MALAYSIA IS NOT ONE COUNTRY

Go Addy: "malaysia" is not one country. It is a federation of 3 Nations (Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak) - every Nation is independent of each other as seperate legal entity. That is the Federation of 'malaysia" (in accordance with the Malaysia Agreement 1963 - if still valid)

Instead of complying with the Federation arrangement, Malaya is changing the rules in the middle of the game to turn "malaysia' into a " Unitary State " by taking away of the autonomous rights of Sabah Sarawak and make them states as parts of Malaya.

This has created irreparable damage and irreversible complications. "malaysia" is now at a lost - cannot go forward and cannot go backward : STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE!!!

"malaysia" cannot exist based on the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957. ( because this agreement does not include Sabah and Sarawak) This Agreement 1957 should have been abolished on 16 September 1963 and replaced with the Malaysia Agreement 1963. This replacement cannot be done because to do so will dissolve the Malayan Union of 11 states and everyone will become independent states ( Kelantan, Trengganu, Johore, Penang and Malacca are ready to opt out at anytime now). In fact in 1963 - 4 days before the proclamation of "malaysia", Kelantan made a Court Application to challenge that the they are not consulted when the Malaysia Agreement was signed in 1963 and are therefore not bound by it.

So the danger of adopting the Malaysia Agreement 1963 as rhe basis to legitimise the formation of "malaysia" cannot be done. 

This explains the reason why Sabah Sarawak legally and constitutionally are by default still remain outside the constitution's definition (Article 160).

NOW - "MALAYSIA" CANNOT GO FORWARD AND CANNOT GO BACKWARDS.

--- STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE ---

-----NEITHER HERE NEITHER THERE-----

Lina Soo: so precise, thank you Addy. may i add if Malaysia is a new country, then Malaya will have to cease as a member state of United Nations, and Malaysia to re-apply as a new member of UN. 

so quit saying msia is a new nation and all are equal partners. dont believe the spin and propaganda of britain and malaya promoters of malaysia scam. we have been taken for a ride for 52 years, so wake up now

Borneo Wiki: "Malaya" renamed "Malaysia" as stated in MA63. Go Addy --- But, wait...... MA63 was abrogated when S'pore left & the original "Malaysia" agreed to by 4 countries ceased to exist...

So that means SS are not legally part of Malaysia and there is nothing to negotiate except de-colonization!

***In order to get better understanding about this matter, please read these articles, "Defining Malaysia: Is Malaya Masquerading as Malaysia?" and "Is Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) a Valid International Agreement?" Once you finish your reading, you will know the truth. Don't forget to share these articles to your friends.***

Read More

Toppling government through non-violence is constitutional, say lawyers

A Federal Court ruling has allowed for the removal of the chief executive of a state without having to take a vote of no confidence in the legislature, constitutional lawyers said.

They said instead, statutory declarations (SD) from majority elected representatives to remove the government was constitutional as declared by the highest court of the land in 2010.

Lawyer Edmund Bon said a five-man Federal Court bench led by current Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria had approved this procedure in the Perak case of Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin versus Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Barisan Nasional (BN) had in 2009 submitted 31 SDs from 28 BN assemblymen and 3 opposition representatives who were BN-friendly to convince the ruler of Perak that Nizar, who was then the mentri besar, had lost the majority support of the assemblymen.

  

"The chief political executive (prime minister, mentris besar and chief ministers) can be removed if the appointing authority finds the incumbent no longer enjoys the confidence of the majority," he told The Malaysian Insider.

Bon, who was in the legal team that appeared for Nizar, however, said that most constitutional lawyers and academics was still of the opinion that the better option was to take a vote of no-confidence in the legislature.

He said this in response to Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's revelation earlier today that an Umno leader was behind a plot to topple the government with the support of opposition lawmakers.

Zahid, who is also home minister, said he had learned that they were preparing statutory declarations (SDs) ‎to remove the government of Datuk Seri Najib Razak. – August 15, 2015.

Source: The Malaysia Insider

Read More

Kenyataan RASMI SSKM-SSU(UK) Berhubung Dengan Kenyataan Datuk Syed Abas Ali Tentang Larangan Penggunaan "Perpisahan (Secession)" Didalam Sidang Dewan Undangan Sabah.

Salam Sejahtera, Salam Hormat dan Salam Perpaduan untuk Bangsa Negara Sabah dan Bangsa Negara Sarawak. Saya Doris Jones mewakili kumpulan sosial didalam Facebook yang bernama Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM), yang kini sudah berdaftarkan secara SAH sebagai sebuah NGO dengan nama Sabah Sarawak Union (SSU-UK) dibawah bidang kuasa perundangan United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (UK) ingin membuat kenyataan rasmi berhubung dengan kenyataan Datuk Syed Abas Ali tentang Larangan Penggunaan "Perpisahan (Secession)" didalam sidang Dewan Undangan Sabah.

Didalam kenyataannya di Daily Express Online yang bertarikh 11 Ogos 2015, mengatakan bahawa dia akan memberikan amaran untuk tidak membenarkan perkataan "Perpisahan (Secession)" dibangkitkan didalam Dewan Undangan (DUN) Sabah [1]. Walau bagaimanapun, dia memberitahu bahawa jika perkara ini dibincangkan diluar, ia adalah diluar kawalannya [2]. Selain itu, Syed Abas mengatakan yang dia hanya boleh melarang penggunaan perkataan tersebut didalam sidang DUN sahaja kerana ingin wakil rakyat untuk memfokuskan kepada pembangunan. Sabah adalah sebuah "negeri" yang besar dan memerlukan kewangan untuk jalan-raya, bekalan air dan infrastruktur yang lain. Sedangkan beberapa daerah disini lebih besar daripada negeri-negeri di semenanjung. Jadi, ini adalah perkara yang saya harap wakil bangkitkan [3]. Dia juga telah memberikan pembayang dengan mengatakan bahawa mereka seharusnya tidak memikirkan satu pokok sahaja tetapi semua pokok-pokok didalam hutan. Justeru, berharap mendapat kerjasama daripada wakil rakyat dikedua-dua pihak, kerajaan dan pembangkang [4].

***Artikel Daily Express Online tersebut adalah didalam bahasa Ingggeris tetapi telah diterjemahkan dengan maksud yang sama untuk tujuan penyampaian maklumat***

Pertama [1], Dewan Undangan Negeri (Negara) Sabah merupakan satu platform perdebatan yang kebal daripada sebarang tindakan undang-undang. Ia adalah tempat membincangkan, membahaskan dan mendebatkan isu-isu semasa samada isu ringan, berat mahupun sensitif. DUN Sabah juga memainkan peranan dalam menentukan halatuju kerajaan melalui polisi dan dasar yang akan diluluskan. Segala yang berlaku di bumi Sabah adalah dibawah kuasa DUN Sabah untuk menentukan tindakan yang perlu diambil seterusnya. Perancangan tindakan yang ingin diambil oleh Syed Abas Ali untuk melarang penggunaan perkataan "Perpisahan (Seccession)" adalah satu idea atau perancangan yang perlu dikecam sekeras-kerasnya. Ini kerana didalam 20 Perkara, Perkara 7 jelas mencatatkan perkara tersebut. Dengan tidak membincangkan perkara ini, adakah Ketua Dewan Speaker baru ini yang juga merupakan ahli umno ingin menyampaikan satu mesej halus untuk menafikan kewujudan 20 Perkara? Apakah dengan keinginannya untuk melarang perkataan ini digunakan dan dibangkitkan secara tidak langsung mahu mendiamkan peranan 20 Perkara Sabah yang selama ini menjadi rujukan kepada Pentadbiran Kerajaan Negara Sabah?

Kedua [2], Samada isu ini dibincangkan didalam DUN ataupun diluar, itu adalah hak rakyat dan juga wakil pemimpin yang dipilih semasa pilihan-raya. Tugas seorang Dewan Speaker adalah untuk mengawasi persidangan supaya berjalan dengan lancar, mengatur debat supaya tidak menyimpang daripada isu-isu yang dibahaskan, membuat keputusan mengenai aturan urusan mesyuarat sekiranya berlaku perbalahan serta memeriksa samada petisyen, rang dan pindaan perlembagaan boleh diterima ataupun tidak. Tugas Dewan Speaker bukan untuk membuat peraturan sendiri tetapi lebih kepada menjadi orang perantaraan (orang tengah) kepada dua pihak yang sedang berdebat dan berbahas iaitu daripada pihak kerajaan dan pembangkang. Anda sendiri mengakui bahawa anda adalah orang yang masih baru didalam bidang ini. Maka, janganlah berlagak hebat dengan melarang perkara-perkara seperti ini dibangkitkan. Itu adalah hak dan tanggungjawab ahli-ahli DUN Sabah untuk membangkitkan apa-apa isu yang sedang hangat diperbualkan atau dibincangkan di negara Sabah dan disampaikan ke dalam DUN untuk memperhalusikan faktor-faktor perbualan ini berlaku, mengkaji punca, merancang penyelesaian dan menilai keberkesanan penyelesaian yang telah dilakukan. 

Ketiga [3], Anda telah memberikan justifikasi kepada keinginan larangan anda namun ia adalah pandangan peribadi yang sangat bertentangan dengan tugas dan peranan sebagai seorang Dewan Speaker. Selama umno-bn Sabah memerintah Kerajaan Negara Sabah setelah berjaya menumbangkan Kerajaan PBS pada tahun 1994 melalui cara yang kotor, mengapa tidak pernah isu seperti pembangunan infrastruktur seperti jalan-raya, bekalan air dan sebagainya selesai? Ditempat kawasan DUN anda sendiri, apakah selama anda menjadi wakil rakyat bn-umno, terdapat pembangunan yang boleh dibanggakan? Tanya kepada diri anda sendiri, apakah puncanya? Saya pasti anda mampu menjawabnya dengan lebih baik berbanding dengan mana-mana pihak. Apabila perkara seperti isu pembangunan ini tidak menemui jalan penyelesaian yang tepat, ia adalah disebabkan oleh ahli-ahli DUN Sabah tidak pernah berusaha untuk menyelesaikan punca yang sebenar. Apakah punca sebenarnya? Sumber kewangan dan pembangunan Kerajaan Negara Sabah berada didalam genggaman Kerajaan Persekutuan. Ini adalah puncanya. Atas sebab faktor ini, peruntukan tahunan tidak pernah mencukupi untuk negara Sabah kerana peruntukan yang disalurkan itu tidak pernah selari dengan keperluan kos pembangunan. Negara Sabah menjana kewangan berpuluh bilion ringgit namun hanya mendapat satu jumlah yang sangat kecil. Adakah anda ingin menafikan perkara ini? Ingin menjadi seperti musa yang berbangga dengan segala sumbangan kerajaan persekutuan yang hanya beratus-ratus juta sahaja walhal itu adalah hasil duit negara Sabah sendiri? Jikalau anda tetap menafikannya dan berkeras bahawa peruntukan diberikan sangat mencukupi selama ini, maka punca kepada permasalahan ini adalah disebabkan oleh pentadbiran dibawah kerajaan umno-bn telah gagal didalam membuat pengagihan peruntukkan dengan betul. Atau adakah kemunduran pembangunan ini bersangkut paut dengan kekayaan yang dimiliki oleh ahli-ahli wakil bn-umno Sabah?

Keempat [4], Perumpamaan ataupun bayangan yang anda berikan itu sebenarnya merupakan satu punca kepada permasalahan Kerajaan Negara Sabah dari dahulu sehingga sekarang. Ia umpama seperti sebuah keluarga. Anda sanggup membelakangkan kepentingan keluarga semata-mata mahu menjaga kepentingan orang luar. Dimanakah logik pemikiran anda itu? Walaupun terdapat nilai kebaikan didalam perumpamaan atau bayangan anda itu, namun ia tidak sesuai dipraktikan oleh Kerajaan Negara Sabah lebih-lebih lagi  didalam keadaan seperti sekarang ini. Kepentingan seharusnya diberikan sepenuhnya kepada Kerajaan Negara Sabah terlebih dahulu. Setelah isu dan permasalahan dalaman Kerajaan Negara Sabah selesai, barulah Kerajaan Negara Sabah boleh memfokuskan kepada isu luar. Ketika pihak pembangkang membawa usul untuk penambahbaikan jentera Kerajaan dan cadangan penyelesaian kepada isu-isu Negara Sabah, dimanakah suara anda untuk menyokong usul tersebut? Anda diam dan mengkritik mereka. Tetapi apabila dilantik menjadi Dewan Speaker, anda kini mengimpikan perkara tersebut? Jikalau anda ikhlas terhadap perubahan yang ingin dibawakan didalam DUN Sabah, buktikan melalui keadilan dalam mengendalikan isu-isu yang dibangkitkan termasuk dengan isu "Perpisahan (Secession)". Ia adalah tanggungjawab anda untuk menyelesaikan secara professional dan matang agar isu ini menemui jalan penyelesaian yang tepat dan bukan melarang  daripada isu ini dibangkitkan.

Pihak kami sentiasa mengikuti perkembagan perjalanan politik Negara Sabah dan Negara Sarawak serta Malaya. Pemerhatian dan kajian dalam aspek pentadbiran politik dan negara diperingkat antarabangsa juga dilakukan oleh pihak kami untuk memahami permasalahan yang dihadapi oleh Kerajaan Negara Sabah dan Kerajaan Negara Sarawak. 

Akhir kata, ingin saya kongsikan satu cerita yang benar berlaku diluar negara. Seorang pemimpin daripada negara luar telah berjaya membawa pembangunan pesat kepada negaranya dibawah pentadbiran parti politiknya. Apabila ditanya tentang bagaimana beliau mampu membawa pembangunan pesat sejak mengambil-alih pentadbiran negara itu, beliau menjawab dengan satu jawapan yang ringkas, "saya tidak mengambil duit rakyat".

In Sovereignty We Breathe, In Unity We Believe

Pergo Et Perago - Dum Spiro Spero

Doris Jones

Read More

Sarawak’s main grouse is non-compliance of the Malaysian Agreement — Masing

KUCHING: Sarawak’s main frustration is not the lack of power therefore extra power or empowerment given to Sarawak will not address the people’s frustration, says Land Development Minister Tan Sri Datuk Amar Dr James Masing.

“The main cause of frustration is the non-compliance or the perception of non-compliance of the Malaysian Agreement 1963.

“The Malaysian government must revisit the agreement and find out where the non-compliance are if any, to address the issue.

“If indeed there is deviation or non-compliance of the agreement, the government must correct them immediately,” he said yesterday, cautioning that procrastinating in solving the non-compliance would strengthen and give credibility to the cry of secession.

“The agreement is the basis for the creation of the Federation of Malaysia. The basis must be honoured for the federation to survive.

“We must remember that Sarawakians of today are not the same as Sarawakians of 1963. They are now more educated and well read. So procrastination and playing ignorance in addressing their frustration will not work.

“Sarawak For Sarawakians (S4S) is the messenger of the message of frustration. Don’t kill it. Listen to it,” he said.

Source: http://www.theborneopost.com/2015/08/13/sarawaks-main-grouse-is-non-compliance-of-the-malaysian-agreement-masing/#ixzz3iiNAM5ET

Read More

Opposition reps to challenge secession ban in Sabah assembly

KOTA KINABALU, Aug 12 — Several opposition representatives have deemed as inappropriate and premature the ban on secession talk in the State Assembly, and have pledged to challenge the speaker in the next sitting.

Kepayan assemblyman Dr Edwin Bosi said that the speaker has started his first day on the job on the wrong footing by pre-emptively banning the word “secession” before presiding over an actual sitting.

“The speaker should decide during the sitting if the word is used, how it is used. Is it unparliamentary? He has to show that it is unparliamentary.

“I will challenge him in the coming sitting on this during my speech,” said the DAP secretary to The Malay Mail Online.

Api Api elected representative Christina Liew said that the prohibition was premature and that the Speaker should not ban the lawmakers from raising issues from the people.

“The speaker must not make such hasty statements. It’s too premature for him to say that. Let’s wait and see as the events turn,” she said.

“Since when are the elected representatives forbidden to raise issues concerning the people’s issues in the dewan? The dewan is the place we raise issues concerning the people’s interests and welfare. How can he stop us?” said the PKR Sabah vice-chairman.

Sabah legislative assembly Speaker Datuk Syed Abas Syed Ali who clocked in for the first time on Monday, had banned the word “secession” from being uttered during sittings and warned lawmakers against discussing the north Borneo state’s separation from Malaysia.

Secession has been a hot topic in the state among politicians, the public and especially on social media since the Facebook group “Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia” gained traction last year.

The group, led by UK-based activist Doris Jones, plays on local sentiments by raising issues on native land, oil royalty rights, racial and religious tension and erosion of rights among other things.

Secession is considered treason in Malaysia and a warrant of arrest has been issued for Jones.

Likas state assemblyman Junz Wong said that the speaker should not hide behind the ban and instead “take the bull by its horns” and delve into the issues surrounding the secession calls in the state.

“Talks of secession should not be seen as a threat to leave the federation but Sabah should take the bull by its horns and find out, understand and review the needs of Sabahans, “ he said adding that Sabahans has been feeling marginalised and discriminated by various policies and decisions by both the state and federal government.

Calling the ban “unconstitutional,” he urged the government to deal with the issues rather than ignore the sentiments by pushing the blame to “certain quarters” and accused them of politicising the issue.

“I challenge the speaker not to ban the word ‘secession’ or ‘secession talks’ in Dewan but instead move a motion to discuss the sentimental issues surrounding the word ‘secession’ ” he said.

Yesterday, Penampang MP Darell Leiking said that the ban was “illogical” and “undemocratic, showing the immaturity of a state that it should be afraid of discussing issues relating to its constitution.”

He said that he would understand banning the usage of profanity during the sitting but words such as “secession” should be used inherently along with “devolution” or “decentralisation” in line with issues related to the development of a country.

“So why is the state government so afraid to discuss issues like ‘secession’, ‘devolution’ and hosts of issues agreed to in the Malaysia Agreement 1963? It is a curtailment of our rights, especially the right of the people’s representative to debate for and on behalf of their constituents,” Leiking said.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/opposition-reps-to-challenge-secession-ban-in-sabah-assembly

Read More

Speaker Starts on Wrong Footing - No More Democracy – Dr. Jeffrey

Thursday, August 13, 2015

Kota Kinabalu: “The new Speaker of the Sabah Legislature has certainly started on the wrong footing and appears to affirm Dr. Mahathir’s declaration that “Democracy in Malaysia is dead” said Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan, commenting on the new Speaker’s ban on the word “secession” in the Assembly while reporting for duty on his first day at the Assembly.

The banning of the word “secession” is unlawful, unconstitutional and against all parliamentary norms and conventions.

Even in recent times, the British Parliament has debated on the independence of Scotland and secession from the United Kingdom.

The open discussions on Scotland’s independence and secession has resulted in the Scottish nationalists winning 56 out of 59 parliamentary seats in Scotland and the British government devolving greater autonomy and rights to Scotland than before. Even before this devolution, Scotland enjoyed many autonomous powers including having its own autonomous government and its own currency in the Scotland Pound.

There should be freedom of speech in the State Assembly and debates on secession if it come to such a situation should be allowed to be debated openly as in any mature democracy.

“Why is the new Speaker so fearful of the word “secession”?”

“Is it because of bowing to the wishes of the federal government or the Sabah Chief Minister or Umno?” asked Dr. Jeffrey.

The new Speaker should take it upon himself to find out why certain groups are voicing out the people’s unhappiness and disillusion over non-compliance of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and wanting Sabah out of the Federation or a dissolution of the merger that formed Malaysia.

By banning “secession” the Speaker will only lend credence and credibility that the federal government and Umno are treating Sabah as a colony and afraid of the people’s wishes for compliance of the terms of the formation of Malaysia.

The new Speaker has failed to comprehend that as the Speaker he should detach himself from his position as Umno Balung Assemblyman and remain independent and neutral as envisaged in the Westminster system of government that Sabah and Malaysia adopts.

As the head of the Legislature, the Speaker’s position is the equivalent to the Chief Minister and the head of the Judiciary in Sabah which is the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak.

The Legislative Assembly is not an extension of the Sabah government and the Speaker is not answerable or subservient to the Chief Minister.

“I hope that by the next Assembly sitting, the new Speaker would have understood his position and is able to defend the Assembly’s role in our democracy and act in the best interests of Sabah and Sabahans and not to his political party or his political masters” said Dr. Jeffrey.

Read More

The saga of Stephen Kalong Ningkan — the conclusion

The concept of 1Malaysia brilliantly espoused by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak can be appreciated when we look at the birth of Malaysia. Ours is a unique country in so many ways. Besides being a melting pot of various races, we are one of the few countries in the world where one half of the country is physically separated from the other by sea — the South China Sea. By looking at history, you will understand how difficult the challenge was for there to be a Malaysia and that the country be one.

Last week, we looked at the build-up to the constitutional crisis in Sarawak involving Stephen Kalong Ningkan expressed in five letters.

On June 16, 1966, the Governor of Sarawak received a letter signed by 21 members of the Council Negri to the effect that the writers no longer had any confidence in Stephen Kalong Ningkan, as their Chief Minister.

The Governor thereupon wrote on June 16 that from representations he had received, he was satisfied that the plaintiff had ceased to command the confidence of the Council Negri and invited Ningkan to resign.

In his reply of June 17, Ningkan informed the Governor that the Governor’s views as to the loss of confidence of the members of the Council Negri in him was not supported by the meeting of the Council Negri held on the June 14 and he requested the names of those who had signed the representations.

In reply to this letter, the Governor on the same date informed Ningkan as he had refused to tender the resignation of members of the Supreme Council, the Governor declared that Ningkan and other members of the Supreme Council had ceased to hold office and appointed Tawi Sli as Chief Minister forthwith. The Governor also forwarded a list of those who had signed the representations and Ningkan commenced proceedings in the Sarawak High Court against the Governor as the first defendant and Tawi Sli as the second defendant.  On Sept 7, 1966, the ruling Chief Justice of Borneo, Justice Harley, delivered his decision on Ningkan’s suit: “Has the Governor in Sarawak power at all to dismiss the Chief Minister? In considering this question, we may start with section 21 of the Interpretation Ordinance, the general effect of which is that where there is power to appoint (and it is not disputed that the Governor has power to appoint a Chief Minister) there is power to dismiss. However, where the appointment is ‘subject to the approval of some other person, the power of dismissal shall only be exercisable subject to the approval of such other person’. If the appointment of a Chief Minister is subject to the approval of Council Negri, then by this section 21 dismissal also would be subject to its approval.

“In Sarawak, the Chief Minister’s dismissal is quite simply beyond the powers of the Governor unless (a) the Chief Minister has lost the confidence of the House, and (b) the Chief Minister has refused to resign and failed to advise a dissolution.

“I do not think that the Chief Minister of Sarawak was ever given a reasonable opportunity to tender his resignation or to request a dissolution. He was never even shown the letter on which the dismissal was based until court proceedings started, although it is true that at the moment of dismissal a list of signatories was sent to him with the letter from the Governor dated 17th June. That list and that letter were typed on the same date as the publication in the Gazette of the dismissal of the plaintiff, who was given no time at all to consider the weight or effect of the move against him. Plaintiff did not refuse to resign: he merely expressed doubts whether in fact he had ceased to command a majority and requested ‘that the matter be put to the constitutional test’.

“My task is simply to interpret the written word of the Constitution. On such interpretation the case presented in the statement of claim is unchallengeable. There will be judgement for the plaintiff as prayed.”

Judgment for Stephen Kalong Ningkan.

Conclusion

And so Stephen Kalong Ningkan had finally won the day. But victory was short-lived. The Federal Government at that time was facing fierce opposition to the concept of Malaysia. Brunei refused to join, and Singapore – the original partner to Malaysia – had seceded from the Federation. Indonesia started the Confrontation Wars. The Philippines still kept alive their claim to Sabah.

There was internal racial tension, which in 1969 culminated in the May 13 riots. The new nation of Malaysia was under immense pressure after its baptism of fire in the world of nations. The loss of Sarawak would have been the knockout blow for the new nation.

It was inevitable that the Federal Government declared a state of emergency which legally ended Ningkan’s reign as Chief Minister of Sarawak. In a strange way, Ningkan was sacrificed to ensure the survival of Malaysia.

Ningkan challenged the emergency declaration right up to the Privy Council, but on each occasion he was defeated. After that his political career descended into oblivion and outside Sarawak he is hardly known or ever mentioned, even though he was the first Chief Minister of Sarawak. You can hardly find his images, even on the Internet.

However, there has been a unique revival of his name through an unusual way. Whenever any student studies or researches the constitutional law of Malaysia, or whenever there is a leading constitutional case before the Malaysian courts, there will be reference to the leading case law authorities involving Stephen Kalong Ningkan or bearing his name.

His cases are standard text book material on Malaysian constitutional law. A most recent example was the recent constitutional crisis in Perak last year, where the Malaysian Courts had to decide whether the legal Menteri Besar is Nizar or Zambry.

Yet few people know or appreciate this statesman of Sarawak and Malaysia who fought a lonely battle in the face of overwhelming odds and had a never-say-die spirit even when the odds were heavily stacked against him.

History is fraught with stories of men who never give up no matter how great the odds against them. I hope that my maiden articles the last three weeks will revive your memory of him and make him a less forgotten hero of Borneo and Malaysia. Have a productive week.

Read more: http://www.theborneopost.com/2010/04/26/the-saga-of-stephen-kalong-ningkan-%e2%80%94-the-conclusion/#ixzz3gtgq90Yy

Read More

Masing: Full Autonomy not about gov’t depts

The Sarawak Government is talking about the Malaysia Agreement 1963 where the Federal Government has been in non-compliance.

KUCHING: Senior Minister James Masing thinks that Putrajaya may have misread what Sarawak means by Full Autonomy. “We are not talking about the Sarawak Government taking over Federal Government Departments in Sarawak or having these departments handed over to the control of locals.”

“When we say Full Autonomy, we are referring to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) where the Federal Government has been in non-compliance.’

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak passing off the handover of Federal Government Departments in Sarawak as Full Autonomy, he added, would not help address the situation, the frustration among the people. “Putrajaya must address the issue of non-compliance on MA63.”

“The Sarawak4Sarawakians movement is the messenger of the message of frustration. Don’t try to kill it. Listen to them.”

Any further procrastination on addressing the non-compliance issue on MA63, he warned, would simply strengthen and give credibility to those certain groups pushing for secession. “So, procrastination and playing ignorance in addressing the frustration of the people will not work. They people are now well-educated. They read.”

“MA63 was the basis for Sabah and Sarawak to be in Federation with Malaysia. This basis must be honoured for the Federation to survive.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/12/masing-full-autonomy-not-about-govt-depts/

Read More

Najib promises Sarawak and Sabah the autonomy they desire

Saying the call for secession was “stupid talk,” Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak announced today that Sabah and Sarawak will be given more autonomy.

Najib said he had instructed chief secretary to the Government Tan Sri Ali Hamsa to thrash out the autonomy details with the state secretaries of the two Borneo states, which will include streamlining of the administration.

“There is too much duplication (in work and decision making processes in state and federal governments).

“I will give the empowerment to Sabah and Sarawak,” he said at the launch of the National month and fly the national flag programme today at Padang Merdeka in Kuching.

He labelled the call for secession “stupid talk”, echoing a sentiment Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem said in his address earlier.

The prime minister said the decision of Sarawak's forefathers to become an independent state within Malaysia was apt as it had given Sarawak a lot of benefits like security and economic prosperity

The Sarawak chief minister had raised the question of giving Sarawak more autonomy on decisions to administer the state last June when the prime minister made a trip to Kuching. – August 10, 2015.

Source: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/najib-promises-sarawak-and-sabah-the-autonomy-they-requested#sthash.3482cBM1.dpuf

Read More

PM will address Sabah woes soon, no need for secession talk, Umno leader says

KOTA KINABALU, Aug 12 ― Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is well aware of the demands in Sabah for increased autonomy for the state and will soon address these concerns, a senior Umno leader here said in urging for an end to calls for secession.

State Umno deputy chairman Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak said the prime minister knows that these demands ― an increase in oil royalty payments and better compliance of the 20-point memorandum on the 1963 Malaysia agreement ― are issues closest to the hearts of Sabah natives.

“The prime minister knows that these are issues to Sabahans and that is a matter that can be achieved through negotiations rather than through armed conflict like secession from Malaysia.

“I am confident that all these issues will be addressed in due time,” he told Malay Mail Online in an email interview.

The newly-appointed communications and multimedia minister also insisted that the majority of Sabahans still believe in the ruling government and would not likely warm to idea of the state’s secession from Malaysia.

He pointed out that many are already wary of the numerous incidences of security breaches along the state’s porous east coast.

“Despite harping on these issues in the previous general elections, the opposition parties still failed to win the hearts and minds of the people as was evident in the 13the general election results,” he said.

In Kuching on Monday, Najib reportedly pledged to empower Sabah and Sarawak, saying he had instructed Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Ali Hamsa to touch base with the state secretaries of both Borneo states and look into their demands for more autonomy.

Talk of secession become rife last year after a social media group called “Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia” began gaining traction, especially among the rural youth of east Malaysia.

The group has taken up issues emotive to Sabahans such as the alleged grabbing of native customary land, the influx of illegal immigrants, the lack of infrastructure and development in the state, distortion of historical facts regarding Malaysia’s formation and oil royalty rights.

The movement, which claims to be under a UK-based non governmental organisation “Sabah Sarawak Union”, has been campaigning for a review of the 1963 Malaysia agreement.

It has also played up sentiments against the federal government and promoted an online petition urging for a review of the Malaysian Agreement.

Sabah police have issued a warrant of arrest for its founder, UK-based Doris Jones, but UK does not recognise sedition as a crime.

However, four volunteers of the movement are awaiting trial this September for allegedly promoting secession, which is deemed a crime under the Sedition Act.

Source: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/pm-will-address-sabah-woes-soon-no-need-for-secession-talk-umno-leader-says#sthash.FJWoaRRw.dpuf

Read More

New Sabah Speaker bans ‘secession’ from being used in future sittings

KOTA KINABALU, Aug 10, 2015: Newly appointed Sabah Legislative Assembly Speaker has banned the word ‘secession’ in the state’s future sittings.

Datuk Syed Abas Syed Ali made the warning when he clocked in for the new job officially today at the State Legislative Assembly building, here.

Welcomed by his two deputies — Datuk Johnny Mositun and Datuk Johnson Tee, as well as staff, Syed Abas however said it was beyond his control if the assemblymen wished to talk about it outside the auspicious House.

“I can only forbid its usage during the sitting.”

Instead, the Balung assemblyman wanted the assemblymen to discuss issues related to bringing development to the people and for the people.

Syed Abas reminded that Sabah was a big state and needed a lot of funds for the development of roads, water supply and other infrastructures including school infrastructures for school children.

“Even some districts are bigger than the states in the peninsular…so these are the things that I hope our assemblymen will raise during the sitting.

“They need to think not about one tree but about all the trees in the whole forest.”

He also added that he hoped for the cooperation from the assemblymen from both the government and the Opposition and stated that both these groups had the good of Sabah in mind.

Syed Abas, who took over as the 9th Speaker from Datuk Seri Salleh Said Keruak, who resumed his federal ministerial post as the Communication and Multimedia Minister, told the media that it took him and his wife by surprise.

“I was surprised when the chief minister asked me to take over as Sabah’s speaker, with the approval from the Prime Minister. It was a good offer.”

Syed Abas has been in politics since the 1970s and was believed to be the right person for the post due to his vast experience in administration and political arena.

“I was always the backbencher or chairman of government linked corporations, and never did I expect to be appointed, especially since there have been rumours of other people who were likely to become the next State Speaker.

“I was, initially, told that I would probably be offered an assistant ministerial post, so this new responsibility is indeed a real a surprise for me.”

Despite his vast experience, Syed Abas is humbled as he admitted that the new post meant he would have to learn from scratch.

“I am prepared for the new challenge, and while I am the ‘new kid’ here, I believe my able deputies would assist me with the tasks.”

Source: The Rakyat Post

Read More

Najib, Adenan not on same page on autonomy

The Prime Minister does not mention the Full Autonomy that Sarawak Chief Minister Adenan Satem has been preaching in his homeland

KOTA KINABALU: The UK-based Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (Bopim), a Borneo rights NGO, takes issue with Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak describing “secession” talk in Sabah and Sarawak as “stupid talk”.

Bopim President Daniel John Jambun also noted that Sarawak Chief Minister Adenan Satem, apparently echoing Najib’s remarks, was quoted in the media as saying that, “there’s no need to leave Malaysia, it is a stupid talk. More power to Sarawak, yes, but secession – no”.

“If Najib’s idea of autonomy by way of working through the Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak goes through, the rights activists in Borneo will step up their respective campaigns ranging from harping on the Federal Government’s non-compliance on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) to Full Autonomy and secession to independence.”

However, if Adenan’s idea of Full Autonomy takes off, added Daniel, some rights activists in Borneo may be persuaded that he has cut the Gordian Knot on the Federal Government’s non-compliance on MA63, the issue of Malaysia having no legitimacy in Borneo, and in addition being party to further illegalities as in the case of the illegal immigrants in Sabah in particular.

“Adenan has a point when he lauds the benefits of a Federation but the fact remains that the Federal Government was being monopolised by Malaya and not shared with Sabah and Sarawak as the equal partners envisaged by MA63.”

Leaving aside for the moment the question of Malaysia’s legitimacy in Borneo, and being party to further illegalities as contained in the RCI Report, the fact remains that both Adenan and Najib are not on the same page on the status of Sabah and Sarawak in the Federation with the peninsula, pointed out Daniel.

“Adenan has been quoted as saying in the media last month that the Sarawak Government was engaged in talks with the Federal Government for Full Autonomy,” recalled the Bopim Chief. “He envisages the Federal Government, under the Full Autonomy Plan, confining itself to defence, foreign affairs and internal security.”

For starters, added Daniel, it’s wrong of the Sarawak Government to engage in talks with the Federal Government for Full Autonomy without the participation of the Sabah Government as well and/or for the Federal Government to entertain the notion of such talks with Sarawak only. “Both Sabah and Sarawak are in the same plight vis-a-vis Malaya. So, the question of Sarawak going solo on Full Autonomy talks should not arise. This is the result of Umno being in Sabah”

It’s interesting meanwhile, continued Daniel, that the language coming from Najib on Sabah and Sarawak rights was not the same as that used by Adenan. “Najib makes no mention of the Full Autonomy being preached by Adenan.”

Najib, said Daniel, sees autonomy — the word Full is missing from his vocabulary — in terms of the presence of Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak. “In that sense, he keeps referring to the duplication and waste between the Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak and the respective Governments in the two Borneo nations.”

“Going by Najib’s previous statements as well in the media, not so long ago in Sarawak, he sees autonomy and more powers in terms of handing over control of some – not ALL — of the Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak either to locals or handing them over to the respective state governments.”

It has not been stated by Najib, stressed Daniel, where the Budget will come from if the said Federal Government Departments in Sabah and Sarawak are handed over to the respective Governments in the two Borneo nations. “If the control of the said Government Departments was merely handed over to the control of locals, how does that address the problem of duplication and waste mentioned by Najib?”

“Would the Sabah and Sarawak Governments have to stop duplicating what these Federal Government Departments in the two Borneo nations have been doing once they are handed over to the control of locals?”

It’s an open secret in Borneo, said Daniel, that despite the Sabah and Sarawak Governments being members of the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN), all three governments have been competing with each other, almost trying to outdo each other on the same things when it comes to the civil service administration.

Source: Free Malaysia Today

Read More

Mt Kinabalu guides honoured on Singapore National Day

Ricky Masirin, Valerian Joannes get posthumous Commendation medals for “devotion to duty” during Sabah quake; four other Malaysians recognised as well.

SINGAPORE: Mountain guides Ricky Masirin and Valerian Joannes who died trying to bring to safety several Singapore primary schoolchildren from the earthquake-stricken Mt Kinabalu in June were honoured by the Singapore government yesterday.

The two guides were posthumously awarded Commendation Medals during Singapore’s National Day Awards for their efforts in trying to guide Tanjong Katong Primary School pupils to safety.

The citation for the guides read: “(for their) Devotion to duty and exemplary conduct during the Sabah earthquake,” The Straits Times and Asia News Network reported.

Muhammad Danish Amran, another Sabah guide who brought several pupils down the mountain to safety, was also honoured together with Malaysian Mountain Torq trainers Hajiris Sulomin, Hilary Hendry Augustinus and James Maikol.

The Malaysians were among 16 others who were honoured.

Among the Singaporeans given the medal were Tanjong Katong School teachers Mohamed Faizal, Joshua Tan, Nur Uzaimah Fadzali, Lee Hui Jun, Carolyn De Souza and Roushan Amir Hussain.

Faizal, who teaches English and physical education, said modestly: “We weren’t doing anything extra. We were doing what is required of us as teachers, which is taking care of the kids under our charge.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/10/mt-kinabalu-guides-honoured-on-singapore-national-day/

Read More

Sapp to educate Gen-Y on Sabah’s true history

Putrajaya should start counting the Federation with Sabah and Sarawak from 1963 and not from 1957 or from 1948.

KOTA KINABALU: The Sabah Progressive Party (Sapp) wants to educate the Gen-Y in particular that Sabah was once a country on its own before 16 Sept 1963 when it came together in a Federation with Sarawak, Singapore and the peninsula. “Brunei stayed out at the 11th hour,” noted Sapp Vice- Youth Chief Yong Yit Yoong.

“Now, Sabah like Sarawak is a nation within the Federation. Full Autonomy is our Constitutional right. The Federal Government has also reneged on the Borneonisation of the civil service.”

He was explaining the purpose of the Black Sunday 2.0 Gathering on Sunday along Gaya Street, the venue of the packed weekly Sunday Market, in Kota Kinabalu, during which the participants held blank papers. “Friends in the police warned us that we can’t speak up on certain things. So, that’s why we held black papers in protest against such restrictions.”

“We have the right to speak up on Sabah rights. If we don’t have the right to speak up, even in the social media, the Ministry of Communications and Multimedia Commission should close down.”

The Sabah Independence Day celebrations on August 31 to be held in Kundasang this year by the party, added Yong, would stress that independence began in 1963 and not 1957. “In the case of Sarawak, independence came on 22 July 1963 and they observed the anniversary last month for the second time since 1963.”

“The Federal Government should start counting the Federation with Sabah and Sarawak as beginning from 1963 and not from 1957, the Independence Day for the peninsula, or even from 1948 when the Federation of Malaya Agreement was signed in London.”

The history of the Federation in 1963, charged Yong, was being ignored or down-played by the Federal Government as evident in school text books. “We cannot forget out history. We need to educate the Gen-Y so that they will know their true history, not the one put out by Putrajaya.”

Yong, delving into the history since 1963, lamented that the status of Sabah and Sarawak had diminished since Singapore’s departure in 1965 from being equal partners of Malaya incorporating Singapore, to the 12th and 13th states in the Federation. “There has been very little public education on Sabah and Sarawak’s real status in the Federation.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/10/sapp-to-educate-gen-y-on-sabahs-true-history/

Read More

Jeffrey: S’pore abandoned Sabah and Sarawak

The two Borneo nations need to wake up from their trance-like state induced by Umno and the Barisan Nasional (BN).

KOTA KINABALU: Bingkor assemblyman and longtime rights activist Jeffrey Kitingan has mixed feelings on the 50th Anniversary of Singapore ending its merger with Malaya and exiting the Federation with the peninsula, Sabah and Sarawak. “When I asked the late Lee Kuan Yew once what his greatest regret was in relation to Sabah and Sarawak, he hung his head, and tears rolled down his face. He was so choked with emotion and regret that he could not speak.”

“Sabahans and Sarawakians need to wake up from their trance-like state induced by Umno and the Barisan Nasional (BN) and their links with the peninsula where the Federal Government has refused to comply with the Malaysia Agreement 1963.”

While extending greetings on the Golden Anniversary joy for Singapore, he can’t at the same time resist pointing out that the city state abandoned Sabah and Sarawak which facilitated its merger with Malaya through their Federation with the peninsula and the island. “Otherwise, multiracial Malaya refused to have Chinese-majority Singapore merge with it.”

“What might be the status of Sabah and Sarawak today had the two Borneo nations left the Federation in 1965 at the same time as Singapore?” asked Jeffrey on the road not taken. “Just as Lee Kuan Yew fought hard to persuade Sabah and Sarawak leaders to agree to Federation in 1963, Singapore should have fought equally hard for the two Borneo nations to leave the Federation at the same time as it left.”

Moving forward, said Jeffrey, it was clear that Sabah and Sarawak could no longer rely on Umno and Malaya and pointed out that Singapore’s success illustrated Malaysia’s failure. “If Singapore can do it, and Brunei can do well on its own by keeping out of the Federation at the 11th hour, Sabah and Sarawak can also do well if they stand on their own two feet.”

“The Singapore economy in GDP terms is larger than that of Malaysia, the currency almost RM3 to S$1, and it has the world’s third highest per capita income. All these were achieved in a tiny land area, without water or natural resources and without Umno and BN.”

The only thing going for Singapore was its strategic location, human resources, and its commitment to the brightest and best leading the way for all, added Jeffrey. “Sarawak today is better off than Sabah because it has no Umno.”

Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/08/10/jeffrey-spore-abandoned-sabah-and-sarawak/

Read More

Black Sunday 2.0

KOTA KINABALU, 10 Ogos 2015: Satu program aman yang bertemakan Black Sunday 2.0 telah dilakukan oleh Pemuda SAPP bagi tujuan kesedaran awal tentang Hari Kemerdekaan Sabah di Gaya Street pada hari Ahad.

Program ini memfokuskan kepada penyebaran kebenaran sejarah yang selama ini tidak diketahui oleh orang ramai khususnya bangsa Sabah.

Dengan berbekalkan bendera lama kerajaan Sabah yang dikibarkan pada tahun 1963 sehingga tahun 1982, poster yang berlakarkan gambar wajah Ketua Menteri Sabah yang Pertama, Tun Fuad Stephens dan Yang Di-Pertua Negara Sabah, Tun Mustapha telah digunakan untuk tujuan program kesedaran ini.

Menurut En.Dexter Chin yang merupakan setiausaha Penganjur Exco Pemuda SAPP, beliau mengatakan bahawa adalah sangat penting bagi orang ramai untuk memperingati sejarah bahawa Sabah adalah berstatus negara pada 31 Ogos 1963 sebelum membentuk Persekutuan Malaysia pada 16 September 1963.

Pembentukkan Persekutuan Malaysia adalah berdasarkan kepada konsep Rakan Kongsi Empat Negara yang terdiri daripada Negara Sabah (dahulu dikenali sebagai North Borneo), Negara Sarawak, Negara Singapura dan Persekutuan Tanah Melayu (Malaya). Namun, pada 9 Ogos 1965, Singapura telah keluar daripada Persekutuan dan meninggalkan dua negara Borneo ini bersendirian dengan Malaya. Lantas itu, konsep Persekutuan telah diubah dengan penurunan status Sabah sebagai sebuah negara dan rakan kongsi telah diturunkan oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan Malaysia pada 27 Ogos 1976.

Beliau mengulas dengan lebih lanjut lagi dengan menambahkan bahawa apapun yang telah terjadi, Sabah dan Sarawak masih mempunyai kuasa autonomi dalam mengendalikan hal-ehwal kerajaan tempatan. Semuanya in telah termaktub didalam Perjanjian Malaysia dan ia mesti dihormati oleh kerajaan persekutuan. Autonomi penuh perlu diberikan kepada Sabah agar kelancaran didalam pentadbiran dapat dicapai bagi kepentingan kerajaan tempatan dan rakyat Sabah.

Kenyataan Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi yang merupakan Menteri Kementerian Dalam Negeri (kini Timbalan Perdana Menteri) tentang larangannya kepada rakyat Sabah untuk tidak mempersoalkan isu pendatang asing merupakan satu penghinaan kepada rakyat Sabah. Ini kerana kuasa imigresen sebenarnya merupakan kuasa kerajaan Sabah dan ia telah termaktub didalam 20 Perkara. Selain Imigresen, kuasa mengurus Pendidikan dan Ekonomi Sabah juga adalah antara kuasa yang dimiliki oleh Kerajaan Sabah. Namun, kesemua ini tidak dihormati oleh kerajaan persekutuan, tegas En.Dexter Chin.

Justeru, adalah sangat penting untuk setiap rakyat Sabah untuk bersama-sama berjuang untuk menuntut hak Sabah seperti yang telah termaktub didalam Perjanjian Malaysia.

Sepanjang program dijalankan, terdapat sedikit kekecohan dan ketegangan yang telah berlaku. Pihak polis telah mengganggu program tersebut dan ingin merampas bendera Sabah yang dipegang oleh peserta program sehinggakan peserta program tersebut jatuh kerana ditolak oleh pihak polis dengan kasar.

Salah seorang peserta program telah membawa dan mengibarkan bendera Sarawak yang telah dikibarkan pada tahun 1963 sehingga tahun 1973.

Seramai 30 orang peserta telah menjayakan program aman dan dua NGO telah memberikan sokongan kepada program tersebut. NGO yang terlibat ialah Sabah Solidariti dan Sabah Sarawak Union - United Kingdom (SSU-UK).

Turut hadir bersama dalam program tersebut adalah Ketua Pemuda Exco SAPP Jamain Shamarudin, Naib Ketua Pemuda SAPP Stephan Gaimin, Naib Ketua Pemuda SAPP Yong Yit Yoong.

Source: Bobohizan Press

Read More

The Proclamation of Singapore as Independence Country in 1965

The Proclamation of Singapore that announced Singapore's separation from Malaysia on 9 August 1965 was drafted by Mr E W Barker, then Minister for Law. He was also responsible for drafting two other related documents, namely: an Amendment relating to the separation of Singapore from Malaysia as an independent and sovereign state, and an Act to amend the Constitution of Malaysia and the Malaysia Act to give Singapore independence.

PM Lee Kuan Yew entrusted Mr E W Barker with the job of drafting the documents in mid-July 1965 after he received news that the Federal Cabinet had agreed with Tunku Abdul Rahman that Singapore should separate from Malaysia. After several rounds of negotiations between the Singapore government represented by Mr Lee and Dr Goh Keng Swee, Minister of Finance, and the Malaysian government represented by Tunku, Tun Abdul Razak, Deputy Prime Minister, Dato Ismail bin Dato Abdul Rahman, Home Affairs Minister and Tun Tan Siew Sin, Finance Minister, the abovementioned documents were eventually finalised on 7 August.

"Every time I look at these Agreements, I'm happy, I have a sense of pride, having contributed to a major change - the separation of Singapore from Malaysia. I was able to draft these documents then in a short time because I had just left the Bar, in fact, nine months before that. I had been in practice for 14 years and had a lot of experience. Hence, I was able to do it." 

Extract of oral history interview with Mr E W Barker, 1982.

Information extracted from the oral history interview of Mr E W Barker, Accession No: 000193

Proclamation of Singapore that Mr E W Barker 

drafted was signed by Mr Lee on 9 August 1965. 

1. Lee Kuan Yew, The Singapore Story: Memoirs of Lee Kuan Yew (Singapore: Times Editions Pte Ltd and Singapore Press Holdings, 1998), pp. 631-632.
   
   
2. Leslie Fong, "The Week Before Separation", in Singapore 25 Years: A Straits Times Special, National Day, 9 Aug 1990, ed. Leslie Fong (Singapore: Straits Times Press, 1990), pp. 5-10 and Lee, The Singapore Story, pp. 628-647.

Source: http://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/article/proclamation-of-singapore

Read More

Konspirasi Pengkhianatan dan Pembunuhan

Mungkin ada yang takut untuk membuka mulut dan untuk sebab itu, biar pihak kami yang berbicara. Sila lihat gambar ini. Keempat-empat mereka merupakan sahabat baik dan dikatakan sebagai abang dan adik. Mereka juga pejuang Kebangsaan Negara Sabah. malaya tidak mampu mengganggu bangsa Negara Sabah secara langsung. Apatah lagi minyak dan gas. Walaupun mereka digunakan untuk menumbangkan Tun Mustapha kerana keengganannya untuk menyerahkan minyak, apabila mereka memegang kerajaan, mereka juga sedar sebab-sebab apa Tun Mustapha tidak mahu menyerahkan minyak tersebut.

Komplot untuk menghapuskan Pejuang-pejuang ini telah dilakukan atas kesepakatan malaya dan barua (pengkhianat) bangsa negara Sabah iaitu harris salleh.

Selepas misi konspirasi pembunuhan berjaya dilakukan dengan cara "semula jadi (konon)" tetapi yang sebenarnya, bom telah dipasang dan meletup diudara sebelum mendarat (BUKAN terhempas), harris salleh telah menjadi Ketua Menteri, dia telah menyerahkan hak minyak & gas 2 minggu selepas kejadian tersebut tanpa membawa hal ini kepada perbincangan kabinet menteri Sabah. Selepas itu, dia juga telah bersetuju menurunkan status "Negara" kepada "negeri". Dia juga dalang perlaksanaan Dasar Kabotaj yang menyebabkan peningkatan harga kos hidup di Negara Sabah sehingga membantutkan pertumbuhan ekonomi yang jelas hanya menguntungkan pelabuhan malaya. Dan orang ini juga dalang disebalik projek IC.

"Harris later admitted that he found himself being pushed around by the federal government and he was too young to stand up against the its demands. However, if Tun Fuad was still alive, he may be able to stand up against it because he was more senior and had the respect of the federal government."

Mengapa orang ini masih hidup sehingga sekarang? Sebab ada sesuatu yang bakal disaksikannya nanti iaitu penghukuman terhadapnya. Keadilan akan dilakukan terhadap mangsa tragedi Double Six.

Sebarkan info ini.

Read More