Di Dalam Perlembagaan pula, MELANAU dan MELAYU dinyatakan TERPISAH daripada satu sama-lain. Ini kerana perlembagaan dan sejarah itu sendiri memperakui bahawa MELANAU adalah berbeza dengan MELAYU. Manajala “MELAYU” yang dinyatakan dalam Perlembagaan Negara Sarawak pula BUKANLAH MELAYU YANG dimaksudkan sebagai “MELAYU DAN BUMIPUTERA” di MALAYA, tetapi Masyarakat MELAYU SARAWAK yang boleh dianggap sebagai ETNIK LAIN yang mempunyai budaya dan bahasa tersendiri dan HAK MELAYU SARAWAK berserta HAK MASYARAKAT LAIN adalah TERMAKTUB JELAS dalam Perlembagaan Negara Sarawak.
Showing posts with label kongsi cerita. Show all posts
Showing posts with label kongsi cerita. Show all posts
Thursday, 28 August 2014
Thursday, August 28, 2014
18 Points
,
Exposing the Truth
,
Fact
,
kongsi cerita
,
Sarawak
,
SSKM
No comments
MELANAU ADALAH MELANAU, MELAYU ADALAH MELAYU
Menjawab percubaan MEMELAYUKAN BANGSA MELANAU oleh pihak Malaya yang DIKESAN semenjak 1980.
Penerangan : Perbuatan pihak Malaya yang cuba MEMELAYUKAN masyarakat bukan melayu di Sarawak adalah satu tindakan bertentangan perlembagaan Negara Sarawak, Perlembagaan Persekutuan itu sendiri dan perjanjian Malayasia yang mereka setujui dan tandatangani sendiri. Kerosakan it disemai dan dicambah ke dalam sistem pendidikan terutamanya subjek sejarah dan ditambah buruk dengan KERJASAMA oleh pihak KEMENTERIAN PENDIDIKAN MALAYSIA yang MEMBANTU dalam usaha MENGELIRUKAN rakyat Sarawak dan Sabah terutamanya RAKYAT MALAYA SENDIRI. Apa-apa tindakan yang bertentangan
dengan perlembagaan serta asas-asas perlembagaan boleh dianggap sebagai MENGHASUT dan KERAJAAN PERSEKUTUAN harus bertanggungjawab terhadap kerosakan pengetahuan dan polisi bersifat PEKAUMAN. Di dalam buku teks tersebut, dinyatakan bahawa Masyarakat Melanau menggunakan BAHASA MALAYSIA sedangkan bahasa yang rasmi digunakan oleh Masyarakat Melanau ialah BAHASA MELANAU.
Di Dalam Perlembagaan pula, MELANAU dan MELAYU dinyatakan TERPISAH daripada satu sama-lain. Ini kerana perlembagaan dan sejarah itu sendiri memperakui bahawa MELANAU adalah berbeza dengan MELAYU. Manajala “MELAYU” yang dinyatakan dalam Perlembagaan Negara Sarawak pula BUKANLAH MELAYU YANG dimaksudkan sebagai “MELAYU DAN BUMIPUTERA” di MALAYA, tetapi Masyarakat MELAYU SARAWAK yang boleh dianggap sebagai ETNIK LAIN yang mempunyai budaya dan bahasa tersendiri dan HAK MELAYU SARAWAK berserta HAK MASYARAKAT LAIN adalah TERMAKTUB JELAS dalam Perlembagaan Negara Sarawak. Dan kami TIDAK MEMERLUKAN pihak MALAYA untuk MENYEBARKAN PENYALAHGUNAAN KONTRAK SOSIAL untuk menimbulkan KETIDAKSENANGAN di kalangan Masyarakat Sarawak yang saling menghormati antara satu sama lain. Pihak MALAYA dan PERSEKUTUAN MALAYSIA HARUS INGAT bahawa KONTRAK SOSIAL TERGUNAPAKAI HANYA di MALAYA dan bukan di Sabah/Sarawak. Maka, kami akan memerhatikan apakah tindakan pihak Persekutuan Malaysia mengenai perkara ini, dan kami akan bertindak SELARAS dengan APA YANG PERSEKUTUAN lakukan.
Jangan disentuh hal kami di Negara Sarawak dan Sabah, selesaikan dahulu MASALAH PERKAUMAN anda di Malaya. KAMI TIDAK MEMERLUKAN ANDA.
-Bersama-Sama Kita Membina Semula Negara Kita-
#SarawakForSarawakian
#SabahForSabahan
DUM SPIRO SPERO | PERGO ET PERAGO
Tuesday, 11 September 2012
Tuesday, September 11, 2012
18 Points
,
20 Points
,
Agreement of Malaysia
,
Exposing the Truth
,
Fact
,
History
,
International
,
kongsi cerita
,
Malaysia
,
Malaysian.
,
North Borneo
,
Report
,
Rights
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
,
Sharing
,
SSKM
1 comment
Sabah ada Hak berpisah dengan Persekutuan!
KOTA KINABALU: Malaysian history professor DS Ranjit has come under fire in Sabah for declaring that the people of the state no longer have the fundamental right to self-determination (click here to read the article) as their legislators had surrendered that power a long time ago.
The Universiti Malaya historian, whose talk entitled “Sabah prospects and retrospect: The aftermath of colonial rule” here on Thursday, put forward the argument that the British colony which had joined Sarawak, Singapore and Malaya to form Malaysia on Sept 16, 1963, would never be able to legally withdraw from the union.
The state’s autonomy champion, maverick politician Jeffrey Kitingan, promptly disputed this fact, saying the argument put forward by Ranjit was guesswork and unsound.
Jeffrey, the chairman of United Borneo Front (UBF), was imprisoned without trial under the infamous Internal Security Act (ISA) in 1991 for allegedly having secessionist views during the rule of Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) from 1986 to 1994.
“The major issue, with regard to Sabah’s right to secession, is the fact that the Malaysia Agreement is now viewed by the general opinion to be invalid from the moment Singapore left the federation,” he said.
“This is due to the fact that by normal understanding of law, if a signatory to an agreement withdraws from the agreement, the agreement automatically becomes invalid and no longer in effect.”
Sabah, Sarawak not consulted
Jeffrey reminded Ranjit that when Kuala Lumpur decided on the expulsion of Singapore, it did so unilaterally without consulting Sabah and Sarawak though they were equal partners in the formation of Malaysia.
“While this is another case of a condescending attitude of KL towards the Borneo states, it was also a contravention of the mutual agreement and mutual consultation as established during the signing of the Malaysia Agreement,” he said.
“As to the excuse that Sabah has no right to secede because the State Legislative Assembly passed a resolution that Sabah would not secede, we must remember that the same house could have made the opposite decision.
“The resolution can even be reversed today if enough members of the house agree to do it.”
Replying to Ranjit’s question that “…if the original agreement was null and void after Singapore’s expulsion, then why did the state assembly pass this law?” Jeffrey said that the assembly must have made a resolution not to secede because of pressure from Kuala Lumpur, and there was fear that the agreement was actually null and void.
“If the agreement was still in effect and valid, why the need to pass a law to validate the agreement?” he asked.
Jeffrey, who has repeatedly raised the 20-Point Agreement signed during the formation of Malaysia which granted Sabah a degree of autonomy, reminded Ranjit that Kuala Lumpur had the moral responsibility to consult the people of Sabah before expelling Singapore “because we together formed Malaysia following a referendum conducted by the Cobbold Commission”.
Razak’s decision
Jeffrey said the unilateral decision by then prime minister, Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, had forced him to belatedly and “guiltily make a tour of the two states to explain the departure of Singapore”.
“The people of Sabah and Sarawak can also claim their right to self-determination based on the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” he said.
“Anyway, a decision to curtail a people’s right to secede is against the principle of human rights.
“And, keep in mind that Point 7 of the 20 Points is not even a safeguard for Sabahans but a curtailment of their right to self-determination.”
Jeffrey, the younger brother of deputy chief minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan, also said Ranjit’s opinion about the validity of the Malaysia Agreement has yet to be tested in a court of law.
Source: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2011/10/22/jeffrey-dismisses-historians-view/
Saturday, 21 July 2012
Saturday, July 21, 2012
18 Points
,
20 Points
,
Agreement of Malaysia
,
Exposing the Truth
,
Fact
,
History
,
kongsi cerita
,
Memorandum
,
Report
,
Rights
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
,
SSKM
No comments
"ENQUIRY" WAS HIGHLY UNRELIABLE & USED TO DENY SABAH SARAWAK REAL INDEPENDENCE BY ANNEXATION INTO NEO-COLONIAL MALAYSIA
Part 1
This "Enquiry" was conducted in a highly questionable manner.
It did not take into account the anti-Malaysia opposition in Brunei and Sarawak, and to a lesser extent in Sabah.
Did they ask the many thousands who were in the streets of Kuching to demonstrate against the British/Malayan "Malaysia Plan" because it was “neo-colonial plan” in the early 1960s?
What sort of opinion poll was it? How far did they go to assess public opinion?
How can you determine the fate of 2 countries by just consulting a few hundred (OR thousand for what it was worth) people?
What proper framework of inquiry and rules did they use to "gauge" people's "feelings"?
(It was not a UN conducted enquiry- But would still be questionable in those days when the UN was manipulated by the major colonial powers).
Should they not have slowed down and held a general referendum instead of rushing Sabah and Sarawak into "Malaysia"?? Even the British Governors of Sabah and Sarawak expressed similar views and said the people were not ready for the Malaysia idea.
It was the fate of many people and the British failed to exercise due care and responsibility to determine whether the people wanted to be in Malaysia and only after the colonial master had carried out a programme to educate and fully inform the people of what they would be walking into.
The massive anti-Malaysia opposition in Northern Borneo erupted including mass demonstrations, the Brunei independence Uprising leading to the protracted Sarawak guerrilla independence war from 1962 to 1990.
These are just some of the questions not thrashed out in the early 1960s. They were in a rush and did not give us a fair chance!
This new colonisation plan was based on many false assumptions and rationales. The 2 main ones are:
1. The British rationalisation for Malaysia was that it would like a combination of 5 countries for joint security against the spread of communism ("red scare") and foreign invasion (original plan included Brunei) fundamentally to defend their economic and strategic interests in South East Asia.
It could be argued that this original idea had already broke down when Brunei was not included in Malaysia and when Singapore left in 1965.
Neither Brunei or Singapore were invaded.
But if we wake up one day we can see that Sabah and Sarawak were INVADED and taken over by Malaya (this was the UMNO & Tunku's private joke played us poor innocents at the time!) The Malayan government in its most patronising way- openly said they would "protect" us - from what?
The British rationale failed. They helped Malayan UMNO invade Sabah and Sarawak not protect them from Malayan invasion despite (Sabah and) Sarawak having a “protectorate” Treaty with Britain in 1888.
Captured from CHAPTER 2 : ENQUIRY IN NORTH BORNEO, Section D. - Summary of Evidence from Indegenous and Chinese Populations and Political Parties ; 118 (e) Status of North Borneo in Malaysia.
=================
Bukti Sabah sebagai bukan satu daripada 13 atupun 14 negeri dalam Malaysia.
Part 2
2. The Malayan UMNO rationalisation was the issue of "racial balance"- combining the Malays and Sabah Sarawak "natives" numbers to counter balance the bigger Singaporean Chinese numbers.
The argument fell flat when Brunei did not "join" - thus the numbers of natives would have been deflated. Then Singapore left in 1965- this means Malays become the majority. It benefitted UMNO's plan for Malay supremacy under the NEP apartheid system now in place since 1969.
The whole Malaysia concept had broken down by 1965. We were left stranded in Malaysia without ever being given the opportunity to say "we also want to get out!"
The fundamental fears many of use still alive and our predecessors feared and expressed openly was being re-colonized by Malaya.
So Tunku A Rahman (who did not dream up "Malaysia" but the British did) wrote to assure us that Malaya would never colonize Sabah or Sarawak.
The 18/20 Points Agreement also reflected this fear of re-colonization.
But assurances and signed guarantees proved useless.
Malaya went ahead to Malayanize the 2 colonies and took control of our destiny and resources. They used our oil resources to develop the Malayan economy and gave us back crumbs! “Bornenonization” and all other rights guaranteed by the Agreements were broken.
In 1973 when Sabah and Sarawak demanded a review of the Malaysia Agreement, this was arbitrarily refused by Razak. How could he deny us our right which was in the Malaysia Agreement? Sweep it under the carpet the usual UMNO way of doing things!
We can ask ourselves what benefit is there for Sabah and Sarawak to remain in Malaysia?
Many of us will agree there is absolutely NONE! Looking at Brunei and Singapore we can only envy them as prosperous and independent little states while Sabah and Sarawak the richest territories have been rdeuced to be the most poverty strickened colinies in Malaya!
The sooner we take Sabah Sarawak out of Malaysia the better!
For Sarawakians remember that 22 July on Sunday is our "independence day".
The British "gave" us our independence on this date in 1963 (Sabah got its independence on 31 August 1963) and by 16 September 1963 this was taken away when Sabah & Sarawak were ANNEXED and colonized in Malaysia under UMNO rule.
SSKM has organised private commemoration of this day in London, Kuching and other Sarawak towns, Dubai and Kuala Lumpur.
If you wish fly the Malayan colonial flag upside down (as a sign of distress) and raise the Sarawak flag of your choice.
Hidup Sabah Sarawak Independence!
Historical Tree Map tracing Sabah & Sarawak independence & colonization to 2012
Corrections
Many of us will agree there is absolutely NONE!
Looking at Brunei and Singapore we can only envy them as prosperous and independent little states while Sabah and Sarawak the richest territories have been reduced to be the most poverty stricken colonies in Malaysia!
***This article was taken from comment posted in http://sabahsarawakmerdeka.blogspot.com/2012/07/enquiry-in-north-borneo.html***
Saturday, July 21, 2012
18 Points
,
Agreement of Malaysia
,
Exposing the Truth
,
Fact
,
International
,
kongsi cerita
,
Sarawak
,
Sharing
,
SSKM
No comments
Sarawak Independence Day: Broadcast in Melbourne Australia on 19 July at "Plenty Valley FM 88.6"
From Australia...
How are you & how is the preparations for Sarawak Independence Day 22 July? Radio Free Sarawak also mentioned this day and published the 18 Points Agreement. Do you follow their broadcasts?
You may be interested to published this news item on Sarawak Independence Day was broadcast in Melbourne Australia on 19 July at "Plenty Valley FM 88.6" .
The Sarawak national anthem was played at the end of the comment.
The broadcast was made in response to the news passed on by you. (Thanks).
CELEBRATION SARAWAK INDEPENDENCE ON 22 JULY 1963
This coming Sunday the London based movement call Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia or SSKM has organised an international celebration of Sarawak Independence Day on 22 July.
Similar celebrations are also being organised in the Sarawak capital Kuching on Borneo Island and other Sarawak cities and towns, London, Kuala Lumpur and in Dubai. In Australia and New Zealand private celebrations have been planned.
Sarawak was an independent sovereign state also known as land of the White Rajahs from 1841 to 1941. It was recognized as sovereign state by the United States in 1850 and Britain in 1863.
The State of Sarawak came into being when the English adventurer James Brooke was rewarded with a part of present day Sarawak by the Brunei Sultanate in 1841 for assisting the Sultan to put down a local rebellion. The Sultan recognised James Brooke as the ruler and Rajah of Sarawak. From that time the first and Second Rajahs began to expand the territory of Sarawak to its present day size. Sarawak was recognized as sovereign state by the United States in 1850 and Britain in 1863.
Sarawak celebrated its 100 years as an independent Kingdom in 1941 and a new Constitution was passed which promised the transition to an independent democratic state from Brooke rule.
In December 1941 Japan invaded and occupied Sarawak till 1945. After the war Britain took over and ruled Sarawak as colony in 1946 when the Third Rajah Charles Vyner Brooke sold Sarawak to Britain for a large sum of money.
This was called "cession of Sarawak" as colony to Britain and was strongly opposed by many Sarawakians.
The anti-cession and independence movement of Sarawak had the sympathy and support of Anthony Brooke the Tuan Muda or heir apparent to the Sarawak Kingdom. Anthony Brooke passed away in March this year. He was 98 years old. Born in 1911 he lived through the reign of the second and third Rajahs and was a part of Sarawak's history.
He continues to be held in high regards by many Sarawakians because of his leadership in the early struggle for Sarawak independence in which he led the non violent anti-cession movement to oppose Sarawak being colonized by Britain. He was banned from returning to Sarawak after 1946 but continued to lead the anti-cession movement until 1951.
While he was overseas things got out of hand when in Dec 1949 members of a splinter group of the movement assassinated of the British Governor Duncan Stewart . The Governor had been transferred from Palestine to Sarawak which was thought to be more peaceful.
Anthony Brooke's activities were suppressed by the British colonial office but he continued to his relationship with Sarawak till his death. Since the 1960s he formed and led a movement called “Peace through Unity” which has a webpage under this name. He was silent on the topic about the incorporation of Sarawak into Malaysia.
Before his passing he drew attention to - The Brooke motto: “Dum Spiro Spero - while I breathe I hope - is a sentiment both of us have taken to heart and aspire to express in all we do”. This is also Sarawak's motto.
On 22 July 1963 Sarawak gained independence from British colonial rule while Sabah became independent on 31 August 1963. By 16 September 1963 both states were incorporated into the new federation Malaysia proposed by Britain and Malaya.
Many critics see this as the annexation of Sabah and Sarawak by the Malayan Gov't and that Britain's had hastily divested its responsibility to the Sarawak & Sabah people by forcing them into the control of the new replacement colonial master.
THIS IS A RECORDING OF THE SARAWAK ANTHEM CALLED “FAIR LAND SARAWAK” WHICH WILL BE PLAYED AT THE INDEPENDENCE CELEBRATIONS
The words of the song slightly update are:
“Fair Land Sarawak
We will never cease to honour thee
and with our loyal sons (& daughters)
Defend your liberty
From your high forest hills,
Down to the open sea
May freedom ever reign
All of us Live in Unity
Proudly our Flag flies high
above our Country Strong and Free
Long may our People live
in Peace and harmony”
Wednesday, 18 July 2012
Wednesday, July 18, 2012
18 Points
,
20 Points
,
Agreement of Malaysia
,
Exposing the Truth
,
kongsi cerita
,
North Borneo
,
Rights
,
Sabah
,
Sarawak
,
SSKM
1 comment
Percubaan Sabah untuk Keluar dari Malaysia dulu BUKAN KHABAR ANGIN... TAPI ITU ADALAH BENAR!!!
North Borneo was granted its Independence on 31 August 1963(1). Sixteen days later it formed Malaysia with Sarawak, Singapore and the Federation of Malaya i.e. on 16 September 1963.
Donald Stephens, Tun Fuad as he was known then, was appointed Sabah's first Chief Minister while Datu Mustapha was appointed her first Head of State. Datu Mustapha had expected that as Head of State, he would retain many functions previously in the purview of the all powerful Governor. When he realized that contrary to his expectations, it was the Chief Minister who wielded power, he became frustrated and refused to co-operate with Stephens. It got so bad that the government was unable to efficiently go about conducting the business of governing. The Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, mediated and the solution was for Stephens to step down. Stephens stepped down on 31 December 1964 and took up the position of federal minister for Sabah Affairs and Civil Defense. Replacing him as Chief Minister was Peter Lo who previously held the position as Federal Minister without portfolio.(2)
The Straits Times, 24 July 1975, Page 1 |
In June 1965, Lee Kuan Yew who had been championing Malaysian's Malaysia, challenged the capability of federal leaders to govern and suggested that Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak as recent entrants to Malaysia, and perhaps Melacca and Penang as well in view of the high presence of Chinese in their populace, as well as being former Straits Settlements themselves, formed a partition. He said these states could form a new nation. He said those states that preferred a Malay's Malaysia could stay on their own. In mid-July, there were racial clashes between the Chinese and Malays in Singapore which led to the Tunku to decide that Singapore should be booted out. On 9 August 1965, a resolution was passed in the federal parliament to separate Singapore from Malaysia.(3)
The Straits Times, 24 July 1975, Page 1 |
Stephens, now a Datuk, claimed that he was not consulted upon with regard to the booting out of Singapore and he should had been consulted since he was the Federal Minister for Sabah Affair. Together with Peter Mojuntin, the Secretary General of United Pasok Momogun Kadazan Organization (UPKO), he toured the state telling the people that Sabah should re-examine the Twenty Points, the conditions of Sabah's entry into Malaysia. Recalcitrance in Sabah was the least that the Tunku wanted because during this period, the Konfrontasi was ongoing, the Tunku was afraid that this might give President Sukarno of Indonesia, the excuse to step in and annex Sabah into Indonesia.
The Straits Times, 24 July 1975, Page 1 |
There was also speculation that Stephens was going to pull Sabah out of Malaysia and link up with Singapore. If this happened, Sarawak would had followed suit. Hence on 13 September 1965, the Tunku flew into Jesselton and fired Stephesn as Federal Minister for Sabah Affair and Civil Defence. This, the Tunku hoped, would limit his activity in state level. At the same time, the Tunku was already thinking of ways to neutralize Stephens and Tun Datu Mustapha bin Datu Harun became his prime candidate. Tun Mustapha was in Tunku's opinion, the only politician in Sabah with the stature to challenge Stephens. During this time, Tun Mustapha was still the Head of State.(4)
The Tunku encouraged Tun Mustapha to re-enter politic. Tun Mustapha was initially reluctant but agreed later when Tunku agreed to his requests for a fair degree of autonomy, logistical and economical assistance from the federal government and the help of a politically trained lawyer. Three days later, Tun Mustapha stepped down as Head of State to challenge Stephens in the incoming first election of an independent Sabah. Syed Kechik was sent to Sabah to help Tun Mustapha to neutralize Stephens.(5)
Syed Kechik engineered the coup to get Datuk Donald Stephens to step down as President of UPKO and retire from politic. He was also to convince UPKO members to force Peter Mojuntin into retirement and that his paper, The Sabah Times would run articles suggesting that USNO and UPKO should merge in the interest of bumiputra unity. In the book, The Politics of Federalism, it insinuated that Tun Mustapha would have sought alternative arrangement to save the face of a long-standing colleague. A passage from the book aptly described the situation, “The two were unwitting actors in a drama written by the federal government, and both felt compelled to play out their roles, however reluctantly”. The book further went on to say that had the encounter was between Stephens and other parties in the Sabah Alliance, he would have emerged unscathed, given his powers of articulation and pursuasion but this encounter was with Kuala Lumpur(6)
I will not go into detail on why Stephens agreed to these(you will have to get a copy of the book for more details), suffice to say that he was outmaneuvered. Meanwhile, Syed Kechik was aware that even with Stephens departure from politics, UPKO still posed a danger. Ganie Gilong, now the President of UPKO, was still calling for a re-examination of the Twenty Points and UPKO enjoyed popular support from the people. Syed Kechik cornered and coerced Ganie Gilong into making a public statement that UPKO would refrain from talking about the Twenty Points publicly but instead would discuss it internally. UPKO's apparent rapprochement with USNO made headlines throughout the country.(7)
Fast forward, Sabah had its first General Election and UPKO had a few Assemblymen elected. The following are a few excerpts from the book which painted the author's opinion of our early politicians:
“For them, to join up with the ruling government could be construed as a patriotic gesture in the interests of the nation. The real motivation for defection, however, was the accorded status of becoming a minister, the accompanying benefits of a line of credit with local banks, and the possibility of a timber concession. These were to be decisive. Neither Sabah politicians nor their public were noted for fidelity in the political arena, where personalities were more important than issues. And in the mind of a poorly-educated and essentially amateur politician, crossing over to USNO was not perceived as that treasonous a political act.
On 2 November 1967, Payar Juman, the UPKO member for Kiulu, resigned from UPKO to join USNO, accusing UPKO of creating political tension in the state and taking the party into the opposition without first having considered the consequences of this for the rank and file....”(8)
On 2 November 1967, Payar Juman, the UPKO member for Kiulu, resigned from UPKO to join USNO, accusing UPKO of creating political tension in the state and taking the party into the opposition without first having considered the consequences of this for the rank and file....”(8)
Stephens was by now financially drained because UPKO was practically bank rolled personally by him. By this and other factors, he acceded to Tun Mustapha's demand that UPKO was to be disbanded in the interest of bumiputra solidarity and its members absorbed by USNO.
Stephens was sent to his political exile in the form of a High Commissioner post in Australia. Out maneuvered and cut off from his power base in Sabah.
After the race riot on 13 May 1969, a state of emergency was declared throughout Malaysia. Tun Mustapha was appointed Chairman of the State Operations Committee (SOC) with the power to detain. Tun Mustapha used this power to detain his political opponent. Many opponents were detained including Yap Pak Leong, an independent Assemblyman who was the sole opposition in the Legislative Assembly and Khoo Tao Choon, the brother of Deputy Chief Minister Khoo Siak Chew.(9)
Meanwhile, Syed Kechik felt that the attachment of Sabah Muslims to Islam was more nominal than devoted and he worked on a concept of establishing an organization to promulgate Islam in Sabah. He felt that Islam could be a binding and rallying force in USNO as it is in UMNO in Malaya. There was also concern that if the majority of Kadazan Christians were to allign themselves with the Chinese, they could emerge as a new power base. He mooted the idea of setting up United Sabah Islamic Association (USIA) to Tun Mustapha who readily agreed to it since he had wanted Sabah to be Muslim and Sabah's language to be Malay, in order to bring the state closer to the situation in Malaya.(10)
The book said Syed Kechik did not anticipate the zeal of USIA workers in getting converts even to resort to pressure and intimidation. All he could do was put up with it tacitly. He also did not deny that there were missionaries being expelled in Sabah in that period but explained it away simply as their passes having expired and not renewed. Nonetheless, he admitted that there were instances where passes were simply terminated. He also conceded that there were instances where converts received rewards like money, promotion and timber areas from Tun Mustapha for their conversion.(11)
The Legislative Assembly's five year term was coming to an end in April 1972. Peter Mojuntin, USNO Assemblyman for Moyog, wrote a letter in 1970 addressed to the Prime Minister then, Tun Abdul Razak, accusing Tun Mustapha of persecuting Christians, running a police state and covering dishonesty with dishonesty. Hundreds of copies of this letter were in circulation in Kuala Lumpur and Kota Kinabalu. This was the first salvo initiated by Mojuntin to organize a challenge against Tun Mustapha. In February 1971, Mojuntin announced that he would form a new political party, Union of Sabah People (USAP), however, this did not materialize eventually and Mojuntin bade his time. (12)
Eventhough emergency regulations had been lifted for some months, Tun Mustapha was still wielding the detention powers. The book says this was an indulgence given by Tun Razak who was very well aware how the wealthy Chief Minister could personally play in helping out UMNO. One way to keep Tun Mustapha loyal was to give him the detention power.(128)
By 1974, Tun Mustapha had become an embarrassment to leaders in Kuala Lumpur who found themselves impotent to reign in the wily Chief Minister.
There were also rumour that Tun Mustapha was going to pull Sabah out of Malaysia. The rumour was taken seriously for Tunku Abdul Rahman, the former Prime Minister of Malaysia had issued a public plea to Tun Mustapha not to pursue secession. (A) The secession rumour was probably the final straw for Tun Razak. Tun Razak summoned Datuk Harris Salleh to Kuala Lumpur and told him that should Tun Mustapha declare Sabah's independence, he would declare emergency, send in troops and install Datuk Harris as Chairman of the SOC. Tun Razak also impressed on Datuk Harris that a new party had to be formed to challenge USNO. The book says Datuk Harris told Tun Razak that the only politician with sufficient stature to lead an opposition against USNO was Tun Fuad Stephens. A few weeks later, after a discussion with Tun Razak, Tun Fuad agreed to provide leadership.(16)
On the morning of 15 July 1975, Datuk Harris Salleh, Datuk Ghani Gilong, Datuk Peter Mojuntin, Datuk Salleh Sulong and Mohammed Noor Mansoor escorted by the police, announced at the main lounge of Borneo Hotel, the formation of Bersatu Rakyat Jelata Sabah (BERJAYA).(14)
The rest, you must read the book yourself. Source : The Politics of Federalism : Syed Kechik in East Malaysia
(1) Pg 8
(2) Pg 9
(3) Pg 11
(4) Pg 17
(5) Pg 18
(6) Pg 26
(7) Pg 27
(8) Pg 89
(9) Pg 101
(10) Pg 102
(11) Pg 108
(12) Pg 127
(13) Pg 128
(14) Pg 145
(15) Pg 146(16) Pg 158
(A) Source - The Straits Times 24 July 1975 : Tunku's plea to Tun M: Don't Pull Out
The Politics of Federalism : Syed Kechik in East Malaysia
***Source taken from http://despiritofsabahan.blogspot.com/2012/03/percubaan-sabah-untuk-keluar-dari.html ***
***Source taken from http://despiritofsabahan.blogspot.com/2012/03/percubaan-sabah-untuk-keluar-dari.html ***
Friday, 18 May 2012
TANYA ANGIN KENAPA POKOK BERGOYANG ?
Menurutnya kejayaan negara mencapai kemerdekaan dan membentuk Persekutuan Malaysia pada 16 September 1963 telah dicemburui banyak pihak sehingga ada yang beria-ia hendak menidakkannya dengan pelbagai gelagat yang berniat jahat dan tohmahan yang tidak berasas."Justeru itu, kita hendaklah memastikan segala kesejahteraan hidup dan kemakmuran yang telah kita capai itu tidak dirosakkan oleh golongan tertentu yang tidak bertanggungjawab itu.
"Demi menjamin kestabilan dan ketahanan politik, sosial dan ekonomi negara ini, kita harus menolak segala bentuk anasir dan tindak-tanduk melampau yang sengaja dicetuskan oleh sesetengah pihak yang cemburu akan keharmonian rakyat pelbagai keturunan dan kepesatan pembangunan yang telah dilaksana oleh kerajaan sejak negara kita mencapai kemerdekaan," katanya.
★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆★☆
Sabah mahu merdeka dari British bukan untuk dihisap hasilnya oleh Malaya. Tiada lagi kompromi, hancurkan hegemoni arogan (kesombongan keangkuhan kecongkakan) Malaya di Sabah!
“Jika Tiga Negara boleh ditubuhkan menjadi Malaysia, tiada sebab tidak boleh dibubarkan!” - Naspazi





