BRITISH BREACHED THE AGREEMENT LEADING TO THEIR "OBLIGATION"

The British government "obligation" take its initial course after they breached both of this agreement in relation with the Sarawak government due to Japanese occupation in 1941.

AGREEMENT between HER MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT and CHARLES BROOKE, SECOND RAJAH OF SARAWAK

WHEREAS CHARLES BROOKE Esquire Rajah and lawful Ruler of the State of Sarawak, in the island of Borneo, has represented to Her Majesty's Government the desire of that State to be placed under the protection of Her Majesty the Queen under the conditions hereinafter mentioned; it is hereby agreed and declared as follows:-

Article 1.

            The State of Sarawak shall continue to be governed and administered by the said Rajah Brooke and his successors as an independent State under the protection of Great Britain but such protection shall confer no right on Her Majesty's Government to interfere with the internal administration of that State further than is herein provided.

Article 2.

            In case any question should hereafter arise respecting the right of succession to the present or any future Ruler of Sarawak, such question shall be referred to Her Majesty's Government for decision.

Article 3.

            The relations between the State of Sarawak and all foreign States including the States of Brunei and North Borneo shall be conducted by Her Majesty's Governemnt or in accordance with its directions; and if any difference should arise between the Government of Sarawak and that of any other State, the Government of Sarawak agrees to abide by the decision of Her Majesty's Government and to take all necessary measures to give effect thereto.

Article 4.

            Her Majesty's Government shall have the right to establish British Consular Officers in any part of the State of Sarawak who shall receive exequaturs in the name of the Government of Sarawak. They shall enjoy whatever privileges are usually granted to Consular Officers and shall be entitled to hoist the British flag over their residences and public offices.

Article 5.

            British subjects commerce and shipping shall enjoy the same rights privileges and advantages as the subjects commerce and shipping of the most favoured nation as well as any other rights, privileges and advantages which may be enjoyed by the subjects commerce and shipping of the State of Sarawak.

Article 6.

            No cession or other alienation of any part of the territory of the State of Sarawak shall be made by the Rajah or his successors to any foreign State or the subjects or citizens thereof, without the consent of Her Majesty's Government but this restriction shall not apply to ordinary grants or leases of lands or houses to private individuals for purposes of residence, agriculture, commerce, or other business.

            Given under my hand and seal this 14th day of June is the year Eighteen hundred and eighty-eight.

Seal.                                                                                                           (Signed) C. BROOKE, Rajah.

Seal.                                                                                                           (Signed) SALISBURY.

5 September 1888

AN AGREEMENT between HIS MAJESTY'S GOVERNMENT

and the RAJAH IN COUNCIL of the STATE OF SARAWAK

Whereas by an Agreement dated September 5th, 1888, between Her Majesty's Government and Charles Brooke, Esquire, Rajah and lawful Ruler of the State of Sarawak it was, inter alia, agreed that the State of Sarawak should continue to be administered by the said Rajah Brooke under the protection of Great Britian but that such protection should confer no right on Her Majesty's Government to interfere with the internal administration of the State further than was therein provided:

And Whereas it is the desire of His Majesty's Government and of the Rajah in Council of the State of Sarawak that further provision should be made regulating the relations between His Majesty's Government and the State of Sarawak:

Now, therefore, it is agreed between His Majesty's Government and His Highness the Rajah in Council of the State of Sarawak, as follow:-

1. This agreement is supplementary to the above-recited agreement of September 5th 1888, and the said agreement shall be read subject to the provisions of the agreement hereinafter appearing.
2. The State of Sarawak will receive and provide a suitable residence for a British Officer to be called the British Representative who shall be accredited to the Court of the Rajah, and whose advice must be asked and acted upon on all matters affecting the relations of the State of Sarawak with foreign states or the rights and status of foreign nationals and on all matters of defence.
3. The British Representative shall be appointed by His Majesty's Government.
4. The services of the British Representative shall be available for consultation and shall be entitled to offer his opinion on matters touching the general administration of the State. He shall have acess to such State documents and records as concern matters in respect of which his advice is sought under this Clause or under Clause 2 of this Agreement. He shall be entitled to attend meetings of the Supreme Council when such matters are discussed, but he shall not be entitled to a vote. He may attend all meetings of the Council Negri and he may address that Council if invited by the President to do so, but he shall not be entitled to vote therein. 
5. His Majesty's Government will at all times to the utmost of its power take whatever steps may be necessary to protect the territory of Sarawak from external hostile attacks.

In Witness Whereof the parties hereto have hereunder set their hands this twenty-second day of November 1941.

Signed by (T.S.W. THOMAS) His Excellency the Governor of the Straits Settlements and High Commissioner for the Malay States for and on behalf of His Majesty's Government in the presence of:-

G.R. DON FOX  

Signed by (C.V. BROOKE) His Highness the Rajah of Sarawak in the presence of:-

G.T. MacBRYAN

*New information will be continue to be added in this article at a regular basis as per requirement.

Author: Zulfaqar bin Sa'adi. Information Chief of State Reform Party (STAR).

CHAPTER XI OF THE UNITED NATIONS (ARTICLES 74)

"...As mentioned previously, I was asked to “ascertain, prior to the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia, the wishes of the people of Sabah (North Borneo) and Sarawak within the context of General Assembly resolution 1541 (XV), Principle IX of the Annex, by a fresh approach, which in the opinion of the Secretary-General is necessary to ensure complete compliance with the principle of self-determination within the requirements embodied in Principle IX.” 

(U Thant, Secretary-General of the United Nations from 1961 to 1971)

EQUAL PARTNERSHIP IN THE FEDERATION OF MALAYSIA

Aside from reading and understanding the Principles I-XII of the United Nations Resolution 1541, the preamble of the UN Resolution 1541 must be take into account where it state that "Considering the objectives set forth in Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations,". There are 2 Articles (73-74) which laid out the objectives which was being considered for the UN Resolution 1541. Here we seek to understand Article 74 in Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations.

Article 74

Members of the United Nations also agree that their policy in respect of the territories to which this Chapter applies, no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas, must be based on the general principle of good-neighbourliness, due account being taken of the interests and well-being of the rest of the world, in social, economic, and commercial matters.

Article 74 of the Chapter XI of the United Nations in regards to the formation of the Federation of Malaysia on 16th September 1963, state that the Members of the United Nations which is the Federation of Malaya and the British at that particular time, agree that the territories of Sabah and Sarawak which applies with the Chapter is no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas. 

Down the historical line, the metropolitan areas of Sabah and Sarawak is the British government which on 16th September 1963, transferred their Trusteeship of the Trust Territories of Sabah and Sarawak to the new metropolitan areas of the Federation of Malaya through the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. The agreement was signed on 9th July 1963 in London and later commemorated on 16th September 1963. 

The integration of the non-self-governing territories of Sabah and Sarawak with the independent state of the Federation of Malaya through the formation of the new Federation of Malaysia is on the equal basis and equal partnership, as the territories of Sabah and Sarawak is no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas, the Federation of Malaya. 

Sabah and Sarawak is no less than the whole Federation of Malaya!

So, why did the Federation of Malaya now masquerading as the Federation of Malaysia treated Sabah and Sarawak as less and in par with a mere states of Malaya such as Perlis, Perak, Pahang, Malacca etc.? 

Any attempts to put Sabah and Sarawak any less than the metropolitan areas, the Federation of Malaya is a breached of the international standards and principles. For example, amendments of the Article 1 of the federal constitution in 1976 which putting Sabah and Sarawak to be less than the whole Federation of Malaya is illegal internationally.

The relationship between the Federation of Malaya with Sabah and Sarawak must be based on the general principle of good-neighbourliness. Again, as a neighbour, we are equal partner. There are no neighbour which is not equal. 

As a good neighbour, any interest and well-being of the people in social, economic and commercial matters must be done in a two-way basis between the Federation of Malaya with the Government of Sabah and Sarawak respectively. This is what a good neighbours do. 

Fast forward to 2015, is the formation of the Federation of Malaysia based on the general principle of good-neighbourliness?

Judge for yourself.

*New information will be continue to be added in this article at a regular basis as per requirement.

Author: Zulfaqar bin Sa'adi. Information Chief of State Reform Party (STAR).

CHAPTER XI: DECLARATION REGARDING NON-SELF-GOVERNING TERRITORIES

Thant, known honorifically as U Thant was a Burmese diplomat and the third Secretary-General of the United Nations from 1961 to 1971; the first non-European to hold the position.

UNITED NATIONS MALAYSIA MISSION REPORT

The Federation of Malaysia was formed on 16th September 1963, 2 days after the United Nations Malaysia mission report was published. 

According to the Report, the Federation of Malaysia was formed within the context of General Assembly resolution 1541 (XV), Principle IX of the Annex, by a fresh approach. Below is the selected text from the Report which clearly mentioned about how the principle of self-determination for North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak was being conducted during that time based on UN Resolution 1541;

Annex 3

United Nations Malaysia Mission Report, “Final Conclusions of the Secretary-General,” 14 September 1963

UNITED NATIONS MALAYSIA MISSION REPORT

Final Conclusions of the Secretary-General

"...There was no reference to a referendum or plebiscite in the request which was addressed to me. I was asked to ascertain the wishes of the people “within the context of General Assembly resolution 1541 (XV), Principle IX of the Annex, by a fresh approach” which in my opinion was necessary “to ensure complete compliance with the principle of self-determination within the requirements embodied in Principle IX,” taking into consideration certain questions relating to the recent elections..."

"...As mentioned previously, I was asked to “ascertain, prior to the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia, the wishes of the people of Sabah (North Borneo) and Sarawak within the context of General Assembly resolution 1541 (XV), Principle IX of the Annex, by a fresh approach, which in the opinion of the Secretary-General is necessary to ensure complete compliance with the principle of self-determination within the requirements embodied in Principle IX.”

Concerning the integration of a non-self-governing territory with an already independent state, Principle IX provides:

“Integration should have come about in the following circumstances:

(a) The integrating territory should have attained an advanced stage of self-government with free political institutions, so that its peoples would have the capacity to make a responsible choice through informed and democratic processes;


(b) The integration should be the result of the freely expressed -wishes of the territory’s peoples acting with full knowledge of the change in their status, their wishes having been expressed through informed and democratic processes, impartially conducted and based on universal adult suffrage. The United Nations could, when it deems it necessary, supervise these processes.”


FULL REPORT CLICK HERE


CHAPTER XI OF THE UNITED NATIONS (ARTICLES 73-74)

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1541 is a principles which should guide Mem­bers in determining whether or not an obligation exists to transmit the information called for under Article 73 e of the Charter of the United Nations.

Aside from reading and understanding the Principles I-XII of the Resolution 1541, the preamble of the UN Resolution 1541 must be take into account where it state that "Considering the objectives set forth in Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations,". There are 2 Articles (73-74) which laid out the objectives which was being considered for the UN Resolution 1541. The Articles is being attached at the end of this pieces.

Article 73 mention about "...Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government...". Thus, in case of the formation of the Federation of Malaysia, the Members of the United Nations here is the Federation of Malaya which assume the responsibilities for the administration of the new federation (Malaysia) which also engulfing the territories of Sabah and Sarawak which is yet to attained a full measure of self-government. 

Such responsibilities for the administration is actually a  sacred trust hold by the Federation of Malaya through the formation of the new federation (Malaysia) in 1963. One of the responsibilities of the Federation of Malaya through the formation of the Federation of Malaysia is to develop self-government and to assist Sabah and Sarawak in the progressive development of their free political institutions.

What interesting here is the free political institutions and the advancement of the self-government of Sabah and Sarawak must be pursue and develop through the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. This is one of the purpose of the formation of Malaysia! Did you know?

To develop a free political institutions in Sabah and Sarawak, the Federation of Malaya must respect the political advancement of the Sabahans and Sarawakians and ensure our just treatment, and our protection against abuses.

The million dollar hidden question today is, how are Sabahans and Sarawakians can develop a free political institutions if our political institutions is not free from the shackles of Malaya?

As can be seen today, instead of respecting the free political advancement of the Borneo states, the Federation of Malaya without due respect even contested and grabbed the political seats and powers in Sabah and Sarawak. This is happening with the existance of the Malaya-based political parties in Borneo such as UMNO Baru, MCA, DAP, PKR, PAS, Amanah etc. Is this how the Federation of Malaya held their sacred trust towards Sabah and Sarawak by jeopardizing the free political institutions of the Borneo states?

Is this how the Federation of Malaya as a Trustee, develop and help the advancement of the free political institutions of the Borneo states as state in the UN Charter?

In conclusion, the Federation of Malaya which masquerading as the Federation of Malaysia today should respect the rights of the Borneo states to has a FREE POLITICAL INSTITUTION. 

Free from abuse, free from outside interference, free from any shackles to let us pursue and develop our own political advancement.

Sabahans and Sarawakians particularly need to wake up with their mistake and absolutely illegal mistake as this is a treason to Sabah and Sarawak sovereignty if the people keep giving up our political institution and sovereignty to other countries (Malaya). So, stop voting for Malaya-based parties. Stop putting Malaya-based parties in Borneo. We must has a  free political institutions!

Below is the Articles 73-74;

Article 73

Members of the United Nations which have or assume responsibilities for the administration of territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government recognize the principle that the interests of the inhabitants of these territories are paramount, and accept as a sacred trust the obligation to promote to the utmost, within the system of international peace and security established by the present Charter, the well-being of the inhabitants of these territories, and, to this end:

  a. to ensure, with due respect for the culture of the peoples concerned, their political, economic, social, and educational advancement, their just treatment, and their protection against abuses;

  b. to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the peoples, and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions, according to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and their varying stages of advancement;

  c. to further international peace and security;

  d. to promote constructive measures of development, to encourage research, and to co-operate with one another and, when and where appropriate, with specialized international bodies with a view to the practical achievement of the social, economic, and scientific purposes set forth in this Article; and

  e. to transmit regularly to the Secretary-General for information purposes, subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require, statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social, and educational conditions in the territories for which they are respectively responsible other than those territories to which Chapters XII and XIII apply.

Article 74

Members of the United Nations also agree that their policy in respect of the territories to which this Chapter applies, no less than in respect of their metropolitan areas, must be based on the general principle of good-neighbourliness, due account being taken of the interests and well-being of the rest of the world, in social, economic, and commercial matters.

UNITED NATIONS GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 1541

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1541

 (1960) 

the United Nations General Assembly

1541 (XV). Principles which should guide Mem­bers in determining whether or not an obligation exists to transmit the information called for under Article 73 e of the Charter

The General Assembly,

Considering the objectives set forth in Chapter XI of the Charter of the United Nations,

Bearing in mind the list of factors annexed to General Assembly resolution 742 (VIII) of 27 November 1953,

Having examined the report of the Special Committee of Six on the Transmission of Information under Article 73 e of the Charter,12 appointed under General Assembly resolution 1467 (XIV) of 12 December 1959 to study the principles which should guide Members in determining whether or not an obligation exists to transmit the information called for in Article 73 e of the Charter and to report on the results of its study to the Assembly at its fifteenth session,

1. Expresses its appreciation of the work of the Special Committee of Six on the Transmission of Infor­mation under Article 73 e of the Charter;

2. Approves the principles set out in section V, part B, of the report of the Committee, as amended and as they appear in the annex to the present resolution;

3. Decides that these principles should be applied in the light of the facts and the circumstances of each case to determine whether or not an obligation exists to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter.

948th plenary meeting, 15 December 1960.

ANNEX

PRINCIPLES WHICH SHOULD GUIDE MEMBERS IN DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT AN OBLIGATION EXISTS TO TRANSMIT THE INFORMATION CALLED FOR IN ARTICLE 73 E OF THE CHARTER OF THE UNITED NATIONS

Principle I

The authors of the Charter of the United Nations had in mind that Chapter XI should be applicable to territories which were then known to be of the colonial type. An obligation exists to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter in respect of such territories whose peoples have not yet attained a full measure of self-government.

Principle II

Chapter XI of the Charter embodies the concept of Non-Self-Governing Territories in a dynamic state of evolution and progress towards a "full measure of self-government". As soon as a territory and its peoples attain a full measure of self-government, the obligation ceases. Until this comes about, the obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e continues.

Principle III

The obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter constitutes an international obligation and should be carried out with due regard to the fulfilment of international law.

Principle IV

Prima facie there is an obligation to transmit information in respect of a territory which is geographically separate and is distinct ethnically and/or culturally from the country administering it.

Principle V

Once it has been established that such a prima facie case of geographical and ethnical or cultural distinctness of a territory exists, other elements may then be brought into consideration. These additional elements may be, inter alia, of an administrative, political, juridical, economic or historical nature. If they affect the relationship between the metropolitan State and the territory concerned in a manner which arbitrarily places the latter in a position or status of subordination, they support the presumption that there is an obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter.

Principle VI

A Non-Self-Governing Territory can be said to have reached a full measure of self-government by:

(a) Emergence as a sovereign independent State;

(b) Free association with an independent State; or

(c) Integration with an independent State.

Principle VII

(a) Free association should be the result of a free and voluntary choice by the peoples of the territory concerned expressed through informed and democratic processes. It should be one which respects the individuality and the cultural charac­teristics of the territory and its peoples, and retains for the peoples of the territory which is associated with an independent State the freedom to modify the status of that territory through the expression of their will by democratic means and through constitutional processes.

(b) The associated territory should have the right to deter­mine its internal constitution without outside interference, in accordance with due constitutional processes and the freely expressed wishes of the people. This does not preclude con­sultations as appropriate or necessary under the terms of the free association agreed upon.

Principle VIII

Integration with an independent State should be on the basis of complete equality between the peoples of the erstwhile Non-Self-Governing Territory and those of the independent country with which it is integrated. The peoples of both territories should have equal status and rights of citizenship and equal guarantees of fundamental rights and freedoms without any distinction or discrimination; both should have equal rights and opportunities for representation and effective participation at all levels in the executive, legislative and judicial organs of government.

Principle IX

Integration should have come about in the following circum­stances :

(a) The integrating territory should have attained an advanced stage of self-government with free political institutions, so that its peoples would have the capacity to make a responsible choice through informed and democratic processes;

(6) The integration should be the result of the freely ex­pressed wishes of the territory's peoples acting with full knowl­edge of the change in their status, their wishes having been expressed through informed and democratic processes, im­partially conducted and based on universal adult suffrage. The United Nations could, when it deems it necessary, supervise these processes.

Principle X

The transmission of information in respect of Non-Self-Governing Territories under Article 73 e of the Charter is subject to such limitation as security and constitutional considerations may require. This means that the extent of the information may be limited in certain circumstances, but the limitation in Article 73 e cannot relieve a Member State of the obligations of Chapter XI. The "limitation" can relate only to the quantum of information of economic, social and educa­tional nature to be transmitted.

Principle XI

The only constitutional considerations to which Article 73 e of the Charter refers are those arising from constitutional relations of the territory with the Administering Member. They refer to a situation in which the constitution of the territory gives it self-government in economic, social and educational matters through freely elected institutions. Nevertheless, the responsibility for transmitting information under Article 73 e continues, unless these constitutional relations preclude the Government or parliament of the Administering Member from receiving statistical and other information of a technical nature relating to economic, social and educational conditions in the territory.

Principle XII

Security considerations have not been invoked in the past. Only in very exceptional circumstances can information on economic, social and educational conditions have any security aspect. In other circumstances, therefore, there should be no necessity to limit the transmission of Information on security grounds.

HOW TO MAKE NATIONAL SECURITY BILL "USELESS" AGAINST SARAWAK

NATIONAL SECURITY BILL 2015

On 1 December 2015, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Shahidan Kassim tabled a new bill for its first reading in Dewan Rakyat. It gives the National Security Council (NSC) extensive powers to deal with national security issues. Following which, the House has passed the Bill on 3 December. The bill gives powers to the council headed by PM Najib to arrest anyone without a warrant once an area is declared a security area.

MALAYSIA CONSTITUTION

Laws of Malaysia. Federal Constitution. 

Inconsistencies between federal and State laws.

75. If any State law is inconsistent with a federal law, the federal law shall prevail and the State law shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.  

From the federal constitution, it was easily understand by the first glance that the federal law shall prevail if there is any inconsistencies between the federal law made by the Malaya masquerading as Malaysia federal government (Central government) and the state government. This is only true to the extend of the States in the Malaya federation such as Perlis, Pahang, Johor, Malacca etc.  

However, in case of the Central government and Sarawak state government relationship, the reading of the Article 75 of the Federal Constitution must be read hand-in-hand with the Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) and the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63). 

If there is any inconsistencies between the federal and the state laws in term of Sarawak, IGC and MA63 is more supreme than any federal law as such documents is an international agreement between the government bearing registration number 10760 at the United Nations. Thus, any inconsistencies of the federal laws itself must be referred to the IGC and MA63 for further elaboration.

REPORT OF THE INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE, 1962.

Malaysia. Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee, 1962.

Annex A. Legislative List, Administrative Arrangement and Assurance.

General

      It is accepted that in the early years after the establishment of Malaysia as few changes as possible should be made in the administrative arrangements in the Borneo States affecting the day to day lives of the people. During this period certain Federal powers should be delegated to the State Government.

      Some administrative details have been included. Others remain to be worked out. 

Legislatives Lists as in the Ninth Schedule to the Federation of Malaysia Constitution. List I. Federal List. 2. Defence, etc. (Federal)

Subject to internal security considerations, licensing powers in respect of shot guns and their ammunition and in respect of a waiver or reduction of licensing fees, should be delegated to the Borneo State Governments. The function of licensing should be exercised by the State Governments in consultation with the Police. 

As it was state in the Annex A of the IGC, as an assurance, any administrative arrangement subject to the Sarawak state government, there should be as few changes as possible should be made in the administrative arrangements in the Borneo States and certain Federal powers should be delegated to the State Government.

This means that even though Sarawak agree to give certain power to the Central government and in this case defence etc., it did not mean that this given power was absolute and exclusively belong to the Central government. 

As for the defence arrangement, there were caveats and condition which means that there were conditions that the Central government must fulfil, in order for the Central government to get these powers from Sarawak. Such conditions for defences etc. is Subject to internal security considerations of Sarawak state government where such legislative measure should be delegated to the Borneo State Governments.

The Central government must first fulfil the conditions set out in Annex A of the IGC, otherwise the power of the NSC is not enforceable or that it is illegal for the Central government to make law that would diminished the power of the Sarawak state government. It wll be illegal for the Central government to enforce Emergency through NSC in Sarawak without the consent of Sarawak state government. 

MALAYSIA AGREEMENT 1963

Malaysia. Agreement concluded between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore. 

TITLE III. Legislative Powers and Administrative Arrangement. 

37 (1) It is hereby declared that the power of Parliament to make laws with respect to a matter enumerated in the Federal List includes power to authorise the Legislatures of the States or any of them, subject to such conditions or restrictions (if any) as Parliament may impose, to make laws with respect to the whole or any part of that matter.

     (2) Notwithstanding Article 75, a State law made under authority conferred by Act of Parliament as mentioned in Clause (1) may, if and to the extend that the Act so provides, amend or repeal (as regards the State in question) any federal law passed before that Act.

     (3) Any matter with respect to which the Legislature of a State is for the time being authorised by Act of Parliament to make laws shall for purposes of Articles 79, 80 and 82 be treated as regards the State in question as if it were a matter enumerated in the Concurrent List. 

It was again clearly state in the Malaysia Agreement 1963, Title III, that the power of Parliament to make laws (Federal List) is subject to such conditions or restrictions (if any). Such conditions or restrictions in case of Sarawak is outline in the Annex A of the IGC. 

In case of defense etc., the power of Parliament to enforce Emergency in Sarawak through NSC was subject to the conditions and restrictions which is the approval of the Sarawak state government.

This means, the Emergency declaration in any part of Sarawak through NSC can only be applicable after the approval of the Sarawak state government, otherwise it was illegal for the Central government to imposed Emergency in any part of Sarawak for that matter. 

Sarawak state government has the power to repeal any federal law as State law made under authority conferred by Act of Parliament as mentioned in Clause (1) may, if and to the extend that the Act so provides, amend or repeal (as regards the State in question) any federal law passed before that Act.

Any inconsistencies in relationship between the Central government and Sarawak government lastly, must be treated as regards the State in question as if it were a matter enumerated in the Concurrent List. Concurrent List means any laws is subject to the approval of both Central and Sarawak state government. Emergency declaration in any part of Sarawak, must be subject to approval by both the Centrall government and Sarawak state government to be effective. Otherwise, it is illegal.

NSC DID NOT REDUCE THE RIGHTS OF SARAWAK

It was interesting when Chong Chieng Jen from Malaya-based party of DAP during debate in parliament state that the passing of the NSC Bill will reduces and diminishes the rights of Sarawak. Here is where he get it all wrong. NSC did not reduce or even diminishes even a specks of the rights of Sarawak.

The rights of Sarawak is fully safeguards and outline in the IGC and MA63. IGC and MA63 cannot be change by the Parliament. NSC cannot change these two documents. These two documents is beyond the reach of the Parliament as only the government concerned can changes any agree terms of the IGC and MA63. Only the government of Malaya, Sarawak and Sabah through a new rountable meeting and committee can change the IGC and MA63. For example when changes the date of Malaysia Day from 31st August 1963 to 16 September 1963 was made on 28 August 1963 through the agreement of the such governments.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it was clear that any legislature matter in case of defense etc., that was under the Federal Lists, still subject to the approval or repeal by the Sarawak state government. If the Central government declare Emergency in any part of Sarawak, it still need to be subject by the approval of the Sarawak state government.

Choose your government wisely as they're the one responsible to safeguard Sarawak, If Emergency do happen in Sarawak, it is due to the approval of the Sarawak state government. Sarawak PBB-led government will be responsible if it do happen.

*New information will be continue to be added in this article at a regular basis as per requirement.

Author: Zulfaqar bin Sa'adi. Information Chief of State Reform Party (STAR).

COMPLIANCE MECHANISM - IGC REPORT

Malaysia. Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee, 1962.

Chapter II. Establishment of the Federation of Malaysia

14. In certain respects the Committee agreed that the requirements of the Borneo States could appropriately be met by undertakings or assurances to be given by the Government of the Federation of Malaya rather than by Constitutional provisions, and these are mentioned in the appropriate sections of this Report. The Committee agreed that the more important undertakings should be included in the formal agreement and envisaged that the other undertakings and assurances might be dealt with in exchanges of letters between the Government concerned.

1. the Committee - United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore.
2. Borneo States - North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak

First, we need to understand what is the requirements of the Borneo States. Where we can find the requirements of the Borneo States?

The requirements of the Borneo States can be seek and understand through the formation of the Federation of Malaysia itself which was contained in the IGC Report, Malaysia Agreement 1963 as well as United Nations (UN) Resolution 1541. 

According to the UN Resolution 1541 and Malaysia Act 1963 Chapter 35, The Federation of Malaya must act as a Trustee of the Trust Territories (Sabah and Sarawak) by fulfilling the trusteeship obligation accordingly based on the IGC Report, Malaysia Agreement 1963, federal constitution and UN Resolution 1541. This is the requirements of the Borneo States where undertakings or assurances must be taken, devised and obliged by the Federation of Malaya and the Government of Sabah and Sarawak through the formation of the new Federation of Malaysia since 16th September 1963.

It was state in paragraph 14 of the Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee, "rather than by Constitutional provisions" which means that any undertakings or assurances taken by the Federation of Malaya towards Sabah and Sarawak and vice versa, can be made through free negotiation as peers between the equal partner relationship of the Federation of Malaya with Sabah and Sarawak. 

This requirements of the Borneo States and undertakings or assurances actually explain the relationship between the Trustee and the Trust Territories which was an international relationship between the Government concerned based on the international agreement (Malaysia Agreement 1963). A relationship that go beyond the federal constitution, as peers in international relation, "rather than by Constitutional provisions". Since this relationship is based on the international agreement, it is beyond the reach of the Constitutional provisions. Thus explaining the sentences "rather than by Constitutional provisions".

However, it must not be misunderstood as if there is any superiority in the relationship of the Trustee and the Trust Territories. Principle VIII of the UN Resolution 1541 state that Integration with an independent State (the Federation of Malaya) should be on the basis of complete equality between the peoples of the erstwhile Non-Self-Governing Territory (Sabah and Sarawak) and those of the independent country with which it is integrated. Thus, The Federation of Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak was equal partner in the Federation of Malaysia.

The undertakings or assurances to solve any conflicts and problem or to seek the implementation must complied with the IGC Report, Malaysia Agreement 1963 and the UN Resolution 1541.

It was also state that the more important undertakings should be included in the formal agreement. In addition to the free negotiation to solve or to implement the requirements of the Borneo States, formal agreement must be sealed between the Federation of Malaya with the Government of Sabah and Sarawak respectively. The least that the Federation of Malaya and the Government of Sabah and Sarawak can do to take appropriate undertakings or assurances to solve or to implement any issues arises in regards to the relationship between the Federation of Malaya and the Government of Sabah and Sarawak is through exchanges of letters between the Government concerned. 

After a free negotiation, formal agreement or exchange of letters or any other compliance mechanism has been undertaken and pursue properly, an appropriate enactment can be made to seal of the such undertakings or assurances. 

The implementation and resolving the conflicts between the Federation of Malaya and the Government of Sabah and Sarawak through such mechanism as explained above, any decision thereof must be enacted or written in black and white.

Who are responsible for the compliance mechanism?

According to the paragraph 14 of the Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee, The government of the day is responsible to solve any conflicts and to seek a full implementation of the IGC Report, Malaysia Agreement 1963 and UN Resolution 1541. The government of the day is the Barisan Nasional under the leadership of the Prime Minister of the Federation of Malaya renamed Malaysia, Najib Razak and the Chief Minister of Sabah, Musa Aman and the Chief Minister of Sarawak, Adenan Satem. The government under their leadership is responsible to met such requirements of the Borneo States and to take proper undertakings or assurances thereof.

Let us not forget the responsibility of the British government which act as a former trustee of the Borneo States, custodian and co-signatories of the Malaysia Agreement 1963. The British government also responsible to ensure final responsibility of their trusteeship upon the Borneo states especially Sarawak in line with the 9 Cardinal Principles is fully met. Transfer of trusteeship through Malaysia Act 1963 Chapter 35 doesn't mean ceasing the obligation but a mere step to ensure the obligation can be ceased through the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. I doubt it was anywhere near successful and the British must take responsibility to ensure  requirements of the Borneo States was fully met through their unsatisfactory irresponsible act to transfer the sovereignty on 16th September 1963.

Successful or not the government of the day doing their job to meet their obligation, you be the judge.

*New information will be continue to be added in this article at a regular basis as per requirement.

Author: Zulfaqar bin Sa'adi. Information Chief of State Reform Party (STAR).

ENGLISH LANGUAGE - A REBUTTAL TO TAN SRI ABDUL KADIR SHEIKH FADZIR (IKATAN)

Looks like some people has their information twisted when Parti Ikatan Bangsa Malaysia, or Ikatan, has stated that Bahasa Malaysia should remain the sole official language in Sarawak. It was an easy Google search information that CM Adenan Satem announced on 18th November 2015 that English will be an official language of Sarawak alongside Bahasa Malaysia.

52 years ago, in 1963 as per the formation of the federation of Malaysia, it was already agreed that various rights and constitutional safeguards for the Borneo States was being incorporated into the formation of the federation of Malaysia itself. Such rights and safeguards was being outline in an easy read documents of the Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) and Malaysia Agreement 1963.

Below are such rights and safeguards which has been outlined in the documents:

ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND THE REPORT OF THE INTER-GOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE

Malaysia. Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee, 1962. 

Chapter III. Proposed Constitutional Arrangements.

28. National Language

Malay should be the national language of the Federation of Malaysia, but Article 152 should be modified in its application to the Borneo States so as to secure that:-

(a) for a period of ten years after Malaysia Day and thereafter until the State Legislature otherwise provides, the English language shall be an official language and may be used in the Legislative Assembly and for all other official purposes in the State, whether Federal or State purposes, including correspondence with Federal Ministries and Departments;

(b) for a period of ten years after Malaysia Day and thereafter until the Federal Parliament otehrwise provides, the English language may be used by the representatives of the Borneo States in both Houses of the Federal Parliament;

(c) for a period often years after Malaysia Day and thereafter until both the State Legislatures have otherwise provided, all proceedings in the Supreme Court relating to cases arising in the Borneo States and all proceedings in the High Court of the Borneo States shall be in the English language (subject to the proviso regarding evidence in the existing Clause (4)); and

(d) until the State Legislature otherwise provides, all proceedings in subordinate Courts in the State, other than the taking of evidence, shall be in the English language.

Malaysia. Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee, 1962.

Chapter III. Proposed Constitutional Arrangements.

30. Costitutional safeguards

(1) It is mentioned in other parts of this Report that the Federal Constitution should provide that certain provisions relating to the Borneo States should not be amended or repealed without the concurrence of the Government of the State concerned. These provisions relate to immigration, citizenship, representation in the Federal Parliament and the High Court of the Borneo States. In addition, in relation to the Borneo States, special safeguards on these lines will also be needed in respect of the distribution of legislative powers, and the executive authority of the Borneo States on matters within their legislative powers, and related financial arrangements, and in respect of the following other matters-

(i) religion;

(ii) language; and

(iii) the special position of the indigenous races. 

ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND THE MALAYSIA AGREEMENT 1963

Malaysia. Agreement concluded between the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo, Sarawak and Singapore. 

Annex A. Malaysia Bill. 

Part III. General Constitutional Arrangements. Title VI. 

Chapter 2 - Borneo States. 

61. Use of English and of native languages in Borneo States.  

(1) No Act of Parliament terminating or restricting the use of the English language for any of the purposes mentioned in clauses (2) to (5) of Article 152 shall come into operation as regards the use of the English language in any case mentioned in Clause (2) of this Article until ten years after Malaysia Day.

It is important to understand about the "conditional" clause for the enforcement of the "Malaysia Day" when we read the IGC Report and Malaysia Agreement 1963 in relation with the usage of the English language. The date of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 being commence is not based on the date of Malaysia Act being passed by the federation of Malaya but was actually based on the word "Malaysia Day".

Article II of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 says: "...the date on which the said Act is brought into operation is hereinafter referred to as "Malaysia Day""

The date was initially planned to fall on the 31st August 1963, but was postponed to the 16th September 1963. Now, the problem is, nowhere that the definition of "Malaysia Day" was found in the federal constitution to make "Malaysia Day" enforceable. There is no date being define in the federal constitution to be referred as "Malaysia Day" which make "Malaysia Day" clause was unenforceable. For this reason, the ten years "Malaysia Day" clause in the usage of English language will have no effect of the law.

This means, as long as the definition of "Malaysia Day" was not properly inserted into the federal constitution, Sarawak can use the English language for as long as we want until it was amended or repealed with the concurrence of the Government of Sarawak.

Other than the unenforceable clause of “Malaysia Day”, it was also stated in the “Constitutional safeguards” of the Report of the Inter-Governmental Committee that “…certain provisions relating to the Borneo States should not be amended or repealed without the concurrence of the Government of the State concerned…”. That certain provision also included in respect of the usage of language of the state.

This means that any decision related to the usage of any language in Sarawak was a state rights and any move by the Malaya cum Malaysia federal government to change the rights of Sarawak in the usage of English must be made in concurrence of the Government of Sarawak. Language is Sarawak rights enshrined in the IGC and Malaysia Agreement as well as federal constitution. Kept in mind, that federal constitution cannot change IGC and Malaysia Agreement 1963 as it was inter-governmental agreement beyond the reach of the Malaysia parliament itself. Any changes in the federal constitution also must abide with the term agree in the IGC and Malaysia Agreement 1963. Otherwise, it was a breach of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 which means a breach of Malaysia itself. When you breach anything about Malaysia, you are not being patriotic!

SARAWAK A MULTI-LINGUAL SOCIETY

What kind of understanding has the people like Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim and Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir has in mind and heart about Sarawak?

Do you know that Sarawak is a multi-racial and multi-religious society?

With such diverse culture and tradition, of course come with it, is a multi-lingual society. It was a norm to meet a Sarawakian Malay who speaks in Iban, Malays, English or Melanau. It was a norm to meet Sarawakian Chinese who speaks Malays, Melanau, Iban and etc. Such multi-lingual society is not the cause of our disintegration, but in contrary, it has become the richness and a point of unity for Sarawakians through the ages. This is the advantages of Sarawak. Through a multi-lingual society, it was an advantage for Sarawak to have English as the official language alongside Bahasa Malaysia. The advantages as the people can learn easily the English language as how easily the people can grasp others language through living together. This is how Sarawakians has united. We learn others language not just for communication but to further our understanding of how our brothers and sisters from another ethnic group communicate and see the world. The success of Kuching to become the City of Unity recently also prove that the methods apply by us is far beyond what Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim and Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Sheikh Fadzir can grasp to full understanding.

It was agreeable that Bahasa Malaysia signifies the Malaysian identity. Nobody denied that. English as another official language also signifies Malaysian identities. It signifies that what was incorporated in the Malaysia Agreement 1963 itself. What was defined in Malaysia Agreement 1963, is what signify Malaysia. It was the non-compliance of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 is what bad for Malaysia, but upholding Malaysia Agreement 1963 will certainly signifies what is Malaysia is all about. And the rights of Sarawak to use English as another official language of the state is what signify Malaysia. Rejecting such rights is not. So, the usage of English as Sarawak official language alongside Bahasa Malaysia is clearly signifying Malaysia.

MALAYSIA UNITY IS DIFFERENT THAN MALAYA UNITY

Wait a minute…at a time of Merdeka? For sure you’re talking about the Independence Day of Malaya in 1957 right? Since the federation of Malaysia has never gained independence as it was only formed on 16^th September 1963 through equal partnership of Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak and Sabah together with British as co-signatories. 

Nobody are using Malaya constitution. We all are using Malaysia constitution. But before we go further, you better work out on the right definition of Article 1 in the constitution first. Are we using Malaya Agreement 1957 or Malaysia Agreement 1963? This is a completely an interesting different topics altogether. 

I would be agreeing with you that the federation of Malaysia has been struggling to ascertain its character as a nation and that the national language represented an integral part in history to unify the people under a single banner. Better yet, in a true sense of reality, it was the federation of Malaya that has been struggling to unify its people, not the federation of Malaysia. 

To unify the people of Malaya, Sarawak and Sabah would need another strata of understanding and mindset. To unify the people of the federation of Malaysia (not Malaya), just abide with the Malaysia Agreement 1963, respect the agreement and implement the agreement. That’s how you unite the people at large. This is a big part of our history together as a nations within an enlarge federation. This is our banner. A banner called Malaysia Agreement 1963. So, respect the rights of Sarawak in term of the usage of English language to be implementing as the state official language. “Bangsa Malaysia” can only be mould through this basic history of Malaysia. The basic understanding of Malaysia Agreement 1963.

Sarawakians are happy to be multi-lingual society as it was our culture and tradition. A culture and tradition that will always uniting us as Sarawakians and a culture and tradition that will make us a progressive society in the years to come. If the people in the West Malaysia failed to get behind such a practical world we are living in, it just make it obvious, how West will remain to be West and East remain to be East (Tips: United Nations Resolution 1541).

The most effective ways for our children to master English as an international language is to make it official that English is our official language alongside Bahasa Malaysia. This is but, only a starting point for the next steps of how English will be moulded successfully into our society, once again just like in the historical past. Perhaps, the re-introduction of the English School, Teaching of various subjects in English and so on.

Related news READ HERE: 
http://www.therakyatpost.com/news/2015/11/24/bahasa-malaysia-signifies-malaysians-says-ikatan-president/

*New information will be continue to be added in this article at a regular basis as per requirement.

Author: Zulfaqar bin Sa'adi. Information Chief of State Reform Party (STAR).