KL should limit its role in Sabah, Sarawak
2013 marks 50 years since Sabah and Sarawak joined the federation, and two NGOS ‘fighting for the sovereignty” of the states want a “serious re-look” at the Malaysia Agreement.
Raymond Tombung, FMT
KOTA KINABALU: The fight for Sabah and Sarawak’s rights and autonomy moved up a notch with the sealing of a collaboration between two NGOs from the respective states.
Two NGOs, from Sabah and Sarawak, have called for a ‘serious re-look” at history and how the Malaysia Agreement came about.
The NGOs suggest that based on the original spirit of the Malaysia Agreement, the federal government should limit their roles to Defence, Foreign Affairs and the Economic Planning in the two “states”.
The NGOs – UK-based Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BOPIM) and the Sarawak Sovereignty Movement (SSM) – see 2013 as an opportune year for them to commence with the pursuit of this long-overdue objective especially since 2013 marks the 50th year of the Malaysia Agreement.
Earlier this week, on June 11, BOPIM and SSM signed a joint commitment in Kuching to “fight for the sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak.”
BOPIM president Daniel John Jambun in a joint-statement with SSM’s spokesman, Moshidi Abdul Rahman, said that the gist of the joint approach is for the revival of the two states’ sovereignty as were achieved on August 31, 1963 for Sabah, and on July 22, 1963 for Sarawak.
“At the same time we want to explore further the deeper nature of the relationship that both Sabah and Sarawak should have with Malaya after the restoration of the sovereignties of the Borneo states.
“One idea is that when it comes to Sabah and Sarawak, the Federal Government should confine itself to defence, foreign affairs and national economic planning.
“We need to seriously re-look at the whole history and arrangement of the Malaysian federation.
“Firstly, we are of the position that there has not been a proper referendum conducted in Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya prior to the formation of Malaysia,” the joint statement said.
Jambun further explained that the BOPIM-SSM stance is that because of the absence of a referendum, the federal government saw no compelling reason to fulfill the provisions of the Malaysia Agreement, and this had led to a lot of what is now seen as non-compliance.
“We must be aware of the fact that the Cobbold Commission was not a referendum. It was merely a survey and this clearly was an open British and Malayan breach and transgression of the United Nation’s Protocols on Decolonization,” he said.