MA63, “Equal Partnership” and the Future of the Malaysian Federation

Arnold Puyok

MA63 should not be seen from the Sabah and Sarawak ‘angle’ alone but from the perspective of the Malaysian federalism. Only when MA63 is seen in its totality that will we be able to effectively implement its provisions.

People in Peninsular Malaysia think that MA63 is about fighting for the rights of Sabah and Sarawak alone when in fact it is about strengthening the spirit of the Malaysian federalism.

MA63 is the bedrock of the Malaysian federalism. It lays the foundation for the Federal Constitution. When we strengthen Sabah’s and Sarawak’s position, we uphold the ideals of MA63 and the aspirations of our founding fathers.  

Our founding fathers did not define “equal partnership” clearly nor was it extensively discussed in the committees tasked to propose the constitutional safeguards for Sabah and Sarawak. Many have interpreted equal partnership based on Article 1 of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 in which the 11 states in the then Malaya are seen as representing one component and the other two components being Sabah and Sarawak.

In 1976, Sabah’s and Sarawak’s status is said to be relegated or downgraded to mere “states” like the other “ordinary” states in Peninsular Malaysia. However, despite the amendment, Sabah’s and Sarawak’s “special position” in the Federal Constitution remained intact. A former Sarawakian MP Edmund Langgu Saga wrote that the amendment was done for the purpose of nation-building (“The ‘1976 amendment’ is an inclusive nation-building effort”, https://www.malaysiakini.com/letters/360760).

Amending Article 1 (2) without specifying equal partnership and how it will affect the country’s federal structure will bring us to the path of uncertainty further down the road.

So, where do we go from here?

First, the provisions of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 must be effectively implemented particularly the recommendations of the Inter-Governmental Committee Report. But before this can be done, the state and federal governments must identify which jurisdictions must be returned to the state or remained under federal control.

Second, any attempt to revisit the MA63 must be done with the aim of restructuring the Malaysia federalism in which the states are empowered to make decisions on their own according to their uniqueness and needs. There is ample evidence linking decentralisation with good governance and economic growth.

Third, the narrative of MA63 in the new Malaysia should be about strengthening the spirit of the Malaysian federalism, creating a sense of belonging to the nation, and increasing a sense of pride towards our nationhood as Malaysians.  

Govern Well and Prove the Critics Wrong

Arnold Puyok

Bersatu’s decision to set up a branch in Sabah has left some Warisan supporters and local-based parties wondering whether the state will be witnessing another episode of a Semenanjung-based party coming to divide and rule the state. Some people have already cautioned Warisan to buckle up lest it will be challenged by Bersatu.   

Should Warisan be concerned at all? What can it do to remain on a strong footing?

The Sarawak PH has already announced that it has accepted Bersatu to be part of the state PH coalition. The Sabah PH is expected to follow suit. And this is set to reconfigure the existing coalition. So, the next few months will be interesting to watch.  While it's important for Warisan to keep its political support intact, it’s even more important for the party to ensure that it has the vision and a plan to develop Sabah. If Warisan can convince the people that it has what it takes to govern effectively, it should not worry about Bersatu because ultimately, it’s the electorates who have the power to decide the best party to rule Sabah.   

Chief Minister and Warisan founder Shafie Apdal’s magnanimous response to Bersatu shows that he understands how the politics of federal-state relations work. It also indicates that he cannot afford to repeat his predecessors’ confrontational approach in dealing with the federal government particularly under Tun Mahathir.

So, there’s no turning back to Warisan. It has to accept the fact that Sabah politics is not the same as before. Sabah is no longer insulated by parochial politics and regional sentiments. It has become a more open society, thanks to the migration of people from Peninsular to Sabah and rampant inter-marriages.

As I have written in my previous article, Bersatu coming to Sabah is to fill the void left by UMNO. The Bersatu supporters in Sabah know that they can obtain the support of the Muslim Bumiputera people and to emerge as an alternative player to Warisan. Their strategy is to be as close as possible to the source of power in KL. But, as for now, Warisan has the advantage as it has five ministers at the federal level and it is the incumbent government.

However, the perception on the ground is that Warisan has so far failed to demonstrate its ability to govern well.

So, what can Warisan do?

First, GE14 was a close call and was not a victorious win for Warisan. Warisan came to power not based on the people’s overwhelming mandate. It came to power through an alliance with PH and UPKO. Thus, with such a “paltry” win, Warisan must do more in order to gain the people’s support. At the moment, the people are waiting – they want to see a vision, a direction and a short-term and long-term economic blueprint for Sabah’s development. They want the government to talk more about new policies and new ideas to propel Sabah to greater heights.

Second, Warisan must strengthen itself internally by sharpening its policy focus and outlook. It has to reinforce its machinery at the grassroots level by roping in individuals with qualifications and experience in administration.

Warisan should not worry about Bersatu going into the Muslim-Bumiputera areas to break its dominance because it can capitalise on its multiracial outlook to get the support of Sabahans from various ethnic backgrounds. But, if Warisan says that it is multiracial, it has to prove that Sabah's ethnic groups are represented well in the administration at the local and state levels.

Third, Warisan must take heed of what the PH-led government has done at the federal level. It is not a "perfect" government but at least under the leadership of Tun Mahathir Mohamad, the government is trying its best to fix the problems facing the country through the establishment of the Council of Eminent Persons and recently the Economic Council. There were also some very promising initiatives announced by the government when Tun Mahathir presented the 11^th Malaysian Plan Midterm Review.

Overall, the people are still waiting for the Warisan-led government’s “grand vision” for Sabah:  where will this government take Sabah to in the next five, ten or 20 years?

If Warisan can prove that it can deliver the public goods effectively, that it has the right people to execute the right policies for Sabah, and that it has the grand vision to transform Sabah into a progressive and developed state, it should not worry about Bersatu and the threats posed by its opponents.

Is Bersatu’s entry into Sabah inevitable?

Arnold Puyok

Prime Minister and Bersatu Chairman Tun Mahathir Mohamad seems to give a signal to Warisan that Bersatu’s plan to spread its wing to Sabah is Bersatu’s prerogative and not Warisan’s.

So, is Bersatu’s entry into Sabah inevitable? Can Warisan convince Bersatu to stay away from Sabah?

Let’s address the first question and put it in the wider context of national politics. Sabah is heading for a change and this is evident since 2008. National-based parties have slowly gained popularity in Sabah. A growing number of Sabahans think that national-based parties are capable of championing state interests as well. They believe that Sabah issues can be brought straight to the attention of the federal lawmakers in parliament.

And if the results of the last three general elections (including GE14) are anything to go by, they show that the national-based parties are more popular than the local-based parties. In GE14, local-based parties like PHRS, PPRS, PKS and PCS contested but lost.

The so-called Gabungan Sabah only garnered five per cent of the popular votes in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera areas, non-Malay Muslim Bumiputera (17 per cent), Chinese (four per cent) and mixed (six per cent) (Table 1).

STAR Sabah performed slightly better, winning one parliamentary seat in Keningau and one state seat in Bingkor. But like the rest, it was defeated in other areas.

The reasons for the dismal performance of the local-based parties will be the subject of another discussion. But generally, Sabahans were looking for the alternative parties and leaders to represent them. And the claim by the local-based parties that only they can best represent the interests of Sabahans does not hold water anymore. STAR Sabah’s marginal win in Keningau and Bingkor was attributed to a multi-cornered contest, involving strong candidates from Warisan, BN and PH.     

PKR and DAP managed to improve their electoral performance this time, winning eight and six seats respectively at the state and parliamentary levels.

So, given the electoral success of PKR and DAP, there are no reasons why Bersatu would not want to join the fray and to compete particularly in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera constituencies.

Observers have argued that the direct involvement of national-based parties in Sabah was precipitated with UMNO’s entry in 1991. This is widely regarded as a form of federal intervention in local politics. The presence of UMNO, MCA, PKR and DAP has broken the regional barrier that has insulated Sabah politics for so long. This “nationalisation of local politics” is set to change the course of Sabah politics in years to come.

Now, let’s move on to the second question.

In GE14, BN and the PH-Warisan alliance were equally popular in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera constituencies (Table 1). Warisan might be successful in ending UMNO’s dominance in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera areas. However, there are many UMNO’s loyal supporters who remain undecided on what to do next. Those who have left UMNO are eyeing for a new platform to make a comeback. This is where Bersatu could play a role -- to fill the void left by UMNO in the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera areas. 

So, based on this assessment, it would be highly likely that Bersatu would spread its wing to Sabah. If this happens, it would put Warisan in a dilemma. Warisan is convinced that it could gain the support of Sabahans based on its "multiracial" outlook, but the Malay-Muslim Bumiputera communities in Sabah may be more attracted to Bersatu that aspires to emerge as the alternative party to serve their interest.

Table 1 Popular Votes Won by Parties According to Constituency Type at State Level

Party/ Coalition	Popular Vote According to Constituency Type (%)
	Malay-Muslim Bumiputera	Non-Malay Muslim Bumiputera (KDM)	Chinese	Mixed
BN	45.95	45.70	19.86	29.57
Pakatan Harapan-Warisan Alliance	46.30	32.55	74.84	63.43
Gabungan Sabah	4.58	17.10	4.11	5.73
Other	3.17	4.65	1.20	1.28

Source: calculated from the Election Commission (EC) and “The Star Online GE14” (https://election.thestar.com.my/).

Shafie’s year-end rated: The good, the bad... and the ‘we’ll see’

Julia Chan

KOTA KINABALU, Dec 26 ― To say Sabah Chief Minister Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal did not have an easy ride to the top is an understatement.

The Semporna native galvanised a fractious Opposition, broke down a Barisan Nasional stronghold despite being thrown into lock-up, and toppled his powerful political nemesis in incongruous fashion, so no one can say he did not have to battle to get to the top. 

However, once in the chief minister’s post he has had to tackle some thorny issues dealing with security, conservation, socio economic development and race, all while living up to high expectations.

Here are what lawmakers from both sides of the political divide, as well as political observers and man on the street, think about his performance:

GOOD

1. Logging ban

Out to clean up allegations of timber monopolies and illegal logging, Shafie’s controversial and drastic decision to ban the export of logs and subsequent review all timber concessionaires was lauded by most people.

“Stopping illegal logging is probably the best thing he’s done so far. It’s two-prong, to stop unrelentless logging and also keep the money within the state and provide jobs. If he can industrialise the timber downstream industry, that would change the state economy,” said Kota Kinabalu MP Chan Foong Hin.

2. Abolishing communal titles

The former administration mooted communal titles for the purpose of preventing individuals from selling their land to “outsiders”, an unpopular decision due to the lack of individual rights it granted its holder, and when Shafie decided to abolish it, it was generally well received.

Despite the pros of the communal title, many preferred the uncomplicated nature of a conventional land title.

3. People skills

Shafie has called himself a chief minister for all Sabahans, across all the races, and has made a point of visiting communities in all regions in the State, and even won the hearts of the Christian community by singing a Christmas carol during a Christmas bazaar at the town ground.

“Everywhere Shafie goes, he is well received ― in the city, in the interior he is going down to the ground and appealing to most Sabahans. He definitely is riding high on popularity, people welcome him everywhere, and his soft spokenness and good manners also earn him a lot of supporters both in urban and rural areas,” said Chan.

BAD

1. Coal mining

When Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad first suggested accessing Sabah’s coal reserves, Sabahans were up in arms, offended that Sabah’s precious natural resources be exploited by “federal powers”. Shafie later said that they would do a feasibility study first, but at the same time alluded that the government might need to take a controversial route for the greater good of the people.

“It goes against their so-called pledge to protect the environment. The Maliau Basin has been protected by the previous governments for the last 30 years. It was tempting but its environment implications ― and the global backlash ― stopped them, and for good reason,” said Kiulu assemblyman Datuk Joniston Bangkuai.

“In an era where we are moving into sustainable methods of harnessing power, its archaic to move back to coal. There is argument for clean coal technology but the mining of coal is almost certain to affect the sensitive ecology. It might bring benefits but it might be ‘political suicide’ in my view.”

 2. Datukship titles

The Sabah governor’s birthday this year came four months after the new administration and saw the entire Sabah Cabinet among 65 people plus some MPs getting the title of Datuk, something that did not sit well with many Sabahans, given how inexperienced some of the ministers were.

“He was rewarding his people too fast ― it’s nice that he’s trying to reward their contribution, but it is exactly the Umno culture people were rejecting. I think this was a lost opportunity for the new government to show they were ‘different’ and were not about reward for their people.

“There’s nothing technically wrong with it, but it was thoroughly unnecessary and gives the wrong impression,” said one prominent lawyer in Sabah.

3. The extension of the governor’s term

The most recent controversy to hit Shafie was the lifting of the two-term limit for the governor as head of state.

Assemblymen questioned the timing ― during a special sitting two weeks ahead of the current Head of State Tun Juhar Mahiruddin’s term expiry, and his involvement in the appointing of two chief ministers after the May 9 polls.

Despite protests from several state assemblymen, the amendment was passed in the state assembly last week with 45 in favour of the change, 15 objecting, and five absent from voting.

 “This move leaves a bad impression for the public and does not bode well for Warisan who has promised government reforms,” said political analyst Arnold Puyok.

“Of course they argued that this was in line with MA63 but rather than focusing on the TYT term, there are more pertinent issues to focus on, such as uplifting the English language as official language in Sabah or seeking the mandate from the state assembly to strengthen Sabah’s position in the federation.”

MA63 refers to the Malaysia Agreement 1963 and TYT is the Malay abbreviation for Tuan Yang Terutama, or Your Excellency in English.

INCONCLUSIVE

1. Dual portfolio

After a contentious route to the chief minister office, Shafie appointed himself as state finance minister. Like Dr Mahathir’s decision to also take on the education portfolio, the decision was criticised but unlike the latter, Shafie chose to retain both portfolios, saying that he would not hold the finance portfolio longer than necessary to sort out the state’s economic “mess”.

“It’s unfortunate that he did not take the more honourable route. But to be fair, Shafie’s Parti Warisan Sabah did not make any promise to not hold dual portfolios, like Pakatan Harapan and  Shafie also has an degree in Economics, which makes him the most qualified for the post,” said a state assemblyman in the Warisan-led government who declined to be named.

“If Shafie is really serious about reforming governance in Sabah, he shouldn’t take a dual ministerial role. The perception now is that, just like his predecessor, Shafie wants to have a total control over how financial resources are being distributed. But his decision not to let state GLCs to be run by elected politicians is laudable,” said Arnold Puyok.

2. Stance on Kaiduan dam and Tanjung Aru Eco Development (TAED)

“Shafie’s party leaders have vocally opposed the two controversial projects pre-GE14, saying that the BN government did not consider the people involved, and promised to scrap the project. But the lack of clear stance now gives the impression that current state government was only pretending to side with the people for votes, and are not doing anything about it now,” said Bangkuai.

“Shafie has to explain why Kaiduan and the TAED are important in terms if their benefits. he has to convince the people as well that the projects will be developed with great care to ensure that the environmental impacts are minimal,” said Puyok.

There has yet to be a decision on either projects.

3. Reversal on pump boat ban

Championing the people’s livelihood, Shafie lifted the ban on pump boats and reintroduced barter trading with southern Philippines which were enforced at the advice of security authorities in the interest of preventing undesirable elements from entering Sabah.

Cross border criminals, including kidnap-for-ransom groups and smugglers, tend to favour pump boats for their speed and ability to move quickly in waters, even when shallow.

 “This could be good for some fishermen and coastal businesses whose livelihood has been affected, but with security at stake, I think the risk is too high. As it is, there are some intrusions and kidnapping happening where the culprits were using pump boats,” said Bangkuai.

4. The case for state rights, and increased oil royalty

Arguably the biggest political question at stake is whether Shafie can compel the federal government to give in to Sabah’s demands to reinstate the state’s right as enshrined in the MA63 as well as fulfill their pledge to increase the oil royalty from 5 to 20 per cent.

“Shafie’s promise of fighting for the oil royalty and MA63 are nothing new. It has been in the agenda of successive governments since PBS. In fact Shafie, in reply to my question at the state assembly, said he was confident the request for 20 per cent oil royalty would be finalised before end of the year. It's already December and there is no concrete indication it could be met,” said Bangkuai.

“He should tackle the MA63 head-on and in a practical manner, unlike many of the so-called Sabah champions who are only interested in raising anti-federal sentiments,” said Puyok.

So how did Shafie score?

While Shafie’s first six months in office have been riddled with a mix of issues, political observers said he has the benefit of doubt from the people, but also carry a lot of expectations in the “new Malaysia.”

“People are expecting some things to happen quickly, like in peninsular Malaysia, but there is a seeming lack of direction when he takes too long to deliberate ― that is the appointing chairmans for boards and GLCs, Tanjung Aru project and even his stance on child marriage could have been a lot better,” said a political analyst who declined to be named.

The analyst said that the Warisan government must be seen to be on equal footing with the federal government, reminding them that several Warisan leaders hold prominent positions in the federal government as should have more authority and accountability.

“For instance, the MA63 and return of 40 per cent of revenue to the state. These things, although tedious in nature, should be delivered to some extent. There should be more evidence of equal partnership or else it is just like before ― an example of federal powers lording over Sabah again.

“I don’t think the public thinks he performed badly, but there is much to do and improve upon, and there has yet to be concrete signs of a “better” government,” he said.

Source: https://www.malaymail.com/s/1706276/shafies-year-end-rated-the-good-the-bad...-and-the-well-see

Pairin's Mixed Legacy

Sabah's former Chief Minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan has finally made the decision to leave politics for good. 

Pairin is synonymous with Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS), a multiracial party he founded in 1985. Pairin would be best remembered for winning the Tambunan by-election against the mighty Berjaya party and subsequently the 1985 and 1986 state elections - a period in Sabah politics marked by betrayals, mayhem in the capital city of Kota Kinabalu, and dramatic incidents in the Istana. Many would also remember Pairin for handing over power in a gentlemanly manner to UMNO in 1994 - an act that earned him respect from his comrades and foes alike. Pairin has personal qualities that very few politicians have: loyal, tactful and forgiving.

In delivering his farewell speech at the PBS 33rd party congress, Pairin took the opportunity to admonish United Pasok Momogun Kadazandusun Organisation (UPKO) for its act of  "betrayal" in the aftermath of the GE14.

There are reasons why Pairin was upset about UPKO. 

Pairin knew that multiracialism was the way forward for Sabah and democracy as an attractive ideology to sell to Sabah's diverse society. PBS was formed based on these core principles. Together with Joseph Kurup (PBRS President), Bernard Dompok (UPKO founding President) and others, he formed PBS in 1985. But PBS that led the Sabah Government from 1985-1994 was removed from power after a spate of resignations from party leaders to form PBRS, SAPP and PDS (later UPKO). To date only PBRS remains in Gabungan Bersatu Sabah with PBS.

Pairin could have retired in style if he pushed for reforms in PBS and chose not to contest in GE14. But changes in PBS were painfully slow, resulting in the party losing its appeal among the key ethnic groups in Sabah including the Kadazandusun. When he decided to contest in GE14 and lost to his younger brother Jeffrey in Tambunan, it only reaffirmed the fact that the Huguan Siou (Paramount Leader of the Kadazandusun) was gradually losing his popularity as political leader.

Now PBS is left with Dr Maximus Ongkili and a handful of Pairin's loyal supporters in the party. All eyes are on Dr Maximus on what he will do next to rejuvenate PBS. PBS can leverage on its decisive win in one Muslim Bumiputera and five Kadazandusun seats in GE14 to position itself as a formidable player in Sabah.

To remain relevant in Sabah's changing political landscape, here are the areas where Dr Maximus has to tackle head-on:

1. To improve the party's image and attract more new members. PBS has strong and very appealing core struggles but it has failed in convincing the young people to join the party. Dr Max's challenge is to make the party more attractive to young professionals and graduates. There are many young people who are attracted to PBS' progressive platform but are discouraged by the old guards' lukewarm attitude towards them. It is easier for PBS to lure the young people as it has a broader policy outlook and experience to represent the multiracial Sabah but the question is, is the party ready to allow fresh and young blood to be part of PBS' rejuvenation programme? If Warisan has Jo-Anna Rampas and Darell Leiking, and UPKO Ewon Benedict, Nelson Angang, Felix Saang, etc, who are the emerging young leaders in PBS? 

2. To increase the number of non- Kadazandusun members in the party. As it is now, PBS is heavily Kadazandusun even though it espouses multiracialism. No non-Kadazandusun or non-Christian has ever been elected president. And more non-Kadazandusun and Chinese members are abandoning PBS to join other parties. To make the party more attractive, it should improve its multiracial composition and more drastically, amend the constitution to allow the party's president to be rotated among the key ethnic groups in Sabah. 

3. PBS should talk more about economic issues ie how to create employment for young Sabahans, how to make Sabah an attractive place for investments, etc. This will not deviate PBS from its core regional struggles. PBS can make a lot of difference if it can relate the MA63, autonomy, Sabah's constitutional rights with people's daily needs. Dr Max should take on the Sabah issues not as an academician and but as a policymaker.

Source: https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2018/11/15/pairin-delivers-emotional-goodbye-speech/ fbclid=IwAR1MYublr1NbAWrVpB6KkYxdueX3CGCsjVLWhBYAg890l1E3kSJuPSdeKUY

Tourism Tax Fiasco: Good Policy Turns "Bad"

The recent spat between Minister of Tourism Nazri Aziz and his Sarawak counterpart Abdul Karim Hamzah is not about the Sarawak/Sabah government against the federal government or the people of East Malaysia against the people of Semenanjung as many people think it is. It is about the way Nazri responded to Karim who wanted the Tourism Tax to be deferred in Sarawak as “local concerns” must be taken into consideration before the tax is implemented. The same concern was raised by a senator from Sarawak, Zaiedi Suhaili, during a debate in the senate. As soon as Nazri fired his first salvo against Karim, calling him “samseng” (thug) and “setahun jagung” (greenhorn), all hell broke loose. Sabah and Sarawak leaders, joined by thousands of social media users, criticised Nazri for his remarks against Karim. Some went further by saying that the Tourism Tax is “illegal”, an attempt to undermine the Malaysian Agreement and to erode Sabah’s and Sarawak’s rights in the federation. But is this the case?

Tourism Tax falls under the federal government's jurisdiction after it was included as part of the items in the Federal List in 1994. The federal government has the legal right under the constitution to impose tax in the federation. Sabah, prior to the formation of Malaysia, gave up its right over taxation (except sales tax) in replacement for Special Grant as stipulated in Part Four of the Tenth Schedule of the Federal Constitution. Does the Tourism Tax undermine the Malaysian Agreement? Does it erode Sabah’s and Sarawak’s rights? Some in the legal fraternity don’t think so as there is a clear demarcation of power between the federal and state governments as stipulated in the Federal, State and Concurrent List. The onus is on Sabah and Sarawak to include tourism as part of their jurisdiction in the future through the country’s legal and constitutional process.

The next issue raised by many is, were Sabah and Sarawak properly consulted before the parliament debated the Tourism Tax Bill? If by consultation here we mean providing the avenue for Sabah and Sarawak leaders to give their opinions, there is a platform for them to do so through a debate in parliament. But according to Hansard record, only Darell Leiking, a member of parliament for Penampang in Sabah and Zaiedi Suhaili, a senator from Sarawak, took part in the debate. What could be the reason for the “absence” of Sabah and Sarawak lawmakers from such an important debate? Crucially, only Nazri and the Ministry of Tourism can explain whether Sabah and Sarawak tourism officials/stakeholders were involved in discussions at the departmental/ministerial/grassroots levels prior to the tabling of the Tourism Tax Bill.

It looks like the issue is not about the Tourism Tax per se but the importance of a clearly established and transparent line of communication between federal and state officials in the course of formulating and implementing a policy. By the way, given proper implementation and monitoring, the country will stand to benefit from the Tourism Tax (as explained at length in the Hansard). Knowing Nazri, many are not really surprised by his “legendary” outburst but being a senior minister or “anak jantan” as he likes to call himself, he should by now know that it is not just what you say that matters but how you say it.

Nation has lost a statesman

All he wanted to do was to spend more time with his family and retire gracefully from politics, but the call of duty obligated the late Tan Sri Adenan Satem to leave the comfort of his private life to helm one of Malaysia’s most geographically-challenging and culturally-diverse states. After taking over as Sarawak’s chief minister from “strongman” Tun Abdul Taib Mahmud (now the Yang di-Pertua Negeri) in early 2014, Adenan did not wait long to introduce a slew of people-oriented policies, such as abolishing tolls, lowering ferry fares, reducing electricity tariffs, recognising the UEC (Unified Examination Certificate) and defending Sarawak’s constitutional rights. 

He demonstrated to Sarawakians that he could deliver through his “53 principles and actions”. In less than two years in power, Adenan’s popularity soared and he enjoyed strong support from Sarawak’s multicultural and multireligious communities. He distinguished himself as a people-oriented leader, who was willing to take actions for their cause. He broke barriers by presenting himself as the people’s leader. Adenan could be seen everywhere, be it at a restaurant enjoying his favourite food, at an airport waiting for his flight, or at a pasar just like what the ordinary people do. And, he did this without the company of bodyguards or personal assistants. In short, Adenan could mingle with just anybody, irrespective of race, religion and social class. Having earned the respect and admiration of Sarawakians, Adenan went to the 2016 state polls with the ambitious agenda of winning big for ruling coalition Barisan Nasional (BN). 

Some, however, were pessimistic about Adenan’s chances given the people’s lackadaisical attitude towards BN. Others were not confident that the “Adenan factor” would be decisive enough to bring back the Chinese votes to BN. Despite the attempts by the opposition to undermine Adenan’s popularity, they admitted that he was a formidable force behind BN’s campaign strategy. A seasoned, witty and strategic politician, Adenan capitalised on the opposition’s weaknesses by addressing the issues they raised head on and by cleverly “seizing” their “Sarawak for Sarawakians” sloganeering. Adenan showed that his demands for autonomy were not simply rhetoric by presenting to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak the state’s demand for autonomy in 13 administrative areas. Adenan’s presidential style of campaigning worked like magic. The BN won 72 of the 82 seats contested. The PBB (Parti Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu), the largest party in Sarawak led by Adenan, made a clean sweep, winning all 40 seats it contested. He also proved his critics wrong by winning five seats formerly held by the opposition. The Adenan factor proved to be decisive in breaking DAP’s dominance in the Chinese-majority areas. 

It is not an understatement that BN won in Sarawak because the people trusted and had confidence in Adenan. Indeed, Adenan’s successor will have big shoes to fill. The immediate challenge will be to effectively implementing Adenan’s “53 principles and actions” and fulfilling his autonomy demands for Sarawak. Adenan will be remembered as one of the rare leaders who achieved so much in such a short time. He reminded us that those in power ought to do the right thing for the ordinary people. He will be remembered as the person who broke the barrier between the leader and the led. We will remember his chants of “oh... ha” and “you… you”, which were uttered not without a purpose: Adenan wanted to tell us that he is part of us and without us, he is nobody. For Malaysia, the country has lost a statesman, who despite his persistent demands for autonomy, still believed in the preservation of the federation. Adenan strove to maintain the integrity of the federation by reminding us that Sarawak (and Sabah) did not join Malaysia, they formed (together with Malaya) this beloved country of ours. 

Rest in peace, Tok Nan.

Arnold Puyok
Kuching, Sarawak.

Source: http://www.nst.com.my/news/2017/01/203925/nation-has-lost-statesman