theborneopost.com
Sapa chief says his piece on status of Sabah, Sarawak in MA63
KUCHING:
The president of Sarawak Association for Peoples’ Aspirations (Sapa),
Dominique Ng, yesterday commented on what he described as the ‘current
confusion over the status of Sabah and Sarawak’ between the Chief
Minister of Sabah Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal and Tan Sri Datuk Amar Dr
James Masing, the Deputy Chief Minister of Sarawak.
Ng said the
statement that was allegedly and originally ascribed to Shafie Apdal was
that the latter had at the meeting with the Prime Minister brought up
‘the status of Sabah and Sarawak as one territory’, about the restoring
of such a status, and that it had been stipulated in the MA63.
Dominique Ng
Pursuant to that, Masing had expressed a differing opinion – that Sabah and Sarawak are two territories, not one.
“Today
we read of a fellow MA63 activist and champion Zainnal Ajamain coming
to the defence of Shafie, and claiming that Masing was incorrect in
saying that Sarawak and Sabah were two separate regions in the
Federation of Malaysia!
“Zainnal Ajamain was referring to the MA63
and Annex A Part II Section 1(3) thereof and that it was stated therein
that both Borneo states are a territory, and that it was a
misconception on the part of Masing about the word ‘territories’
therein,” said Ng.
Ng, who is also an advocate and solicitor
practising in Sarawak, said that when he looked up the section quoted,
what he could only find was an Annex A Part II Clause 4(3) which was
relevant [and not section 1(3)] and which also referred to a clause
4(2).
For the sake of clarity, Ng then reproduced the whole section, which reads as follows:
4.
(1) the Federation shall be known, in Malay and in English, by the name
Malaysia. (2) The States of the Federation shall be – (a) the States of
Malaya, namely Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negeri Sembilan,
Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor and Trengganu; and (b) the
Borneo States, namely Sabah and Sarawak; and (c) the State of Singapore
(3)The territories of each of the States mentioned in Clause (2) are the
territories comprised therein immediately before Malaysia Day.
Ng
stressed that nowhere in the said clauses was there any reference which
can be construed as making Sabah and Sarawak a single territory, no
doubt they were referred together as ‘the Borneo States’ in Clause 2(b).
However,
he said that it was very clearly stated in Clause (3) that Sabah and
Sarawak [and also Singapore for that matter] were two separate
territories as they were ‘the territories comprised therein immediately
before Malaysia Day’.
Ng emphasised that MA63 and the prime
documents related to the formation of Malaysia are very clear about
Sabah and Sarawak being territories which came together with the
territories of Malaya and Singapore to form Malaysia.
Ng sounded a
warning, in that the current and very petty argument seemingly between
Sabah and Sarawak over the meaning of ‘territories’, of whether we are
one or two territories, we may be missing the wood for the trees!
“Indeed
the definition of the word ‘territory’ usually denotes ‘a geographical
area that has been acquired by a particular country but has not been
recognised as a full participant in that country’s affairs’. In plain
simple English, colonies!
“And by that definition the word of
which has been included in the said Annex A of MA63, could it be argued
that Sabah and Sarawak have become, and by default, are still colonies
of Malaya? Or more correctly, colonies of the Federation of Malaya?
“Because
the behaviour of the Federal Government so far since those far away
Malaysia Formation days of 1963 has always been one of a colonial master
over its colonies of Sarawak and Sabah, acquired as a result of MA63,”
he said.
Ng reminded all the squabbling parties that September 16,
the day Malaysia was formed or otherwise known as Malaysia Day, was
totally ignored and relegated to the rubbish bins of history for decades
until a decade-long campaign led by some people including he himself
managed to have it restored officially and accorded a public holiday
status, only in 2013.
Ng also proposed that it would be more
profitable for Sarawakians and Sabahans to employ “our collective time
to deciding whether MA63 is still valid, or whether it was void ab
initio, or voidable as a result of the numerous breaches thereof.
“And
if so, why are we still squabbling over the tidbits thrown out by
Malaya and where we have to scramble over in our haste to fight over
them?” he asked.
Ng is leading a team that has expressed its intention to sue the Federal Government over MA63.
My comments:
I hope that Sabahans and Sarawakians are well-prepared to fight for the independence of Sabah and Sarawak. Sarawak, especially, should set the good example for Sabahans to follow suit. Always remember United Nations' Decolonisation Declaration on 14 December, 1960, the 1514 resolution giving the colonised people the rights of "self-determination".
Britain gave back the power to Sarawakians on 22nd July, 1963 because of United Nations' Decolonisation Declaration on 14th December, 1960. Who on earth can stop Sarawakians to quit from the Malaysia federation for good? The rights and power are vested in the hands of Sarawakians. That's it!
