Pages

Powered By Blogger

Saturday, 10 June 2023

The Sarawak Initiatives

Dear Sir/Mdm,

Catch us LIVE on The Sarawak Initiatives YouTube channel:-
"Sarawak: Self-determination and the Colonial Overlay" by Dr. Greg Poulgrain and moderated by Prof. Dr. James Chin on 21/6/2023 (Wednesday) at 8:00 pm.

Youtube Live_Infographic.jpg

The Speaker:
Greg Poulgrain is Adjunct Professor of History at the State University of Malang (UM, Indonesia) and Adjunct Fellow Law and Society at the University of the Sunshine Coast (USC Australia). He is the author of The Genesis of Konfrontasi - Malaysia, Brunei, Indonesia 1945-65 (SIRD, Kuala Lumpur, 2014)

Topic Summary:
Concerned that the truth “would have a bad effect on public opinion in Sarawak”, the Colonial Office (in the 1950s) resorted to Newspeak saying “the people of Sarawak shall be entrusted in due course with the governance of themselves.” The template for Malaysia was taking shape a decade before it was formed in 1963. Even though different political priorities emerged in the intervening decade – unrest in Singapore, the influence of Indonesia - they did not threaten the original plan but were used to embellish it. The deception culminated in Malaysian Confrontation. This presentation looks at how this was achieved, the benefits accrued and the problems that ensued.

How to watch the YouTube LIVE:
Click the link here to watch the LIVE stream: http://rb.gy/2lgbr 

Get notified for the LIVE by subscribing to our YouTube channel: http://youtube.com/channel/UCnhTONL31Ksn0Vd9cBQT17w

Do not miss out! Feel free to share the opportunity with your colleagues and friends. 

Thank you and best regards,

Filominna Richard
TSI Executive Secretary
Tel: +6019-876 7928

Friday, 9 June 2023

回应砂总理。。6/6/2022的声明

新闻公告
肯雅兰全民党主席温利山
2022 年 6 月 9 日

有鉴于:回应砂拉越总理在 FMT(今日自由大馬) 2022 年 6 月 6 日的声明。

在此謹告知总理丹斯里阿邦佐哈里;如果砂拉越决定离开馬來西亞联邦,联邦和砂拉越宪法中没有规定禁止后者這么做。同时,砂拉越宪法并没有赋予总理权力来决定砂拉越和其人民之命运与是否应该永远留在马来西亚联邦。

总理的职務是根据宪法规定或法律授权管理砂拉越。总理必须明白,砂拉越并不只属于他个人的而是属于砂拉越全体人民的。即使联邦和砂拉越宪法禁止退出,但是如果人民选择退出并且满足某些情况,那么砂拉越退出马来西亚是无法被阻止的。如果新加坡可以退出马来西亚,同样的,如果砂拉越和沙巴人民选择这样做,那他们就没有理由不能退出。

愿总理获悉,肯雅兰全民党 采访的大多数人都想离开马来西亚。

总理需要提醒的是,1962 年有成千上万的砂拉越人在街头游行反对马来西亚计划。东姑阿都拉曼希望马来西亚在 1963 年 8 月 31 日马来亚独立日同时成立,但由于某些方面的反对而被迫成立将这个日期改为 1963 年 9 月 16 日。

沒有人应该否认砂拉越与马来亚联邦的合并是英国人“强加”于砂拉越人民的事实。解密文件显示,英国和东姑阿都拉曼之间曾秘密会面或计划将沙巴和砂拉越合并为马来亚的领土。许多反对马来西亚计划的人被捕并不得不逃往丛林并被贴上恐怖分子的烙印。他们在维护自己的权力和国家的权力时,怎么可能被贴上恐怖分子的标签?英国当时正在利用人民对本身权力的无知而进行操作。

人们反抗是因为马来西亚计划是强加给他们的。砂拉越政府,亚历山大·瓦德尔爵士(Sir Alexander Waddell)发出警告并说:“任何在 1963 年之前或过早地强制合并的企图很可能会导致砂拉越的种族冲突和彻底的叛乱”——见第 5 页 Michael Leigh 的Deals、Datus and Dayaks .

让所有砂拉越人民和总理知道;联合国大会第 1514 号决议具有宣言性质並根据国际法赋予殖民地自决的合法权利。既然是合法的权力,殖民霸主就无权阻止去殖民化。即使联邦和砂拉越宪法禁止退出,你也不能简单地忽视国际法规定的这项合法权力。自联合国大会于 1960 年 12 月 14 日通过联合国大会第 1514 号决议以来,联合国是希望看到所有殖民地能安全的脫离其殖民霸主而独立。

 英国尚未完成沙巴和砂拉越去殖民化的义务;将它们交给马来亚联邦并不意味着英国可以轻松脫手。

提醒马来西亚政府,当时菲律宾和印度尼西亚反对馬來亚联邦与沙巴和砂拉越合併之计划。菲律宾和印度尼西亚认为它违反了国际法之联合国大会第 1514 号决议规定的自决权。政治家、沙巴和砂拉越人民视东姑阿都拉曼精心策划合併沙巴和砂拉越以扩大马来亚的领土之计划是“政变”。


马来亚通过在 1963 年 7 月 9 日签署马来西亚协议和 1963 年 8 月 1 日发布科博德委员会报告意圖合併沙巴和砂拉越而导致边界对抗和马尼拉协议的签署。马尼拉对沙巴东部拥有主权索取之事尚未解决。

Thursday, 8 June 2023

OMO Sarawak

Only Sarawak State government can repeal Oil Mining Ordinance, says Assistant Minister

KUALA LUMPUR (June 26): A Sarawak State Assistant Minister said today that only the Sarawak State government can repeal the Oil Mining Ordinance (OMO) 1958 because it was passed by its State Legislative Assembly.

As such, national oil company Petroliam Nasional Bhd (Petronas) is bound by the OMO, said Sarawak State government’s Assistant Minister for Law, state-federal relations and project monitoring Sharifah Hasidah Sayeed Aman Ghazali in her Facebook post today.

“[The OMO] is a valid law and will remain valid unless repealed by our State Legislative Assembly,” said Sharifah.


To recap, Petronas failed in its motion seeking leave for a declaration from the Federal Court that the formation of PDA 1974 implied that the OMO was repealed.

It also filed an application for leave to commence proceedings under Article 4 (4) of the Federal Constitution, seeking a declaration that the PDA 1974 applied with regard to the regulatory control of upstream activities in Sarawak.

In an earlier statement, Petronas said that the application was declined solely based on technical grounds and that the matter falls outside of the Federal Court’s jurisdiction.

“The Federal Court did not in any way determine or endorse the merits of the legal position taken by the Government of Sarawak to regulate upstream petroleum activity under its OMO 1958," said Petronas.

Sharifah however disagreed, noting that since the motion has been dismissed, the Sarawak State government can enforce the OMO against Petronas, pointing to how the State government can gain revenues from licences, leases or permits imposed on all players including Petronas.

The provisions under the OMO “are not inconsistent with the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) 1974”, she said.

“Section 3 of OMO makes it an offence for any person who is found to be exploring, prospecting or mining petroleum or natural gas upon any land in Sarawak without any lawful authority to do so under any provisions of the OMO.

“Section 4 of OMO sets out types of licences or lease that a person may apply,” she said, adding that therefore Petronas is bound by the OMO and has to comply with the provisions in carrying out any oil and gas (O&G) exploration, prospecting and mining activities both on- and offshore Sarawak.

“Also by virtue of our Sarawak Land Code, State Land is defined to include the bed of any river, stream, lake or watercourse and also the foreshore and beds of the sea within the boundaries of Sarawak,” Sharifah added.

That, she said, means that any person occupying Sarawak State land for upstream activities is “required to have the authority under the Land Code” or by a license issued under OMO.

“The State Government has decided to enforce our laws to the full extent,” Sharifah added. “Petronas can still bring the matter to the High Court, but let us be mindful that no laws can be declared so simply as invalid. If I were Petronas, I would not do that.”

Petronas goes to court.... Sarawak's oil and gas claim

Petronas goes to court over Sarawak’s O&G authority claim

This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily on June 5, 2018

KUALA LUMPUR: Petroliam Nasional Bhd (Petronas) is challenging the Sarawak government’s claim to regulatory authority in the upstream oil and gas (O&G) sector. The national oil company is taking the question to the Federal Court via an application filed yesterday.

At the heart of the matter is whether the extraction of petroleum resources requires mining leases from the state government

While the state had repeatedly said it has regulatory authority over such activities, Petronas is now asserting it does not need such approvals from the state to undertake upstream O&G activities in Sarawak.

In a statement yesterday, Petronas said it is seeking a declaration from the apex court that the Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA) is the law applicable for the nation’s petroleum industry. The company is also seeking a declaration that it is the exclusive owner of petroleum resources in the country as well as the only regulator of upstream activities nationwide, including in Sarawak.

“The court filing is done to seek and clarify Petronas’ role as the custodian of the nation’s oil and gas resources and not an act of suing the Sarawak state government,” said Petronas. “We remain committed to support Sarawak’s aspiration to participate in the oil and gas industry in the state, for as long as it is within the framework of the PDA.”

The application names the Sarawak government as the respondent. The state’s Attorney-General’s Chambers confirmed that it has been served with a notice from the Federal Court Registry.

“At the moment, the state has yet to receive the motion filed by Petronas related to the application,” State Assistant Minister in the Chief Minister’s Department for Law, State-Federal Relations and Project Monitoring Sharifah Hasidah Sayeed Aman Ghazali said in a statement.

“The state government will do everything within its powers, in accordance with the rule of law, to defend our rights in this matter,” she added.

In April, Sarawak Chief Minister Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari Abang Openg said companies operating in the upstream O&G sector in Sarawak must obtain the necessary licences and leases from the state beginning July 1.

Malaysia. That interpretation would mean the Sarawak state government could no longer consider itself the authority under the ordinance, Petronas wrote.

Petronas asserted that the PDA had, in any case, superseded the ordinance. Petronas’ application to the Federal Court includes a declaration that the Oil Mining Ordinance was impliedly repealed by the PDA.

Petronas in its application also expressed concerns that the state government may interfere with the operations of its subsidiaries and contractors. The concerns include its worry that production sharing contractors may face uncertainty as to whom to deal with in respect of regulatory approval.

Additionally, Petronas raised the worry that the state government may revoke work permits of non-Sarawakian workers in upstream activities or refuse to renew the permits upon expiry.

Petros was incorporated in July 2017. In August 2017, Abang Johari reportedly said Petros will enable Sarawak to actively participate in O&G extraction activities in the state while actively pursuing its quest for a 20% royalty from Petronas.

At present, the federal and state governments are entitled to a 5% royalty each as stipulated in the PDA. Increasing the rate to 20% would entail amending the PDA via Parliament.

The state’s quest for a higher royalty began with Abang Johari’s predecessor Tan Sri Adenan Satem back in 2014. Adenan had taken over as chief minister in 2014 and oversaw a landmark motion to ask for a 20% oil royalty passed in the state assembly later that year.

The motion had been mooted by state opposition. Adenan passed away in January 2017.

 

砂资源Vs砂地税

砂资源Vs砂地税
砂拉越有超级多的资源。就石油据最保守估计是85万桶。何只!然而咱们砂人还要面对用贵石油成品。还要面对种种税务压力。

看看汶莱一天才出产10万桶石油,几乎没有还什么税。根本没有所谓的土地税。

再看看人家阿联酋7国中的Dubai 一天才出产65万桶油,人民丰衣足食以外,更是享受高级的生活水准。

反观咱们砂拉越应有尽有,却要还让人喘不过气的城郊区和城市区的地税,期限60年。
每英亩地马币:
农业地:200
城郊地:2500
城市地:5000

突然,砂政府,完全不顾民意,自作主张把很多诗巫西岸的农业地更改为城郊地,地费大暴涨达12倍多。

古晋石角,农业地更暴涨20倍多。可是,跟人民严重脱节的天然资源和城市发展部长Tengah Ali 却说这是合理的。跟汶莱和阿联酋7国完全不征收土地税对比一下,什么叫合理?

我不反对象征性的征收一些土地税以供土地局员工们的薪水和行政管理费。那里像现有的政策,就想着在人民身上榨取。

砂拉越超级丰富资源,不是每个砂百姓都有份吗?

这已经做了二,三十年的部长都大捞特劳捞得盘满钵满,也太自我为中心了。站在部长的高度,完全不顾民生。

60年的政治经济垄断已经严重制造贫富差距两极化。财富几乎都掌控在政治集团这些顶级的政客们的手中。

扎希:联邦与砂和谐合作。。更大进步繁荣

扎希:联邦与砂和谐合作 砂人享受更大进步繁荣

他这些话是会激怒无限砂人。我们倒认为马来亚没有沙砂老早就破产告终了。他还敢来砂说大话。

在60年前,马联邦以巫统为主,承诺给沙砂进步繁荣还是停留在空中。

今天,这巫统主席应该不知无耻为何物吧!他竟敢重复这些话。

看,不参组马联邦的汶莱是真的进步繁荣了。从马联邦退出的新加坡更是进步繁荣,而且已经是个先进国。

反观,沙砂60年是不间断的被掠夺,剥削,打压,抢劫和霸凌。

马来亚假借马联邦的名义光明正大的来抢夺沙砂资源去发展马来亚,导致沙砂沦落到今天落后不堪的地步。

一条泛婆罗洲大道到今天已60年还没建成。

各种基本设施非常不足。全沙砂道路网水准低落。

水电供应很不到位。医疗服务不理想和设备很不足,常常需要社会人士捐赠。残校沙砂最最多。互联网服务差,有学子要爬上树去上网,等等等等。

马联邦每年从砂掠夺两,三千亿税收,回馈的连6% 都不到,说什么废话跟马联邦合作可享更进步繁荣。我看他的良心早就被狗吃了。

我倒认为脱马独立才是进步繁荣唯一的出路。

Wednesday, 7 June 2023

砂医疗执行权

Hasidah: 马联邦必须授砂政府执行权以纠正医护缺点

砂拉越总理属(法律,MA63, 邦-联邦)副部长Hasidah 认为砂的卫生部必须减少砂和马来亚医疗覆盖率,可达性,品质和安全的差距。

她认为马联邦必须授执行权给砂卫生部处理健康医疗体系那些缺点。

砂议会人民代表实施志豪附议砂政府有提供马联邦参考和建议方案以提高和升级砂医疗服务以让砂全民获益。

马联邦宪章80(4)确实有明文规定授权和义务。

还有联邦宪法80(5)他们有必要提供资金让砂政府提供行政安排像设置维护,人力资源,医院和诊所设备等等等等以让全砂百姓获益。