Research and culture


If there are images in this
attachment, they will not be
“Separation as Last Resort Cannot
be Ruled Out – Dr. Jeffrey”
Kota Kinabalu: “While
separation from Malaysia may not
be an immediate
option, it (separation) should not
be ruled out as a last resort option
forced option” said Datuk Dr.
Jeffrey Kitingan, Chairman of STAR
responding to views that
separation of Sabah and Sarawak
was not an option
and treasonous to even discuss it.
We need to differentiate the
differences in instances of
separation and
contentions of some instances
being treasonous. For the Islamist
Malay extremists, calls for the
chasing out of people from the
is separatist and seditious as well
as treasonous.
Calling for the separation of Sabah
and Sarawak due to the non-
non-compliance of the Malaysia
Agreement, the 20/18 Points and
constitutional documents is
nothing more than a consequence
of the failure
of the non-fulfilment and non-
Similarly, there is nothing
treasonous in the separation of
Singapore in
1965. It was a separation of ways
due to differences after the
of Malaysia.
The fundamental issue at hand
and which goes to the very root of
the basis
of the formation of Malaysia is
that the basis of the federation has
and broken down. From a
federation of 3 equal partners
equal to Malaya
(now 3 after the departure of
Singapore), Sabah and Sarawak
has been
down-graded to be the 12th and
13th States. For the TYT Yang
Negara of Sabah and Sarawak,
equal to the Head of State of
Brunei, United
Kingdom or the USA, their
Excellencys have been down-
graded to Yang
DiPertua Negeri.
Tun Fuad Stephens had made it
known that Sabah, Sarawak and
Brunei (then)
would not be joining as the 12th,
13th and 14th States and be
colonies of
Malaya. Tunku Abdul Rahman
has assured in 1962 that the
Territories would be equal
partners to Malaya. In the IGC
Report and the
Memorandum of Malaysia by the
Malaysia Solidarity Consultative
the definition of the Federation of
Malaysia was as follows:-
“An association of several
Sovereign States with a central
organ vested
with powers directly over the
citizens of the member State and
in certain
defined circumstances over the
member States themselves. There
would be a
Central Government and also
State Governments, but from the
view point
of international law, the
collection of States forming the
would be recognized as one
Sovereign State within a family of
Malaysia was to be a new nation
comprising of the four sovereign
Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and
Even the history and facts of the
formation of Malaysia are
manipulated and
distorted. Malaysia Day on 16
September, the very day of the
formation of
Malaysia was never
commemorated until in recent
years. Malaysia was born
in 1963 and was never in existence
before then and was never
It was a new country. Does our
national celebrations and talks of
independence of Malaysia in 1957
reflect the truth? Is the history of
Malaysia taught to our young and
our school-children the truth?
It was only in 2013, on its 50th
anniversary, did Sarawak
recognize its
Independence Day on 22 July.
Why was it prevented from doing
so before
2013? In Sabah, Independence
Day on 31 August was
commemorated as the
birthday of His Excellency, the
Governor. In 2013, the federal
police and
the Special Branch in Sabah
prevented the people from
carrying out a walk
to commemorate its independence
on 31 August. Why must the
government do this?
Worst still, the federal
Government of Malaya has been
masquerading as the
federal government of Malaysia
and the federation has slowly but
being turned into a unitary state.
In Sabah, it is not only being
internally colonized, the federal
government has put in a parallel
government with the Federal
Secretary Office. Powers of the
Borneo States
have also been usurped through
the years through amendments in
the Federal
In Sabah, foreigners including
from India and Pakistan were
given dubious
ICs and MyKads, many said to be
falsely born again in Sabah, and
into the electoral rolls as voters
for hire to vote for Umno/BN.
This is
reverse ethnic cleansing and
robbing the local natives of their
franchise to choose their
government and leaders which has
now been
sub-franchised by the Umno
federal government to these
illegals with ICs
and MyKads.
Riches and wealth from both
States have been siphoned off to
fund the
lop-sided development in Malaya
while the people in Sabah and
Sarawak do
not even get to enjoy decent clean-
treated water. Other basic
and basis infrastructures are not
existent in many places.
In 2009 when taking over the reins
of power, PM Najib promised that
villages would be more than 5km.
from a sealed road. Six years
later, it
is not only a broken promise but
totally forgotten and thrown down
The BN leaders may not realize it
or choose to ignore it but the
people of
Sabah and Sarawak no longer
accept that Petronas be vested
with their oil
and gas resources and giving back
only 5% of the revenue when it is
exploited. The Borneo States were
even made to waive all claims to
royalties on the oil and gas
extracted. This is worse than
Indonesia and
Russia where the oil-producing
provinces and republics get not
less than
70% of the oil revenue.
In Norway, each Norwegian, even
unborn, is already a millionaire
due to the
oil wealth from its North Sea oil-
wells. In Sabah, Sabahans suffer
ignominy of being the poorest in
the nation despite contributing
billion in 2012 and will be
contributing another RM26.6
billion in 2014.
In this modern world of
technological advancement and
real-time social
media, the truth can no longer be
hidden from the people. The days
government imposing its will on
the people are dead and gone.
All over
the world, dictators and dictatorial
governments and regimes are
toppled and replaced by the voices
of the people.
What are being posted, discussed
and shared in the social media and
the internet on the basis of the
formation of Malaysia and its
failures and
non-compliances are nothing more
than intellectual discussions of
facts and
reality. They represent the
genuine concerns and feelings of
the people on
the ground and this is not
confined to the internet but in the
coffee-shops, in the streets and
even in the corridors of
departments and agencies.
It is disappointing to see the
Deputy Home Minister, who is a
to play the race and religion card
in threatening the bloggers and
participants of the social media.
“How is a discussion on the
formation of Malaysia and its
consequences be
seditious and lead to friction
between races and religions?
asked Dr.
In fact, history of Sarawak and
Brunei will show that its “pejuang-
and the people came together as
one regardless of race and religion
common intent and purpose in the
face of adversity and defended
Sarawak and
Brunei respectively. The real
traitors are those who sell out the
interests and sovereignty of
Sarawak and Sarawak not the
people who are
defending the interests and
sovereignty as what the people are
now trying
to do what the political leaders
have failed to do.
Malaysia was formed between the
people of Malaya and the people
of Sabah
and Sarawak. There was a basis
for such a merger of federation.
Naturally, in the discussions of the
basis of the formation, the option
a de-merger or separation is and
should be an available option on
the table
for discussion. Whether it is the
best option, the right option or
fail, it is a separate issue
altogether? There is nothing
sinister or
treasonous about discussing it
unless one has caused or
participated in the
ill-treatment of Sabah and
Sarawak in the federation of
Malaysia and fears
for the consequences of their
The people especially in Sabah and
Sarawak should not be prevented
their discussions. After all, it is
their future and the future of
and Sarawak which concerns
Datuk Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan
Chairman, STAR Sabah
02 February 2014
Separation from Malaysia not an
option, warn Sarawak leaders
‘treasonous’ online postings
FEBRUARY 01, 2014
Sarawak leaders are seeking to
allay simmering anger in Borneo
states over
anti-Christian and anti-East
Malaysian sentiments in the
peninsula but have
cautioned against demanding
separation from Malaysia, saying
it can be
considered treason.
Senior Sarawak cabinet minister
Tan Sri Dr James Masing (pic, left)
there should not be any talk of
separation, which has been a
piece on Facebook pages set up by
Sabahans and Sarawakians.
“Don’t talk about cessation. Any
movement at cessation is wrong,”
he said
when asked to comment on the
calls for separation, as well as the
anti-Sabah and Sarawak
sentiments from the peninsula.
A similar warnin

Written by Admin
Saturday, 11 February 2012 09:45

Share TIMBALAN Presiden Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), Datuk Seri Dr Maximus Ongkili tidak bersetuju dengan tafsiran Peguam Besar Negeri Sabah Datuk Roderic Fernandez berhubung peruntukan Tanah Hak Adat Bumiputera (NCR) di dalam Ordinan Tanah Sabah (SLO) bahawa ‘Tiada Tanah NCR selepas 1930’.  Menyifatkan ia satu tafsiran yang salah, beliau berkata tidak seperti di Sarawak, tiada tempoh tertentu berhubung tanah NCR di dalam konteks Sabah.

“Jika anda melihat dengan jelas Ordinan Tanah Sabah, ia tidak menyatakan sedemikian. Saya bukan seorang peguam terlatih, tetapi saya mempunyai beberapa latihan undang-undang asas dan saya fikir ia adalah satu tafsiran yang salah kerana penghakiman yang dilakukan Mahkamah Tinggi Borneo selama bertahun-tahun ini mengiktiraf asas tanah-tanah NCR yang diwujudkan di Sabah.

“Saya fikir ia adalah satu kenyataan yang menyedihkan dan berbahaya. Sudah pasti ia adalah hak mahkamah untuk memutuskan apabila ia dikemukakan di mahkamah tetapi keputusan-keputusan sebelum ini adalah konsisten dengan hak adat bumiputera boleh diwujudkan dalam ordinan tanah. Jika tidak semua keputusan mahkamah tentunya salah,” katanya kepada pemberita selepas menghadiri taklimat mengenai kemajuan Koridor Pembangunan Sabah di pejabat Pihak Berkuasa Pembangunan Ekonomi dan Pelaburan Sabah (SEDIA), di sini Jumaat.

Ongkili, yang juga Menteri Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi, berkata demikian ketika diminta mengulas kenyataan Fernandez semalam bahawa tiada tanah NCR baru boleh diwujudkan kerana hanya tanah-tanah ‘yang masih’ didiami penduduk pribumi sebelum SLO berkuatkuasa diiktiraf mempunyai status berkenaan.

Fernandez juga dipetik sebagai berkata bahawa tiada peruntukan di dalam SLO bagi kaum pribumi yang diduduki selepas tahun 1930 dan didakwa sebagai NCR dan tuntutan bagi tanah NCR hari ini mesti membuktikan pemilikan tanah adalah sebelum 1931.

“Saya tidak tahu bagaimana beliau boleh membuat tafsiran sedemikian, tetapi apa yang boleh saya katakan bagi pihak PBS dan saya pasti Barisan Nasional juga akan berbuat demikian yakni jika beliau terbukti benar sebagaimana dinyatakan undang-undang menerusi mahkamah; maka saya fikir BN Sabah akan memastikan kami meminda ordinan berkenaan (SLO) bagi melindungi tanah NCR di Sabah.

“Jika beliau benar, PBS akan segera mengambil tindakan bagi kerajaan BN mengambil langkah dan melakukan pindaan dalam Ordinan Tanah Sabah bagi melindungi hak kaum pribumi Sabah dilindungi di bahawa ordinan berkenaan,” katanya. (BERNAMA)

Written by Admin
Sunday, 12 February 2012 02:29

ShareSURUHANJAYA Hak Asasi Manusia Malaysia (SUHAKAM) memandang berat dan bimbang dengan kenyataan Peguam Negeri Sabah, Datuk Roderic Fernandez bahawa Ordinan Tanah Sabah (OTS) yang berkuat kuasa pada tahun 1930 tidak membenarkan wujudnya Hak Tanah Adat yang baru di Sabah.

Pengerusinya Tan Sri Hasmy Agam berkata kenyataan Fernandez bahawa tidak ada peruntukan dalam OTS bagi anak negeri untuk membuat penempatan selepas 1930 dan menuntut Hak Tanah Adat adalah jelas bercanggah dengan kedudukan Hak Tanah Adat, yang merupakan hak asas Orang Asli dan Asal seperti mana dijamin dalam Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

“Suruhanjaya juga rasa terkejut dengan komen Peguam Negeri Sabah kerana kedudukan yang dinyatakan ini adalah sama sekali baru dan bercanggah dengan semua dasar-dasar sedia ada dan interpretasi OTS, khususnya undang-undang adat dan perspektif bumiputera.

“Pendirian itu amat membimbangkan kerana ia mungkin akan terus menambahkan kesulitan yang sedang dihadapi oleh anak negeri Sabah berhubung pemilikan tanah di bawah dasar dan undang-undang sedia ada,” katanya dalam kenyataan di sini.

Sehubungan itu, beliau menyeru pihak berkuasa agar dapat memastikan sebarang keputusan polisi oleh kerajaan negeri, terutamanya tentang hal-hal tanah mestilah berdasarkan konsultasi yang berkesan dan bermakna serta mendapat persetujuan daripada masayarakat dan pihak lain yang berminat.  Beliau mengulas kenyataan Fernandez bahawa tiada tanah baru berstatus NCR yang akan diwujudkan memandangkan hanya tanah yang ‘masih’ diduduki oleh pribumi sebelum tarikh penguatkuasaan Ordinan Tanah Sabah (SLO) yang mendapat pengiktirafan status itu.

Hasmy berkata suruhanjaya itu juga menggesa agar penangguhan kepada sebarang polisi baru berkaitan hal-hal tanah dibuat sehingga selesai Inkuiri Nasional mengenai tanah Orang Asal dan Asli. Inkuiri itu, yang diketuai oleh Hasmy, dimulakan di Sabah pada Jun tahun lepas diikuti Perak, Kelantan, Pahang, Johor dan Selangor.  Ia melibatkan beberapa penyelidik daripada Universiti Malaysia Sabah, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak dan Universiti Malaya bertujuan mendapatkan fakta selain melihat dari segi undang-undang, amalan dan prosedur yang melibatkan tanah Orang Asal dan Asli.

Laporan inkuiri itu, yang akan mengesyorkan penyelesaian bagi jangka masa panjang, sederhana dan pendek, dijangka dapat disiapkan pada Julai dan akan diserah kepada Parlimen, Dewan Undangan Negeri, kerajaan Persekutuan dan negeri. (BERNAMA)

Written by Admin
Sunday, 12 February 2012 02:12

ShareSaudara Pengarang,


SAYA sangat terkejut dengan kenyataan yang disampaikan oleh Peguam Besar Negeri Sabah, Datuk Roderic Fernandez berhubung peruntukan Tanah Hak Adat Bumiputera (NCR) di dalam Ordinan Tanah Sabah (SLO) sebagai ‘Tiada tanah NCR selepas 1930.”


Jika inilah tafsiran yang beliau berikan, maka ini secara langsung menyebabkan kesahihan keputusan mahkamah bagi mana-mana perbicaraan lampau berkaitan dengan Tanah Adat sebagai diragui. Oleh itu, saya menganggap tafsiran ini sebagai tafsiran pribadi dan bukannya tafsiran rasmi.


Bagaimanapun saya melihat ini sebagai satu isu sensitif dan memberikan senjata kepada pembangkang untuk menawan Sabah dan perlu ditangani segera. Di luar sana terdapat berpuluh ribu penuntut Tanah Adat. Jika isu ini tidak ditangani dengan bijaksana dan tiada tafsiran undang-undang yang berwibawa dibuat, saya risau akan wujud keadaan tidak terkawal.


Justeru itu, sebagai pemimpin yang sentiasa berdamping dengan rakyat, saya memohon agar isu berkaitan tafsiran ini dibangkitkan segera dalam Persidangan Dewan Undangan Negeri. Kita tidak mahu menghukum sesiapa. Kita hanya mahukan agar kebenaran diputuskan.


Kita juga mahu Majlis Peguam mampu memberikan pandangan profesional dan merujukannya dengan sebarang keputusan Mahkamah sebelumnya.


Sebagai pemimpin yang dilantik mewakili sekitar dua ribu lebih penuntut Tanah Adat penduduk asal dari Kemabong, tafsiran ini mewujudkan rasa tidak selamat dan kecewa penduduk. Saya menerima banyak pertanyaan, pandangan, keluhan dan tidak kurang juga menerima tempias kemarahan penduduk terhadap BN.


Saya bersyukur, kerana Datuk Seri Maximus Ongkili prihatin dan secara terbuka memperjuangkan tuntutan Tanah Adat menerusi Parti Bersatu Sabah. Terus terang, jika itu tafsiran undang-undang (tentang Tanah Adat) itu seperti yang dikatakan oleh Peguam Besar Negeri Sabah, maka sewajarnya satu pindaan perlu dibuat bertujuan melindungi dan memelihara hak asasi orang asal yang mempunyai tuntutan tanah adat.


Saya dapat tahu isu berkaitan Tanah Adat ini menjadi isu pembangkang. Saya merayu agar wakil rakyat BN berusaha untuk menjaga kebajikan rakyat seperti yang diterapkan oleh YAB Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak menerusi konsep 1Malaysia: ‘Rakyat didahulukan, Pencapaian diutamakan’.


Pada pandangan saya, biar pemimpin tersalah tafsir, jangan sampai rakyat tersalah hukum. Kami sayangkan BN tetapi apa daya kami membantu jika rakyat membuat keputusan yang silap kerana marah dengan Tafsiran Peguam Negeri yang agak celupar!


Salam Hormat,



Ketua Bahagian PBS Kemabong

Sabah Issue

Written by Admin   
Sunday, 05 February 2012 14:31



Dear Editor,


TO SAY that Sabah belongs to the defunct Sulu Sultanate is absolute nonsense. A Sultan is the spiritual head of the local ummah. Muslim sultanates in southeast Asia were not territorial in the western sense.


A Sultan confined himself to collecting tolls along the waterways.Today, by law, you are not allowed to collect tolls along the waterways.


What the Sultan of Brunei had in Sabah was the ‘right’ to collect tolls along the waters in northern Sabah. He handed over this right to the Sultan of Sulu for his help in resolving a palace dispute in his favour.


The Sulu Sultan was at that time already collecting tolls along the waterways in eastern Sabah. The Sabah Interior, deep in Dusun country, was neither under the Brunei or Sulu Sultans.


In Peninsular Malaysia, it was the British who stopped the sultans from collecting tolls along the waterways, drew the boundaries for them so that they would have territories to ‘rule’, recognised them and gave them a regular state pension to compensate for the loss from collecting tolls along the waterways.


Peninsular Malaysia is actually the southern half of the Kra peninsula and historically part of the Thai kingdom after the first kingdoms, Hindu, fell.


Who drew the border between Thailand and Peninsular Malaysia? The British. Before the British, the border of Thailand was down south in Tumasik (Singapore).


The British fought two wars with the Siamese to hack away Peninsular Malaysia from the Thai kingdom to plant rubber and mine tin.


If we look at the Federal Constitution, the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia are not listed as Natives of Peninsular Malaysia. The Federal Constitution merely defines who is a Malay.


The term Bumiputera does not exist in the Federal Constitution. It’s a bullshit political term coined by Umno to cover up for the fact that the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia are not Natives of Peninsular Malaysia.


The Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia speak Malay because it’s the lingua franca of the islands in southeast Asia. Hence, the Malay archipelago which means an Archipelago where the Malay language is spoken as the lingua franca.


In fact, the Malay-speaking communities in Peninsular Malaysia are by race either Bugis, Javanese, Minang and so on. There’s no such thing as a Malay race although there is a Malay language.


Malay was originally a dialect from the hill country in Cambodia. It was developed by Hindu and Buddhist missionaries and used for the purpose of spreading their language, for trade, administration and education.


The first mention of Malay is Malaiur (hill country in Tamil in Sumatra in the Jambi province). Malai in Tamil means hill.


The Tamils call a Malay-speaking male as malaikaran (male from the hills) and a female as malaikari (female from the hills). This talk of rumpun Melayu by Umno is plain political bullshit.


In Kerala, the people are known as Malayalee (people of the hill). Mahathir is a Malayalee who suddenly started calling himself a malaikaran.


Best Regard,





By Agence France-Presse, Updated: 2/1/2012

 Malaysia scanners to stem money smuggling

 Malaysia is installing scanners to detect bank notes at airports and border crossings to curb illegal money outflows believed to be in the hundreds of billions of dollars over the past decade.

 The move comes after Washington-based watchdog group Global Financial Integrity said in a recent report that Malaysia lost $338 billion between 2000 and 2009 to such outflows, ranking it fifth in the world.

The Star daily quoted customs deputy director-general Zainul Abidin Taib as saying seven such scanners were already operating at Kuala Lumpur International Airport and the rest would be installed by the end of the year. A customs official confirmed the report to AFP.

 Prime Minister Najib Razak announced in December a special task force to check the illegal flight of funds. He has come under fire from the political opposition which accuses his government of massive corruption, incompetence and inefficiency that is costing the country dearly.

 Global Financial Integrity said Malaysia was fifth behind China, Mexico, Russia, and Saudi Arabia in illicit outflows. Its report did not specify the causes of the Malaysian outflows but a earlier report by the group said possible causes were corrupt business practices and the large population of about 2 million illegal foreign workers in the country.

Written by Admin
Saturday, 07 January 2012 09:55






THE SABAH chapter of Star was launched here today with the announcement that it has managed to gain 60,000 new members in just three weeks.


A crowd of about 4,000 mostly men, received the announcement at an almost packed Hongkod Koisaan Hall in Penampang near here, with a burst of applause.


All ardent supporters of maverick politician Dr Jeffrey Kitingan, they greeted the news as confirmation that their hero would once again be catapulted to new political heights in the up-coming general election.


“Todate, we have received about 60,000 applications forms to become members of Star in Sabah,” said Jalumin Bayogoh, the master of ceremonies for the event.


“Out of the 100,000 forms distributed we have received back 60,000 forms,” Jalumin said as an afternoon shower started, threatening to put a damper on the proceedings.


A check with one of Kitingan’s lieutenants, Daniel John Jambun, confirmed the figure.


“Yes it is a fact we already received about 60,000 applications out of the 100,000 forms distributed through our men and coordinators throughout Sabah,” he told FMT.


The forms were understood to have been distributed soon after the first anniversary of United Borneo Front (UBF) on Dec 16.


The heavy rains failed to dampen those who turned in droves in cars and buses, some all the way from districts as far as Tawau, Kudat and Nabawan.


Jambun believes the crowd would have been much larger if the event had been held either on Saturday or Sunday. Organisors had to settle for Friday afternoon as the hall had been booked for most weekends until May this year.


“Nevertheless it was a huge success,” he said adding that more members as well as influential opinion leaders are expected to join the Sabah chapter of Star.


Apart for Kitingan and Star president, Dr Dripin Sakoi, also present were representatives of various organisations including Amdee Sidek, deputy president of Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) who came with his colleagues, Monggoh Orow, the deputy state chairman of Amanah as well as leaders of Sabah People Front (SPF) which is expecting to get a boost from senior state Umno leaders soon.


Former president of Setia (now renamed Bersama), Henry Sabagong Rumpit handed in his membership application form on the spot.




Newly-installed State Reform Party (Star) Sabah Chapter Chairman, Jeffrey Kitingan has warned Pakatan Rakyat today ‘not to be greedy’ and to focus on their challenges in the peninsular.


He also said that it would not be of any good to Sabah if peninsular-based parties are allowed to “dominate and control” Sabah like what Umno is doing.


“Enough is enough. We cannot depend on outsiders to lead us. Let Pakatan Rakyat parties concentrate in Peninsular. They control already four states, why must control Sabah and Sarawak too? Don’t be too greedy.


“If they (PR parties), like Umno also want to dominate and control over us, then there is not much difference between them and Umno or Barisan Nasional.


“A takeover by any Malayan-based party will result in us in the same situation under Umno. You can take from me,” said the maverick Kitingan who was once jailed for speaking up for Sabah rights during former premier Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s rule.


He was speaking at the launching of the Sabah chapter of the Sarawak-based party at the Hongkod Koisaan hall near hear Friday.


Kitingan, who was a a vice-president of PKR before this, said the time had come for Sabah-based political parties to take charge and responsibility again in the state matters.


During his 50 minutes speech, Kitingan explained the conditions of Sabah and Sarawak in at the onset of Malaysia formation in 1963 and the dashed hope of the people in both the successive governments as well as the current and previous leaders of the two large states.


The Harvard scholar also explained why he finally chose Star instead of other state parties as his vehicle.