Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Blackout confirmed Constitutional Crisis



http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/read.cfm?NewsID=2340
Home / Forum
Why then amend MA63– and after Stephens gone?
Published on: Sunday, December 11, 2016
By Joshua YC Kong
I WAS in the Sabah Legislative building after a lapse of a few years recently, arriving just before noon when a black out occurred.Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman told the Assembly that day there was no issue on status of Sabah both at the time of the Malaysia Agreement (MA63) or when amended in 1976.
the MA63 was framed with the intention of a partnership of 3/4 parts including Singapore which left in August 1965.
When it was based on partnership concept, it does not matter when Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore were referred as “states” when Sabah Sarawak were colonies then and Singapore was already an independent nation and such term “states” are irrelevant when partnership is concerned.
why then amend the sacred Constitution in 1976, 12 years later as after thought when this could be done in 1965 when Donald Stephens was still around with the departure of Singapore? Then in 1976, Stephens was dead.
Ex-CM Tan Sri Harris said he agreed with Musa and he went on to say a lot more against the necessity as demanded by some people to revert to MA63.
Harris blamed the plight of Sabah and Sarawak to the negative policies that ignore the interests of Malaysians in the two states.”
That is just hitting on the nail when MA63 was manipulated and so much diluted in many aspects in terms of justice of any agreement made.
Joshua YC Kong




Blackout confirmed Constitutional Crisis

I was in the Sabah Legislative building after a lapse of a few years this morning (21 Nov ) arriving just before noon when black out occurred.

Isn’t it a “deadly” sign in the power outage or black out  that Chief Minister Musa Aman missed the important point on MA63 by telling the Assembly that “No issue on status”.

There are many issues that have been raised recently albeit still not too late after 53 years after the “earthquake” on 13 July, 1976 in Parliament.

The point CM missed was obvious the MA63 was framed with the intention of a partnership of 3/4  parts including Singapore which left in August 1965.

If indeed there was a Malaysia Act 1963, then the Parliament was referred to Parliament of Jamaica. (see document attached).  That is Malaysia Act 1963 as invalid and null and void with no effect.

When it was based on partnership concept, it does not matter when Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore were referred as “states” when Sabah Sarawak were colonies then and Singapore was already an independent nation and such term “states” are irrelevant when partnership is concerned.

If what Musa claim is correct, why then amend the sacred Constitution in 1976, 12 years later as after thought when this could be done in 1965 when Donald Stephen was still around with the departure of Singapore?  Then in 1976, Donald was dead.

So with that Sabah was gone as good with the “destruction” of M63 on the partnership deal.

So no longer for restoration of MA63 to be delayed and what is needed now is to deal with all the “losses” suffered by Sabah and Sarawak in several key aspects now to put Sabah and Sarawak on almost equal footing of 3 / 4 instead 12 and 13  post 1976.

Joshua Y C Kong 23 November, 2016

No comments:

Post a Comment