Joseph Tawie | June 14, 2012
“Sarawakians will always regard the 18-point agreement as legally binding despite arguments to the contrary." - Tuan Haji Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah
One fact stands out in Sabah and Sarawak – grassroots politicians on both sides of the political divide are united on the issue of the Malaysia Agreement.
KUCHING: In the run-up to what is likely to be a highly charged 13th general election, political mischieve-makers abound, especially in Sabah and Sarawak, on which both Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak and Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim are dependent on for a victorious run to Putrajaya.
It was only a short while ago that Sabah State Legislative Speaker Salleh Keruak came in for a shelling for dismissing the state’s 20-point agreement. Now, Sabahans and Sarawakians have to contend with former Sabah Archives director Tigabelas Zainal Abidin’s equally disconcerting views.
Both Sarawakians and Sabahans believe that the 18-20 points in the Malaysia Agreement were the foundation on which the two states agreed to form the federation of Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore.
It was to guarantee and safeguard their interests and rights in the federation.
But Tigabelas, in his latest comment, said that the “20-point” document was “just a memorandum” and not an “actual agreement” that was signed during the formation of Malaysia.
He called the “agreement” a “memorandum of conditions”.
His views have sparked another round of angry rebuttals from Sarawakians and Sabahans from both sides of the political divide.
While Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian has accused Tigabelas of telling “half truths and half lies”, his college in Barisan Nasional, Assistant Minister of Youth Development Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah, said “nobody” should trivialise or reduce the strength, terms and conditions of the 18-20 point documents.
He said these points had been “agreed upon” by Sabah, Sarawak, Singapore and the Federated Malaya States before they entered into the Malaysia Agreement.
Incomplete argument
Explaining his “half truth, half lie” accusation levelled against Tigabelas, Bian said: “Tigabelas was correct to say that it was a memorandum.
“But it is only half a truth and half a lie. He did not go further to explain that the 18-20 points recommendations were eventually incorporated in the Malaysia Agreement, especially from Articles 1 to11.
“The Malaysia Agreement was agreed to by the Federated Malay States, Britain, Singapore, North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak.
“These points were later incorporated into the Malaysian Constitution. As such, the 18-20 points are legally binding.”
Bian said most people did not understand that the 18-20 points were the recommendation of the various committees such as the Cobbold Commission, the Inter-Governmental Report of North Borneo (Sabah), Sarawak and Singapore, and the Malaysian Solidarity Consultative Committee of North Borneo and Sarawak.
Meanwhile, Karim said history must not be “rewritten” based on Tigabelas’ opinion. He pointed out that it was important to see the “intention” of the parties when they discussed and finally agreed to “merge” and formed what is today’s Malaysia.
“Sarawakians will always regard the 18-point agreement as legally binding despite arguments to the contrary.
“The terms and conditions are crucial and formed an integral part and foundation for the formation of Malaysia and must be respected by the respective parties that inherit the respective governments of the two states and the federal government,” he said.
Dewan Rakyat Deputy Speaker and the MP for Santubong, Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar, echoed Bian and Karim’s views, pointing out that the 18-20 points were the products of negotiations between all parties for the formation of Malaysia and a study made by the Cobbold Commission.
He said that looking at the interests of the two states, the leaders of the country should observe the terms of the agreements where they are not in conflict with the constitution.
‘Conditions’ equally important
The observation of Tigabelas as the “custodian of the country’s historic records for almost 13 years”, has further underlined growing resentment against the ruling Umno-Barisan Nasional which is seen has having stripped the state of its political dignity.
State Reform Party (STAR) Sabah chairman Jeffrey Kitingan said that while it is true that the Malaysia Agreement was a “memorandum of conditions”, it was equally “important” to note that it was a “milestone in the creation of Malaysia”.
“While it [the 20-point agreenment] is a memorandum of conditions … it is important to understand that the 20 points, being a list of conditions submitted by leaders of five political parties in Sabah, are an important milestone in the creation of Malaysia.
“Without these conditions being agreed and discussed, one can conclude that there would have been no Malaysia. It is that important,” said Jeffrey, who is the foremost proponent for the full reinstatement of the terms of the Malaysia Agreement for Sabah and Sarawak.
“Therefore, people including politicians and the former state archives director should not be quick to dismiss the 20-point memorandum merely at its face value but for what they represent – the desires and concerns of the people of Sabah,” he said.
Tigabelas reportedly said that many individuals debating the 20-point Malaysia Agreement had based their arguments on misinterpretations derived from secondary or even tertiary sources “without referring the actual records”, which are available in the state archives.
“As the custodian of the country’s historic records for almost 13 years, I have inspected and studied various materials pertaining to the 20 points including reports, memorandums, letters, minutes of meeting, books, films, photographs, news reports, articles and translations related to the document and its contents apart from the 20-point agreement itself,” he said, adding that recent statements by leaders and politicians arguing the validity of the 20 points were confusing the people.
No comments:
Post a Comment