砂政府要收回民都鲁海港

炮佐大言不惭的说要跟马来西亚联邦政府要回民都鲁海港的管理权。这是他在30/1/2023 Samalaju海港私人有限公司10周年晚宴上发言。

他说砂政府要制定砂海港发展大蓝图让各海港各司其职，希望透过船务以衔接国际主要海港交通来推动砂经济。

民都鲁私人有限公司在1993年在民都鲁获得特殊经营权。

砂政府拥有39.7%股份；国油和马国际船运公司30.8%。他们之间组成70.5%的股份在马股交易所称为挂牌公司。

民都鲁海港就在新成立的中央港务局管理，营运和规划发展。

自1993年，20年了，税务收费从来没有检讨过。因此，该海港在砂境内跟其他海港收费有出入，造成分歧性收费。

国油为民都鲁海港最大利益单位，砂政府还是有意跟它持续合作管理，发展民都鲁海港业务。在大家共同合作下，把民都鲁海港发展成亚太海运枢纽目标迈进。

在1978年，联邦议会完全没有依据联邦宪法76（1）（c）条文下，咨询或获得砂议会同意下，就通过联邦海港法案（217法案）把民都鲁海港佔为己有成为联邦海港。

接着1981年，又通过民都鲁港务局法令管制民都鲁海港。

各种行为活像盗匪，所以916马来西亚日,也是砂拉越国殇日。

马来亚以马来西亚联邦名义掠夺，剥削，打压，抢劫和霸凌砂拉越。

当然，咱们砂拉越政客们的无能和贪婪造就了马来亚海盗霸权可以很顺畅在砂沙横行霸道，尽情的干下无法无天的恶行。

MA63值多少？

*肯雅兰全民党主席温利山**

2023年1月20日

关于马来西亚的问题是: 用于移交新加坡沙巴和砂拉越的 1963 年马来西亚协议（MA63）根据国际法是无效的协议 - 请参阅联合国国际法院（ICJ）于 2019 年 2 月 25 日所交付的查戈斯群岛案例之判決。

即使有效的 MA63 因根本违反协议而使之成为廢纸。

 为什么各方仍然认为MA63是一份神圣的协议而可繼續谈判？

MA63被英国人用來提交新加坡沙巴和砂拉越予馬來亚以扩大其領土和然后马来亚政府将之更名为马来西亚。英国这样做是为了规避联合国大会第 1514 号决议，该决议称所有殖民地都将去殖民化。

不可否认，马来亚利用MA63吞并并占领了新加坡, 沙巴和砂拉越。李光耀还蒙骗我们加入馬來亞参组马来西亚来完成英国的偉大计划。当时他未能确保新加坡脱离英国独立之后就因而说服馬來西亞成立。马来西亚成立后，他制造了混乱致使东姑連吃敗陣因此经过辛苦谈判之后，新加坡终于解脱出局了。

1963年联合国司法年鉴中有证据表明马来西亚是马来亚，马来亚是马来西亚。

The problem about Malaysia is that the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) that was use to hand over Singapore Sabah and Sarawak was an invalid agreement under international law - see Chagos Islands case by UN International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered on 25 Feb 2019.

Even if valid MA63 became a toilet paper due to fundamental breaches of the agreement.

 Why all sides still think as if MA63 was a sacred agreement and that it is negotiatiable? 

MA63 was used by the British to hand Singapore Sabah and Sarawak to enlarge Malaya and MALAYA then changed its name to Malaysia. The British did this to circumvent UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 which said all colonies are to be decolonized 

It could not be denied that Malaya use MA63 to annexed and to occupy Singapore Sabah and Sarawak. LKY also cheated us to join MALAYA to form Malaysia to fulfill the British Grand Design plan. He persuaded Malaysia be formed after he failed to secure independence from the British for Singapore. After Malaysia was formed he created havoc and Tunku lost the game to him, kicked Singapore out

There is evidence about Malaysia is Malaya and Malaya is Malaysia in UN Juridical Year Book 1963.

归还MA63权益

新聞公告

2023年1月20日

肯雅兰全民党主席温利山

**鉴于1963 年马来西亚协议 (MA63) 规定的权利*

在研究 1963年馬來西亞協议(MA 63 )下的权利之前，最重要的事務是沙巴和砂拉越政府与联邦政府都需要确定马来西亚联邦成立的合法性。所有事情都必须从根本上进行审查，包括MA63 的合法性。 砂政盟政府(GPS)应该向公众披露其在伦敦所发现的有关 MA63 的事情。

如果協议无效或不合法，為何須要执行呢？如果協议无效或非法缔約签署的，后果是马来西亚联邦必须解散而各方应离开联邦。如果该協议有效，那么只需执行其中的所有条款和条件即可。為何需要等待、谈判或重新谈判呢？在过去的 59 年里，这个问题一直悬而未决。

尊敬的首相拿督斯里安华建议 MA63 的事情需要多一点谈判，这似乎不会很快结束过去几年一直困扰着沙巴和砂拉越政府与联邦政府的“幽灵” 。

首相可能需要被告知沙巴和砂拉越人民都知道; 成立马来西亚联邦的主要目的是为了保护英国在第二次世界大战后之东南亚的利益，以及让马来亚从沙巴和砂拉越的石油资源受益。

如果首相要否认这些油气资源从未被用来发展马来亚的事实，那就废除1974年石油发展法令, 2012年领海法令和1966年大陆架法令，并将所有油气资源归还沙巴和砂拉越。

许多沙巴人和砂拉越人在 1960 年代不同意组建马来西亚联邦之方式而导致了反对这一想法的大规模公众示威，因为在决定成立马来西亚之前英国沒有授予沙巴和砂拉越独立。

要恢复砂拉越的所有权利，首先全部必須将沙巴和砂拉越恢复到它们原来作为国家的地位，而不是作为马来西亚联邦内的地区或省份。这是因为马来西亚是大马来亚的计划並且很难否定沙巴和砂拉越没有被吸纳、吞并或合并是为了扩大马来亚領土。 这种精心策劃的馬來西亞(大馬來亞)是通过MA63而落实的。

现在担心的是，一些联邦和地方领导人建议使用的术语; 地区（wilayah）或省份(province)，会有一天造成到沙巴和砂拉越变为联邦领土，并被称为 (Wilayah Persekutuan Sabah )联邦直轄区沙巴和 (Wilayah Persekutuan Sarawak)联邦直轄区砂拉越。这就像现在被称为 Wilayah Persekutuan Labuan 的联邦直辖区纳闽。

如果发生这种情况，根据 MA63 保护沙巴和砂拉越权利的移民法将变得多余。

PRESS STATEMENT

Re: Rights under Malaysia Agreement 1963(MA63)

Before looking at the rights under MA 63 it is utmost important that both the federal and governments of Sabah and Sarawak need to determine the legality of the formation of the federation of Malaysia. All things must be examined from the roots including the legality of the Treaty, MA63. The GPS government should disclose to the public what they had found in London about the matters concerning MA63. 

If the Treaty was invalid or illegal, what is there to implement? The consequence is that, if the Treaty was invalid or illegally signed, the federation of Malaysia has to be dissolved or parties should leave the federation. If the Treaty is valid, then, just implement all terms and conditions therein. What is there to wait or to negotiate or re-negotiate? The matter had been left outstanding or unsolved for the past 59 years. 

The suggestion by the honourable prime minster, Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim that things in MA63 could be negotiated a little more seems will not bring an end soon to the “ghost” that had been haunting the federal and state governments of Sabah and Sarawak for past years. The prime minister may need to be informed that peoples of Sabah and Sarawak are aware that the main intention for having the federation of Malaysia formed was to protect the interest of the British in South East Asia after world war II and for Malaya to benefit from the oil resources of Sabah and Sarawak. 

If the prime minister wish to deny that fact that these oil and gas resources had never been used to develop Malaya, then repeal the Petroleum Development Act 1974, Seas Territorial Act and also the Continental Shelf Act and to return all oil and gas resources to Sabah and Sarawak.

Many Sabahans and Sarawakians in 1960s did not agree as to how the federation of Malaysia should be formed. This led to huge public demonstrations against the idea because Sabah and Sarawak were not granted independence by the British before deciding on Malaysia be formed.

To restore all rights of Sarawak, all must begin with putting back Sabah and Sarawak to their original positions as countries, not as regions or provinces within the federation of Malaysia. This is because Malaysia was a plan for Greater Malaya and it is difficult to dispute that Sabah and Sarawak had not been absorbed, annexed or merged for the plan for Greater Malaya, that is, to enlarge Malaya and this was carefully planned and done by way of MA63.

The fear now is that the term, region (wilayah) or province being used as suggested by some federal and local leaders, will one day see Sabah and Sarawak becoming federal territories and be called as Wilayah Persekutuan Sabah and also Wilayah Persekutuan Sarawak. This will be like Labuan, which is now, known as Wilayah Persekutuan Labuan. 

If this happens, the immigration laws protecting the rights of Sabah and Sarawak under MA63 will be left redundant.

VOON LEE SHAN

President, Parti Bumi Kenyalang

狼的智慧

《狼的智慧》：驚人的3大生存法則，學會受益一生

在狼的故事中，我們可以得到很多智慧與啟發。

當你困頓於緊繃無措的都市生活時，大自然的精靈會給你慰藉的力量。

世界上，存在一群狂熱的 愛狼”分子。德國作家埃莉•拉丁格就是其中最為典型的一員。

為了接近狼，她辭去了穩定高薪的律師工作，隻身前往美國印第安納州的狼園進修。

後來，又跋山涉水遠赴明尼蘇達州的荒野，與生性兇猛的野狼親密接觸。

在經歷過無數個命懸一線的生死時刻後，埃莉發現狼是一種充滿感情和智慧的動物。

她把自己與狼共舞的故事，寫成了一本《狼的智慧》。

希望用這本書，給予我們人類一些關於生存的啟發。

共生法則

在書裡，埃莉講述了一件令她至今感慨萬千的事。

2013年4月，她作為觀察員前往拉馬爾山谷。

在一處洞穴裡，她發現了一頭剛生產5天的雌性拉馬爾狼和4只可愛的小狼崽。

這天，16只凶狠的莫麗狼突然衝進山谷，襲擊了拉馬爾狼群。

這隻狼媽媽因為身體虛弱，即使拼命地跑，還是陷入了莫麗狼的包圍圈。

它被逼上了一座陡峭的山峰，等待她的，要么是跳崖身亡，要么是一場惡鬥。

危難時刻，忽然從遠處跑來一隻年輕的母狼，成功地引起了莫麗狼的注意，並把它們引向了另一側山谷。

這隻母狼，是拉馬爾族群裡的長跑健將，在熟悉的棲息地，它不僅輕鬆地擺脫了追擊，還把入侵者繞地暈頭轉向。

最後，莫麗狼在山谷裡迷失了方向，不得不放棄進攻。

試想，如果年輕的母狼沒有挺身而出，拉馬爾狼群很可能被滅種，而它自己也可能失去家園。

埃莉說：

在狼群裡，每一隻狼都會盡全力保護其他成員，它們天生就有這種能力。”

狼群裡的每一隻狼，都天生具備一種 共生”意識，有一種 利他”的格局。

反觀我們自己，是否能做到時時為他人著想呢？

《道德經》有言：

既以為人，己愈有；既以與人，己愈多。”

幫助別人，就是幫自己；為別人付出的，終將會回報到我們自己身上。

在崇尚 狼性文化”的任正非身上，發生過這樣一件事。

當時，業務骨幹李玉琢鐵了心要離開華為。

就在他辦理離職手續時，任正非卻下了死命令，要求相關部門在12月31日之前誰也不許審批。

眾人揣測任正非是為了拖延時間，直到發年終獎時，大家才恍然大悟。

原來，華為規定，員工只有待到年底最後一天，才能拿到全額獎金。

李玉琢因此拿到了200萬的年終獎。

任正非的良苦用心，不僅成全了李玉琢，還為華為吸引到更多人才，可謂雙贏。

稻盛和夫在《活法》裡曾說：

在這個宇宙間，如果長吹著一股利他之風，它就會推動一切事物不斷向好的方向前進。”

真正聰明的人都不會只顧著自己，他們懂得凡事對他人有利，對自己同樣有利。

真正聰明的人都不會只顧著自己，他們懂得凡事對他人有利，對自己同樣有利。

我們生活在人群中，就像狼生活在狼群裡，都需要互相搭橋，彼此成就。

叢林法則

1895年，達爾文在《物種起源》中，提出了 物競天擇，適者生存”的生物進化理論。

這一理論，在狼群領地之爭中，體現得尤其明顯。

埃莉在書中，為我們描述了一場狼群之間殘忍的地盤爭奪戰。

那是發生在黃石公園的一場惡戰，作戰雙方是德魯伊狼和沼澤狼。

那天，16只壯年德魯伊狼忽然衝進黃石公園，它們游過冰冷的河水，衝上陡峭的山坡，呈扇形排開。

只聽得頭狼的一聲狼嗥，全部德魯伊狼化身為熱血勇士，沖向了沼澤狼。

經過幾小時的殊死搏鬥，德魯伊狼贏了地盤，而沼澤狼卻被咬死了大半，零碎的屍體佈滿山谷，剩下的殘兵遊甬落荒而逃。

關於這場邊界戰爭，埃莉分析說，德魯伊狼常年保持著高強度的訓練，而沼澤狼則在安逸的環境裡，失去了作戰能力。

狼群之間致命的領地之戰，再次告訴我們：弱肉強食的叢林法則，一直存在於世界的各個角落。

強者為王，弱者為寇，唯有強者才能存活。

現實生活中，叢林法則更多體現在我們與生存環境的較量中。

當時代疾馳向前，有的人在舒適圈里甘當弱者，直到被社會拋棄，才驚慌失措；

但也有人，時刻保持警覺，不斷更新自我，活成了生活裡的強者。

大家是否還記得，那位唐山收費站的大姐？

2018年，唐山市決定撤銷路橋收費站，不少人一夜之間面臨失業，其中有位女員工向領導哭訴：

我今年36了，我的青春都交給收費站了。我現在啥也不會，我也學不了什麼東西了。”

此言一出，網友們直呼：可憐又可悲！

與其說她的青春交給了收費站，不如說是她把青春消耗在了日復一日的安逸中。

同樣是上熱搜，湖南賣菜的李阿姨，卻被十幾萬網友點贊，還被《人民日報》點名表揚。

李阿姨雖然只是一名普通的菜販，但卻能與時俱進。

她觀察到當今的年輕人生活節奏快，沒時間料理 一日三餐”。

於是，她自創 一周菜單”，提前把蔬菜處理好，顧客只需回家炒一下就可以吃。

她不斷提升自己的服務，不僅菜賣得更好了，自己的生活也變得更有意義。

梁啟超曾說：物競天擇勢必至，不優則劣不醒則亡。”

有限的生存領地裡，只有更加勇猛的狼才能掙得地盤；充滿競爭的人類社會，也只不斷變強的人，未來才有更多的路走。

秩序法則

作家帕斯捷爾納克說：

生活是一個龐偉的競技場，大家盡可以在那裡進行奪取勝利的較量，但必須老老實實地遵守比賽規則。”

無規矩不成方圓，有規矩才有秩序，這是自然界萬事萬物的運行法則。

在《狼的智慧》中，埃莉講得最多的，就是狼群家族裡的秩序。

她說：狼群里長幼有序，分工明確，所有成員各司其職，日常生活井然有序。

每個狼群都有一個 共識”，那就是它們不僅會一起撫養幼崽，還會供養年長或者受傷的狼。

穿行山谷時，走在最前面的是狼群中的青壯年，頭狼夫婦緊隨其後，再後面則是老弱婦孺。

每當遇到危險，作為首領的頭狼會審時度勢，發出號令，指揮大家渡過難關。

大多數情況，狼都遵循著規則安守其位，但也發生過一次例外，用埃莉的話說，那是 一件轟動一時的命案。”

當時，有一隻德魯伊狼，它先是趕走了母親和妹妹，又殘忍地虐待其他成員，甚至殺死了幾隻幼崽。

這隻狼破壞了狼群裡 團結一致，嚴禁互鬥”的規則，而它的下場，也十分悲慘。

它被其他的狼，群起而攻之，最後被活活咬死。

規則，不僅是一種約束，更是一種保護，忽視規則，無異於忽視生命。

前段時間，一則 奔馳女硬闖小區”的新聞，在社會上引起軒然大波。

事情發生在北京市海淀區，女司機晉某不僅無視小區例行檢查的規定，堅決不配合測量體溫，還口出惡語辱罵工作人員。

面對眾人的勸阻，她愈加張狂，揚言道： 車我不要了，罵你怎麼了，滾蛋！”

隨後，她試圖駕車衝進去，威脅保安說，要告他非禮。

無視甚至破壞規則的人，終將受到規則的懲罰。

這位奔馳女司機，最終因妨礙公務罪，被行政拘留。

她本是一家企業的老總，自己的事情被曝光後，等待她的可能是更大的經濟損失。

她的事兒，讓我想起了吳軍在《見識》裡的一句話：

不管是自然界，還是現實生活，處處都需要規矩來維持和穩定秩序。

秩序法則，讓原野上的狼擰成一股繩，抵抗殘酷的生存環境；更能讓人類社會得以有序運行。

寫在最後

埃莉說：

狼群表現出的社會性，一直是生物學家和心理學家研究的重點。”

她認為，通過對狼群的觀察，人類可以更加了解自己。

埃莉，不僅有一顆強大的探索之心，更有一種為人類解惑的悲憫情懷。

MA63协议是什么？

MA63协议是什么？

       2O/1/23安华耒晋主持了MA63行动理事会会议。会后取得5项成果，其实这5项对砂是不痛不痒无关紧要的，至于关键的是给砂沙两邦正名之事，则是打了太极由统治者决定。看来过去马耒亜已"玩"了砂沙6O年，再"玩"上6O年易如反掌，除非砂沙天然资源已枯遏了，那就会主动退出"古励"砂沙独立。

         马耒亜说MA63是马来西亚立国契约，但对砂沙来讲是亡国契约！6O年代在砂最常听到的一句话是：通过参加马来西亚取得独立，马来西亚将带来繁荣，幸福！60年过去了砂拉越独立了吗？人民生活繁荣幸福了吗？说句实话6O前砂是英殖民地，6O年后的今天砂是马耒亜的次殖民地，成了资源最丰富 ，经济发展与基建设施最落后的"州 "！问砂同胞们这到底是怎么一回事？真无奈呀！千害万祸归根结底是可恨的英殖民主义者搞了个世纪大谎言，国际大骗局的MA63协议，把砂沙人民推进了万丈深渊的马耒西亚地狱中去永世不得翻身！

        到底MA63协议是什么东西？MA63本质上是一份非法的新殖民主义宣言书。首先它违反了6O年代联合国去殖民化的1541和1514决议案。也就是剥夺了砂沙人民神圣的自决权力。2,MA63协议一手由英国人操纵制定的，完全没有砂沙民意基础，全世界最荒唐的国际协议！尤其是未经砂沙全民公投作出的决定，因此是无民意基础和非法无效的。若马政府有底气也有勇气应邀请联合国当局派团耒砂沙，针对MA63耒一次全民公决，这样即可一劳永逸地砂沙的地位问题！3，9/7/63所谓四位代表砂赴英伦签下MA63协议的，全由英国人委派未经砂立法会批准的非法代表，这四人长期耒被砂人民诟病为祸国殃民的儍瓜的卖国贼！他们能代表谁？他们所签的能有法律效力否？从成立大马第一天开始马方就否决并不执行MA63耒看，马方早就认为MA63是一张废纸没必要遵守。只有无知，可怜，愚蠢，自作多情又自我作贱的砂拉越人把MA63奉为神圣不可侵犯的律法。4，MA63完全违反国际法。砂沙原是英国殖民地，依国际法砂沙无权，无资格参与签署由4方共同签署的MA63国际协议。严格地讲当年砂沙签了等于O。按规定一份国际协议须在一年内上报联合国当局否则便失效。可是MA63却延至197O年才上报联合国，时间已过了7年早已失效。在联合国的马耒亜联合邦席位也是在197O年改为马耒西亚联邦。5，1965年8月9日当新加坡脱马独立后，即无召开4方圆桌会议修改原协议，亦无议决让新加坡退出。那么MA63是否还存在？马来西亚还是马耒西亚否？抑或是马耒西亚变成了马耒亜的马耒西亚？

         砂拉越同胞们，上述几点事实足以证明我们今天的马耒西亚是一个非法组成的国家，只要在法律上MA63被判为非法，那么马来西亚就必须解散还砂沙人民的自决权。

           当英国人把砂沙"恩赐"给了马耒亜后，马耒亜在英国人授意和支持下第一时间在砂大地上大开杀戒，实施紧急状态和内安法令，大肆抓，捕，杀砂不要当马亡国奴的砂年青人。在血雨腥风中成立的大马一夜间成了我们的国家，这是什么逻辑？与中间隔了1千公哩外的马耒亜共组一个国家这又是什么地理逻辑？是4O年代末东巴与西巴的翻版？东巴与西巴于7O年代初已崩塌了，东马与西马一样是逃不过分崩离析的厄运吧！新年伊始，望同胞们有梦想，安华绝不能带好梦给我们，我们只能团结起来共筑美梦----脱马独立-----明天必定会更好！

砂拉越和沙巴在马联邦的定位

2023年1月16日

新聞公告

肯雅兰全民党主席温利山

鉴于 沙巴和砂拉越不是邦(Region)。

沙巴人和砂拉越人必须审查政治家的声明，以及当副首相拿督斯里扎希声明时表示砂拉越和沙巴现在被赋予邦Region地位，不再被视为马来西亚的州 - 见 World of Buzz，2023 年 1 月 13 日。他們必须让沙巴人和砂拉越人知道，沙巴和砂拉越曾经是与马来亚互不相干毫無關係的国家，但却被卷入英国为保护其在该地区的利益而设计之新殖民主义所造成的后果​​。英国同时策划的新殖民主义也否絕沙巴和砂拉越根据联合国大会第1514号决议获得独立的权力，並通过1963年7月9日签署的1963年马来西亚协议将沙巴，砂拉越和新加坡交给马来亚。声称砂拉越通过加入马来亚联邦成立马来西亚联邦而独立，这在法律上具有误导性。因为根据国际法，一个国家不可能在另一个国家之內独立。

因此，沙巴和砂拉越不能称为马来西亚的邦Region。除非沙巴和砂拉越被称为国家Countries，否则被称为邦Region (区域)是不可接受的，因为根据国际法，一个邦Region (区域)没有固定的边界。若这样，沙巴人和砂拉越人便失去了其国家。

国家之间这种未经全民投票决定殖民地人民意愿的政治安排违背了这片土地上人民决定其自己和国家未来的自然和不可剥夺的权利。

  

英国对马来亚的去殖民化以及随后创建马来西亚的方式是新殖民主义在起作用。 AJ Stockwell教授的研究工作和印尼总统苏加诺对当时英国和马来亚策划的新殖民主义导致印尼和马来西亚武装对抗的分析指出；沙巴人和砂拉越人应该认真对待此事以免后代人被掩蓋了历史关于马来西亚是如何形成的，以及为什么在 1963 年至 1966 年期间印尼和马来西亚之间发生武装对抗的知识, 信息和记录。

东姑阿都拉曼于 1957 年 8 月 31 日宣布马来亚“Merdeka”（独立），随后英国将北婆罗洲（沙巴）、砂拉越和新加坡与马来亚联邦合并成立马来西亚是以新加坡、沙巴和砂拉越签署1963 年马来西亚协定（MA63），从而规避了联合国大会第 1514 号决议规定的殖民地人民的自决权。要说英国对沙巴和砂拉越的殖民主义已经结束，并且可以用这种方式做到这一点是具有误导性与不正确的。

因此，所有事情都是为了让英国人和马来亚人看起来很好，而卻是踐踏当时我们人民的高文盲率和对其权利的无知，就好像沙巴和砂拉越获得了独立，而实际上却没有。

沙巴人和砂拉越人都知道，根据国际法，国家或国家可能会因合并​​而灭绝（1990 年南北也门）。国家或国家也可能因被另一个国家吸收或吞并而灭绝。当国家合并或被另一个国家吸收或吞并时，被合并、吸收或吞并的国家就失去了其身份。他们可能会以这种方式灭绝。

许多法律专家认为MA63不是有效的条约或协议，如果这是正确的; 马来西亚如何是合法的，沙巴和砂拉越如何成为马来西亚的合法一部分？许多法律专家认为，MA63是马来亚联邦用来吸收或被用来合并、吸收或吞并新加坡、沙巴和砂拉越的工具。

如果我们看看东姑阿都拉曼在一本名为《与东姑阿都拉曼的对话》的书中所说的话; 法律专家的分析可能是正确的。当时东姑说新加坡、沙巴和砂拉越等英国殖民地是英国政府送给马来亚联邦的礼物为了扩大马来亚联邦的领土。马来亚的这种扩张似乎是通过合并、吸收或吞并的方式进行的。马来亚联邦随后于 1963 年 9 月 16 日更名为马来西亚联邦。联合国秘书处在Dato Ong Yoke Lin致其信函中获悉更名一事。因此，马来西亚不是一个新的国家。

如果联邦政府真的有诚意要将沙巴和砂拉越恢复到原来的状态，那么，沙巴和砂拉越就不应该被称为邦(Region)，而应该被称为国家。只有这样，才能恢复平等的伙伴关系，前提是马来亚、沙巴和砂拉越之间的国会和联邦内阁席位要平等分配。同时，所有被马来亚或联邦政府征用的资源和土地，都必须归还沙巴和砂拉越。不应该允许任何马来亚政党竞争沙巴和砂拉越的任何联邦议会议席，因为这是我们祖先的意图，诱使沙巴和砂拉越参組马来西亚联邦。

一份日期为 1963 年 6 月 15 日的解密文件是殖民地国务院大臣致英国砂拉越总督的文件，其中写道：“在马来西亚成立之前授予新州属独立是不可取的，无论如何也是不切实际的。然而，允许新加坡北婆罗洲和砂拉越成为该协议的缔约方可能会满足李的观点。这将涉及将协议形式从国家元首协议转变为国家间协议。”

1963年马來西亞协议第1条明确指出; 在1963年7月9日签署MA63时，沙巴和砂拉越是殖民地。因此MA63是将沙巴和砂拉越交给马来亚的协议，马来西亚怎么可能成立联邦呢？

愿联邦和砂拉越政府重新审视马来西亚成立的合法性、愿望和意图。这是因为据我所知，没有任何迹象表明沙巴和砂拉越人民曾希望将沙巴和砂拉越合并、吸收或并入马来亚联邦，以扩大马来亚联邦的领土，并更改马来亚联邦的名称作为马来西亚联邦。如果有，沙巴和砂拉越人民有权要求证明。

Press Statement

Re: Sabah and Sarawak are not regions.

Sabahans and Sarawakians have to examine statements made politicians and also a statement made by DPM Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi when they said *Sabah and Sarawak* are now accorded the status of regions and no more regarded as states in Malaysia – see World of Buzz January 13, 2023. It has to be made known to Sabahans and Sarawakians that Sabah and Sarawak were once countries independent from Malaya but was a result of neo-colonialism engineered by the British to protect its interest in this region. Neo-colonialism engineered by the British at the same time was also denying the rights of Sabah and Sarawak to gain independence under the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 by handing Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore to Malaya by way of Malaysia Agreement 1963 signed on 9 July 1963. To say that Sarawak is independent by joining the federation of Malaya to form the federation of Malaysia is legally misleading. This is because under international law, there could not be a country independent within another country. 

Sabah and Sarawak could not therefore, be called regions within Malaysia. Unless Sabah and Sarawak are called countries to be called as regions should not be acceptable because under international law, a region has no fixed boundaries. And in this way, Sabahans and Sarawakians have lost their countries.   

Such a political arrangement between nations without a referendum to determine the wishes of the colonized people was against the natural and inalienable right of the people of the land to determine their future own future and the future of their country. 

  

The manner of decolonization of Malaya by the United Kingdom and the subsequent creation of Malaysia was neo-colonization at work. The research work of Professor AJ Stockwell and the analysis of President Soekarno of Indonesia of neo-colonialism engineered by the British and Malaya at that time that led to the armed confrontation between Indonesia and Malaysia should be taken seriously by Sabahans and Sarawakians so that such historical records could not be swept under the carpet for the knowledge and information of future generations as to how Malaysia was formed and why there was an armed confrontation between Indonesia and Malaysia from 1963-1966.

Tunku Abdul Rahman declared Malaya “Merdeka”(independence) on 31 August, 1957 and this was then followed by the British merging North Borneo (Sabah), Sarawak and Singapore with the federation of Malaya to form Malaysia by having Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak signed the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) thus circumventing the right of self-determination of colonized people under the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514. To say that there was an end of colonialism of Sabah and Sarawak by the British and that this could be done this way was misleading or incorrect.

All things were therefore to make things look good by the British and Malaya t the expense of high illiteracy and ignorance of our people of their rights at that time as if Sabah and Sarawak were given independence when it was not. 

Be it know to Sabahans and Sarawakians that under international law States or countries may become extinct through merger (North and South Yemen in 1990). The States or countries may also become extinct by absorption or annexation by another country. When countries merged or been absorbed or annexed by another country, then, the country that had been merged, absorbed or annexed lost their identity. They could be extinct in this way.  

Many legal experts opined that MA63 was not a valid treaty or agreement and if this is correct, how could Malaysia be legal and how could Sabah and Sarawak be legally part of Malaysia? Many legal experts consider that MA63 was an instrument used to absorb or be used to merge, absorb or annex Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak by the federation of Malaya.

The analysis of legal experts could be correct if we see what was said by Tunku Abdul Rahman in a book, titled, CONVERSATION WITH TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN, when Tunku said the British colonies of Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak were a gift by the British government to the federation of Malaya. As a result of this, the territories of the federation of Malaya were enlarged. This enlargement of Malaya seemed was by way of merger, absorption or annexation. The federation of Malaya was then renamed as the federation of Malaysia effective 16 September, 1963. The United Nations Secretariat was informed of the change of name in a letter sent by Dato Ong Yoke Lin to the United Nations Secretariat. Therefore, Malaysia is not a new nation.  

If truly the federal government is sincere to revert, Sabah and Sarawak to their original state, then, Sabah and Sarawak should not be called as regions, but, as countries. Only in this way, could equal partnership be restored provided that there would be equal distribution of seats in parliament and federal cabinet posts between Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak. At that same time, all resources and land taken by Malaya or federal government have to be returned back to Sabah and Sarawak. There should not be any political parties from Malaya be allowed to contest in any parliamentary seat in Sabah and Sarawak because this was what the intention of our forefathers that enticed Sabah and Sarawak to join the federation of Malaysia to form Malaysia. 

There was a declassified document dated 15th June, 1963 from the Secretary of State for Colonies to the British Governor of Sarawak which states, “It would be undesirable and in any event impracticable to confer independence on new states before Malaysia. Lee’s point might however be met by allowing Singapore North Borneo and Sarawak to be parties to the agreement. This would involve changing form of agreement from a Heads of State agreement to an inter-state agreement.” 

Article 1 of Malaysia Agreement 1963 mentioned clearly that Sabah and Sarawak were colonies at the time the MA63 was signed on 9 July 1963. Therefore the MA63 was an agreement to hand Sabah and Sarawak to Malaya and how could there be any federation of Malaysia formed?  

May the federal and Sarawak governments re-look into legality, desires and intention of how Malaysia was formed. This is because what I know there is nothing to show that peoples of Sabah and Sarawak had wanted Sabah and Sarawak be merged, absorbed or annexed by the federation of Malaya to enlarge the territories of the federation of Malaya and have the federation of Malaya be renamed as the federation of Malaysia. If there is, the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak have the right to demand proof. 

VOON LEE SHAN

President

Parti Bumi Kenyalang.

Pas leaders..mind their own business

PAS leaders should know when to mind their own business

Francis Paul Siah  

12 Jan 2023

Malaysiakini

COMMENT Firstly, it’s important that I get this out of the way and set the record straight. 

I have to declare at the outset that I find nothing wrong with PAS as a political party. I believe I have said this before. Every party shares one common objective – it is first and foremost a platform for politicians to pursue their careers in politics and PAS is no different.

The characteristics of PAS, as a political party, must surely be also about attaining power, pursuing an ideology, having a common agenda, and establishing a government.

Notwithstanding that it is a religion-based party, the direction of PAS will depend largely on who are the key people leading the party at the given time.

PAS today is seen as more extreme and bigoted under president Abdul Hadi Awang and his team. It is clear that after then PAS spiritual leader Nik Abdul Aziz Nik Mat passed away in 2015, the party has never been the same.

Many of us would surely have noted and recognised the whole world of difference between the PAS of Nik Aziz and that of Hadi.

For the record, and I’m always proud to repeat this, I had respectfully described Nik Aziz as a saint in my writing. It’s an honour I’ve accorded no other politician (not even among my fellow Christians) except Nik Aziz.

I also recall making a declaration years ago that if I were a Malay and a Muslim and keen on a political career, I would join PAS. Why? Because of Nik Aziz. Somehow, you felt safe, secure, and unlikely to be led astray when Nik Aziz was around.

PAS now run by hypocrites

Sadly, PAS today is top-heavy with hypocrites at the leadership level. For starters, head honcho Hadi had already declared that corruption is not wrong in Islam. What baloney!

I’m actually very worried that many of the first-time MPs and state assemblypersons in PAS are taking their president’s words at face value – it’s really okay to be corrupt and steal from the public coffers when you are in power.

Well, this is what the president had preached, isn’t it? Ever wonder why Hadi had chosen to settle a suit out of court involving an alleged sum of RM90 million with Sarawak Report editor Clare Rewcastle-Brown a few years ago?

I believe we know how to write the concluding chapter of the story when the main party involved preferred a “hush-hush” deal. It’s clear something that is not right has to be covered up.

So, here we are, and I’m not sorry for saying this. I’ve absolutely no respect for a leader like Hadi. I’ve described him and Bersatu president Muhyiddin Yassin as “sour grapes” post-GE15.

The duo, comrades in arms or partners in crime (depending on how you view them), must have strong, valid reasons as to why they are so desperate to regain power.

We cannot help but wonder whether it has something to do with the ongoing MACC probe on the billions said to be missing from the Finance Ministry. This allegedly happened under Perikatan Nasional rule when Muhyiddin was prime minister.

Why? Didn’t Hadi say that corruption is okay in Islam? Only the president’s acolytes in PAS believe his statement; the other Muslims in Malaysia probably think Hadi must either be deluded or has some vital screws loose somewhere.

Seriously, only a “mentally unstable” person would come to Sarawak and declare that only bumiputeras who are Muslims are allowed to lead Sarawak.

Hello, brother Hadi, in case you are not aware, the majority of bumiputeras (the real sons of the soil) in Sarawak are Dayaks. Oh yes, some of them are loin-cloth (cawat) wearing Ibans whom you had unapologetically mocked in the past.

No, I’m not the only one slamming PAS leaders as hypocritical. Last month, Umno veteran Shahrir Samad has taken a cynical jab at PAS leaders who are always “pure” even though Terengganu Menteri Besar Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar was on holiday abroad when the state was hit by heavy floods.

Shahrir recalled that PAS leaders opposed the idea of holding the GE15 during the flood season, but it is also possible for the party’s leaders to go on vacation when the people are facing calamities.

Samsuri later apologised for not being “present” during the critical phases of the massive floods that struck the state.

Alcohol none of PAS’ business

I must also mention another hypocritical act of another PAS leader – that of Permatang Pauh MP Muhammad Fawwaz Mohamad Jan – who courted flak from a DAP assemblyperson in Penang for “assuming the role of moral police” regarding the promotion of alcoholic beverages at a mall in the state.

It is clearly not the MP’s business to check the legitimate sale of liquor in shopping malls. In fact, it is never the duty of an MP to carry out such an act, which is against the culture and practices of those of other races and faiths.

The trouble with a newbie MP like Fawwaz is that he probably thinks that a YB belonging to a superior race or religion has every right to trample on others with impunity.

I’ve read somewhere that Fawwaz is an ustaz, 39 years old, and has two wives and 10 children.

Brother Fawwaz, here’s my little advice. Please work hard, concentrate on doing good deeds and don’t get into trouble. Bringing up 10 kids is a tall order.

Five of them could be going to college at the same time and you have to be responsible for their studies. I know that an ustaz doesn’t earn much; neither does an ordinary backbencher MP.

Do not believe what your president has espoused. Corruption is wrong in every religion. Don’t think that being a YB gives you a license to accept bribes, steal and abuse your power.

For now, stop being a busybody and mind your own business.

I must also tell you this, Fawwaz. If I were the owner of the mall, I would have shown you and your team the door immediately.  

FRANCIS PAUL SIAH is a veteran Sarawak editor and heads the Movement for Change, Sarawak (MoCS). He can be reached at sirsiah@gmail.com.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.