Sunday, April 21, 2019

Sandakan is the “eyes” of the dog-shaped head of Sabah


Sandakan is the “eyes” of the dog-shaped head of Sabah

What are the important issues for the 8th By-election in Sandakan since May 9, 2018 for GE 14 ?  This is the first one in Sabah since GE14.

For the record, Rantau is the seventh by-election since the 14th general election (GE14) on May 9 last year, with five being state seats and two Parliamentary seats, Port Dickson and Cameron Highlands.
The results so far have been 4 for Pakatan Harapan  (PH) and 3 for Barisan Nasional (BN) with Sungai Kandis, Seri Setia, Balakong and Port Dickson to PH and Cameron Highlands, Semenyih and Rantau to BN
The electoral roll for the Sandakan seat has 39,856 ordinary voters.  The by-election would be the first anniversary of GE14.

Would this be an assessment or review of the performance of P H or too early for critical review?

Nevertheless much has happened to the nation and Sabah in particular especially if the PH’s election manifesto for GE14 is to be an indicator.

We know the major issues at stake namely MA63 (rights), GST/SST (cost of living), Project IC (dubious citizens) ; PDA and oil agreement with Petronas (resources), rainforests (logs), and Sandakan’s welfare and local economy ( business opportunities, security, and jobs).

Pakatan Harapan‘s manifesto 1st Promise was abolish GST but how many people were aware of Promise 32 out of 60 was: Introduce a tax system that is people-friendly and entrepreneur-friendly but SST is not so friendly to all especially the lower level of people as costs of living went on unabated. GST at 6% was badly implemented and so is SST. Over regulation can “kill” potentialities in society. GST is definitely a better tax regime if not lopsided in its implementation processes.

We cannot avoid referring to the  Election Manifesto especially PILLAR 4: RETURN SABAH AND SARAWAK TO THE STATUS ACCORDED BY THE MALAYSIA AGREEMENT 1963  Promise 40: Implement the 1963 Malaysia Agreement,  Promise 41: To ensure the prosperity of the people of Sabah and Sarawak by enhancing the states’ economic growth Promise 42: Create more employment opportunities for Sabahan and Sarawakian youths,   Promise 43: Making Sabah and Sarawak a model of harmonious society,  Promise 44: Improving the quality of education and healthcare services,  Promise 45: Advancing the interest of the rural and remote populations,  Promise 46: Protecting the sovereignty and security of Sabah, Promise 47: Decentralisation of power to Sabah and Sarawak, . Promise 48: To return and guarantee the right of customary land of the people of Sabah and Sarawak.

Malaysia Baru can be “hollow” for Sabah and Sarawak  if the Pillar 4 of PH’s manifesto  is ill implemented. Maybe the report of Council of Eminent Persons (CEP) not OSAed can give some enlightenment on this pillar 4.

Can  PH’s manifesto for GE14 with the pledge “rebuilding the nation fulfilling our hopes” be implemented as soon as possible when we now know that the Parliament failed to amend the Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution in April, 2019 when the minister concerned also come from Sandakan?

Now the Law and Parliament Minister is talking of Parliament Selection Committee (another delay) when the Sabah State Assembly passed the motion to support Amendments to the Federal Constitution.
It is alleged that the said amendment failed for the refusal to insert the six words “pursuant to the Malaysia Agreement 1963” in the proposed Bill to amend Article1(2) of the Federal Constitution.
If the MA63 is itself an issue, then can we fall back on IGC report, 18/20 points and the declaration on 16 September, 1963 all part and parcel of formation of Malaysia?
We have seen in recent years a lot of domestic agitations over formation of “Malaysia” with committees after committees and not going any head way. It seems now that “Malaysia” is dubious and untouchable.
Since this is started in 1962, and to allay the blame, why not have a round table conference of the original five parties (except Brunei) who had signed MA63 together with UN to resolve the 55 years of impasse. We desire regional peace.  Brunei, Philippines and Indonesia plus UN can be observers.
Some people have been talking of referendum, arbitration, international and local Courts etc but would such measures work?
Assuming the amendment in Federal Constitution to make the three parties as equal partners as the original intention is accomplished, who would enforce the costly implementation?  Can it be that business as usual for 55 years?
We have also observed how Malaysia has bypassed UN such as ICERD, ICC, human rights, etc with impunity.
Project IC is still obvious a grievous matter in terms of human rights for the local to be displaced by the non citizens despite RCI on Illegal Immigrations Sabah.
Our oil wealth under our soil is being exploited to benefit outsiders and others without accountability and justification and RCI on Petronas is very much desired to establish how the Prime Ministers since 1976 dealt with Petronas.
Much of our rainforests is replaced by mono crop is also benefitting outsiders with the locals adapting to the rising temperature of more than 3 degree Celsius since 1970. The Heart of Borneo is not keeping our hearts cool.  Matured trees are still cut for the logs trade in the much diminished forests only to be replaced by commercial crops (oil palm and softwood) or small seedlings which may take another 100 years to mature if ever to abate climate change.
It is reported that Sandakan Is going through a bleak scenario for some years already as the ex MP Stephen Wong had it recorded in a video clip.  Short of a “ghosts” town once a bustling timber town, can the by-election with all the pressing issues still very much neglected make a move over for a better future for Sabah bring back our wealth as provided in MA63 and stop the sellout of our oil in Petronas as we enter an era of New Malaysia since GE14.
Joshua Y C Kong 22/04/2019

No comments:

Post a Comment