KUASA IMIGRESEN SARAWAK DIMANSUH? LANGKAH MAYAT KAMI, RAKYAT SARAWAK DAHULU!

BOLEH dikatakan Sarawak sekarang ditekan di setiap penjuru arah dek kerana mempertahankan hak-hak yang masih ada di Sarawak. Dalam pada itu sejak Pakatan Harapan memerintah Malaysia yang mana pada mulanya mempunyai manifesto yang “menarik” seperti memberikan semula kuasa autonomi yang hilang kepada Sarawak hanyalah retorik semata-mata kerana satu demi satu kenyataan daripada wakil-wakil Pakatan Harapan dari Malaya berlainan daripada apa yang dilaungkan.

Sewaktu sidang perbahasan pindaan Artikel 1(2) Perlembagaan Persekutuan di Dewan Rakyat tempohari menyaksikan Timbalan Presiden PPBM yakni Datuk Mukriz Mahathir secara terang-terangan meminta untuk Sarawak mahupun Sabah memansuhkan kuasa imigresen yang dikatakan tidak mengikut lunas-lunas integrasi nasional dan hanya undang-undang lapok yang tidak digunapakai lagi. Dan kemudian muncul pula suara sumbang tatkala Perdana Menteri Malaysia iaitu Tun Mahathir Mohamad pula turut menyatakan hal yang sama iaitu penggunaan passport untuk rakyat Malaysia bergerak di dalam negara Malaysia sendiri adalah sesuatu yang pelik.

Bertindak daripada ulasan Tun M itu, Presiden Parti Rakyat Sarawak memberikan kenyataannya seperti di dalam pautan ini:

https://sarawakvoice.com/2019/04/15/wajarkah-hak-imigresen-sarawak-dimansuhkan/

Manakala awal-awal lagi sejak di tahun 2018, Ketua Menteri Sarawak iaitu Datuk Patinggi Abang Johari tegas menyatakan bahawa TIADA KOMPROMI untuk sebarang tindakan bagi memansuhkan kuasa imigresen Sarawak. Pautan-pautannya adalah seperti berikut:

http://www.bernama.com/state-news/beritabm.php?id=1661422

https://www.utusanborneo.com.my/2018/11/03/sarawak-pertahan-hak-imigresen

http://www.bernama.com/state-news/beritabm.php?id=1706314

Berdasarkan kepada perkembangan semasa ini mungkin elok rasanya kesemua mereka yang bukan rakyat Sarawak mengetahui bahawa kuasa imigresen Sabah dan Sarawak ini tercatit di dalam Akta Imigresen Perlembagaan Persekutuan Malaysia yang dijelmakan hasil daripada yang dikenali sebagai Perkara 18/20 seperti terkandung di dalam Laporan Suruhanjaya Cobbold 1hb Ogos 1962. Satu suruhanjaya yang menjalankan kajiselidik samada adakah benar rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak benar-benar ingin melepaskan segalanya dan bersama-sama membentuk Malaysia.

Ringkasan daripada kajiselidik Suruhanjaya Cobbold itu adalah seperti berikut:

About one-third of the population of each territory strongly favours early realisation of Malaysia without too much concern about terms and conditions. Another third, many of them favourable to the Malaysia project, ask, with varying degrees of emphasis, for conditions and safeguards varying in nature and extent: the warmth of support among this category would be markedly influenced by a firm expression of opinion by Governments that the detailed arrangements eventually agreed upon are in the best interests of the territories. The remaining third is divided between those who insist on independence before Malaysia is considered and those who would strongly prefer to see British rule continue for some years to come. If the conditions and reservations which they have put forward could be substantially met, the second category referred to above would generally support the proposals. Moreover once a firm decision was taken quite a number of the third category would be likely to abandon their opposition and decide to make the best of a doubtful job. There will remain a hard core, vocal and politically active, which will oppose Malaysia on any terms unless it is preceded by independence and self-government: this hard core might amount to near 20 per cent of the population of Sarawak and somewhat less in North Borneo.

— Lord Cobbold, Cobbold Commission

Frasa “Another third, many of them favourable to the Malaysia project, ask, with varying degrees of emphasis, for conditions and safeguards varying in nature and extent” inilah yang dimaksudkan nenek moyang kami dahulu biarpun tidak berpendidikan tinggi tetapi telah awal-awal mempunyai visi andainya pembentukan Negara Malaysia itu kelak akan “membaham” hak-hak anak negeri Sabah dan Sarawak baik dari segi peluang ekonomi, pekerjaan, menikmati sumber-sumber bumi yang dimiliki oleh Sarawak seperti minyak dan gas, maritim dan hutan dari diekpsloitasi oleh rakyat dari negeri-negeri lain di dalam Negara Malaysia.

Selain daripada itu mereka juga bimbang sekiranya ekstremis agama, politik dari luar akan dengan mudah mempengaruhi minda anak Sarawak yang lain kerana budaya yang berbeza di Sarawak itu sendiri. Sebagai satu wilayah yang mempunyai kepelbagaian kaum dan agama adalah menjadi kerisauan bahawa anasir-anasir negatif ini boleh mengganggugugat keharmonian yang sudah terbina sekian lamanya dari zaman Brooke sehinggalah Malaysia kelak.

Jadi mana mungkin kami memperkotak-kotikkan wasiat dan kepercayaan daripada nenek moyang kami atas nama konsep politiking Persekutuan. Usah bicara mengenai intergrasi nasional sekiranya 55 tahun membentuk Malaysia, Sabah dan Sarawak sendiri kurang diketahui keberadaannya sebagai entiti Negara Malaysia. Kurang pendedahan baik dari segi media mahupun di dalam teks pembelajaran sekolah memungkinkan ramai generasi baru Malaya menganggap Sarawak mahupun Sabah itu bukan Malaysia. Dogma pemikiran yang diserap sejak diawal pendidikan itu sendiri sudah “membuang” kami di dalam minda rakyat Malaysia itu sendiri.

Apa yang penting sekarang apakah cara yang terbaik untuk mendekat jurang perbezaan antara Sabah dan Sarawak dengan negeri-negeri di Malaya baik dari segi infrastruktur, ekonomi dan sebagainya. Bukan sesekali untuk menyentuh hak kami yang tersisa biarpun kamu berada di tampuk teratas di dalam Persekutuan Malaysia. Ingatlah bahawa tanpa Sabah dan Sarawak itu TIADALAH NEGARA MALAYSIA. Sehingga ke hari ini kami masih tidak mahu lagi ramai rakyat kami untuk beranggapan bahawa Malaya adalah “PENJAJAH ALAF BARU” selepas Koloni British yang memerintah Sarawak dari tahun 1946 hingga 1963.

Untuk Ahli Parlimen Jerlun dan Langkawi, mungkin ada baiknya untuk mengodek sejarah keberadaan Free States of Bavaria, Jerman yang sehingga ke hari ini masih lagi utuh malah berbangga mempertahankan hak autonomi imigresen mereka di dalam Negara Jerman. Di Bavaria, sesiapa sahaja rakyat German BUKAN BAVARIAN dikehendaki mengecop pasport (bukan IC) untuk memasuki Bavaria. Malah sesiapa yang rakyat German hendak mendiami Bavaria harus mempunyai alamat dan IC Bavaria jika ingin menetap dan menikmati segala kemudahan Bavaria seperti elektrik, air dan sebagainya.

Sarawak dan Sabah masih lagi terlalu baik hati kerana hanya meminta IC (biarpun di dalam terma adalah passport) untuk memasuki wilayah kami dengan 90 hari tempoh had untuk tinggal dan gunalah apa sahaja yang kami miliki. Mahukah kami sekejam itu?

Terma yang popular baik di dada akhbar, tv dan papan iklan sentiasa menjengkelkan kami…”Seluruh Malaysia termasuk Sabah dan Sarawak”!

Untuk Persekutuan, wakil Sarawak dalam PH dan GPS sebagai parti memerintah Sarawak, INGATLAH yang anda semua berada di tampuk pemerintahan kerana rakyat yang memilih dan jangan sesekali cuba menggadaikan hak yang tersisa atas nama survival politik kamu! LANGKAH MAYAT KAMI RAKYAT SARAWAK DAHULU! TAKE IT OR LEAVE IT! FULLSTOP

#Sarawakian1stMalaysian2nd

LAIN DIJANJI LAIN YANG MENJADI

- RM1 bilion timbalbalik hutang untuk sekolah daif di Sarawak

PERUMPAMAAN lama ada menyebut mengalih kain ke balik rumah, mengalih kata ke hadapan yang membawa maksud memungkiri janji dengan tiba-tiba.  Begitulah juga jika dibandingkan dengan isu sekolah-sekolah daif di Sarawak yang mana pada mulanya setelah pelbagai rintangan, Menteri Pendidikan Malaysia sendiri bersetuju untuk menerima RM1 bilion sebagai timbalbalik pembayaran hutang Sarawak yang kemudiannya disalurkan oleh Persekutuan untuk membaikpulih sekolah-sekolah daif di Sarawak.  

Namun apakan daya setelah segalanya diwar-warkan malah Menteri Pendidikan Malaysia iaitu Dr. Mazlee Malik menerima kata-kata pujian daripada penyokong PH sebagai “1 Bilion Ringgit Malaysia Man” lain pula jadinya apabila Menteri Kewangan Malaysia iaitu Lim Guan Eng pula menukar arah dengan meminta Sarawak membayar RM1 bilion sebagai pembayaran hutang yang kemudiannya Persekutuan akan mengatur membaikpulih sekolah-sekolah daif berdasarkan peruntukan tahunan kepada Sarawak.  

Satu sikap yang sudah terang lagi bersuluh untuk membuli Sarawak sedangkan hakikatnya pembayaran hutang Sarawak kepada persekutuan selama ini adalah “on time”.  Bertindak kepada maklumbalas ini, Ketua Menteri Sarawak iaitu DP Abang Johari tegas mengatakan TIDAK kepada terma baru yang cuba diberikan kerana pokok persoalan timbulnya idea RM1 bilion itu adalah untuk membantu pihak Persekutuan menyelesaikan masalah sekolah-sekolah daif di Sarawak yang berlarutan sehingga ke hari ini.  Jikalau Sarawak menyetujuinya bermakna sekali lagi masalah ini akan terus berlarutan sampai bila-bila.  

Ianya dinyatakan oleh KM Sarawak melalui pautan ini:

https://www.theborneopost.com/2019/04/14/no-to-advance-payment/?platform=hootsuite&fbclid=IwAR0zygzhnq9VgYH8FNGNZhz18HzqJ-OwmQm1moR_k7bpw0doA0R_FUG0JcQ

Dan mengenai persetujuan kabinet Malaysia pula adalah seperti pautan ini:

http://www.astroawani.com/berita-malaysia/kabinet-lulus-pinjaman-rm1-bilion-baik-pulih-sekolah-daif-di-sarawak-199150

Sampai bila sebenarnya pihak Persekutuan hendak bermain tali atas hal ini dek kerana Sarawak bukan “sekapal” dengan mereka di dalam kem politik.  Sudahlah segala hal melibatkan pendidikan dan infrastruktur pendidikan itu dibawah senarai Persekutuan dan Sarawak tampil menghulur tangan dengan hati yang terbuka alih-alih lain yang dijanji lain yang jadi.  

Kalau lembu dipegang pada tali, manusia pula berpegang pada janji.  Dan yang pasti Sarawak yang diwakili oleh parti tempatan Gabungan Parti Sarawak bukanlah seperti kerbau dicucuk hidung.  Rakyat Sarawak harus peka bahawasanya kerajaan persekutuan sekarang kerajaan lidah bercabang yang seperti menanam tebu di tepi bibir namun pengakhirannya habuk pun tiada! Jutaan ringgit peruntukan untuk pembangunan sekolah-sekolah cina, satu sen pun berkira untuk membaikpulih sekolah-sekolah daif di Sarawak.  Kami juga rakyat Malaysia, itu jangan lupa!

Ketegasan KM Sarawak kena pada tempatnya, jangan dilayan Persekutuan yang suka membuli kita.  

#SarawakDiutamakan 

ADUN BUKIT KEPONG MB JOHOR YANG BAHARU

SEKITAR jam 9.30 pagi tadi ternoktahlah sudah cerita khabar angin siapakah calon yang layak untuk menggantikan Datuk Osman Sapian yang meletak jawatan sebagai Menteri Besar Johor pada Isnin lepas.  Perlantikan ADUN Bukit Kepong sebagai Menteri Besar yang ke-17 iaitu Dr. Sahrudin Jamal, 42 tahun merupakan satu lagi kronologi bersejarah bagi negeri Johor Darul Takzim.  

Beliau yang merupakan wakil rakyat bagi PBBM merupakan exco bagi Kesihatan, Persekitaran dan Pertanian negeri Johor mengangkat sumpah jawatan dihadapan Sultan Ibrahim di Istana Bukit Serene.  

Salam tahniah dan semoga akan terus memacu negeri Johor Takzim sebaik mungkin.  

MPs Of GPS are actually doing the right and proper thing to protect Sarawak, - Shankar Ram, Lawyer

Dear friends,

I am sure you would want to know the connection between Malaysia Agreement 1963 [MA63] and the Malaysia Federal Constitution. I will make this as simple as possible for you to understand. You must know that it was the Malaysia Agreement that brought about the Malaysia Federal Constitution.

It is important to understand the above point to appreciate what exactly is GPS trying to do in relation to the recent Proposed Amendments to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution to restore the rights of Sabah and Sarawak.

A bit of history of the formation of Malaysia - On the 9th July 1963, the Governments of the Federation of Malaya, United Kingdom, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore signed the Malaysia Agreement whereby Singapore, Sarawak and North Borneo would federate with the existing States of the Federation of Malaya and the Federation would be called "Malaysia". This Malaysia Agreement was signed with the Federation of Malaya as one of the party under which the other States of Malaya came.

The MA63 was not signed with Kelantan, Johor nor with any other Malayan States but with the Federation of Malaya as a party representing the other Malayan States.

The Federal Parliament then passed the Malaysia Act 1963 based on the Malaysia Bill form, with various Annexures A, B, C, D to J attached to the Malaysia Agreement, and to amend the Federation of Malaya Constitution, 1957, Article 1(1) and (2) to provide, inter alia, for the admission of the three new States and for the alteration of the name of the Federation to that of "Malaysia". The Act received the Royal Assent on August, 26 1963 and came into operation on the 16th September 1963.

So what became the Malaysia Federal Constitution, with the coming into effect of Malaysia Act 1963, is the Malaysia Agreement 1963 [MA63] that brought about such.

It is only sensible and proper to have an Agreement beforehand, which is the Malaysia Agreement 1963 [MA63] with all the conditions and assurances required by Sabah and Sarawak to be stated clearly therein and in the earlier concluded Inter Governmental Committee Report 1962 [IGC Report] specifically mentioned in Article VIII of MA63, before you form a Nation, Malaysia.

A case that explains quite properly the above inter-connection between MA63 and the Federal Constitution is the case of The Government of The State of Kelantan v The Government of the Federation of Malaya and Tuanku Abdul Rahman (1963) 29 MLJ 355 (decision of the late Chief Justice Thomson).

The sanctity of the IGC Report (signed on 27th February 1963) mentioned in Article VIII of MA63 and the Malaysia Agreement 1963 has been upheld by at least two decisions of the apex court (Federal Court) in Pihak Berkuasa Negeri Sabah v Sugumar Balakrishnan [2002] 3 MLJ 72 and Datuk Hj Mohammad Tufail bin Mahmud & Ors v Dato Ting Check Sii [2009] 4 MLJ 165.

A simple reading of this very important Article VIII contained in the Malaysia Agreement 1963, quoted below, shows the importance of the IGC Report mentioned therein that protects the rights of Sabah and Sarawak guaranteed.

Article VIII of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 reads as follows: "The Governments of the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo and Sarawak will take such legislative, executive or other action as may be required to implement the assurances, undertakings and recommendations contained in Chapter 3 of, and Annexes A and B to, the Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee signed on 27th February, 1963, in so far as they are not implemented by express provision of the Constitution of Malaysia."

The Malaysia Bill attached to the Malaysia Agreement 1963, which is under Annex A, its Article 4 reads as follows:

PART II

THE STATES OF THE FEDERATION

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 State of Malaya, namely, Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negri 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.

Therefore, MPs of GPS are actually doing the right and proper thing to protect Sarawak by insisting firmly that the Proposed Amendments states clearly and specifically the Malaysia Agreement 1963 because the Malaysia Agreement 1963 mentioned specifically the IGC Report (signed on 27th February 1963) that guaranteed the rights (the assurances and undertakings given for Borneo States) of Sabah and Sarawak.

For your better understanding of the Proposed Amendments, GPS insist on the following amendments to Article 1(2):

"The States in the Federation pursuant to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 shall be-

(a) the States of Malaya, namely, Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor and Terengganu; and

(b) the Borneo States, namely, Sabah and Sarawak."

We must go back to the roots to be able to make an honest and sensible restoration of Sarawak Rights. After all, the word "restore" means to return something or someone to an earlier good condition or position.

This is the same position when it comes to the definition of "the Federation" under Article 160(2) of the Federal Constitution that reads ""the Federation" means the Federation established under the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957".

It is obvious that "Federation" now has a different meaning and Article 160(2) must be amended to reflect MA63.

The Malayan States formed their Federation of Malaya in 1957.

Sabah and Sarawak later in 1963 formed Malaysia together with the Federation of Malaya.

For those people who may think that Sarawak Dewan Undangan Negeri is below or lower to Parliament and the Dewan Undangan Negeri or Sarawak has no right, with great respect, such is a wrong line of thinking because Malaysia is a nation that subscribes to Constitutional Supremacy. Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies have different powers under the Constitution and are not in any sense "servient".

The Constitution provides a framework for them to work together. Please see Article 161E of the Federal Constitution.  

The Malaysia Agreement 1963 is readily available on the internet.

That is all for now.

Shankar Ram Asnani

Of The Middle Temple, Barrister,

Advocate of the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak

Advocate of the High Court of Malaya

Copy & paste from : https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10218546139394146&id=1515788739

DIMANAKAH PENYATAAN SARAWAK SABAH SEBAGAI “RAKAN KONGSI” DI DALAM PINDAAN?

Di dalam satu temubual yang dibuat semalam, seorang Ahli Parlimen Sarawak iaitu MP Santubong, Datuk Seri Wan Junaidi bin Tuanku Jaafar berbicara panjang lebar tentang kewajaran Gabungan Parti Sarawak tidak mengundi untuk Rang Undang-undang Artikel 1(2) Perlembagaan Malaysia.  Ianya adalah seperti pautan ini.

https://dayakdaily.com/all-we-want-is-for-spirit-of-ma63-to-be-reflected-in-federal-constitution-wan-junaidi/?fbclid=IwAR15Bezw0Ny7InTAncRtOJPfrnjNoWBilQ8R4wOJHpiZB_qIz8RBCAwvwvY

Kata-kata dari seorang ahli politik berpengalaman dan juga lulusan undang-undang malah merupakan mantan pegawai polis serta pernah menjadi Timbalan Speaker Dewan Rakyat serta menteri peringkat persekutuan bukanlah sesuatu yang boleh dipandang sipi-sipi sebegitu sahaja.  Banyak ilmu yang kita perolehi di dalam kita cuba memahami apakah Perjanjian Malaysia 1963 dan juga makna Perjanjian Persekutuan Malaya 1957 serta Perlembagaan Malaysia itu sendiri.  

Pindaan yang disajikan oleh PH seumpama sebiji telur yang gebu dan licin di luar, namun di dalamnya kosong atau di dalam bahasa Sarawak “ngerebung” @ kosong.  

MOVING FORWARD ON “FLIGHT MA63 “

We hope that YAB PM Tun Dr Mahathir will still ensure that the Cabinet Steering Committee will continue doing what it was established to do. So too, we hope that the Technical & Working Committtees under it will continue their tasks as scheduled.

Additionally, in the spirit of wanting to address the non-fulfilment of obligations of MA63 ( with IGC Recommendations annexed thereto) & the Federal Constitution, by any of the parties i.e. Federated Malay States, Sabah & Sarawak, all these years since forming Malaysia, we hope that there will be a Special Select Committee of Parliament formed, as suggested by the PM himself in his winding up speech last Tuesday, in order to enhance our common efforts in getting to amicable or workable closures of antecedent or outstanding issues. Similar suggestion to form a parliamentary select committee, was moved earlier by MP Santubong & MP Putra Jaya on behalf of GPS MPs as well as by Opposition Leader, Dato’ Sri Sabri Yakub and MP Tuaran. Most of the opposition MPs who spoke during the debate on the Bill, also ask Parliament to form a select committee with a view to have the reasonable inputs from all stakeholders.

It would be a real disappointment to all Malaysians particularly the people of Sabah & Sarawak if all the efforts to address the shortcomings in the implementation of MA63 is stalled or done in any lesser mode.

The Bill did not get the mandatory 2/3rd of total votes required simply because it lacks the necessary ingredients in terms of proper wordings and substance in order to really give the constitutional & legal meaning that places ‘equal-partner/party status’ to Sarawak as envisaged by MA63, the IGC Report & the Cobbold Commission Report.

The GPS MPs had fiercely contended that nothing in the the draft Bill was there anything to say that Sabah and Sarawak are “equal partners” and further MA63 were not referred to. The Bill could not be supported also because the interpretation of the word “ Federation” in Article 160 of the Federal Constitution as it is now, only refers to mean “the Federation pursuant to the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957”, thus, confusingly leaving out Sabah & Sarawak and MA83 from the equation.

This anomaly or “error”’ in the interpretaion of the word “ Federation” has been there since 1963, tending us to believe that even the 1963 version of Article 1(2) were also not properly drafted to reflect the requirement of MA63. That lack of substance subsisted even when the same article was amended along with another 40 odds amendments to the Constitution, made in 1973.

Whether we like it or not, the Federal Constitution has to be looked at and reviewed in the light of MA63, holistically, once and for all. Due to the multifaceted nature in subject-matter covered by our Federal Constitution, amendments to the Constitution can be done by stages, depending on priorities and needs of the nation, but any exercise thereto must be done in such a way that the proposed amendment (s) must essentially be complete in form as well as substance in any particular regard or aspect, without leaving any legal ambiguity, hiatus, anomaly, vacuum or lacuna .

Our GPS MPs are wise enough to fathom what is right and what is not so right for Sarawak and its people. But more important than just being wise, they are very careful and conscious of how history will eventually judge them and they want to be judged by our present and future generations as very astutely responsible leaders of the people who keep tabs of the peoples’ pulses, and fight for their needs and aspiration. History will tell why they could not just swallow something which was raw or half-cooked and meaningless such as the Bill on Tuesday which was advanced by the PH Govt and viciously supported by some Sarawak PH MPs without much thoughts and care for the interest of Sarawak and its people.

Amazingly, some senior Sarawak PH MPs were noticeably quiet and seemingly mum during the debate session. Some asked why are they behaving differently on their side. The answer is that, there is a clear distinction between GPS MPs and their PH counterparts. GPS MPs had to make sure that in whatever they do it must be “SARAWAK FIRST”! whilst it seems that those on the other side seemed to desparately want the Bill to be hurriedly passed as if their were really deep on a 

“party-survival” kind of mode!

Dato’ Idris Buang 

Information Chief

Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu

Sarawak

11 April 2019