M or W 政治模型 18/10/2019

M or W 政治模型   18/10/2019

        我说，“准备砂拉越独立，请把票投给肯雅兰全民党。只有这个党，有胆量说，[追寻砂拉越独立]”。

        他或她说：“投给谁都是一样的。一上台就变了样。”

     做砂拉越国兴觉运动大约一年过程中，我的那一句话勾引出一般普通人的共同思维。是的，多数华人对火箭党失望到顶点。一时，我也很失措的不知道如何辩解。差点也掉进那种[绝望的边缘]。

还好，我有很坚定的理念。还好，我有亲朋戚友的交流。还好，我常常也一个人安静反复正逆向思考。还好，我有收集足够[砂拉越可以独立的信息]。在联合国官方网站，我们砂拉越的身份是：[改/Change]。这表示我们砂民可以透过联合国赋予殖民地人民的权利改变现有的状况。我们严重被殖民，是[亡国奴]，大家知道吗？1960年12月14日，联合国有通过一个议决叫[去殖民化1514/1541议决]。这决案赋予殖民地人民[自决权]来决定自己国家的未来。

如果砂民大多数都要独立，把票投给肯雅兰党。赢了选举，肯民党的终极目标是[追寻砂拉越独立]。他们就要在砂议会启动[独立法案]，像科索沃（Kosovo），新加坡，（Singapore）， Rhodesia等等都是单方面宣布独立。同时，通知联合国。联合国就会召开会议准许[砂拉越独立]。所以砂拉越独立是砂民和联合国的事。跟马来亚=马来西亚一点丁关系都没有。

砂拉独立后，56年各种各样的利益纠缠，有联合国的协调的，一切都会有妥当的处理。近50多年来，大概有100多个国家独立。 我们沙砂两国有100%权力独立的。大家还犹豫什么呢？ 砂拉越早一天独立，早一天除掉掠夺匪，剥削者，霸权打压，抢劫和霸凌。我们砂国才有机会发展成为一个美好的国度像芬兰，挪威，瑞士等等等的一等国家。

     砂拉越独立后，每一个砂民都要扮演着监督政府的角色。全民参与政经文教的发展。[砂国兴衰，个个砂民有责]。我们砂国要实践的是W政治模型：[以民为本，绩效为先]，民主，民治，民权，民有，民享，公平，公正和正义。一独立就要准备[公投法令]。以让全民来决定事关重要的事件。一定要有地方选举。让当地人决定和管理当地的事物。政府和人民是一体的。跟M政治模型完全不一样。W是M翻跟斗，所以完全不一样。

        M政治模型是独裁的，[天下以自我为尊。]，特权和中央集权，像509之前，BN政治模型和509后PH的政治模型是出于同一个拷贝的。结果，只有一小撮人获得无限的利益。查看过去五六十年M政治模型创造出来的实相。Mahathir家族和他的朋党如何[骑劫][新经济政策]来搜刮不义之财成为百万，百百万，亿万，亿亿万，亿亿亿万。。富翁。

        M政治模型，是独裁者的天下，他利用各种名义把[国有]的产业都[私人化]。看Mahathir本人，家族和朋党如何经营[私人化][国有产业]。他们都是[打包赢]的，生意失败都是人民买单。这些旧帐都有记录。 

        所以在M政治模型里，谁上场都是一样的。要不一样的政治模型，需要砂民的力量推动砂拉越国独立自主，推行W政治模型。砂X-BN，现在砂盟GPS政治模型也是M政治模型的。要不一样的砂拉越是要让M翻跟斗变成W政治模型。 你愿意配合吗？       林梅芳

theborneopost.com

Fong refutes expert’s view on imposition of SST | Borneo Post Online

Fong addresses the press conference held jointly with Sharifah Hasidah.

KUCHING: The suggestion by constitutional law expert Emeritus Professor Datuk Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi that Sarawak can only impose State Sales Tax (SST) on items under the State List in the Constitution is incorrect, says State Legal Counsel Dato Sri JC Fong.
     “There is no restriction stated in Article 95B(3) that the SST can only be imposed on those goods or services forming the subject matters in List II or List IIA (State List) in the Ninth Schedule of Federal Constitution,” he said through a press statement delivered during a press conference at his office, here yesterday.
Fong said the proper and only logical view must be that the right of either Parliament or State Legislature to impose taxes like SST or federal sales tax, does not depend on whether the matter or goods is on the Federal List or State List.
He said it would depend on the nature of the transaction, the income-generating activity or in the case of SST or federal sales tax, whether the particular good is declared a ‘taxable’ item and whenever a ‘sale’, as defined in the law, occurs.
Shad Saleem made the remarks during a talk here on Tuesday titled ‘The Spirit of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 in our Constitution’, articulating what seems to be Petronas’ argument that Sarawak cannot impose SST on petroleum products as such products are in the Federal List.
      Fong said the ‘spirit of MA63’ is clearly expressed in paragraph 24(1) of the Inter-Governmental Committee Report which is now an annexure to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).
“Taxation, including in particular customs and excise duties and taxes on incomes and profits, should be a federal subject but each Borneo state should have the power to impose a sales tax, if it wishes, provided that any federal sale tax would take priority over a state sales tax and provided that discriminatory rates would not be imposed on goods of the same type but of different places of origin,” he said, adding this recommendation is now incorporated into Article 95B(3) of the Federal Constitution.
         The recommendation and Article 95B(3)(c) clearly envisage that SST and federal sales tax could be levied without discrimination on goods of the same type, he pointed out.
        However, he said the federal sales tax shall be met out of sums collected from a person liable for that tax before a charge for a state sales tax.
     “This means where a taxable person is charged both federal sales tax and state sales tax on goods of the same type, federal sales tax enjoys priority in payment,” he explained.
        Among the goods subject to federal sales tax listed in the Third Schedule to the Sales Tax (Rate of Tax No. 2) Order [P.U.(A) 93/2008] are petroleum gases and other hydrocarbons such as liquefied and natural gas.
Therefore, pursuant to Article 95B(3) of the Federal Constitution, SST may also be imposed on liquefied natural gas or ‘petroleum gases’ subject to the condition that payment of federal sales tax by a taxable person takes priority over payment of SST on the same type of goods, said Fong.
    “Taking Professor Shad and what he said is Petronas’ argument to its logical conclusion and/or conversely, federal sales tax should not be levied on matters in the State List.
     “He pointed out, for instance, that turtles and riverine fishing are matters in the State List.  Then why are turtle meat and freshwater fish listed as taxable goods in the First Schedule to the Sales Tax (Rate of Tax No.2) Order, 2018?
  “Since forestry is in the State List, federal sales tax should not be imposed on ‘dark red Meranti, light red Meranti and Meranti bakau’ produced from logging licences issued by the state.”
      Fong stressed that the federal government’s imposition of federal sales tax on these items on the State List serves to confirm that a sales tax may be levied by the federal government on matters in the state list, and likewise, SST may be levied on subject matters in the Federal List.
     “It is a cardinal rule of statutory, as well as constitutional, interpretation that no one, including the Courts and ‘experts’ like Prof Shad should read into the law, words or provisions which are not there, based on the fundamental rule that judges and even ‘experts’ have no law-making or law-amending powers.
     “Therefore, there should not be read into the clear provisions of Article 95B(3) of the Federal Constitution, any words which have the effect of restricting or confining the rights of the state to enacting laws to impose SST only on goods which are on the State List.
    “What is good for the goose is good for the gander, as the saying goes. If there could be implied into Article 95B of the Federal Constitution a restriction on the exercise by the State Legislature to make laws to impose SST only on matters in the State List, then logically or conversely, a similar restriction ought to be read into the provisions of Article 96 which reads: ‘No tax or rate shall be levied by or for the purposes of the federation except by or under the authority of federal law.”
        Fong went on to say that Parliament cannot pass any federal law on matters listed in the State List, and that federal purpose or ‘purposes of the federation’ is defined in Article 160(2) to mean, inter alia, purposes of the federation in connection with matters in which Parliament has power to make laws otherwise than by virtue of Article 76.
           Additionally, Item 4(e) of List I (Federal List) covers ‘property and its transfer and hypothecation, except land’, which means Parliament and the federal government have no legislative or executive authority over transfer of land or property, he added.
     “If, it is legally permitted to read into or implied in Article 96, that tax or rate can only be levied by federal law on subject matters in the Federal List and for the purposes of those subject matters, then federal law cannot levy tax or rate on matters in the State List such as transfer of land [Item 2(c) in List II of Ninth Schedule].
     “In the premises, the constitutionality of taxes like real property gains tax and stamp duties levied upon the authority of federal laws, which have to be paid, on transfer of land, could be successfully challenged in court.
     “I am sure many Sarawakians would want to take a similar stand like Petronas – not to pay these types of federal taxes which they view as unconstitutional, and the Registrar of Lands in Sarawak can be compelled by an order mandamus from the court, to register instruments of land transfers which have not been paid stamp duty.”
        Fong remarked that what Shad Saleem had said on Petronas’ argument was not only against the spirit of MA63 but also, if he were right in his opinion, would open the floodgates for taxpayers not paying taxes imposed by federal laws on subject matters which are clearly under the State List such as transfer of land, or for taxpayers to challenge in court the imposition of taxes like real property gains tax and stamp duties whenever they transfer or dispose of land.
         Assistant Minister in the Chief Minister’s Department (Law, State-Federal Relations and Project Monitoring) Sharifah Hasidah Sayeed Aman Ghazali was present with Fong at the press conference.

My comments:

So-called federal constitution  10/10/2019

        The so-called federal constitution, is it based on MA57 or MA63? The so-called Parliament has become so grotesque when they have messed up the international treaty called MA63. What is the basis of constitution should be the question that the Sarawak government should ask the Malaya = Malaysia government. It is ridiculous to argue on when federal constitution with no regards to MA63 which is believed widely as a fraud from the very beginning.
Did Sarawak and Sabah have the right to sign MA63 when they were still colonised under the British government in 1963? 

        On 25^th February, 2019, the Mauritius government has claimed back the Chagos island from the British government at the International Court of Justice.  This precedent should serve as a very good model for Sarawak and Sabah to follow the right course of action to settle 56 years of plundering, exploitation, oppression, suppression, robbing and bullying.  There is nothing to talk or negotiate anymore.  It is idiotic to argue with the plunderer, exploiter, oppressor, suppressor, robber and bully. 

Settle the matter at the International Court of Justice, not at any imperialist and coloniser courts in Malaya/Malaysia.  There is no basis of Justice in this whole organisation.  Everything is one-sided to the advantage of Malaya/Malaysia.

 

Sarawak govt con­fi­dent it can sus­tain in­vestor con­fi­dence it reg­u­lates its own O&G in­dus­try

pressreader.com

Sarawak govt con­fi­dent it can sus­tain in­vestor con­fi­dence it reg­u­lates its own O&G in­dus­try

• 4 Oct 2019
• +1 more
• Lim How Pim

KUCHING: The Sarawak gov­ern­ment is ready to take over the helm of its oil and gas in­dus­try in the state if Pu­tra­jaya thinks the im­po­si­tion of the state sales tax (SST) on the in­dus­try will hurt in­vestor in­ter­est and con­fi­dence, an as­sis­tant state min­is­ter said yes­ter­day.

As­sis­tant Min­is­ter in the Chief Min­is­ter’s Depart­ment Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah Say­eed Aman Ghaz­ali said Sarawak has in place the nec­es­sary laws to reg­u­late the in­dus­try if the fed­eral gov­ern­ment does not think it could con­tinue to do so.
“If the Fed­eral Gov­ern­ment feels it is un­able to sus­tain in­vestor in­ter­est and con­fi­dence in the oil and gas in­dus­try in Sarawak, be­cause in­dus­try play­ers, in­clud­ing Petronas, has to pay an­nu­ally RM3 bil­lion of SST, the Fed­eral Gov­ern­ment should con­sider se­ri­ously al­low­ing the State to reg­u­late fully the in­dus­try un­der its Oil Min­ing Or­di­nance and Dis­tri­bu­tion of Gas Or­di­nance.

“If the Fed­eral Gov­ern­ment feels it is un­able to sus­tain in­vestor in­ter­est and con­fi­dence in the oil and gas in­dus­try in Sarawak, be­cause in­dus­try play­ers, in­clud­ing Petronas, has to pay an­nu­ally RM3 bil­lion of SST, the Fed­eral Gov­ern­ment should con­sider se­ri­ously al­low­ing the State to reg­u­late fully the in­dus­try un­der its Oil Min­ing Or­di­nance and Dis­tri­bu­tion of Gas Or­di­nance.
“The State Gov­ern­ment is very con­fi­dent that it is able to sus­tain in­vestor con­fi­dence, whether short or long term, in the oil and gas in­dus­try in Sarawak. This is am­ply demon­strated by the fact that for­eign oil com­pa­nies op­er­at­ing in Sarawak such as Shell, Mur­phy Oil, Per­tam­ina etc have paid the SST as­sessed up to date.
“Only Petronas has yet to pay,” said Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah, who is in charge of Law, State-Fed­eral Re­la­tions and Project Mon­i­tor­ing in a state­ment.
She made these re­marks in re­fut­ing an ar­ti­cle with head­line ‘Why the in­tro­duc­tion of the Pe­tro­leum Sales Tax in Sarawak may not ap­peal to Ev­ery­one’ pub­lished in the Malaysian Re­serve on Sept 30.

She made these re­marks in re­fut­ing an ar­ti­cle with head­line ‘Why the in­tro­duc­tion of the Pe­tro­leum Sales Tax in Sarawak may not ap­peal to Ev­ery­one’ pub­lished in the Malaysian Re­serve on Sept 30.
Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah said the ar­ti­cle con­tained a num­ber of in­ac­cu­rate state­ments re­lat­ing to Sarawak’s con­sti­tu­tional rights to levy SST on pe­tro­leum prod­ucts prin­ci­pally liq­ue­fied nat­u­ral gas (LNG), crude oil and con­den­sates.
“To be­gin with, the SST Or­di­nance 1998 was passed pur­suant to Ar­ti­cle 95B(3) of the Fed­eral Con­sti­tu­tion.
“The Ar­ti­cle reads ‘The Leg­is­la­ture of the State of Sabah and Sarawak may also make laws for im­pos­ing sales tax, and any sales tax im­posed by State law in the State of Sabah and Sarawak shall be deemed to be amongst the mater enu­mer­ated in the State List and not in the Fed­eral List’.
“There­fore, the State Leg­is­la­ture’s con­sti­tu­tional author­ity to pass laws on SST is not de­pen­dent on Ar­ti­cle 96 as con­tended in the Malaysian Re­serve,” she pointed out.

She said the right of Sarawak to pass laws on SST was in­cor­po­rated into the Fed­eral Con­sti­tu­tion pur­suant to the rec­om­men­da­tion in para 24(1) of Chap­ter III of the In­ter­Gov­ern­men­tal Com­mit­tee (IGC) Re­port which is an An­nex­ure to the Malaysia Agree­ment.
To ques­tion the state’s right to levy SST (which is a rev­enue as­signed to the state un­der Item 7 Part V of the Tenth Sched­ule of the Fed­eral Con­sti­tu­tion), ac­cord­ing to her, is there­fore a dis­guise to dis­hon­our the Malaysia Agree­ment and what is ex­pressly pro­vided in the supreme law of the na­tion as a source of rev­enue of Sarawak.
“The ex­er­cise of a right so clearly en­shrined in the Con­sti­tu­tion should not be de­pen­dent upon the out­come of the cur­rent dis­cus­sions on MA63 (Malaysia Agree­ment 1963) which should be fo­cused on mat­ters per­tain­ing to the ero­sion or recla­ma­tion of those rights which Sarawak is le­git­i­mately en­ti­tled to, un­der MA63.

“Why SST by State Gov­ern­ment? The Chief Min­is­ter has re­peat­edly ex­plained why SST needed to be im­posed. The State needed this ad­di­tional source to drive its de­vel­op­ment agenda.
“It must be pointed out that ac­cord­ing to pub­licly avail­able data, from 1976 to 2017, the to­tal rev­enues de­rived from the pro­duc­tion and sale of oil and gas within Sarawak ter­ri­tory amounted to RM660 bil­lion, of which only five per cent or RM33 bil­lion was paid to Sarawak,” she said.
As such, Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah said Sarawak had con­trib­uted very sig­nif­i­cantly to fed­eral cof­fers from its rich oil and gas re­sources since 1976.
All the nat­u­ral gas de­rived from Sarawak were con­verted to LNG for ex­port to Ja­pan, Korea and Tai­wan, earn­ing very sig­nif­i­cant for­eign ex­change for the Malaysian gov­ern­ment, she stressed.
Hence, she said the im­po­si­tion of SST on pe­tro­leum prod­ucts ‘is a dis­charge of the State Gov­ern­ment’s fidu­ciary duty to Sarawakians to seek a fairer share of the rev­enues from oil and gas pro­duced in Sarawak’.

Hence, she said the im­po­si­tion of SST on pe­tro­leum prod­ucts ‘is a dis­charge of the State Gov­ern­ment’s fidu­ciary duty to Sarawakians to seek a fairer share of the rev­enues from oil and gas pro­duced in Sarawak’.
“Based on the present pro­duc­tion rate of oil and gas in Sarawak and at cur­rent global oil prices, the amount is RM40 bil­lion an­nu­ally. The SST will yield ap­prox­i­mately RM3 bil­lion ad­di­tional rev­enues for the State.
“A er all these years of con­tribut­ing bil­lions of ring­git to fed­eral Trea­sury from the State’s pe­tro­leum re­sources, what is the ba­sis for the Min­is­ter of Fi­nance Mr Lim Guan Eng to say ( as re­ported in Malaysian Re­serve) that the State’s im­po­si­tion of SST to yield ad­di­tional re­serve to the State of RM3 bil­lion is un­rea­son­able,” she said.
With re­gard to al­leged loss of in­vestor con­fi­dence in the oil and gas in­dus­try in Sarawak due to im­po­si­tion of SST, Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah said it must be pointed out that ‘ trade, com­merce and in­dus­try’ are mat­ters un­der the fed­eral port­fo­lio (Fed­eral List).

With re­gard to al­leged loss of in­vestor con­fi­dence in the oil and gas in­dus­try in Sarawak due to im­po­si­tion of SST, Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah said it must be pointed out that ‘ trade, com­merce and in­dus­try’ are mat­ters un­der the fed­eral port­fo­lio (Fed­eral List).

To ques­tion the state’s right to levy SST is a dis­guise to dis­hon­our the Malaysia Agree­ment. Shar­i­fah Hasi­dah Say­eed Aman Ghaz­ali

The Borneo Post

4 Oct 2019

My comments:

Take legal action to deal with them.  When Ah Gou or Ah Mao  refuses (阿狗或阿猫) to comply to the payment of SST, the prompt legal action is always taken to deal to make him pay immediately.  It is always so effective and correct.  What the Sarawak government should do now is the same treatment to deal with Petronas.  Every concerned Sarawakian is watching and judging.  Yes, time has set and prompt action to be taken to sue them in the court.  If it doesn't work,  just declare Sarawak independent unilaterally to get rid of the trouble of Malaya colonial power.

Negaraku Malaya 4/10/2019

Negaraku Malaya  4/10/2019

        Will I stand up when Negaraky Malaya is played?  No, for sure, no!  Will you stand up to sing or show your respect to the national anthem of the imperialist and colonist?  Will you?  Yes or No!

        I know Tourism….Abdul Karim will and so will all the GPS-crowned political clowns.  School students, teachers and the government servants will as they are grounded to do so.  They have no choice when GPS-crowned political clowns bow to the authority of the Malaya imperialists and colonial masters. 

        Common Sarawakians like you and me are boiling with anger and disgust at the sight of the Malaya flag and sounds of Negaraku Malaya which stands for domination and colonization as they show no respect to MA63.  How can they expect respect from Sarawakians and Sabahans when they have breached all the trust of MA63 in the first place?

        Now, how can Sarawakians like S4S leaders who represent most of the common Sarawakians care about standing up to sing or show their respect to the pirate song?  No, for sure, no!  Respect, yes, “ is earned, not forced upon”.  Respect is also two sided. 

        Don’t force on us as Sarawakians and Sabahans are no longer so foolish and blind like ever before.  It is 2019 going to be 2020.  It is not 1920.  True democracy should rule.  The government which is really ‘by the people, of the people and for the people’ should realise herself in reality.  We, Sarawakians can no longer tolerate the Malaya imperialists and colonists to plunder, exploit, oppress, suppress, rob and bully Sarawak anymore. 

        We know how unreliable and tricky GPS-crowned political clowns are to protect Sarawak to gain her independence.  Tourism….Abdul Karim is a very good respresentative of disloyalty to Sarawak.  It is understood that PDA 1974 and 1976 degrading Sarawak and Sabah into a 12^th and 13^th states are unconstitutional and against the international laws.  I wonder when GPS-crowned political clowns will repeal the Acts PDA 1974 and Degrading Act 1976. 

PH-crowned political clowns, I believe, are too traitors-prone to be trusted anymore and are clear to 99% of the Sarawakians, especially the Chinese.  We despise them for being so Malaya-minded, hearted and oriented to uphold the national status of Sarawak.  We have the video-taped record of  DAP Chong Chieng Jen’s comments on the Status of Sarawak.  He thinks it funny if Sarawak is considered as a country.  I wonder what he thinks about England, France, Germany and so on in the European Union.  Are there countries in the European Union?  Who is so funny and makes a fool of himself?

        Is Malaysia a country or a federation like European Union?  Malaya with the name changed to Malaysia is a country.  Sarawak is a country and Sabah is a country.  Malaya hiding behind the name of Malaysia has created the make-believe of Malaysia and in the process, messed up the equal partnership  to turn the countries Sabah and Sarawak into 12^th and 13^th states of Malaya and have colonised these two coooooooooooountries ever since. 

        Today, at least 90% of Sarawakians are wide-awake of these hidden facts despite the history of Sarawak and Sabah being more or less erased to facilitate the Big-plan of Malaya’s invasion and aggression to swallow up these two countries for their own use. 

        When Mahathir, this devil and all the PH-crowned political clowns declare to take over the power of Sarawak Dun, I believe 90% of Sarawakians feel exasperated and disgusted. 

        How can you force free loyal Sarawakians to stand up to sing the pirate song, Negaru Malaya?  It is idiotic to play Negaru Malaya and hold the pirate flag to say, “I love Malaysia=Malaya” the imperial and colonial country?  We only make fools of our children and ourselves if we allow ourselves to do so.

        I hope that Sarawak will gain her independence as soon as possible to relieve many Sarawakians to appear like fools.  May God/Allah bless Sarawak and her people.