Arnold Puyok
AS more and more disclosures are made at the ongoing hearing of Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Sabah illegals problem, Sabahans have begun to speculate in earnest about the matter, considered the "mother of all issue" in the state.
Some are angry at what they see transpiring at the RCI hearing so far, with witnesses testifying about various ways in which illegals were given documentation. But others prefer to adopt a wait-and-see attitude until more stories are told. Of course, the opposition leaders have been quick to capitalise on the issue even though they are struggling to find the right "angle" through which they can use to attack the Barisan Nasional.
Some of the opposition leaders have called the present government "illegitimate" while others want the electoral roll to be cleaned first before the general election in called. Former chief minister Tan Sri Harris Salleh, whose name is implicated in the illegal immigrant issue, defended his track record, saying that he did not break any law. He was also quick in passing the buck to the federal government who he said held the power to award citizenships to anyone.
Harris snubbed one of the RCI investigation officers when he was asked about the Project IC (or Project M). Calling the Project IC as a "false" story, Harris said he did not have time to respond to people who raise the issue. Interestingly, Harris's former boss Tun Mahathir Mohamad acknowledged Project IC and defended it as a "legal" process.
The RCI was established by Prime Minister Najib Razak who was under pressure from the public and leaders from both sides of the political divide. The decision to go ahead with the RCI is a popular one. In a survey conducted by the Merdeka Centre, an overwhelming 88% of the respondents agreed with the establishment of the RCI. Most of the respondents (11%) also said that they want the illegal immigrant issue to be debated in the coming election. This shows that the illegal immigrant issue is important and requires an urgent solution.
Not everyone is happy that the RCI is taking place. Obviously, Najib is taking a bold but risky political gamble as many Umno leaders are implicated in the issuance of Malaysian ICs through dubious means. The RCI works both ways for Najib and the BN. It works for Najib as it "proves" the sincerity of the government to address the illegal immigrant problem in Sabah; it works against the BN as the allegation of illegal immigrants being given Malaysian citizenship illegally happened throughout the BN's rule.
The stories recounted by the witnesses at the RCI so far show that the illegal immigrant problem in Sabah is complex and has no easy solution. Some of those alleged to have acquired Malaysian ICs illegally have become part of the society and have on numerous occasions participated in the country's electoral process.
Questions have been raised whether these "fake" Malaysians should have their citizenships revoked or whether they be allowed to remain as citizens based on humanitarian grounds. Public confidence can only be restored if the RCI is allowed to do its task without fear or favour. As the election looms, the public is expecting the RCI to wrap up its investigation soon and to propose immediate and long term solutions to the illegal immigrant problem in Sabah. That is not likely to happen, as the RCI has six months to complete its task.
Despite the rhetoric and posturing by commentators and politicians alike, the illegal immigrant issue is one touching on the country's security and sovereignty. Thus no parties should interfere in the work of the RCI or try to take advantage of it for their political gain.
Source: http://fz.com/content/tough-task-sabah-rci
Tuesday, 29 January 2013
Monday, 7 January 2013
Opposition Capers in Sabah
Opposition Capers in Sabah
By Arnold Puyok
Sabah politics has never failed to generate the interest of political pundits. Not only does Sabah have a lot of political mavericks known for their political stunts, Sabah politics is also as unpredictable as the weather. The withdrawal of two former BN strongmen, Wilfred Bumburing and Lajim Ukin, to align with PR has heightened the race to win public office in Sabah. BN is banking on its track record while PR is riding on the promise to form a transparent, democratic and people-friendly government.
The state-based opposition parties SAPP and STAR are also promising a better and more reliable government. But different from PR, they rely heavily on the “Borneo Agenda” to rally support. The PR-friendly groups such as APS (Angkatan Perubahan Sabah) led by Wilfred is tasked to go into the Kadazandusun areas to weaken STAR while Lajim’s PPPS (Pakatan Perubahan Sabah) is responsible for consolidating the Muslim support in PR.
All the state-based opposition parties resort to sloganeering to woo new supporters. The very mention of “inikalilah” (this is the time) reminds one of STAR with its no-holds-barred approach in championing Sabah’s rights and autonomy. APS’s campaign motto is “ubah” (change), almost similar to PPPS’s “tukar”. Can PR and state-based opposition parties provide a strong challenge to BN that has more than 50 years of experience in electoral politics?
In the effort the deny BN any chance of winning, PR is determined to have a one-to-one fight with the ruling party. However, such a plan seems remote judging from the way PR deals with the issue of seat allocation. The chances for PR to win and deny BN’s two-thirds majority in Sabah are high if it allows state-based opposition parties to contest one-to-one against the ruling party in all the 60 state constituencies.
As PR’s main aim is to win Putrajaya, it will have to win a certain number of parliamentary seats in Sabah even though the task of winning has become difficult than ever. The SAPP’s strongholds are mainly in Chinese-majority areas. The state-based opposition party to watch is STAR, whose support is growing particularly in the Kadazandusun areas even though there has been rumour that the party has lost support following the allegation that it is funded by UMNO to split the support for PR.
STAR’s “Borneo Tea Parties” seem to bear fruits at least among young professionals, especially teachers. If STAR’s facebook account is used to measure the party’s popularity, the Sarawak-based party should be commended for its ability in attracting new members in such a short time.
SAPP had said that it managed to strike a deal with STAR. But Jeffrey Kitingan’s statement in the media that he is determined to “do it alone” squashed SAPP’s attempt at finding an amicable solution to end the squabble over seat allocation. It is possible for all the state opposition-based parties to contest against each other and thus give BN the advantage to return to power.
There are many reasons why Jeffrey refused to budge. First, Jeffrey has a bigger agenda in mind, one of which is to restore Sabah’s rights and autonomy through the Borneo Agenda. For Jeffrey, this can only be done if STAR has bargaining power in the legislative assembly. Second, in the event there is no clear winner in the election, STAR would have the chance to bargain as a coalition partner.
Seats allocation will remain a main issue among the opposition parties. PR might contest in all the 25 parliamentary seats in Sabah depending on the outcome of its on-going negotiation with SAPP and STAR. However, on his visit to Sabah, Anwar Ibrahim said he is willing to contest only in areas where PR has a higher probability of winning.
STAR may contest in all 60 state seats. STAR may have no choice but to go into a collision course with APS in Kadazandusun-majority areas and PPPS in Muslim-majority areas. SAPP may have no choice as well but to compete with STAR. If this happens, it reduces the chances of the opposition to win. No amount of sloganeering and sophisticated campaign approach can help the opposition leaders topple BN unless they are willing to bury their ego and work as a team.
Retrieved from http://themalaysianinsider.com
By Arnold Puyok
Sabah politics has never failed to generate the interest of political pundits. Not only does Sabah have a lot of political mavericks known for their political stunts, Sabah politics is also as unpredictable as the weather. The withdrawal of two former BN strongmen, Wilfred Bumburing and Lajim Ukin, to align with PR has heightened the race to win public office in Sabah. BN is banking on its track record while PR is riding on the promise to form a transparent, democratic and people-friendly government.
The state-based opposition parties SAPP and STAR are also promising a better and more reliable government. But different from PR, they rely heavily on the “Borneo Agenda” to rally support. The PR-friendly groups such as APS (Angkatan Perubahan Sabah) led by Wilfred is tasked to go into the Kadazandusun areas to weaken STAR while Lajim’s PPPS (Pakatan Perubahan Sabah) is responsible for consolidating the Muslim support in PR.
All the state-based opposition parties resort to sloganeering to woo new supporters. The very mention of “inikalilah” (this is the time) reminds one of STAR with its no-holds-barred approach in championing Sabah’s rights and autonomy. APS’s campaign motto is “ubah” (change), almost similar to PPPS’s “tukar”. Can PR and state-based opposition parties provide a strong challenge to BN that has more than 50 years of experience in electoral politics?
In the effort the deny BN any chance of winning, PR is determined to have a one-to-one fight with the ruling party. However, such a plan seems remote judging from the way PR deals with the issue of seat allocation. The chances for PR to win and deny BN’s two-thirds majority in Sabah are high if it allows state-based opposition parties to contest one-to-one against the ruling party in all the 60 state constituencies.
As PR’s main aim is to win Putrajaya, it will have to win a certain number of parliamentary seats in Sabah even though the task of winning has become difficult than ever. The SAPP’s strongholds are mainly in Chinese-majority areas. The state-based opposition party to watch is STAR, whose support is growing particularly in the Kadazandusun areas even though there has been rumour that the party has lost support following the allegation that it is funded by UMNO to split the support for PR.
STAR’s “Borneo Tea Parties” seem to bear fruits at least among young professionals, especially teachers. If STAR’s facebook account is used to measure the party’s popularity, the Sarawak-based party should be commended for its ability in attracting new members in such a short time.
SAPP had said that it managed to strike a deal with STAR. But Jeffrey Kitingan’s statement in the media that he is determined to “do it alone” squashed SAPP’s attempt at finding an amicable solution to end the squabble over seat allocation. It is possible for all the state opposition-based parties to contest against each other and thus give BN the advantage to return to power.
There are many reasons why Jeffrey refused to budge. First, Jeffrey has a bigger agenda in mind, one of which is to restore Sabah’s rights and autonomy through the Borneo Agenda. For Jeffrey, this can only be done if STAR has bargaining power in the legislative assembly. Second, in the event there is no clear winner in the election, STAR would have the chance to bargain as a coalition partner.
Seats allocation will remain a main issue among the opposition parties. PR might contest in all the 25 parliamentary seats in Sabah depending on the outcome of its on-going negotiation with SAPP and STAR. However, on his visit to Sabah, Anwar Ibrahim said he is willing to contest only in areas where PR has a higher probability of winning.
STAR may contest in all 60 state seats. STAR may have no choice but to go into a collision course with APS in Kadazandusun-majority areas and PPPS in Muslim-majority areas. SAPP may have no choice as well but to compete with STAR. If this happens, it reduces the chances of the opposition to win. No amount of sloganeering and sophisticated campaign approach can help the opposition leaders topple BN unless they are willing to bury their ego and work as a team.
Retrieved from http://themalaysianinsider.com
Role of Sabah and Sarawak in nation-building
Role of Sabah and Sarawak in nation-building
By Arnold Puyok
TO BUILD a nation is not easy. It took the Americans more than 200 years to finally find their identity. Hence, there surely is a lot of work to be done to transform Malaysia into a solid nation. It is indeed a work-in-progress. We must remember, Malaysia is just 49 years old (from its founding in 1963), way too young compared with major countries, such as the United States, China and India, just to name a few.
In order to build a successful Malaysian nation, Malaysians must be willing to put aside their political and cultural differences. However, this will be an enormous challenge as not only are Malaysians divided politically and culturally, they are also divided regionally. A case in point is Sabahans and Sarawakians who are separated from their peninsular Malaysian counterparts by the South China Sea.
The main challenge confronting the government of the day (and any government to come) is to bridge what I call the political and cultural gap in Malaysian society. This endeavour must start with the effort to truly integrate Sabah and Sarawak into the Federation of Malaysia. Since 2008, Sabah and Sarawak are considered by many as the ruling party Barisan Nasional’s (BN) “fixed deposits”. The label came after the East Malaysian states helped the BN return to power by contributing 56 parliamentary seats in the 2008 general election.
These seats were crucial in ensuring the BN’s slim electoral victory. Many analysts (including this writer) have predicted that the BN will return to power but not necessarily with Sabah and Sarawak as its fixed deposits anymore, depending on changes in the dynamics of local politics. Sabah and Sarawak’s fixed deposits status has brought them to national prominence. Sabah, in particular, has been receiving numerous development assistances from the Federal Government.
Under the Ninth Malaysia Plan Sabah received the largest financial allocation of more than RM16 billion. More Sabahans were also appointed to hold important positions in the federal cabinet. Datuk Seri Anifah Aman, for instance, was appointed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to helm the influential Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Afdal, the Ministry of Rural Development. These cabinet portfolios are normally reserved for key Umno leaders from peninsular Malaysia.
Despite the special treatment given to Sabah and Sarawak, many are not happy with the fixed deposits label. They ask: if Sabah and Sarawak did not contribute the 56 seats to the national parliament, would they receive the same treatment today? Would the BN withdraw its fixed deposits (special treatment) when Sabah and Sarawak could no longer offer better interest rates (electoral support)?
When the democratically elected PBS (Parti Bersatu Sabah) was in power, it was pushed into the political wilderness by the Mahathir administration simply because the party was championing state rights and autonomy. This caused Sabah to lag behind in terms of infrastructural development. Despite peninsular Malaysia’s marked development progress, Sabah and Sarawak are still way behind.
It is important for the government to set politics aside for the sake of nation-building. Sabah and Sarawak must not be regarded as fixed deposits anymore. Sabahans and Sarawakians have suffered a lot due to “bad politics” played by self-serving leaders. The Federal Government must not alienate Sabahans and Sarawakians just because they are politically and culturally different. Sabahans and Sarawakians are loyal Malaysian citizens who want to be treated equally as their fellow Malaysians in the peninsular Malaysia.
If the government is serious about building a strong Malaysian nation, Sabahans and Sarawakians teach us that we all can live in peace and harmony if we are willing to accept each other’s political and cultural differences. In Sabah and Sarawak, ethnic tolerance is high. There have never been any ethnic riots in Sabah and Sarawak throughout Malaysia’s 49 years of history. Ethnic harmony is intact thanks to inter-ethnic marriages. Regional identity plays a more important role than do ethnicity and religion. It does not matter whether one is Kadazandusun, Bajau, Murut, Lundayeh or Bisaya, racial identity is not as strong as in peninsular Malaysia.
While many of the indigenous people in Sabah and Sarawak have embraced either Islam or Christianity, they take pride in their cultural roots. That is why when the “Allah” issue came about, Sabahan Muslims came to defend the right of their Christian counterparts to use the word “Allah".
Najib is correct when he said that Sabah is a model for the 1Malaysia policy even though many acknowledge the fact that 1Malaysia existed in Sabah and Sarawak long before it was conceived. The introduction of the 1Malaysia concept and the inclusion of Sabah and Sarawak into the country’s mainstream development by the Najib Administration is a step in the right direction towards building a Malaysian nation.
However, this must be done by acknowledging the religious and cultural diversity of the people of Sabah and Sarawak. The journey of building a Malaysian nation started long ago when the country’s founding fathers drafted a constitution that respects the democratic right of every Malaysian citizen such as the right to religious beliefs, the right to vote, the right to form a political party and so on.
The people in Sabah and Sarawak were also accorded with certain rights due to their religious and cultural uniqueness. If the powers-that-be recognise these rights and make every effort to educate Malaysians to respect and accept them, we are in the right track to building a successful nation.
The original version of this posting can be found at http://fz.com/content/role-sabah-and-sarawak-nation-building.
By Arnold Puyok
TO BUILD a nation is not easy. It took the Americans more than 200 years to finally find their identity. Hence, there surely is a lot of work to be done to transform Malaysia into a solid nation. It is indeed a work-in-progress. We must remember, Malaysia is just 49 years old (from its founding in 1963), way too young compared with major countries, such as the United States, China and India, just to name a few.
In order to build a successful Malaysian nation, Malaysians must be willing to put aside their political and cultural differences. However, this will be an enormous challenge as not only are Malaysians divided politically and culturally, they are also divided regionally. A case in point is Sabahans and Sarawakians who are separated from their peninsular Malaysian counterparts by the South China Sea.
The main challenge confronting the government of the day (and any government to come) is to bridge what I call the political and cultural gap in Malaysian society. This endeavour must start with the effort to truly integrate Sabah and Sarawak into the Federation of Malaysia. Since 2008, Sabah and Sarawak are considered by many as the ruling party Barisan Nasional’s (BN) “fixed deposits”. The label came after the East Malaysian states helped the BN return to power by contributing 56 parliamentary seats in the 2008 general election.
These seats were crucial in ensuring the BN’s slim electoral victory. Many analysts (including this writer) have predicted that the BN will return to power but not necessarily with Sabah and Sarawak as its fixed deposits anymore, depending on changes in the dynamics of local politics. Sabah and Sarawak’s fixed deposits status has brought them to national prominence. Sabah, in particular, has been receiving numerous development assistances from the Federal Government.
Under the Ninth Malaysia Plan Sabah received the largest financial allocation of more than RM16 billion. More Sabahans were also appointed to hold important positions in the federal cabinet. Datuk Seri Anifah Aman, for instance, was appointed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to helm the influential Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Afdal, the Ministry of Rural Development. These cabinet portfolios are normally reserved for key Umno leaders from peninsular Malaysia.
Despite the special treatment given to Sabah and Sarawak, many are not happy with the fixed deposits label. They ask: if Sabah and Sarawak did not contribute the 56 seats to the national parliament, would they receive the same treatment today? Would the BN withdraw its fixed deposits (special treatment) when Sabah and Sarawak could no longer offer better interest rates (electoral support)?
When the democratically elected PBS (Parti Bersatu Sabah) was in power, it was pushed into the political wilderness by the Mahathir administration simply because the party was championing state rights and autonomy. This caused Sabah to lag behind in terms of infrastructural development. Despite peninsular Malaysia’s marked development progress, Sabah and Sarawak are still way behind.
It is important for the government to set politics aside for the sake of nation-building. Sabah and Sarawak must not be regarded as fixed deposits anymore. Sabahans and Sarawakians have suffered a lot due to “bad politics” played by self-serving leaders. The Federal Government must not alienate Sabahans and Sarawakians just because they are politically and culturally different. Sabahans and Sarawakians are loyal Malaysian citizens who want to be treated equally as their fellow Malaysians in the peninsular Malaysia.
If the government is serious about building a strong Malaysian nation, Sabahans and Sarawakians teach us that we all can live in peace and harmony if we are willing to accept each other’s political and cultural differences. In Sabah and Sarawak, ethnic tolerance is high. There have never been any ethnic riots in Sabah and Sarawak throughout Malaysia’s 49 years of history. Ethnic harmony is intact thanks to inter-ethnic marriages. Regional identity plays a more important role than do ethnicity and religion. It does not matter whether one is Kadazandusun, Bajau, Murut, Lundayeh or Bisaya, racial identity is not as strong as in peninsular Malaysia.
While many of the indigenous people in Sabah and Sarawak have embraced either Islam or Christianity, they take pride in their cultural roots. That is why when the “Allah” issue came about, Sabahan Muslims came to defend the right of their Christian counterparts to use the word “Allah".
Najib is correct when he said that Sabah is a model for the 1Malaysia policy even though many acknowledge the fact that 1Malaysia existed in Sabah and Sarawak long before it was conceived. The introduction of the 1Malaysia concept and the inclusion of Sabah and Sarawak into the country’s mainstream development by the Najib Administration is a step in the right direction towards building a Malaysian nation.
However, this must be done by acknowledging the religious and cultural diversity of the people of Sabah and Sarawak. The journey of building a Malaysian nation started long ago when the country’s founding fathers drafted a constitution that respects the democratic right of every Malaysian citizen such as the right to religious beliefs, the right to vote, the right to form a political party and so on.
The people in Sabah and Sarawak were also accorded with certain rights due to their religious and cultural uniqueness. If the powers-that-be recognise these rights and make every effort to educate Malaysians to respect and accept them, we are in the right track to building a successful nation.
The original version of this posting can be found at http://fz.com/content/role-sabah-and-sarawak-nation-building.
Monday, 13 August 2012
RCI on illegal immigrants in Sabah: Najib is taking a bold and risky political move
Prime Minister Najib Razak has announced the Terms of Reference (TOR) for the RCI (Royal Commission of Inquiry) to investigate the illegal immigrant problems in Sabah. The next thing for the investigative body to do is to ensure that the findings are announced before the general election next year. This would be politically risky for Najib depending on the outcomes of the investigation as many UMNO leaders will be implicated. The TOR of the RCI are comprehensive focusing on the issue plaguing Sabah for a long time. However, missing in the TOR is a provision to hold the perpetrators behind the issuance of Malaysian ICs to foreigners accountable. This has riled up opposition leaders who have been pressing the government to prosecute anyone responsible for causing the influx of illegal immigrants into Sabah.
Members of the RCI come from different professional backgrounds and are eminent members of the civil service. However, question has been asked as to why there is no representative from NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisation) or civil society movement. Opposition leaders have also complained that members of the RCI are “pro-establishment”. Now, we come to the timeframe given to the RCI to complete its tasks. Six months might not be enough to investigate a perennial and complex problem. Further, as the timeframe given coincides with the expiry of the parliament’s term, the RCI will have no choice but to complete its investigation before the election is called. This will be difficult as the RCI will have no flexibility in determining the pace of its investigation. What if the RCI wants to extend its investigation due to lack of cooperation from witnesses? Or, what if the RCI needs more time to obtain more data? Holding the election before the RCI completes its mission will only reinforce the notion that the formation of the inquiry body is not more than a “political ploy”. Sabahans have been waiting for so long for actions to be taken.
Despite all the strengths and weaknesses of the RCI, Najib should be commended for taking such a bold and risky political move. Najib is basically putting his head on the chopping board as many of the UMNO leaders are implicated in the issuance of Malaysian ICs through dubious means. If MD Mutalib’s book on “Project IC” and Chong Eng Leong’s “Lest We Forget” are to be taken seriously, some big names are mentioned and it will a difficult task to ask them to respond to the RCI’s queries.
BN might be able to score some points by forming the RCI. The RCI has managed to boost BN’s image in the eyes of Sabahans who want the illegal immigrant problems solved if not sooner, later. The main issue that Najib has to deal with is, will the government have the political will to act based on the recommendations of the RCI? What assurance that the government can give that the RCI will not end up like other previous RCIs? What happens if the findings are not in favour of BN? The onus is on Najib to prove that the government is sincere and Sabahans are not taken for another ride on the illegal immigrants issue.
Members of the RCI come from different professional backgrounds and are eminent members of the civil service. However, question has been asked as to why there is no representative from NGOs (Non-Governmental Organisation) or civil society movement. Opposition leaders have also complained that members of the RCI are “pro-establishment”. Now, we come to the timeframe given to the RCI to complete its tasks. Six months might not be enough to investigate a perennial and complex problem. Further, as the timeframe given coincides with the expiry of the parliament’s term, the RCI will have no choice but to complete its investigation before the election is called. This will be difficult as the RCI will have no flexibility in determining the pace of its investigation. What if the RCI wants to extend its investigation due to lack of cooperation from witnesses? Or, what if the RCI needs more time to obtain more data? Holding the election before the RCI completes its mission will only reinforce the notion that the formation of the inquiry body is not more than a “political ploy”. Sabahans have been waiting for so long for actions to be taken.
Despite all the strengths and weaknesses of the RCI, Najib should be commended for taking such a bold and risky political move. Najib is basically putting his head on the chopping board as many of the UMNO leaders are implicated in the issuance of Malaysian ICs through dubious means. If MD Mutalib’s book on “Project IC” and Chong Eng Leong’s “Lest We Forget” are to be taken seriously, some big names are mentioned and it will a difficult task to ask them to respond to the RCI’s queries.
BN might be able to score some points by forming the RCI. The RCI has managed to boost BN’s image in the eyes of Sabahans who want the illegal immigrant problems solved if not sooner, later. The main issue that Najib has to deal with is, will the government have the political will to act based on the recommendations of the RCI? What assurance that the government can give that the RCI will not end up like other previous RCIs? What happens if the findings are not in favour of BN? The onus is on Najib to prove that the government is sincere and Sabahans are not taken for another ride on the illegal immigrants issue.
Monday, 30 July 2012
Impacts of Wilfred and Lajim's withdrawal from BN
*I attended the events organised by Wilfred Bumburing and Lajim Ukin yesterday. Here is my reflection on what will happen next in Sabah politics.
Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal did not come as a surprise to many including the Prime Minister. Both had indicated that they wanted to quit earlier but yesterday’s events – one in Tuaran and the other in Beaufort ended months of speculation about Wilfred and Lajim’s political future. The question that many people are asking now is: what would be the impact of the duo’s withdrawal on Sabah politics especially on BN? Before one can generalise the possible impacts of Wilfred and Lajim’s latest political move, one needs to examine their political background.
Wilfred gained prominence during the PBS era, holding the deputy chief minister’s post once and several other ministerial portfolios. He abandoned PBS to join PDS (Parti Demokratik Sabah) that was later changed to UPKO (United Pasok Momogun Kadazandusun Organisation). Wilfred was appointed as the deputy president of UPKO. Wilfred is perhaps best remembered for initiating a Kadazandusun “unity gathering” in Tuaran where several senior Kadazandusun leaders including Joseph Pairin Kitingan, Herman Luping and others pledged to work together for the betterment of the Kadazandusuns. Wilfred is also known for his outspokenness in parliament in voicing out the illegal immigrant problems in Sabah. Apart from that, Wilfred is not as influential as the Kitingan brothers.
Like Wilfred, Lajim also rose to power during the PBS era, he was once a deputy chief minister and a minister in the state cabinet. Lajim is best remembered for triggering the mass defection in PBS that led to the party’s downfall. At last night’s gathering, Lajim admitted that he was coaxed by Anwar Ibrahim to leave PBS and join UMNO for the “sake of the people”. Lajim is a highly popular leader in Beaufort and regarded as “Janang Gayuh” (Paramount Chief) of the Bisaya community. Apart from his amiable character, Lajim is also known for his generosity.
Both, it seems, have impressive political backgrounds. At last night’s gatherings, Lajim and Wilfred decided to withdraw from BN and pledged their support for PR (Pakatan Rakyat). In a separate function, Wilfred declared the formation of the Angkatan Perubahan Sabah (APS) as his new political platform. APS is not a new party but a loose coalition that is “friendly” to PR. Looking closely at APS’ manifesto, it does not contain anything new to the present struggle of the local-based BN and opposition parties. APS pledged to restore the ideal of Malaysia as constructed by the country’s founding fathers. APS also pledged to uphold Sabah’s sovereignty which it claimed as has been eroded by the influx of illegal immigrants into Sabah. Unlike STAR Sabah’s manifesto, APS does not have policy prescriptions to address the Sabah woes. In Beaufort, the same Sabah agenda rhetoric was given by Lajim Ukin. Lajim’s “tukar” slogan is akin to STAR Sabah’s “ini kali lah” tagline. Calling his new political platform Pakatan Perubahan Sabah (PPS), Lajim desired to free Sabah from economically dominant leaders and to bring more developments to his area. Lajim did not mention any specific names when attacking BN but it was obvious that he directed his tirade to Chief Minister Musa Aman.
The gatherings last night attracted a strong crowd. It was estimated that 2000-3000 people attended Wilfred’s gathering in Tuaran. Lajim attracted slightly more around 3000-4000 people.
So, what is in store for Sabah following Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal? For sure, it remains to be seen whether one would see spillover effects as a result of their exit. One cannot discount the fact that both are influencial leaders in their own areas. However, whether they can cause ripple effects outside their territories is yet to be seen. Unlike Pairin and Jeffrey, Wilfred is considered as a “rookie” among the Kadazandusuns. He might be able to score some points for his fearlessness in bringing the “Project IC” issue to parliament but there are many other leaders who had started exposing the scandal earlier than him. Wilfred’s “Borneo Agenda” also bears a strong resemblance to Jeffrey’s “Tambunan Declaration” that seeks to restore Sabah’s rights and autonomy. The same thing could also be said of PPS’ manifesto. Many of the points touching on the distribution of oil and gas royalty, the strengthening of the 20 Point Agreement and the restoration of Sabah rights and autonomy are covered by STAR and SAPP earlier.
In the final analysis, the impacts of Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal will be minimal, as for now. First, on the policy point of view, both failed to offer meaningful policy prescriptions to address the Sabah issues. This is important as many Sabahans now -- especially the young and educated – support leaders who can provide alternative views in addressing issues of public interests. Second, Wilfred and Lajim do not have influence outside their own territories. For the ordinary Sabahans, Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal is nothing more than an attempt by both to regain their lost influence. Third, Wilfred is not a strong and influential Kadazandusun leader. His base support appears to be only in Tamparuli and Tuaran proper. No doubt that Lajim is a strong Bisaya leader but he is not particularly influential in other Muslim areas.
Anwar is banking on Wilfred and Lajim’s influence in the Kadazandusun and Muslim areas. He knows that Jeffrey is still a popular Kadazadusun leader apart from Pairin. But whether or not his plan to gain influence in the Kadazandusun areas through Wilfred will work depend on many factors. Do not forget many of the Kadazandusuns regard Anwar as the mastermind behind PBS’ fall in 1994. They also do not trust him after he refused to wholly support Jeffrey’s Tambunan Declaration. Lajim’s revelation last night that he was coaxed by Anwar to leave PBS and join UMNO might backfire on him. His opponents might use Lajim’s famous 1994 maneuvre to describe him as opportunist leader.
Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal did not come as a surprise to many including the Prime Minister. Both had indicated that they wanted to quit earlier but yesterday’s events – one in Tuaran and the other in Beaufort ended months of speculation about Wilfred and Lajim’s political future. The question that many people are asking now is: what would be the impact of the duo’s withdrawal on Sabah politics especially on BN? Before one can generalise the possible impacts of Wilfred and Lajim’s latest political move, one needs to examine their political background.
Wilfred gained prominence during the PBS era, holding the deputy chief minister’s post once and several other ministerial portfolios. He abandoned PBS to join PDS (Parti Demokratik Sabah) that was later changed to UPKO (United Pasok Momogun Kadazandusun Organisation). Wilfred was appointed as the deputy president of UPKO. Wilfred is perhaps best remembered for initiating a Kadazandusun “unity gathering” in Tuaran where several senior Kadazandusun leaders including Joseph Pairin Kitingan, Herman Luping and others pledged to work together for the betterment of the Kadazandusuns. Wilfred is also known for his outspokenness in parliament in voicing out the illegal immigrant problems in Sabah. Apart from that, Wilfred is not as influential as the Kitingan brothers.
Like Wilfred, Lajim also rose to power during the PBS era, he was once a deputy chief minister and a minister in the state cabinet. Lajim is best remembered for triggering the mass defection in PBS that led to the party’s downfall. At last night’s gathering, Lajim admitted that he was coaxed by Anwar Ibrahim to leave PBS and join UMNO for the “sake of the people”. Lajim is a highly popular leader in Beaufort and regarded as “Janang Gayuh” (Paramount Chief) of the Bisaya community. Apart from his amiable character, Lajim is also known for his generosity.
Both, it seems, have impressive political backgrounds. At last night’s gatherings, Lajim and Wilfred decided to withdraw from BN and pledged their support for PR (Pakatan Rakyat). In a separate function, Wilfred declared the formation of the Angkatan Perubahan Sabah (APS) as his new political platform. APS is not a new party but a loose coalition that is “friendly” to PR. Looking closely at APS’ manifesto, it does not contain anything new to the present struggle of the local-based BN and opposition parties. APS pledged to restore the ideal of Malaysia as constructed by the country’s founding fathers. APS also pledged to uphold Sabah’s sovereignty which it claimed as has been eroded by the influx of illegal immigrants into Sabah. Unlike STAR Sabah’s manifesto, APS does not have policy prescriptions to address the Sabah woes. In Beaufort, the same Sabah agenda rhetoric was given by Lajim Ukin. Lajim’s “tukar” slogan is akin to STAR Sabah’s “ini kali lah” tagline. Calling his new political platform Pakatan Perubahan Sabah (PPS), Lajim desired to free Sabah from economically dominant leaders and to bring more developments to his area. Lajim did not mention any specific names when attacking BN but it was obvious that he directed his tirade to Chief Minister Musa Aman.
The gatherings last night attracted a strong crowd. It was estimated that 2000-3000 people attended Wilfred’s gathering in Tuaran. Lajim attracted slightly more around 3000-4000 people.
So, what is in store for Sabah following Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal? For sure, it remains to be seen whether one would see spillover effects as a result of their exit. One cannot discount the fact that both are influencial leaders in their own areas. However, whether they can cause ripple effects outside their territories is yet to be seen. Unlike Pairin and Jeffrey, Wilfred is considered as a “rookie” among the Kadazandusuns. He might be able to score some points for his fearlessness in bringing the “Project IC” issue to parliament but there are many other leaders who had started exposing the scandal earlier than him. Wilfred’s “Borneo Agenda” also bears a strong resemblance to Jeffrey’s “Tambunan Declaration” that seeks to restore Sabah’s rights and autonomy. The same thing could also be said of PPS’ manifesto. Many of the points touching on the distribution of oil and gas royalty, the strengthening of the 20 Point Agreement and the restoration of Sabah rights and autonomy are covered by STAR and SAPP earlier.
In the final analysis, the impacts of Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal will be minimal, as for now. First, on the policy point of view, both failed to offer meaningful policy prescriptions to address the Sabah issues. This is important as many Sabahans now -- especially the young and educated – support leaders who can provide alternative views in addressing issues of public interests. Second, Wilfred and Lajim do not have influence outside their own territories. For the ordinary Sabahans, Wilfred and Lajim’s withdrawal is nothing more than an attempt by both to regain their lost influence. Third, Wilfred is not a strong and influential Kadazandusun leader. His base support appears to be only in Tamparuli and Tuaran proper. No doubt that Lajim is a strong Bisaya leader but he is not particularly influential in other Muslim areas.
Anwar is banking on Wilfred and Lajim’s influence in the Kadazandusun and Muslim areas. He knows that Jeffrey is still a popular Kadazadusun leader apart from Pairin. But whether or not his plan to gain influence in the Kadazandusun areas through Wilfred will work depend on many factors. Do not forget many of the Kadazandusuns regard Anwar as the mastermind behind PBS’ fall in 1994. They also do not trust him after he refused to wholly support Jeffrey’s Tambunan Declaration. Lajim’s revelation last night that he was coaxed by Anwar to leave PBS and join UMNO might backfire on him. His opponents might use Lajim’s famous 1994 maneuvre to describe him as opportunist leader.
Saturday, 12 May 2012
DESAH debate introduces a new political culture in Sabah
The recent debate organised by a newly formed NGO DESAH (Democracy Sabah) has opened a new chapter in Sabah politics. The debate which saw DAP’s Dr Edwin Bosi squaring off with Dr Jeffrey Kitingan of STAR centred around the issue of which alternative party is the best for Sabah. Dr Jeffrey started his opening statement by promoting STAR’s struggles for Sabah. As usual, he took a jab at the Federal Government for taking away Sabah’s rights and autonomy. Dr Jeffrey also talked specifically of STAR’s plan for Sabah. Dr Edwin focused his points on DAP’s objectives and the sacrifices made by its leaders. Interestingly, both avoided criticising each other. They were also not hostile and were able to maintain decorum throughout the debate.
In the second round in which both were given the chance to ask questions to each other, Dr Jeffrey once again asked DAP’s commitment in preserving the rights and autonomy of Sabah. Dr Edwin did not disappoint Dr Jeffrey as many of the questions posed to the latter were straighforward and less controversial. Dr Edwin refused to ask any questions to Dr Jeffrey showing once more that he did not want to go at loggerheads with the popular maverick politician. He said he would prefer letting the audience to ask questions later on the DAP.
The most interesting part of the debate was during the questions and answers session. Many of the questions were directed to Dr Edwin from mainly STAR’s supporters. Some of the questions were targetted at DAP and its commitment to preserve the rights of Sabahans under Malaysia. Dr Edwin answered many of the questions posted to him calmly. He refused to answer some and deliberately ignored those focusing on his loyalty as a Sabahan who supports a Semenanjung-based party. Many of the participants of the debate were in their 40s, 50s, and late 60s. The audience behaved extremely well. There were no untoward incidences.
What does this debate tell about Sabah politics in the future? I can see several things. DESAH’s idea of one-to-one fight is well received by some of the people. The voters are considered at the disadvantage as their leaders of choice are not selected to become candidates. Aspiring candidates are normally chosen by party leaders and not by the voters. This is prevalent in the ruling party Barisan Nasional (BN). Due to this, voters ended up being represented by leaders who are not just incompetent but are unable to voice out their constituents’ grievances effectively. DESAH mooted the debate idea to ensure that the voters can see for themselves whom among the aspiring candidates are most suitable to represent the voters in the parliament. Second, there is growing interest among Sabahans about the importance of a debate. Debate is not part of the Sabah political culture. No debates have ever been conducted in the modern Sabah political history. Politicians go to the pulpit without having their ideas challenged by their opponents or by their voters. The DESAH debate has brought about a new thinking and a new culture in Sabah politics. The willingness of DAP and STAR to participate in the debate shows that they are supportive of a debate among political leaders. Third, the number of participants at the debate is really surprising. Initially, the organiser was expecting around 100-150 people to attend. But the crowd at the inaugural DESAH debate was somewhere between 300-400 people! Some did not mind to stand up for two hours! This is really something! The presence of young, 30- and 40-something participants shows that there is growing interest in political activism in this age group.
The Daily Express ran a story about the debate the next day (11 May 2012) focusing on the issues brought by each of the debater. The Borneo Post was less sympathetic saying that the debate was not a debate per se but a public forum as questions were invited from the audience. There may be different perceptions about the debate but the fact remains that elected politicians can no longer sit comfortably and doing nothing. True, there are politicians who refuse to go to the limelight, preferring to act more than to talk. But the whole idea of a debate is not to talk alone; it is about providing the platform for elected leaders to propose, defend, and talk about issues affecting the voters. Voters now want to know how good their leaders are at articulating issues of public interests and what they are going to do to address them. Politicians who say that debates are a waste of time have missed the point and are only making excuses so that they can escape from public scrutiny.
Monday, 16 April 2012
Rakyat are the REAL BOSS
I refer to a recent news report on Free Malaysia Today (March 7, 2012) quoting YB James Masing saying that the rakyat are not the “boss” (loosely meant master) but the elected representatives. This article explains why YB Masing is WRONG. YB Masing must understand that Malaysia practices parliamentary democracy. It means that the rakyat elect their leaders to represent them in parliament. As opposed to direct democracy, representative democracy gives the opportunity to the rakyat to voice their problems in parliament through their representative or wakil rakyat. YB Masing’s claim that the rakyat are the boss before and not after the election is also seriously flawed and shows his lack of understanding of how our political system works. The rakyat are the boss before and even after the election. YB Masing is an elected representative chosen by the rakyat who are his boss. Just because he is a YB (read YANG BERKHIDMAT) and holds a ministerial position in the state cabinet does not mean that the rakyat are subservient to him. Respect to the YB and being subservient to him are too different matters. Respect is earned and no rakyat should be subservient to their YB as they are not slaves. If YB Masing wants the rakyat to respect him, he must first respect the rakyat who are his boss.
YB Masing must realise that his fate as a YB rests in the hand of the rakyat. He is no boss to anyone except to the rakyat who elected him. Another reason why the rakyat are the boss is because YB Masing is accountable to them. He is answerable to the rakyat whose votes give YB Masing the power to safeguard the interest of the rakyat. Without the rakyat, YB Masing is powerless. The rakyat’s interests should come first and not YB Masing’s. He should serve the rakyat, fulfill their needs, understand and solve their problems. Therefore, the rakyat are the boss and not YB Masing.
The problem with YB Masing including some YBs from both sides of the political divide is that, they are still caught in the feudal mentality of the past. Leaders with such a mentality are an impediment to the “People First, Performance Now” slogan championed by Prime Minister Najib Razak. The transformation agenda that the government is now promoting is doomed to fail if the rakyat are treated as slaves and not as equal partners in transforming the country. The rakyat must not be afraid of their YBs. Yes, they must respect them but they must not be subservient. The rakyat must realise that their YBs are their servants as the main role of the YBs is to serve the interest of the rakyat. It is time for the rakyat to rise and to show who the REAL BOSS are.
YB Masing must realise that his fate as a YB rests in the hand of the rakyat. He is no boss to anyone except to the rakyat who elected him. Another reason why the rakyat are the boss is because YB Masing is accountable to them. He is answerable to the rakyat whose votes give YB Masing the power to safeguard the interest of the rakyat. Without the rakyat, YB Masing is powerless. The rakyat’s interests should come first and not YB Masing’s. He should serve the rakyat, fulfill their needs, understand and solve their problems. Therefore, the rakyat are the boss and not YB Masing.
The problem with YB Masing including some YBs from both sides of the political divide is that, they are still caught in the feudal mentality of the past. Leaders with such a mentality are an impediment to the “People First, Performance Now” slogan championed by Prime Minister Najib Razak. The transformation agenda that the government is now promoting is doomed to fail if the rakyat are treated as slaves and not as equal partners in transforming the country. The rakyat must not be afraid of their YBs. Yes, they must respect them but they must not be subservient. The rakyat must realise that their YBs are their servants as the main role of the YBs is to serve the interest of the rakyat. It is time for the rakyat to rise and to show who the REAL BOSS are.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)