When Bota assemblyman Nasarudin Hashim defected to Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) and 10 days later rejoined UMNO, some people claimed that he was the first double-frogged politician.
That is not true. I believe the first double-frogged politician was “born” in Sarawak. It was in Sarawak where this culture of double-frogging began when Ulu Rajang MP Justine Jinggut elected unopposed on a SNAP ticket in the 1982 parliamentary election defected to Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) in 1983. In 1986, he contested on a PBDS ticket and won with a big majority. He leap-frogged back to SNAP before 1987. In 1990 he stood again on a SNAP ticket and was soundly defeated by Billy Abit Joo of PBDS.
Before the State election in April 1987, 28 State assemblymen resigned from their parties to defect to PBDS and Persatuan Rakyat Malaysia Sarawak (Permas).*
Those from Sarawak National Party (SNAP) joined Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) and they were SNAP deputy president Edward Jeli, SNAP secretary general Joseph Balan Seling, SNAP vice president Michael Ben Anak Panggi and SNAP CEC member Geman Anak Itam. Their defections prompted Sarawak’s Chief Minster Abdul Taib Mahmud to call for a fresh election which was held on 15 and 16 April 1987.
PBDS won 15 seats, while Permas won only five seats. Edward Jeli, Geman Anak Itam, Balan Seling and Michael Ben won with big majorities in their respective constituencies. On 14 July 1987, Edward Jeli and Geman leap-frogged back to SNAP, while Balan and Michael Ben hopped to PBB. Sora Anak Rosah defected from PBDS to PBB.
PBDS seats were further reduced to seven when months later Gramong Juna, Mikai Mandau and Bolhassan Kambar defected to PBB.
Sarawak has seen many political frogs since independence, the majority of them were Dayak politicians; and among the first were Nelson Kundai Ngarieng and Stephen Ngelambong from SNAP to PBB, Simon Dembab Maja and Penghulu Abok Anak Jalin from Pesaka to PBB in 1970. Years later Serian MP Richard Riot resigned from PBDS and defected to SUPP.
After partyless for some time, Jawah Gerang joined Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP) and after only a few months he hopped to Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS).
As for Johnichal Rayong who contested on a SNAP ticket in the Engkilili state seat secretly joined SPDP, and following the objection of other BN parties, he wanted to leap-frog to SUPP and his acceptance in SUPP should be announced before June 2008. Until today his application to be a political frog is put on hold. Nevertheless, he behaves like one of them.
The ugly culture of political frogs will not only promote the evil of corruption, but it is also the betrayal of the worst kind to those people who voted for them. Unless the government does something such as introducing the anti-hopping law, political frogs will breed more political frogs, and we as Dayaks should support this law as the majority of political frogs come from our community.
But the question is: Why are Dayak politicians so easily succumbed to temptation to become political frogs and to forsake their honour (if they have any way), the honour of their family and their generation to come? - The Broken Shield
* Reference: The Broken Shield – The Birth of Dayakism
That is not true. I believe the first double-frogged politician was “born” in Sarawak. It was in Sarawak where this culture of double-frogging began when Ulu Rajang MP Justine Jinggut elected unopposed on a SNAP ticket in the 1982 parliamentary election defected to Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) in 1983. In 1986, he contested on a PBDS ticket and won with a big majority. He leap-frogged back to SNAP before 1987. In 1990 he stood again on a SNAP ticket and was soundly defeated by Billy Abit Joo of PBDS.
Before the State election in April 1987, 28 State assemblymen resigned from their parties to defect to PBDS and Persatuan Rakyat Malaysia Sarawak (Permas).*
Those from Sarawak National Party (SNAP) joined Parti Bansa Dayak Sarawak (PBDS) and they were SNAP deputy president Edward Jeli, SNAP secretary general Joseph Balan Seling, SNAP vice president Michael Ben Anak Panggi and SNAP CEC member Geman Anak Itam. Their defections prompted Sarawak’s Chief Minster Abdul Taib Mahmud to call for a fresh election which was held on 15 and 16 April 1987.
PBDS won 15 seats, while Permas won only five seats. Edward Jeli, Geman Anak Itam, Balan Seling and Michael Ben won with big majorities in their respective constituencies. On 14 July 1987, Edward Jeli and Geman leap-frogged back to SNAP, while Balan and Michael Ben hopped to PBB. Sora Anak Rosah defected from PBDS to PBB.
PBDS seats were further reduced to seven when months later Gramong Juna, Mikai Mandau and Bolhassan Kambar defected to PBB.
Sarawak has seen many political frogs since independence, the majority of them were Dayak politicians; and among the first were Nelson Kundai Ngarieng and Stephen Ngelambong from SNAP to PBB, Simon Dembab Maja and Penghulu Abok Anak Jalin from Pesaka to PBB in 1970. Years later Serian MP Richard Riot resigned from PBDS and defected to SUPP.
After partyless for some time, Jawah Gerang joined Sarawak Progressive Democratic Party (SPDP) and after only a few months he hopped to Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS).
As for Johnichal Rayong who contested on a SNAP ticket in the Engkilili state seat secretly joined SPDP, and following the objection of other BN parties, he wanted to leap-frog to SUPP and his acceptance in SUPP should be announced before June 2008. Until today his application to be a political frog is put on hold. Nevertheless, he behaves like one of them.
The ugly culture of political frogs will not only promote the evil of corruption, but it is also the betrayal of the worst kind to those people who voted for them. Unless the government does something such as introducing the anti-hopping law, political frogs will breed more political frogs, and we as Dayaks should support this law as the majority of political frogs come from our community.
But the question is: Why are Dayak politicians so easily succumbed to temptation to become political frogs and to forsake their honour (if they have any way), the honour of their family and their generation to come? - The Broken Shield
* Reference: The Broken Shield – The Birth of Dayakism
21 comments:
My 2-cent view for the question given:
It could be prestige (to be with powerful people around), easy money (most important) and less powerful (because they “have to be the Yes! men” by succumbing to “any directive” given by their political master(s))!
I remember one story last time. There was this old man who was part of the soup ingredients. The only thing he had asked from his political master and the gomen during his tenure as the representative was to increase the frequency of STC (Sarawak Transport Company) bus service – from once to twice daily – plying Kuching and other rural areas within Penrissen and Padawan! The main reason was that the dirt, old Penrissen Road is already there! What this old man didn’t know and do (during his tenure) was to ask for the new superhighway, electricity and water supply, rural clinics and other development infrastructure for his constituency! Telecommunication tower??? Well, computers and mobile phones were not available at that time, lah! Then came in oil palm plantations, followed by Borneo Highland Resort and Mambong Dump(l)ing. On the rise are Bengoh Dam(n), Kampong/Medan Toon Aduh! Rasak, another oil palm project, quarry project(s), etc.
Yup, kind of requesting the service of Scorpene subs from KL to ply to and fro Ulu Kapit and Sibu lah!
The ugly habits of being frogs flourish amongst Dayaks politicians is simply because we Dayaks support such mentality. Look at the PBDS frogs who joined PBB? They were reelected, even when they then stood as PBB candidate.
Dayak Baru, Broken Shield, USA and other blogs need to work harder and smarter to inculcate the belief that frogs are derhaka, traitors and only good for soup tempoyak.
Sarawak, through its Iban elected representative created an history in Malaysia when we witnessed the first phenomenon a political defection and later years followed by Iban, Iban and Iban elected representatives to do the same.James Masing could not deny the facts that `Sarawak is the Land of Iban Frogs`.
The `frogs` have definitely upset those who voted for them, making them feel frustrated or betrayed. They treat the constituents are fools, albeit bring shame to the political process - a bad way to form a government.May be the reasons for them to switch camps were tempted by inducements, the lust for power and wealth.
We cannot allow political frogs to make a mockery of democracy.Thier act are seen as immoral, no integrity or honesty, betray their own family, their own principles, their party and the constituents. Therefore, we should support any move to quickly draft an anti-hoping law.
katak/ringkak sangat sesuai dijadikan umpan taut.. aram, betaut kitai...
It's not surprising that the first frog was Dayak Iban. A prominent Dayak professor once told me that Dayak politicians who were generally poor would be easily blinded by $$$$.
Even with RM100,000 they would jump what more RM50 million as alleged in Perak.
Iban endless obsession of being leader (from Tuai Rumah to Tuai Parti) also contribute to split.
But that just wishful thinking.
Dayak frogs survived well because of dayaks' misplaced values n belief fueled by existing so call dayak leaders. Dayaks are mostly christians but will never fail to mering if the dayak ministers request. Mering is just an excuse to ngirup and merry making. So anyone who becomes a frog can stay as a frog(becomes bull frog) as long as he can fund the rumah panjai folks merry making. So who makes dayak politically backward.... the so call dayak leaders.
Before I write further, may I correct this if I am not wrong:
"In 1990 he (Justin Jinggut) stood again on a SNAP ticket and was soundly defeated by Billy Abit Joo of PBDS.
Billy was then stood as Independent Candidate using Rooster Symbol.
Whatever the history was, moral of the story is that BN is the only MASTER MIND behind all the frogs because BN has all the money, power, corrupts and of course gained benefit out of the frogs.
We the voters "TERLOPONG"!!!
I think on how to avoid the population of frogs to increase is to use the biological methods such as ular sawa or burung hantu...or put the poison directly into their soup.They just betrayed us as a voters!!!Dayaks must CHANGE bah...bah...woooo!!!
Of all the frogs that breeded in sarawak,the dayaks frogs are the most active.Their legs are longer and stronger.They have the tendency to jump faster and farther.
I predict that the next massive jump are from the PRS frogs.Some of the frogs have already jump but the bull frogs haven't.They needed timing and the promise of better benefits.
On the other side of the coin...the Dayaks lack business acumen, henceforth not many dayaks exciled in business fields. But no body dare to dispute that the Dayaks, by all accounts, curve names for the communiy in political arena.Just look around you, there is no Dayaks bigs companies let alone congramulates/a co. of international standard....but politically the Dayaks are every where, Federal minister, deputy fed. minister, state cabinet minister, Asst. minister, ss, pol.sec., Embassador, councellor just name any political appointment, you found Dayaks.In "political frogging" Dayaks are olympic champion...Dayaks politicians learned the trade fast. Could this be a case of the dayaks political skill as gifted?
Double-frogged politician was first born in Sarawak? Jangan hairan atau terkejutlah....like the KDM of Sabah....the Dayaks of Sarawak are targets of " the divide and rule " strategy applied by the Malayans!
They just don't want us to be masters in our own land....the most is as a "ship's fist-mate...never a captain!"
Even our Ghandi-like approach in politic is labeled as "threatening national security" .........
King Cup
To Anonymous (February 14, 2009 1:46 PM),
You are correct. Billy contested as an independent PBDS candidate.
- Jetty
oseph Tawie,
I suggest for your sake, you correct the article above. You say Pesaka members, in a none to subtle way, "jumped" to PBB, by giving the example of the late Temenggong Abok Anak Jalin? That is wholly incorrect. If that is the case, you may as well include in that equation Tun Jugah Anak Barieng, and all the other Penghulus who apparently "jumped" to PBB.
What you should say is Pesaka and it's leadership, chose to merge with another two political parties to create Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu. Linggi himself would have acknowledged his status as founder member of Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu. So are you calling all these founder members "frogs"??? Or have you a bone to pick with members of the Jalin family?? Which is it?? Make up your mind.
Get your facts right Tawie. And re-write that article. This is a request.
To Anonymous (February 15, 2009 9:50 PM),
Do you remember that Abok and Simon Maja were "kidnapped" by Sidi Munan and Alfred Masan and were offered ministerial posts in the Yakub government in 1970? (Sound like what happened in Perak recently).
It was much later that Pesaka joined the government to prevent the break-up of Pesaka. You cannot say Temenggong Jugah and Pesaka leap-frogged.
In 1973 January, Pesaka merged with Bumiputra to form Parti Pesaka Bumiputra Bersatu. All these are being recorded in history. You better read books- The Rising Moon by M. Leigh; Politics in Sarawak 1970-1976 by Peter Searle; The Broken Shield by Joseph Tawie, Politics of Federalism by Bruce Ross Larson and a few other political books. These books are my sources.
- Jetty
Joseph Tawie,
You used the example of Temenggong Abok Anak Jalin as a "political frog", mentioned in the same breadth as the others. That is WRONG.
I don't care who your sources are, but as far as I am aware, and recent history is fact, the Penghulu and Chief of all the Iban from the Bintulu division joined Pesaka, when others were members already, and therein they were led by the late Temenggong Jugah anak Barieng. You go on to say Abok is a frog??? What is wrong with your reading?? How can he be a Frog, where the only Party he joined and moved in was Pesaka, and it's successor, Pesaka Bumiputera Bersatu. Where is your logic in that??? So if you have bone to pick with Abok, then let Sidi come out and say so, PUBLICLY.
I take issue with what you've written in that paragraph.
You remove Abok Anak Jalin from that list. You do so because historical fact is, he was never a frog in the first place. If you're saying Pesaka in 1970 were not in cahoots with Parti Bumiputera and were not in synch with UMNO, then that would be something for you to explore further. And as for Jalin's ministerial post, it was an empty portfolio, Tunku Abdul Razak and UMNO wanted him there, because he was Iban, and because he was bumiputera and lastly because they preferred him over any other Ibans at the time. He was not a key figure, and if you claim Sidi Munan spoke to him in 1970, well whatever Sidi says is hearsay, and what you've written about Abok is FACTUALLY incorrect.Either way, what the other Members of Parliament did in crossing the floor to join the opposition or government, defines them as Frogs. Abok never did that. Not in 1970, and not in 1974 during his short tenure. That is FACT. And the Official History books would back that up. And if you have any more questions, why don't you speak to Rahman Ya'Kub directly? He was the Chief Minister making him, thus the handler of all those under him, including Abok.
Remember we are going by your definition of "frog", and that means known MPs crossing over to either the Opposition or the Government. Get it right, Mr Tawie. And don't try to stretch the facts to fit your mistake.
You re-write that Paragraph, and you do so to retain the credible reputation of your Blog. Bear in mind, when Newspapers print incorrect statements and are found at fault, the editors would issue a correction at the next print. I don't why that can't apply to you.
To Anonymous (February 16, 2009 6:41 PM),
Mr/Ms. Anonymous, I mentioned in my article that Abok was one of the political frogs, I mentioned one, and there were many. Let me quote a passage from The Rsing Moon by M. Leigh page 146: "There was an element of comic opera to the capturing of Penghulu Abok, the first Iban to waver from the fairly solid Pesaka front. After being kept isolated from all other Pesaka members (in the Palm Hotel) he was brought by his bodys across river to Astana."
2. A passage from The Politics of Federalism by Bruce Ross-Larson page: "He contacted Pesaka's Penghulu Abok, saw that he was separated at the Palm Hotel from other Pesaka members, and convinced him to join forces with Bumiputra. The offer of a cabinet post was too much for Penghulu Abok to refuse, and he doubtless felt, in the absence of any ulterior motives, that he could do more for his contituents as Minister of State than as one among many Council Negeri members. The defection was, of course, kept secret."
3. A passage from Politics in Sarawak 1970-1976 page 19: "It will be recalled that after Penghulu Abok and Simon Dembab joined the new government and Pesaka's president Tan Sri Temenggong Jugah - having been given the choice of supporting the government or resigning from his cabinet post - had also given way, what remained of the Pesaka front in Council rapidly disintegrated."
4. A passage from The Broken Shield by Joseph Tawie page 15: "Folowong the 'kidnap' of two of its Council Negeri members, Pesaka was therefore forced to join the coalition government. Because if Pesaka did not follow suit, there was a possibility that more would be joining the coalition individually and this could result in the break-up of the party. That was why Pesaka did not take action against Abok and Maja for joining the government without the approval of the party.....Abok and his nephew Richard Asan were having laksa one evening near the Mayfair Hotel when Sidi and Masan arrived in Mason's old volkswagen. Abok was invited for a ride together with Richard and was driven to a house at Ong Tiang Swee Road. According to Richard, a number of politicians including Noor Tahir were at the house. From there they took Abok to an unknown desatination. Richard was, however, left behind. Today it has been confirmed that the unknown destination was Arif Hotel where Abok was virtually held as 'hostage'." Sound very much similar to the political frogs in Perak.
For your information, I verified this story with Richard and even Sidi told me his version of the story. So to me whether you like it or not Abok was one of the political frogs. There were many.
If you do not want to accept the naked truth, that is your problem. Let the readers be the judge.
- Jetty
P/s: This will be my last response to your comments.
Come on Mr Anonymous, enough of commenting about this issue...the blogger has other issues to highlight in his blog.
If you don't agree with him, then that's you problem lah...Or why don't you write your own version of the article for the other readers to judge.
Cheers mate!!
Hey! for me all politicians nowadays are all the same.
Its all about the money.
Bn ka , snap ka, pbb ka, umno ka...
Money matter most. If I become politician also, I also do the same. I wouldnt fight for rakyat cause. I will use the rakyat votes to get what I need, not their needs.
Buy big house, big car, drink and go merry ...
who cares about the Rakyat.
U care? Yes for now you care, but when you won or at that position you would not even bother to write your blog anymore.. why bother
I agree with Jetty that Penghulu Abok was one of the 'political frogs'.
I don't give a damn what Mr Annoymous says because these events were already being recorded as history in the said books.
Whether Abok was forced to 'jumped', 'defect' or 'moved'to PBB, that do not really matters to me. As long as Abok had moved to another party (PBB), he can be considered a frog.
Maybe Mr Annon. has a different definition about 'political frogs'..Or is he a relative to Abok and cannot accept the FACTS that Abok was a political frog!
To me Penghulu Abok and Simon Dembab Maja were political frogs. If they did not leap-frog to Bumiputra and betray Tun Jugah aand Pesaka, our political story and unity might be different today. The fact they sold themselves to Bumiputra party, the Dayaks until today are under the tutelage of Rahman Yakub and now Taib Mahmud. The two frogs should be whollly blamed for our disunity today.
Don't you find it funny that some people become so brave behind a pc/laptop...but when they leave comments they just want to be anonymous.
And reading thru Mr-Anon replies...it just sounds so typical where one refuses to listen to logic and proof and just blindly support. Sigh...looks like changes will be slower than anticipated.
Post a Comment