有人写的，友人寄来的。  （真的让人眼界打开和大开）
活跃社运学者再纳阿查曼指出，砂拉越参组建国时持有自治主权，经过52年已经被联邦政府逐一“侵蚀”。这主要是基于人民对建国历史的无知。

他认为，人民不能一味怪责砂拉越的国会议员，包括反对党党国会议员在过去52年期间，没有阻止许多违反建国合约的宪法一一通过，造成砂拉越主权逐一被剥夺。

他昨晚在美里电子图书馆主讲大马建国历史的讲座上指出，为何马来西亚建国52年后，砂拉越人民才突然醒觉原本属于砂拉越主权已被“侵蚀”的缘由。

他指出，国会在这52年间经过超过600次修宪各项法案，结果，砂拉越拥有的自治主权变得面目全非。他说，这并不是砂拉越的国会议员在国会举手通过造成的。

根据建国协议，国会议员没有权利代表砂拉越政府就涉及砂州主权课题作出任何决定。

“凡涉及砂州土地和主权的联邦法案，都必须由砂州立法议会通过后，联邦修改宪法案才能在砂州实施。但是，今天为何许多联邦宪法和条例却可以直接由国会通过，不必通过砂州政府便能实施，这在许多砂拉越人心中存有极大疑问。”

“自2011年11月24日内安法令正式废除后，之前许多被官方视为机密文件已可公开。我也是在2012年才从沙巴州政府印刷部拿到了所述政府级委员会报告书（ＩＧＰ）的完整的正本复印文件。之前这些文件条约内容都不能公开查阅。”

紧急法令期间建国协议失效

他揭露，自1969年西马发生种族暴乱，在任首相敦拉萨便在全国颁布紧急法令，一直到2011年11月24日，现任首相纳吉正式废除内安法令后，所述的紧急法令才正式被解除了。这也意味了，废除内安法令六个月后，首相不再拥有颁布紧急法令的权利。

再 纳阿查曼指出，只要国家颁布紧急法令期间，意味着建国协议阐明的砂拉越自治主权自动失效，一切权力都交由联邦中央政府掌控。联邦政府不必通过砂拉越州政府 首肯下，便在1974年通过国家石油公司发展法案。这也造成国家石油公司可以不必先征询砂州政府同意，在砂州海域区陆续设立了钻油井和钻油台，而所有被征 用来开掘油田的海域土地在所述的法案条文下，都注明是国油公司的“免费礼物
”，即是不必缴纳税务给砂沙政府。而砂沙州政府每年只能拿到国油公司输出原油收入的10巴仙的现款收入。

再纳阿曼称，当年在如此情况下，一切权力都掌控在联邦政府手中，相信任由谁掌管州政府，都会迫于无奈签下如此不公平的条约，否则，州政府不签约的话，可能一分钱都得不到。

海域750法案违宪

他 说，根据我国律法，一旦国安法废除后24个月，砂拉越和沙巴便可在预定的2014年的5月24日，将之前所有国油公司占据的“海域土地”拥有权取回。不 过，联邦政府废除内安法令后，很快发现所述将衍生问题，因此，它们很快便提呈了2012马来西亚海域750法案，并且很快在同年六月通过了。即是在国油公 司将失去海域土地权前两个月，便通过了以上新法案。同时所述新法案也重新扩大了联邦政府管辖的砂沙的水域范围，即是距离砂沙海岸线三公里外的水域管理权， 一律由联邦政府掌管。

再纳阿查曼指出，以上法案根本就已违宪。因为，国油公司已经在2012年6月18日缴交砂沙政府税务，很明显，国家石油公司是在属于砂沙的“土地”上运作。国油公司并没有如之前般用现款付还给州政府而是缴交州政府征收的税务。

但是，该2012马来西亚海域750法案，却在2012年6月22日颂布宪报生效，有鉴于此，他指出，所述法案已经违宪。这已完全违反建国协议，更是侵蚀建国协议清楚阐明的砂拉越土地拥有权。

再纳阿查曼促请全体砂沙人民都应该了解建国历史，不要道听途说。因为这将令人民感到更加混淆。

MA63才是索回主权依据

他指出，近期砂沙人民不断提出的18点和20点条款，他认为有必要厘清。

他说，所述的条款只是当年由数个政党所拟定的建国社会契约，它由始迄终不是法定文件。
所以，所述文件欲索取砂沙主权是没有法律功能。

不 过，砂拉越、沙巴和马来亚（新加坡后退出）所签署的63建国协议（MA63）（Malaysia agreement 1963）清楚阐明，砂州政府拥有53项各领域自主权，其中内容清楚记载在柯伯特调查团报告书（Cobbold Commission Report）， 和政府级委员会报告书（Inter-ｇovernmental Committee-I.G.C Report）内，以上才是能够索回砂沙自治主权的国际认同的法定文件。

这是友人意见：
如果有西馬仔怒罵我們東馬人，我們就這樣回應他們：

這次砂州選舉成績說明了，東馬人都極度渴望砂州得到自主權，順便告訴西馬仔想改朝換代 需要靠你們本身，不是靠我們，我們東馬如果有機會獨立的話為何要放棄！萬一真的獨立了，絕對也易了你們西馬仔，你們應該懂得感恩，更不應該罵我們東馬人！ 請問若砂州真的獨立了有對誰不利？  只有巫統！你們說是嗎？
請停止怒罵東馬人。

My comments：
我说西马要学习不要妒忌东马人。 东马两国独立对你们西马人绝对有好处的。  所以，不要硬嘴硬心一起想压制我们。  就好像那天我看了友人寄来的。  本来，我是不想浪费时间听的。 因为，我看到[州]字。 看到州这个[字眼]，我几乎厌恶到不想听。 后来，我还是花点时间听了

我们砂拉越们人要有自己的立场。 那天，我看了[砂拉越，谁爸爸的X？百格时视]这是朋友寄来的。。 这是黄锦河，颜彬？寿和主持人3个人的节目畅谈着话题。黄锦河从头到尾几乎/完全是没有自称[砂州/砂拉越州]。听颜斌寿和那主持人如何[州]到底。所以，我也觉得他们很糟糕。

我也听出看出他们肢体言语[砂拉越就是州]。  马华党员颜先生还坚持呢.   所以我们砂拉越人是时候狠狠地， 辣辣的让这些有居心者好好[自我调整]。 免得[自找麻烦]，会让自己很难堪也难看。  让我们砂国人看西马半岛很野蛮不讲理。

******
M ycomments： 
这是友人寄来的。 不然，真的，到死，还没发现。   发现前后的我，是的， 很不一样了。  西马半岛人对东马骂什么我完全不知道因为我还没有放开一些时间去e-社交。 所以不能很清楚。  不过这次无知或有知的人让Adenan 和他的团队一边倒/压倒性的赢了砂国的政权也不是坏事。  砂国的主权由Adenan的队伍联合民间组织/Ngos一起出动和启动索取砂的[自主自决自治权]吧。 这5年期限，看Adenan和他的团队了。

S4S/革新党，真的输了吗？  我看到他们的成绩，我就想到张建仁的的阿爸张守江。  我每次都开玩笑他守了那[江河]40多載，所以才有今天的DAP在砂国的地位。  革新党，如果好好耕耘，总是带着一颗学习[包容万象]的心。  革新党就是我们全砂人的明日之星。  联邦政府[知法犯法]。 如果Adenan的队伍联合民间组织/Ngos一起出动和启动索取砂的[自主自决自治权]在有限期内失效， 那么我们跟民间组织就一起向联合国起诉这马来联邦政府53以来如何失信MA63条约以霸权形势掠夺砂沙两国。 

谁在捍卫砂朥越自主权？

1. 1966 年砂首长嘉隆宁甘被马来亚开除，夺权委任新傀儡首长。

2. 1969 年513暴动，联邦紧急法令，无条件接管砂，900条砂宪法被改。

3. 1976 砂首长拉曼雅谷被骗可出任大马副首相，于是把砂国变州，变马来亚傀儡， 当时马来亚反对党没人反对。

雅谷也将砂国旗改成三色旗，将自由宗教改为回教，后白毛改回来。

4. 马哈迪时代不断打压强逼砂拉越签署不平等石油合约时，22年为自己捞取暴利1000亿石油税。

5. 白毛上任，从马来亚傀儡逐步夺权成砂土皇帝,搜刮大量砂资源，却没有出卖修改任何砂自主权法令。
a. 坚守移民自主权法令不被删掉除。
b. 将三色国旗改回现在州旗。
c. 将砂回教改回自由宗教。
d. 2013年首次庆祝722。

6. S4S 崛起主办722大集会。

7. 阿德南推动自主权自治，承认722为砂独立日。

8. 馬來亞政黨不承認722，還在報紙講不重要。不断诋毁砂人民运动组织，主张删除砂移民自主权禁止入境法令。

（马来亚反对党当时都在做什么？还在喊改朝换代？对砂主权问题集体沉默。
今天，大选最后几天才开始喊捍卫砂主权，一边还是骂GST, 骂那只鸡和1MD,到底他们是给砂朥越打工？还是给马来亚打工的？）

My comments:
 对于砂拉越722，我们砂国人要回自主自决自治权，有一群人不管是政党或个人，我很肯定他们都很一致想压制我们。 言语和文字都很霸凌。  他们那里能忍受我们砂沙两国从新定位和索回咱们的自主自决自治权呢。  这是天意。

看完这篇文章，我对TaibM厌恶减了一些些。
这是友人寄来的文章。  这就是互联网的神妙。
我真的希望我们砂国人可以团结一 致对外。 凡是对砂国不利，我们要懂得如何切除。  这么多年被掠夺和剥削。  是时候采取行动了。

A system that discriminates 

May 8, 2016, Sunday   Uncle Di

BY now registered voters in Sarawak have cast their ballots to choose the next group of the state’s legislators while some 400,000 plus other fair dinkum locals of voting age (21 years above) did not. Why? Because they are not registered voters. They couldn’t have done so under the present system of voting.

Hopefully, the disenfranchised people will start registering as voters to enable them to vote at the next parliamentary election. Otherwise, they will again miss the chance to participate in a democratic exercise which is more representative of the voting strength and truly reflective of the will of the adult suffrage in Sarawak.

Unless and until, in the meantime, there will be introduced in Parliament legislation to make voting compulsory, those Sarawakians and those in the other states remain voiceless through the ballot box.

As at the 10th of last month, there were under 1.14 million voters on the rolls in the state. From this, 25,022 voters are from the armed forces and the police; of these some, but not all, are Sarawakians and their spouses.
In the polls just concluded, 418 of these voters registered in Bukit Kota and Bukit Sari constituencies were happy that they did not have to go down to the polling stations. The candidates in these two constituencies were returned unopposed.

Every day, each Sarawakian who celebrates his or her 21st birthday is a potential voter, but any who choose not to register as voters will add to the growing number of citizens who are being disenfranchised by design. Not even design, inertia as a rule, ‘can’t be bothered to register’. If you could register by tapping a handphone they probably would … The system needs reform but the people in positions of power have not really addressed this institutionalised discrimination. Prove me wrong.

To the winners, felicitations; to the losers, try again
The results of yesterday’s polls speak for themselves. As nowadays everybody is a political analyst, I shall leave the post-mortems of the results to the experts, including those working for Pemandu. They will look at all the factors that might have contributed to winning or losing before they can conclude whether or not the election was free and fair, and whether money politics played an important part in winning or losing, ban on entry to Sarawak of opposition lawmakers from Peninsular Malaysia, the Adenan factor, perimeter survey initiative, impact of GST, of BR1M, of 1MDB’s woes. Let’s see if any issue or a combination of issues have had any bearing or contribution in the outcome of the election.

In defeat, defiant; in victory, magnanimous.  Just this one comment from me: politics, like sport where competition is the main drive and victory is the ultimate prize, is a kind of game. There are winners and losers in any contest – the winners experiencing the ecstasy of victory and the losers, the agony of defeat. But like in golfing or boxing, there is always another round on another day. To the losers, I’d say, there is no such thing as the end of the world. Winston Churchill once said, “In defeat defiant.” Treat every defeat as a battle lost to be fought another time.

I wish to congratulate those who have won the elections in their respective constituencies and also those who have been picked as members of the new state cabinet. In victory, you should “be magnanimous” as Churchill also said.

Like many other Sarawakians, I’m looking forward to seeing fulfilment of the election pledges, especially from those who are walking in the corridors of power.

For instance, construction of a bridge across the mile-wide Batang Lupar, or the Long Lama bridge: it will be a long bridge and it will take lama to build! Our Lundu-Biawak road took 50 years to complete!

Rule of law
All governments are faced with problems, some of which are difficult to solve, others not so serious. In the course of the next few years or so, the government may encounter all sorts of problems. But it is precisely the job of the government of the day to handle them with wisdom. They can do so if all the key institutions of government are running smoothly – the lawmakers to introduce sensible legislation, the judges to interpret and apply them, the law enforcers to carry out decisions without fear or favour.   More importantly, the people must be law abiding.

One fundamental ingredient of good governance boils down to strict observance of the rule of law. A good government is one that is fair and equitable and observes the very law it makes. A government that does not observe that rule will be faced with all sorts of problems, hampering good governance.

All legislators – those who form the government and those from the opposition – are expected to deliver the goods not only by serving the interests and needs of their respective constituents but also of those other Sarawakians.   Do not discriminate against those who did not vote for you. If you treat them well, they may vote for you come the next election. Have you thought of that?

We have seen how the old legislators performed in the assembly in the past and we expect the new ones to do well, if not better. It is said a new broom sweeps well.

All YBs are expected to do justice to the time they will be there; the opposing YBs should not oppose the policies and legislation introduced by the government for the sake of opposing. They should behave like members of an alternative government; in fact they are, in a parliamentary model of government which we have copied from Westminster.

Before the next election
Because of the large number of people in Sarawak without the chance to vote, I wish to urge those Sarawakians who are eligible for registration as voters to get themselves registered as voters as soon as possible and as many as of them as possible before the next parliamentary election.

In Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah there will be simultaneous elections – state and federal;  Sarawak will only hold the federal election.
As I see it, the 14th general election is crucial for Malaysia in the sense that we in Sarawak have no choice but to stay put in Malaysia. Out of Malaysia is not an option; it may be a case of out of the frying pan into the fire.

Supposing we choose to stay put, what can we do to improve things? Send the best MPs to KL and if there is a new government in Putrajaya, pray that quality leaders will be included in the federal cabinet and in other positions of power and authority.

So much power is now in the hands of the federal government dominated by a certain party. For instance, the power over education and scholarships, local government elections, over the cabotage policy, to name a few issues. For a longer list of the state’s legislative powers – including those of concurrent powers – see the Inter-Governmental Committee Report, 1962.

These are the main subjects around which some serious issues have not been successfully solved since 1963. Potential MPs from Sarawak may like to have a look at them before offering themselves as candidates in the coming parliamentary election.

Comments can reach the writer via columnists@theborneopost.com.

Winning Versus Losing 852016

Winning Versus Losing

Adenan and his team have won landslide victory.   I don’t think I can say congratulatons to them as they are too much foul play.  Which winner in his team dare to hold his/er holy book be it Quran, Bible or Buddhist holy script to declare that his/er winning is clean and honest.  Adenan and his team have won 72 seats.  It is 87% winning by hook or by crook. 

Ya, there is no myth in winning if there are not any promises of development  and votes buying there to say.  Is there a seat he can say it is clean and honest to win the respect?  He and his team no doubt have won (one) the seats but have lost all the rules of the game called “Fair play”.    Votes buying is an open secret to all in Sarawak and the whole Federation of Malaysia. 

Ya, the mandate, luckily is five years only and I hope, I don’t pray as I see God / Allah does not seem to care when it is stinking of 11th Sarawak election in the play.  The helicopter incident /accident may be is just a warning to tell Najib, Adenan and all not to campaign so much. Be honest and do your work.

The Ruling party has all the resources at their disposal to develop Sarawak systematically and uphold the principals of democracy.  Winning Versus losing, winning is at the expense of losing all the virtues of a person, what for?   It is a laughing stock to the whole-wide world.  You may boast and boast and boast and more boast about your winnings in  the 11^th Sarawak election.  But my advice is not to boast too much as everybody everywherre knows that  it is the foul play to fool the hungry, poor and ignorant in votes buying and more promises of development.  Our mass media have the record of all their promises in cash and kind. 

Ya, I despise BN and his cronies using a lot of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

without any sense of shame to name.  This winning is possible where people have no idea what it means by democracy.  Democracy to these people are just a business of bargain and $ to gain in the transaction in the election.   So, it is not so much surprising to many that BN-PBB and the cronies have won (one) so many seats in the game.  For years, it has remained more or less the same though so much to my disappointment. 

I am waiting like many who support the opposition pact that there one day we believe Goodness will triumph the evilness.

Tweets652016

如果你认为砂拉越在马来联邦关系是一个国，请砂拉越人拒绝自我贬低不说砂国却说砂州。砂拉越就是砂拉越，请不要自称砂拉越州。 这真的会让有醒觉的人不能不骂你们。 自己如果都不懂得尊重自己。 你们想别人怎么可能尊重你们。 正名砂拉越为国不是州。 维护砂拉越是每个砂拉越人的责任。

爱护砂拉越是我们砂人的责任。 记得，不要跟他人一起起舞叫[砂国]为砂州。砂拉越今天会落魄到这种地步都是我们砂拉越土包党联合巫统的狼豺虎豹不断的掠夺和剥削后的[结果]。我们这能再忍受这种的侮辱。 砂拉越和沙巴参加联邦MA63 注明这种相对关系。却被人家压制成州。1976年8月27日到今天。是时候，我们要他们好看的时候了吧。请先拒绝人家称砂国为砂州。

我相信现在很多人跟我一样，对砂州这[字眼]很敏感。不论是听到的还是看到的都无限反感。 所以不管是DAP或PKR政党在我心目中都已经失去他们的[重量]。 我对革新党或纯粹砂拉越的政党才看好。 这是起步。 这次砂拉越大选，我不能很确定他们能会有多少的支持率。 但我真的很看好他们未来可以替代DAP/PKR为我们砂国从新定位和拿回所有的权益。 这是砂人一至的共识。

50

SHARES

FacebookTwitterMailSubscribe

Tota and his friend caught up with two Sarawakians who were in town and shares with their scathing views.

The powers that be have destroyed independent institutions in the country and made them into tools to serve the ruling party.

Against this backdrop, the teh tarik stall and the kopitiam have become unique ‘institutions’ which offer much scope for comment, humour, sarcasm and satire about so much of the nonsense going on in Bolehland.

My friend and I had the good luck to meet two Sarawak bumiputras who were in town to attend some NGO programmes. We were eager to learn about the forthcoming Sarawak elections. The Sarawakians generously shared information and even allowed us to extract information from their files.

Below is a summary of our conversation:
(SB1, SB2 = Sarawak bumiputras; F = friend and I)

I: Can you tell us something about the Sarawak elections?

SB1: Why don’t you ask the questions and we will answer them to the best of our ability.

F: Both the print and electronic media are constantly extolling Adenan’s virtues and singing his praises. What’s your opinion?

SB1: The print and electronic media are government-controlled and always spin tall tales. The media are the dullest and emptiest in the world. They can make saints out of sinners and sinners out of saints. Adenan portrays himself as someone always fighting for the interests of Sarawak.

SB2: Adenan is the fifth CM, and he entered politics in 1976 as legal adviser for PBB.  From 1979, he won the Tuang seat and then he won the Tajung Datu seat. On 1 March 2014, he became CM. He is a die-hard Umno supporter and speaks the language of Umno leaders.

SB1: Sarawak, Sabah, Singapore are three separate countries that together with the Federation of Malaya formed Malaysia. Right from the beginning, Sarawak’s 18-Point Agreement granted by the Cobbold Commission slowly but surely was eroded by the Alliance/BN central government.

Adenan, who now claims to be a champion of Sarawak, never opened his mouth to protest. By remaining silent, he connived and colluded with the Umno-dominated government to erode many of the provisions in the 18-Point Agreement.

I: What were the provisions in the 18-Point Agreement that were trampled upon?

SB1: While accepting Islam as the religion of Malaysia, “there should be no state religion in North Borneo, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaysia should not apply to North Borneo” (quote from the 18-Point Agreement). This provision has clearly been violated.

SB2: With regard to language, “English should be an official language of North Borneo for all purposes, State or Federal, without limitation of time” (from the 18-Point Agreement). This provision does not exist at present!

F: Isn’t Adenan abusing the provision in the immigration law to bar all opposition members to prevent them from campaigning for DAP and PKR?

SB1: Well, as I told you the mass media have portrayed all opposition members as sinners. Adenan is supposedly their saint who doesn’t realise that the extremists and religious bigots are aplenty in Umno.

SB2: Adenan is a star-dust dictator. He doesn’t have an iota of knowledge about democracy, fairness, fair-play and a level playing field in the conduct of elections.  That’s why he is barring opposition members from Sarawak.

SB1: He cannot be that daft or stupid [to not know that] many political extremists and religious bigots come from Umno, whom he welcomes and embraces because they apparently come with cash [or goodies]. That’s how ethical and moral he is.

I: What other provisions in the 18-Point Agreement have been eroded?

SB1: The provision for North Borneo to control its own finance, tariffs and the right to work out its own taxation and raise loans on its own credit is non-existent. It is all BIG government, and Putrajaya controls [almost] everything.

SB2: According to the 18-Point Agreement, the existing educational system of North Borneo should be maintained, and for this reason it should be under state control.  Sarawak surrendered this provision, and now education is under federal control.

SB1: The so-called leaders of Sarawak aligned with Umno-dominated BN have betrayed Sarawakians. They never raised any objections when the BN government was ruthlessly eroding the 18-Point Agreement.

I: There have been allegations that politicians and cronies from the ruling party aided by corrupt Sarawakians have indulged in large-scale timber extraction, legal and illegal. Is it true?

SB1: This has been happening without let for years. Now Petronas extracts petroleum without state control.  The state gets a pittance – five per cent of petroleum income.

Global Witness provided unassailable evidence of massive corruption in Sarawak. The CM then, Taib, refused to cooperate with MACC, whom he called “naughty”. He was later elevated as governor. That’s how Malaysia and Sarawak fight corruption in high places.

F: Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore came as separate countries to form Malaysia in 1963. Now Sarawak is treated as merely a state within Malaysia. It is significant that the head of state was originally called Yang di-Pertua Negara – which confirms that Sarawak from a Negara (country) has become a Negeri (state)!

I: The Muslim population of Sarawak is only 25 per cent, yet the CM and the governor come from this minority community – something that would not be permitted in West Malaysia.

SB1: Adenan, it would seem, is a firm believer in Malay hegemony, Ketuanan Melayu and Malay supremacy. The people of Sarawak are asleep. They never realised or cared as the sacrosant 18-Point Agreement was slowly but surely eroded by the Umno-dominated government. In 12 general elections, they have given the Alliance/BN a clear two-thirds majority in the state assembly. This proves their naivety.

Just see what Najib and Zahid are doing – shamelessly promising to build schools, repair churches, build roads, bridges, etc and even MRSM [Maktab Rendah Science Mara or Mara Science Junior College] for Sarawak bumiputras.

All these promises are coming 53 long years late. When or whether these promises will in fact materialise is anybody’s guess.

I: Adenan is well liked by Umno leaders. Any comment?

SB1: Najib is on record as having said that he likes loyal and obedient leaders (aka yes-men or boot-lickers) rather than intelligent ones! That answers your question.

I: Malaysia is the only country in the world where a citizen needs a passport to travel from west to east! Isn’t Adenan behaving like a dictator, barring opposition and NGO leaders from entering to Sarawak to campaign?

SB1: Umno-dominated BN and Adenan are crazy for power. Shameless gerrymandering is not enough. Prevent a fair electoral environment and win the election by hook or by crook…

I: Is it true that some headmen of longhouses do not allow opposition politicians to campaign in their longhouses?

SB2: The grinding poverty in Sarawak is unbelievable. There is talk that if you give RM10 to a rural Sarawakian, he [might be willing to] lend you his MyKad on election day. [Some of the] headmen are no different. Umno leaders armed with RM2.6bn have plenty to offer.

F: What is your advice to Sarawakians?

SB1:  Wake up Sarawakians. Don’t believe that 1MDB debt of RM50bn does not affect you. As always your taxes, your petroleum money, your GST contribution will be used when the bailout comes. You have a golden opportunity to start the ball rolling for Ubah. Do not be content with consuming the crumbs that fall off the Umnoputras banquet table.

F, I: It has indeed been enlightening to talk to you. Thank you for sharing so much information with us. We wish you and Sarawak all the best.

SB1, SB2: Nice talking to you. Bye

(Visited 879 times, 391 visits today)

郑自勉：时间有限 砂争自主权仅剩7年

2016年5月4日 南砂, 砂州选专题

(本报古晋4日讯)从解密的文件看到，砂拉越和沙巴是交给西马托管，若60年后，没有异议和争议，有关的托管就是永久性。因此时间所剩不多，只剩7年。在这有限的时间里，需有赖于大家的努力。
托管期限60年

林连玉教育基金古晋联委会主席郑自勉昨晚出席砂拉政府承认统考文凭的进展和影响汇报会上，谈到砂拉越的主权时，如是表示。
他说，根据1963年大马契约，清楚阐明赋予砂拉越的自主权，其中包括税务、教育、婆罗洲高等法院的权力等，因此，西马若要实施任何政策，必须得到砂拉越的批准。而在教育自主权方面，可以促使砂拉越政府兴建符合人民需要的学校，包括政府资助的私立学校（独中或宗教学校）。

他续说，华裔子弟如果口口声声强调以华裔为单位，前途是茫茫的，必须从跨种族角度出发及探讨，以便华族将后能有尊严的在大马立足，同时，才能确保独中教育及各族文化获得维护。

他也举例说，钓鱼台日本说没有争议，中国说有，若被日本实际管理，根据国际公约，60年后没有争议﹐该岛就是日本的。

“当砂拉越能挣回这些主权，才能确保比较开明和多元化的气氛能够维持，作为华裔子弟与其它种族都爱护自己的文化及互相尊重各族的文化，因此，不论谁领导，只要贤明的﹐不论其肤色都应该给予支持。”

不过，从整个世界大局的宏观角度来看，尤其是中国的发展及一带一路的成功推行，郑自勉有信心，世界要走向大同是不远了，最重要的是，统考、独中必须不断去给予扶持。

另一方面，他也提出质疑为何马来西亚政府不能承认独中统考文凭，事实上全世界有数百多所大学都承认。

他 续说，若政府维持现状，不承认统考的危机是来自于修改后的1996年的教育法令，新法令强化了教育总监的权力，而在修改后的19年来，董总所提出的申请至 今仍未获得批准，亦即全国60间独中合法性仍然是受到质疑的，目前只有一间关丹中学是合法的，主要该中学的批文是有报考政府的考试。

较早 时，郑自勉说，自马来西亚成立后，华校沦为政治的产物，这是因为当权者为了巩固政权和延长它们的统治寿命而采取一种分而治之的手段，而更早前在英国殖民统 治时代，砂拉越的华校是受到当时英殖民政府的资助及承认华校的文凭。惟，自从加入大马后，资助和承认华校文凭的地位就失去了。甚至在最近还有部长发表承认 独中统考文凭是威胁国家主权的论调，简直是荒谬。