah and Sarawak were not given a genuine opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination in a fully free and fair manner. Instead, their inclusion was largely orchestrated by the interests of Malayan elites, who sought to expand their control over the region’s vast resources.

2. *Malaya Replacing the British as the Colonial Power*
Following the formation of Malaysia, Malaya effectively replaced British colonial rule as the dominant foreign power in the newly united federation. The Malayan military and Special Branch took on the role of suppressing any resistance, particularly in Sarawak, where a significant independence movement was emerging. Thus, while Sarawak and Sabah were promised greater autonomy, the reality was that they became subjects under a new colonial power – Malaya.

3. *Emergency Laws and the Extension of Malayan Control*
From the outset, the governance of Malaysia—encompassing all states, including Sarawak and Sabah—was conducted under emergency laws. The Internal Security Act (ISA) and other draconian measures, initially applied to Malaya, were extended to the Bornean states, effectively suppressing any dissent. These laws, meant for national security purposes, ensured that any challenge to the federal government’s authority or calls for autonomy were swiftly crushed.

This authoritarian governance set the stage for the gradual Malayanization of both Sabah and Sarawak, beginning with the Ningkan Crisis in 1966, which saw Sarawak’s first Chief Minister, Stephen Kalong Ningkan, ousted with the help of the Malayan federal government.

4 *. Breach of MA63 and Systemic Marginalization*
*The Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63, if valid)* enshrined guarantees for Sarawak and Sabah, including specific rights to autonomy, control over their natural resources, and a special position in the federation. However, these agreements were systematically violated by the federal government over the decades.

    • The Constitutional amendments, particularly the Constitutional Amendment of 1966 (CSA66), which unlawfully curtailed the political power and autonomy of the Bornean states, breached the principles laid out in MA63. 
    • The imposition of the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1971, focused on Ketuanan Melayu (Malay supremacy), further entrenched the political and economic dominance of Malaya, depriving Sabah and Sarawak of their fair share of development. 
    • Legislative acts like the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74) and Act 354 systematically eroded the rights guaranteed to Sabah and Sarawak under MA63. These acts gave the federal government control over key resources, including oil and gas, which had previously been under the jurisdiction of the Bornean states. 

These policies led to the unbridled plundering of Sabah and Sarawak’s resources, which were diverted to fund Malaya's development, leaving the two Bornean states among the poorest and most underdeveloped regions in the federation.

5. *Religious Apartheid and the Rise of Extremism*
From 1971, Malaysia’s political direction shifted, and the country became increasingly dominated by Islamic extremism and Arabization. 

The policies that followed, including the Islamization of the federal government and the introduction of religious education systems, marginalized non-Malay and non-Muslim populations, particularly in Sabah and Sarawak, where a significant portion of the population is Christian, animist, or adheres to other indigenous belief systems.
This religious apartheid led to increasing Talibanization and Arabization, which further alienated the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak. 

The federation's shift towards a more theocratic state stood in stark contrast to the secular promises made to Sabah and Sarawak under MA63.

6. *Corruption, Mismanagement, and Underdevelopment*
The systemic corruption and lack of transparency in the federal government’s management of Malaysia’s resources became apparent over time. The elites in Malaya, benefiting from Patronage Politics and the dominance of UMNO (United Malays National Organisation), mismanaged the wealth extracted from Sabah and Sarawak. While the Malayan political establishment grew wealthier, the Bornean states, despite their wealth in natural resources, were left to stagnate.

For over 60 years, the people of Sabah and Sarawak faced economic neglect, infrastructural deficiencies, and limited opportunities for development. Sarawak’s oil and gas resources, in particular, were siphoned off to fuel the growth of Malaya, while the Bornean states saw little investment in their own growth or development.

7. *The Rise of Political Discontent*
The marginalization and continued violations of MA63 have led to increasing political discontent in Sabah and Sarawak. The regions' political elites and the people have begun to openly challenge the federal government's failure to honour its promises.

    • *YB Dato Lo Khere Chiang, a prominent GPS (Gabungan Parti Sarawak) leader* , publicly stated in a January 2025 speech that, had a referendum been held, the majority of Sarawakians would have chosen independence. His candid remarks highlight the depth of frustration and resentment felt by Sarawakians who feel betrayed by the federal government. 

    • Dato Lo also remarked that Sarawak’s status had been reduced to that of a “subordinate state”—a vassal rather than an equal partner in the federation. 
    • 
Conclusion: *A Nation Built on Broken Promises*

The story of Sabah and Sarawak's integration into Malaysia is a tale of broken promises, systemic exploitation, and political subjugation. 

Despite the vast wealth generated from their natural resources, the Bornean states have been left impoverished, with their peoples sidelined from the benefits of their own resources. 

The failure to honour MA63, combined with ongoing Malayanization, resource exploitation, and religious apartheid, has led many to question the future of the federation.

As Dato Lo Khere Chiang and others in Sarawak have pointed out, the growing disillusionment among the people of these states suggests that their desire for independence is becoming a more likely outcome. 

Malaysia, as it currently exists, is seen by many as a failed state, with Sabah and Sarawak being relegated to the role of ATM—used to fuel the development of Malaya, while they remain underdeveloped, marginalized, and politically disempowered.

*The call for Sarawakian independence is not merely an expression of frustration—it is a demand for self-determination, for the restoration of their sovereignty, and for the fulfilment of the promises made over six decades ago.*

Opinion by Robert Pei
SSRANZ 
05/01/2025

Saturday, 4 January 2025

草稿信函致砂总理

草稿信函

致:砂拉越总理阿邦·乔哈里

砂拉越州政府

尊敬的砂拉越总理阿邦·乔哈里,

*关于:呼吁砂拉越寻求独立,受到 YB Dato Lo Khere Chiang 鼓舞人心的演讲和格陵兰大胆举措的启发*

我们这些关心的砂拉越人相信这封信对您来说很好。

我们怀着极大的敬意给您写这封信,并考虑到最近的事态发展与砂拉越人民的愿望有着深刻的共鸣。

这些事态发展使砂拉越的自决、自治和独立问题再次受到关注。

我们希望提请您注意两篇非常重要的新年演讲,一篇由砂拉越政治家 YB Dato Lo Khere Chiang 发表,另一篇由外国政治家、格陵兰总理 Mute Bourup Egede 发表,两篇都谈到了国家独立问题。

 • *YB 拿督罗克强的演讲(2025 年 1 月 1 日)* :

◦ *2025 年 1 月 1 日,备受尊敬的砂拉越政党联盟政府部长拿督罗克强*在 YouTube 上发表大胆声明,挑战 Murray Hunter 于 2024 年 12 月 29 日发表的文章“砂拉越加入马来西亚联邦 61 年后:现在何去何从?”中的结论。虽然 Hunter 认为只有一小部分城市中产阶级和专业的砂拉越人支持独立,但拿督罗坚决不同意。

◦ *要点* _*拿督罗认为,如果今天举行全民公投,许多砂拉越人会选择独立,理由是人们越来越意识到砂拉越在马来西亚联邦内面临的不公正。 他强调,这种意识激发了人们对未来的集体渴望,即砂拉越人可以自己规划自己的命运,摆脱马来亚的中央控制。*_ 

*◦ 砂拉越的宪法权利* :拿督罗还强调马来亚继续无视砂拉越的宪法权利,包括 1958 年石油开采法令 (OMO58) 和对砂拉越大陆架的持续主张。这些问题体现了砂拉越的财富如何被外部力量控制和利用,剥夺了砂拉越人推动自身发展所需的资源。

• *总理穆特·布鲁普·埃格德的讲话 (2025 年 1 月 1 日):*

◦ 同样,格陵兰总理穆特·布鲁普·埃格德在他的新年讲话中发表了重要声明,呼吁格陵兰脱离丹麦独立。 埃格德总理强调,现在是格陵兰摆脱殖民历史、获得完全主权的时候了。他的讲话体现了自决精神,强调格陵兰需要在不受外部干涉的情况下塑造自己的未来。

◦ 要点:*埃格德总理关于摆脱“殖民主义的枷锁”*和重新夺回格陵兰命运的声明为砂拉越提供了一个鼓舞人心的对比。正如格陵兰决心摆脱殖民遗产一样,砂拉越也必须认真考虑自己的未来和独立的可能性。

*• 与砂拉越的相似之处:*

◦ *失去对财富的控制:*砂拉越在马来西亚联邦内一直处于边缘地位。尽管该州拥有丰富的自然资源,包括石油、天然气和木材,但我们失去了对这些资源的控制。从我们的土地上产生的财富没有重新投资到砂拉越的发展中,导致该州陷入严重贫困,而马来亚则继续利用这些资源实现自身发展。

◦ *无视宪法权利:*正如 YB Dato Lo Khere Chiang 和总理阿邦·乔哈里所指出的那样,马来亚未能尊重砂拉越的宪法权利。 联邦政府不断侵犯砂拉越的主权,从对大陆架的主权要求到未能真诚履行《1963 年马来西亚协议》(MA63)。

◦ *代表不足和政治排斥*:自新加坡(1965 年)退出马来西亚以来,砂拉越在联邦议会中的代表人数严重不足。在影响我们未来的关键国家讨论中,我们人民的声音没有被听到,这进一步加剧了政治排斥和不公正的感觉。

*• 对独立的支持日益增加:*

◦ 对这些不公正现象的认识日益加深,再加上砂拉越权利的侵蚀,导致砂拉越人对未来自决的情绪日益高涨。 拿督罗表示,许多砂拉越人将在公投中选择独立,这反映了公众意识的转变——希望重新掌控我们的土地、资源和政治命运。

*• 新加坡的例子:*
◦ 拿督罗还指出,新加坡脱离马来西亚后走向独立的历程,是一个国家如何克服逆境、建立繁荣未来的光辉典范。尽管最初面临挑战,但新加坡今天已成为全球成功的故事。

砂拉越拥有丰富的自然资源,如果获得独立自主和控制权,也有可能取得类似的成功。

*• 砂拉越的前进之路:*
◦ 砂拉越正处于十字路口。现在是砂拉越站出来的时候了,就像格陵兰和其他领土所做的那样。我们不能再让自己被边缘化,被当作从属国家对待。

 我们敦促您参与有关砂拉越未来的公开讨论,探索所有途径,包括独立的可能性,以便我们能够确保所有砂拉越人拥有繁荣、自主的未来。

*• 结论:*
◦ 总理阿邦·乔哈里,在您富有远见的领导下,砂拉越有机会团结一致、坚定不移地夺回我们的主权。随着格陵兰迈出走向独立的大胆步伐,砂拉越也必须崛起并规划自己的命运。

我们随时准备支持呼吁公平、公开的进程,让砂拉越人民决定自己的未来。

感谢您对这一重要问题的考虑。我们相信,在您的指导下,砂拉越能够在世界上获得应有的地位,成为子孙后代繁荣进步的灯塔。

您诚挚的,
关心砂拉越的人