‘Sarawak’s paper millionaires’

The state government claims that they have created 2,000 millionaires through the Native Customary Rights JV concept, but others claim they are only paper millionaires.

KUCHING: The Sarawak government claims that they have created 2,000 millionaires through the new Native Customary Rights concept but detractors say they are “paper millionaires”

Sarawak PKR chairman Baru Bian says that they are only paper millionaires.

He was refuting claims by assistant minister in the Chief Minister’s Office (Bumiputera Entrepreneur Development) Mohd Naroden Majais’ statement that 2,000 participant in the NCR exercise were now millionaires.

Naroden had said that through the NCR land development and new concept through JV, about 2,000 landowners who have 50 acres and above now are holding assets worth a million ringgit.

“Therefore, we can say that the scheme has created not less than 2,000 rural Bumiputera millionaires,” the assistant minister had said.

Bian who is also the Ba’Kelalan assemblyman said: “His statement is misleading. In terms of acreage you may say they are ‘paper millionaires’.

“The truth is that they are ‘bankrupt millionaires’, because they have not been paid their dues by the investors and government agency’s agent like Pelita or LCDA (Land Custody Development Authority).

“Two cases had been nullified by the court including the brain child NCR land project of Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud in Machan, Kanowit.

“After nine years the investors said that there are no profits so there are no dividends, so what millionaires is he is talking about?

Commenting on the same issue, Patrick Sibat Sujang, a former NCR land development committee member of Parti Rakyat Sarawak (PRS) accused the assistant minister of misleading the people.

“While on paper, the value of the land could be worth millions of ringgit, but it is useless and meaningless to the landowners as under the JV concept, the landowners had surrendered their land to the JV companies.

“As the landowners have no rights to their land, they are now at the mercy of the investors. They cannot sell their land or get back their land.

“To me the landowners are condemned to poverty for the next 60 years,” said Sujang, pointing out that some landowners received no dividend at all.

“Even if some of them are paid dividends, it is far below the poverty line, and some scheme participants in Lubok Antu received less than RM10 worth of dividend per year,” he said.

“Tell me how the landowners can become millionaires under this concept?

Sujang believed that the only way the landowners can become rich is for the new concept to be replaced by a rental system.

-      - Taken from Free Malaysia Today

Broken promises, displaced natives, cheating BN

Thirty years on, native victims of the Batang Ai and Bakun dams are still waiting for compensations and lands promised to them in return for their relocation.

KUCHING: Unresolved issues as a result of broken promises made to natives displaced by the Batang Ai and Bakun hydro-electric dams should serve as a “warning” to settlers who are yet to be affected by the construction of dams in Baram and other places in Sarawak.

Despite 30 long years, as in the case of Batang Ai, and 14 years in Bakun’s case, the problems with the settlers have not been resolved.

Said Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian: “I would like to urge our people, especially those who are yet to be affected by the construction of the dams, to bear in mind what have happened to the people who have been displaced by the Batang Ai and Bakun dams.

“As long as they are the same [Barisan Nasional] people at the top, their promises will never be fulfilled.”

Bian was commenting on a news report highlighting unresolved issues and unfilled promises made 14 years ago by the Taib Mahmud government to native settlers in return for their relocating from their ancestral homes. The exercise was to enable the construction of the Bakun Dam.

More than 9,000 people from the Kayan, Kenyah and Penan communities who are now resettled at Sungai Asap are still clamouring for the fulfilment of the promises made in exchange for their submerged longhouses and land.

Five longhouses belonging to the Ukit community are still left stranded in the Ulu Balui. They too have claimed that they have not been compensated for the loss of their longhouses and land.

Their leader, Ngajang Midin, said the government owned him more than RM100,000.

Bian, who is the Ba’Kelalan Assemblyman, said: “The recent events unfolding at Bakun, Bengoh and Baram areas tell a sorry tale about the tragedy brought about by the government’s reckless disregard of the people in its haste to satisfy the greed of certain powerful parties.

“The people of Sungai Asap are still waiting for the promises of the government to be fulfilled 14 years after they were relocated to make way for the Bakun Dam.

“Initially they were promised 15 acres per family, but they were eventually given only three acres.

“They also claim to have been shortchanged on other promises of cash compensation, housing materials and scholarship from the Bakun Trust Fund.

“In the Bengoh area, timber licences were issued for land that was allocated to the people for resettlement, creating great distress and anger to those who had already suffered the trauma of the loss of their land and livelihood,” he said.

‘Lying BN government’

Bian said that as for the Baram dam, although BN politicians had tried to convince the public that the people in the area support the building of the dam, this is far from the truth.

“There have been protests by the people determined not to suffer the same fate as those whose lives were destroyed by the Batang Ai, Bakun and Bengoh dams,” he said, adding that two police reports had been lodged against contractors Sarawak Energy Bhd for trespassing on native customary rights (NCR) land to start works on the Baram dam.

“In my visits to the area, I was told by 40 longhouse representatives that 95% of the people oppose the building of the dam,” he said.

Bian also said the BN government has made numerous other promises which have yet to see the light of day, including hospitals in Limbang and Petra Jaya, which have yet to be built.

“I saw billboards mushrooming everywhere proclaiming ‘janji ditepati’ and these are but another attempt to mislead the people.

“In the face of broken promises and mistreatment of the people by this government, the BN politicians have no qualms about accusing the opposition of being liars and making empty promises to win the hearts of the rakyat.

“I have been told to stay out of Limbang by the incumbent MP as the people would not fall for the opposition’s lies. For me, that’s not for the political leaders like us to decide but the rakyat’s prerogatives.

“Whether we are telling lies or not is for the rakyat to judge. Never underestimate the wisdom of the rakyat,” he said.--- Free Malaysia Today

ANOTHER NCR LAND DEVELOPMENT FAILURE

KUCHING:  Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud’s new land development concept ‘Konsep Baru’ to develop native customary rights (NCR) land under a JV hit another major failure when the Sibu High Court granted the return of the land to the owners last week.

Five landowners - Kadam ak Embuyang, Genta ak Saka, Bartholomew Aji Lanyau, Rimong ak Jantan and Laja@ Meris ak Augustine Igoh - representing 163 other claimants of NCR land situated at Sg. Kelimut, Kanowit, Sarawak had sued Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd (subsidiary of LCDA), Superintendent of Lands & Surveys, the State Government of Sarawak, and Boustead Pelita Kanowit Sdn Bhd, the investor of the scheme.

Baru Bian, who represented the plaintiffs, described the ‘victory’ as another judgment in favour of the indigenous Ibans which was handed down by Her Ladyship Puan Yew Jen Kie, High Court Judge Sibu on the April 30, 2012.

“This victory yet again proves that native customary rights (NCR) land cases are gaining legal recognition and sanction in Sarawak.

“Unlike the other 200 NCR land cases now pending in all the High Courts in Sarawak, this case is unique in a sense, because the plaintiffs’ NCR lands are recognized by the State Government of Sarawak to be developed jointly by the State Government through its statutory development arm of Land Custody Development Authority (LCDA), under a scheme termed as ‘Konsep Baru’ which is  the ‘brainchild’ of the Chief Minister of Sarawak.

“The ‘Konsep Baru’ would have its equitable shareholding in the Joint Venture (JV) Company with LCDA holding 40% (10% for LCDA and 30% in trust for the native landowners) and the investor holding 60%,” said Bian at a media conference.

The Ba’Kelalan Assemblyman and Sarawak PKR chief said that the landowners would be deemed to have paid their shares of 30% through the surrendering of their NCR lands for the scheme.

He said that the official launching was on August 19, 1996 by the Chief Minister himself, apparent from the booklet on the official launching adduced in the trial of the case.

He said that on January 14,  2002, a Principal Deed was signed between the Plaintiffs and Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd which described the terms and conditions of the Konsep Baru and the operation of the JV company.

Bian said: “The plaintiffs claimed that Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd and/or the Superintendent of Lands & Surveys, or the State Government of Sarawak, and/or their servants or agents had represented to the plaintiffs and/or promised, and guaranteed to the plaintiffs that in consideration of the Plaintiffs assigning absolutely to Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd, as trustee, their respective interests, rights, shares and estate in the said NCR Lands at Sg Kelimut, the Plaintiffs will benefit or profit through the development of the said NCR Lands into an Oil Palm Plantation, the said profits or benefits to be received after four years of planting oil palm on the said NCR Lands.

“The plaintiffs claimed that the said Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd and/or the Superintendent of Lands & Surveys, or the State Government of Sarawak, had failed, neglected and/or were in breach of the trust given them by the Plaintiffs as the development program of the said NCR Lands was a total failure with no foreseeable opportunity of making money or bringing benefits or profits to the plaintiffs,” he said.

The plaintiffs together with their lawyer Baru Bian had attended a briefing at the District Office Kanowit, with the officers of Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd and the investor, and were informed by the officers of the investor that the joint-venture with Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd to date had never achieved any profits at all.

In fact, the joint venture involving the plaintiffs’ NCR Lands was losing more than RM100 million up to the time of filing the writ in this case. 

The plaintiffs in the circumstances claimed that they had suffered loss and damage as a consequence of the negligence and breach of trust on the part of Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd, the Superintendent of Lands & Surveys, and the State Government of Sarawak.

Alternatively, the plaintiffs claimed that Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd, the Superintendent of Lands & Surveys, and the State Government of Sarawak had fraudulently misrepresented to the plaintiffs that such joint venture with Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd and the State Government of Sarawak would reap profits for the plaintiffs.

Bian said: “Having knowledge of the fact that the said JV would in all likelihood not be profitable, the defendants represented to the plaintiffs that after four years of planting, the plaintiffs would receive their shares of dividends from the said JV.

“The planting of oil palm on the said NCR Lands in fact started in 1996 or 1997 but to date there is no evidence that the said joint venture is making money.

“Having the knowledge that Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd does not have the status of a native under the Land Code, all the defendants or their servants or agents advised the plaintiffs to sign the said Agreement in order to lure the plaintiffs to part with their rights and interest in the said NCR lands for the defendants’ benefits, when in fact this transaction is unlawful under the provisions of the Sarawak Land Code,” he said.

The PKR leader said that in the middle of 2009, Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd made some ‘dividend payment’ to the plaintiffs when the JV in fact had made no profit. The Plaintiffs claimed that such payment was not dividend from the profit but borrowed sum from somewhere with the intention of pacifying the plaintiffs’ anger towards the defendants.

“In the circumstances the plaintiffs alternatively, claimed that the said Principal Deed dated January 14, 2002, as between the plaintiffs and Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd, and other agreements pursuant to this Principal Deed or joint-venture involving the plaintiffs are null and void and of no legal effect vis-à-vis section 8 of the Land Code (Cap.81) and/or on ground of fraud.

“The Plaintiffs claimed that in view of the non-possibility of Pelita Holdings Sdn Bhd, and its joint-venture partner steering the joint-venture business to a profitable enterprise, the said NCR Lands should be given back to the plaintiffs forthwith with no order as to costs of any sort.

“In the light of the above facts the Honourable Judge granted most of the plaintiffs ‘reliefs against all the defendants amongst which are that the Principal Deed dated  January 14, 2002, the basis of the ‘Konsep Baru’  to develop NCR lands, is null and void or illegal vis-à-vis section 8 of the Sarawak Land Code.

“The said NCR lands were therefore handed back to the natives. There was also an injunction order against the defendants and their servants to vacate the said NCR Lands. The full details of the judgment are not yet available to us and as such I am not able to disclose the other details of the Court’s order.

“We will make available on our website the full written judgment of the Court once we have it,” he said.

Bian said that the decision appeared to be the second such judgment against this ‘Konsep Baru’ project, which had been nullified by the Court.

The first was that of Masa Nangkai & Ors v. Lembaga Pembangunan Dan Lindungan Tanah & Ors [2011] 1 LNS 145, a case that came from Sg Tengang, Sri Aman, where Judge Datuk Albert Linton (now Judge of Court of Appeal) said that such agreement (Principal Deed) had been ‘cleverly devised with legal mechanism and legalistic language which are mere fig leaves too scanty to conceal their violations of Articles 5and 13 of the Constitution’.

 In His Lordship’s opinion, ‘the sum total of the rights of the landowners, to put it crudely, and for want of a better word, is zero. They have been deprived of their native customary rights land, which is a source of their livelihood and lost the rights to their property, which are violations of Articles 5and 13 of the Constitution’.

Bian said that that decision could have had some bearing on the present case.

What has happened to our BN Dayak leaders?

According to The Borneo Post today (Feb 11),  Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) deputy president Maximus Ongkilili disagreed with the state attorney general Roderic Fernandez’s interpretation of native customary right (NCR) land provision in the Sabah Land Ordinance (SLO) that there is ‘no NCR land after 1930’.

Describing it as a wrong interpretation, he said that unlike in Sarawak there is no cut-off point in the context of Sabah.

“If you look at the state land ordinance very closely, it does not say that. I am a not lawyer by training, but I have some basic law training and I think it is a wrong interpretation because the judgment of the High Court of Borneo over the years have recognised the basis of NCR land established in Sabah.

“I think that is sad. That is a dangerous statement,” said Ongkilili, who is a federal minister of science, technology and innovation.

Now what is interesting here is that Ongkilili dares to say something against the attorney general of Sabah and the state government. He dares to say that AG was wrong in his interpretation of the land code in respect of NCR land in Sabah.

In Sarawak, none of the Dayak leaders in state Barisan Nasional dares to say anything against the AG of Sarawak and the Chief Minister for not only wrongly interpreting the Sarawak Land Code in respect of the NCR land, but also for refusing to accept the decision of the Court including the Apex court.

The AG, who is very much anti-Dayaks owing NCR land always argues in the Court that NCR land does not include "Pemakai menua" and "Pulau galau". He just refuses to accept the Apex court decision on this.

In the court one after another of the NCR land cases are won by the native landowners through lawyers like Baru Bian, See Chee How, Paul Raja, John Antau and Harrison Ngau to name of the few brave lawyers.

But where are our Dayak ministers and Dayak elected representatives? Don’t they have any conscience when they know that some of the NCR landowners are their grand-parents, parents, brothers and relatives whose lands have been taken away and given to oil palm and timber companies?

Not only they don’t hear their cries for help, but they are part and parcel of the state government’s tools and mercenaries (or Ghurkha soldiers as Edwin Dundang, former SNAP President described them). (Ghurkha soldiers are employed by some Sultans to protect them from their own people).

I recall in June 2000 sitting of the state legislative assembly during which the state government passed an amendment to the Sarawak Land code in respect of the NCR land.

All Dayak assemblymen supported the amendment which is very damaging to NCR land and which is the roots of today’s problem with NCR land.

One Dayak minister who was overzealous of supporting the amendment described it as ‘a gawai gift for the Dayaks’, while another minister said that the passing of the amendment was “a jewel in the crown of Barisan Nasional".

“In that sense, they are the ones who are mercenaries used by others to kill our own people,” said Baru Bian, Sarawak PKR chief.

Call to set up Native Land Tribunal

My colleagues and I welcome the suggestion by Tan Sri Richard Malanjum that a Native Land Tribunal be set up in Sabah and we call for the same to be set up in Sarawak. The statements made by Tan Sri Richard at the Symposium on Sabah Native Land Rights at Universiti Malaysia Sabah fortify the views expressed by us in our Media Release dated 16 January 2012 in which we expressed our support for the call by the Bar Council for a specialized Indigenous People’s Court to be established.

Whether it is called the Indigenous People’s Court or the Native Land Tribunal, the important thing is that this forum should provide an appropriate process to investigate land claims brought by the natives of the land. As pointed out by Tan Sri Richard, there are certain limitations to having such cases heard in Civil courts, such as the requirement of strict compliance with the Evidence Act, unfamiliarity of judges with native adat and culture, and lack of judges.

This proposed Tribunal or Court should comprise of qualified individuals preferably standing on par with High Court judges. Of utmost importance is that they must be well-versed in the adat, customs and culture of the people. They must be given the power to hear cases which involve non-natives, unlike the current Native Court which does not have such power. Their remedial power must be equivalent to the High Court’s to grant injunctions and unlimited award and damages, which again is restricted in the current Native Court.

The composition, ambit and procedure of the proposed Native Tribunal or Indigenous People’s Court are open for debate and discussion. What is clear is that there is a pressing need for this specialized tribunal or court given the recent calls by various parties for its establishment. It is our hope that the Chief Justice will heed the calls and initiate steps to carry out the proposal.

BaruBian

Chairman

PKR Sarawak

State Assemblyman

N 70 Ba’ kelalan

Clonal Rubber Seeds do not exist

Media Statement by Baru Bian

13 January 2012

Clonal Rubber Seeds do not exist

I refer to an item in the Borneo Post dated 11 January 2012 page D1 headlined ‘15 million 1Malaysia Rubber Clone Seeds for adoption’ in which the DLT Group of Companies is reported to be offering 1Malaysia Rubber Clone Seeds for adoption to any interested farmers in the state under the Rubber Seeds Adoption Programme purportedly “the fruit of work, research and development”. This is also reported in Sin Chew Daily on 11 January 2012 at page 7.

I have been informed by highly knowledgeable consultants that there is no such thing as a ‘clonal seed’ because any seed produced by the cloned tree does not necessarily bear the characteristics of that clonal parent. All the seed produced from a clonal tree will be different and not necessarily of good quality. It is therefore not accurate to say that the seed are of the 1Malaysia clone or better than any other rubber seed produced from any other rubber tree whether it be cloned or not.

I was informed that the DLT Group of companies is willing to let farmers have the seeds for free but that in order to produce clonal plants for planting and production they must grow the seeds and then graft buds onto them of legitimate clones such as 1Malaysia, PB260, RRIM2023 etc. etc. From where do the DLT Group of Companies expect the farmers to obtain the buds and how much will they have to pay for them? Will the DLT Group of Companies also be supplying buds free of charge?

I would like to advise all farmers that they need not get seed from DLT or any other company or Government Department as all they need to do is collect any seed from any type of rubber tree growing in the jungle, grow it on until it has the stem size of a pencil and then graft onto it a bud from a legitimate and certified clone that is produced from a budwood nursery.

It has been made known to me that the DLT Group of Companies is one of the licensees of the Malaysian Rubber Board who are licensed to produce the 1Malaysia clones and therefore presumably budwood. They would presumably have received some funding from the Board to carry out the production. I would like to propose supplying deserving farmers subsidized or free of charge-cloned buds. At the same time it is crucial that RISDA educate these farmers to do this cloning process.

Something does not seem right in this whole scenario. Firstly, the role of the Rubber Board, if I’m not mistaken, is to help the rural people who wish to plant rubber trees and make some money from the latex. Why then have two private companies been chosen to adopt 1 million and 700,000 seeds and an individual 1 million seeds? This is helping the big players and not those people who truly need the help. Where does this leave the farmer who has a small plot of land?

Secondly, the way which the DLT Group of companies is conducting their business causes me great alarm as a lot of the farmers will be misled by the claims that they will be given the 1Malaysia clone seeds. After they have been given the seeds, from where will they obtain the high quality buds that they need to graft onto the plants that they grow from these seeds to produce plants for establishment in their smallholdings?

From the press report it appears that the said 1Malaysia clone is very good. It would be helpful to all if Dr. Luhat could furnish us with the performance data of this clone as recorded and reported from field trials in Sarawak and which have been conducted by a reliable testing organization in this State. This would give credence and confidence to all interested parties especially the poor rural farmers. Our rural folk just want to be able to get some good and reliably certified rubber clones so that they can work towards self-sufficiency.

Baru Bian
State Assemblyman
N70 Ba’ Kelalan

Use Tuai Rumah to disperse RM500 aid, says Baru Bian

Sarawak PKR chief Baru Bian suggested that the government should use the offices of district officers, elected representatives and Tuai Rumah (community headmen) to disperse RM500 to the families in the rural areas earning less than RM3,000.

“This is the most practical way to disperse the money to those families in the rural areas,” said Bian, who is also the Ba’Kelalan assemblyman.

“Calling them to town to fill IRD (Inland Revenue Department) forms is not only not practical, but it is also exerting a financial burden on the rural people.

“Just to take RM500, they may have to spend much more than that. Moreover, all the rural families do not pay income tax and thus do not have any IRD form,” he said when asked to comment on the RM500 which is to be given to families whose combined incomes are less than RM3,000 per month.

“The only way to solve this problem is just distribute the money through their elected representatives or Tuai Rumah as almost all the rural people earn less than RM3,000.

“There is no need to fill the form. Let the money be their Christmas gift,” he said.

The money was part of allocation mentioned in the 2012 budget by Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, who is also the Finance Minister.

While welcoming the financial assistance to the poor people, Bian said that the government should know the mechanism how to disperse the money especially with regard the people of Sarawak.

“It is possible that when Najib announced the whole thing, he must have forgotten about conditions in Sarawak.

“I think unconsciously they (federal leaders) always forget Sabah and Sarawak,” he said.

Bian believed that the distribution of the money as far as Sarawak is concerned cannot be done before the general election.

“If you ask them to fill the IRD forms, even after the election, it will not be completed.

“It is possible also that they want to use the money as ‘candies’ for the coming election,” he added.

Out of 2.4 million people, about 70% are living in the rural areas who are mostly Dayaks. Some 50% of them are in the hardcore category.

Penans to be caddies?

KUCHING: Is there any possibility for a Penan whose is wearing only his traditional dress being engaged as a caddie to such personality like Tiger Woods?

This could be possible if the government agrees to a suggestion by Telang Usan assemblyman Dennis Ngau to open up a golf course in the Penans’ territory in Baram in order to give them employment opportunities.

The suggestion was made by Ngau when he talked about woes faced by the natives of the Baram in the absence of basic amenities, infrastructure and economic activities in the area.

“This golf course will be part of the effort to increase the value-added of the tourism sector, and with the expected improvement of the road system in Baram soon, the setting up of the course will definitely provide employment opportunities to the locals,” Ngau said when he debated on the state 2012 budget.

Pointing out that a big chunk of the development budget goes to among others tourism development, Ngau said: “I would like to urge the relevant ministry to look into the request from the people of Ulu Baram who have identified places of interest to be developed as tourism products.

“Definitely Baram is very rich with tourism products, but very poor with supporting facilities such as good roads and other related facilities.

“The absence of these facilities makes tour packages become too expensive thus make it (tourism) unmarketable,” he said.

“As part of the effort to increase the value-added of the tourism sector, and with the expected improvement of the road system in Baram, I urge the government to encourage the private sector to open up a gold course in the area,” he said.

“The opening of the course would give the locals (Penans, Kayans and Kenyahs) job opportunities,” he said.

Currently the people in his constituency depend on rivers and jungles as their major source of food, pointing out that hunting and gathering of jungle produce are still the way of life.

“Rivers and jungles had acted like freezers to them in those days, but today there is an alarming drop in all types of fish and animals,” he said, urging the government to create a Penan communal land or Penan Reserve land, where they could still practise their traditional way of life.

Commenting on Ngau’s suggestion (to build golf course), Baru Bian, Ba’Kelalan assemblyman and Pakatan Rakyat’s shadow minister for Land Development and NCR land affair branded the suggestion as very ‘naïve’ to have a golf course in the interior of Baram.

“Once you destroy the forests and vegetation you also destroy the habitat of the animals.

“Secondly, the fertilizers they use to maintain the golf course is detrimental to marine life,” he said, pointing out that the course would not viable and beneficial ecologically speaking.

“It is so expensive to maintain the course and who would go and play? And how many people can get a golf course employment. 100? That will not solve the employment problem,” he said.

Bian suggested that to open up work opportunities other options should be considered for example the ecotourism like introducing home stay and the planting of different kinds of cash crops.

“Construction of roads to the interiors would open up the place too. This will encourage people to go back to their longhouses and take up their NCR land for farming,” he said.

For a golf course with 18 holes, its length should be between 5,000 and 7,000 yards and it needs at least an area of 150 hectares.

The cost of building the course depends on the type of course the government wants and the type of land where the course it is to be built.

Such a golf course may cost several hundred millions of ringgit.

Ngau did not point out exactly where the course could be built, and if it is in the Telang Usan valley it will be submerged under water when the proposed Baram dam is completed.

The dam which is about the size of Singapore is expected to drown between 70 and 80% of the NCR land.

It is projected to cost more than RM3 billion.

Bian hoped that Ngau is not serious with his suggestion.

Islamic teaching in rural schools, Bian expresses concern

16 Nov 2011

KUCHING: Sarawak parents are concerned over subtle attempts at imparting Islamic teachings and practices to children in pre-schools in the rural areas, said Baru Bian, Ba’Kelalan state assemblyman.

Debating the 2012 budget, Bian, who is Sarawak PKR chief said: “Many rural areas are predominantly Christian, and there is a very real problem of subtle attempts at imparting Islamic teachings and practices in pre-schools.

“There are reports from parents of school children that their children come home from school and recite the Islamic ways of praying at home.

“From my own constituency of Ba’Kelalan, I have personally received reports of such incidents that happened to children from two families,” he said.

According to news reports, the KEMAS director general Datuk Abdul Puhat Mat Nayan said that beginning 2010, KEMAS established 539 new pre-school classes and will open another 2,000 new ones.

Last year, KEMAS opened 150 kindergartens in the state and for this year, they have set up 300 more to increase the accessibility to early childhood education.

Bian said that the people are concerned that these pre-schools are staffed by teachers from outside the local community and worst if they come from Peninsular Malaysia, the majority of whom are Muslims.

“Added to this concern is the news that KEMAS schools will be taking on the PERMATA syllabus, as announced in Sabah in July this year by National PERMATA programme patron Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor.

“I was informed that one of the subjects in the PERMATA curriculum is Islamic teachings in class.

“Can we be guaranteed that all non-Muslim children be exempted from these classes or lessons?

“What are the steps taken by the state government to ensure that teachers of different faiths do not impart or teach their beliefs to the children of different faiths or beliefs in these Tadika or Pra-Sekolah in the state?” asked Bian.

He said: “I propose that local teachers from the local community be recruited to teach in these Tadika or pra-sekolah to avoid any conflict of religious beliefs.

“Secondly, I propose that allocations should be made to NGOs and religious organisations to start or support their own Tadika or pre-schools to reflect our support of imparting knowledge to all notwithstanding their racial or religious backgrounds,” Bian said.

On the teaching of mother tongue, Bian asked the government that there be an official budget every year allocated for the teaching of languages of all the different races in Sarawak from pre-school to Primary Six level.

“The loss of our people’s mother tongue is a serious threat and the precursor to the loss of our culture and identity. The preservation of our languages must be given priority or our people will slowly lose their unique and distinct cultures.

“With the common incidences of inter-marriage between different races in Sarawak, this request needs immediate implementation, “ said Bian, pointing out that it is viable that funds, which are allocated to KEMAS or Permata, can be used to train teachers to teach their local languages or dialects.

State Govt lost again

SIBU: The State government lost yet another case of dispute over native customary rights (NCR) land to the natives this time at Budu, Krian, Saratok, prompting Baru Bian, the natives’ legal counsel to say that it is a clear proof of land grab by the present government.

“Today (23 September), another judgment handed down by the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak at Sibu, is another clear proof that the land grab by the present State Government of Native Customary Land (NCL) in Sarawak is on the rise,” Bian, who is Sarawak PKR chief said.

He was commenting on the natives’ victory against a company Vita Hill Sdn Bhd, the Director of Forests and the state government.

The plaintiffs who are all Iban natives of Sarawak, headed by their longhouse Chief or Tuai Rumah Gayan anak Tupai, and three others brought a legal action on their own behalf, as well as on behalf of 15 other residents who claimed to be proprietors, occupiers, and claimants of Native Customary Rights (NCR) land approximately 3,308.15 acres.

The land is situated at their longhouse known as Rumah Gayan, Dassey, Budu, Krian, Saratok, Sarawak, against three defendants a timber licensee Vita Hill Sdn Bhd and the issuing authority, the Director of Forests, Sarawak and the State Government of Sarawak.

The plaintiffs claimed that on or about the 13^th day of June 2006, without the knowledge and/or consent of the plaintiffs, the Director of Forests Sarawak, the second defendant had issued out to the Vita Hill Sdn Bhd, the first defendant a Timber Licence No. T/3456, which area includes or overlaps onto the plaintiffs’ NCR Land.

The Plaintiffs had proven in the trial that the first defendant and/or their servants or agents had constructed timber roads or feeder roads on the plaintiffs’ said NCR Land and therefore trespassing thereon causing extensive damages.

Bian said the plaintiffs amongst other things also claimed that there was no extinguishment of the plaintiffs’ NCR within the land covered by the said Timber Licence before the same was issued to the first defendant and/or no provision as to compensation in accordance with the Land Code of Sarawak, Forest Ordinance Sarawak and the Federal Constitution was ever made or paid to the Plaintiffs.

Therefore alienation of the said timber licence is unlawful, unconstitutional, and improper and therefore the plaintiffs said that the issuance of the timber licence was null and void.

Further, the plaintiffs argued that the said timber licence is subject to their NCR and therefore their NCR should prevail over the said Timber Licence.

The High Court Judge Puan Yew Jen Kie, handed down her judgment on Friday afternoon concurring with the plaintiffs’ claims, made the following orders:

· A declaration that the Plaintiffs had acquired and/or inherited Native title and/or Native Customary Rights (NCR) and/or usufructuary rights over the said NCR Land as claimed by the plaintiffs.

· A declaration that the first defendant and/or their servants or agents had trespassed upon the said NCR Land of the Plaintiffs.

· A declaration that the said timber licence T/3456, is subject to the plaintiffs’ said Native title and/or Native Customary Rights (NCR) and/or usufructuary rights over the said NCR Land.

The Court ordered that as a consequence order the area under the said timber licence No. T/3456, be rectified to exclude the area claimed by the plaintiffs as their native title and/or native customary rights and/or usufructuary rights land.

The Court also ordered that an injunction restraining the first defendant and/or its employees, servants and/or agents from trespassing, clearing, using or occupying the plaintiffs’ said NCR land.

The judge said that an order that the plaintiffs be given vacant possession of their said NCR Land and the first defendant and/or its employees, servants and/or agents to cease operations and remove all structures and their equipments or machineries from the Plaintiffs’ said NCR Land forthwith.

She said that the damages suffered by the plaintiffs be assessed by the Senior Assistant Registrar of the High Court.

Bian said that it is interesting to note that the plaintiffs went back into their history to prove their case. They claimed that they are the fifth generation of Ibans who occupied the said NCR Land since the time of their ancestors Luyoh Anak Rekan when Sarawak was still under the control of the Brunei Sultanate.

Some documentary proofs like Occupation Tickets issued in the 1930s to some of the Plaintiffs and their parents were evidences of legal occupation.

More recent proofs were the fact that the plaintiffs were compensated by the State Government due to the construction of a public road in 2001 across their NCR Land, Bian said.

The plaintiffs were represented by their Counsel Mr. Baru Bian of Messrs Baru Bian Advocates & Solicitors, Kuching, the first defendant Vita Hill Sdn Bhd by Puan Siti Norashidah Binti Dollah of Messrs Huang & Co., Sibu, and the second and third Defendants, who are the Director of Forests Sarawak and State Government of Sarawak respectively were represented by legal Officer Joseph Chioh Hock Hua.

Bian said: “We welcome this judgment and hope that it would inspire others to fight on to defend their NCR over land in Sarawak, notwithstanding the possibility that the Government of Sarawak may yet appeal against another judgment favouring the natives of Sarawak as in other cases won before this.

“If indeed the State Government and her present political leaders are true to their words of respecting NCR over land in Sarawak and the Court’s judgments as such as this, they should not appeal against this judgment.

“On the other hand, I wish to urge the natives of Sarawak to think really hard of taking the alternative and most effective means of resolving this NCR land issues vis-à-vis logging companies, plantation companies, quarry licences and dams constructions which had driven them to squatters and illegal occupiers status upon their own NCR land by voting for Pakatan Rakyat in the next General Election.

“This is because only a Pakatan Rakyat Government at the Federal and State level could understand the plight of the natives in Sarawak over their NCR land issues and has the political will to resolve it,” said Bian who is the assemblyman for Ba’Kelalan.

Another victory for native landowners

KUCHING: The High Court in Kuching last Friday (15 July) declared as null and void the issuance of the Forest Timber Licence No. T/8329 to the Standard Point Sdn Bhd in native customary rights lands which are owned by more than 500 Ibans of Kampung Sungai Merah, Pantu.

The court presided over by Judge Sangau Gunting further ordered that the plaintiffs’ NCR precludes the first defendant (Standard Point Sdn Bhd) and second defendant (Roundtree Timber Sdn Bhd), from impairing or abridging the plaintiffs’ rights and a prohibitory injunction against both companies restraining them from trespassing, entering, clearing, felling and/or occupying the plaintiffs’ said NCR Land.

The court also declared that the 4th defendant (the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys Sri Aman) and the 5th defendant (Sarawak State Government) take cognizance of such NCR and to enter and record in their Land Registry such right and thereafter to issue title to the said Land in accordance with the Sarawak Land Code.

The companies were ordered to pay agreed costs of RM20,000 to the plaintiffs within one month from Friday July 15, 2011.

On the other hand, costs by the Superintendent of Lands & Surveys Sri Aman, the Sarawak State Government and the Sarawak Forest Director were ordered to be taxed by the Court unless parties come to an agreement on it.

The order was made following a legal suit filed by the plaintiffs, Martin Ak Lindang, Biju Ak Nyelang and Buang Ak Jala and 500 natives from two longhouses of Rumah Musih and Rumah Usek, against the two companies, the Director of Forests, the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys Sri Aman and the state government for encroaching into their ‘pemakai menua’ which has been ruled as their NCR land.

The order was also based on consent order that was entered on February 25 before Datuk Linton Albert for a declaration that the plaintiffs had acquired native customary rights (NCR) over the Land known as ‘pemakai menua’.

In their statement of claims filed in 2007, the natives claimed native customary rights over the said land as their ancestors were the first settlers in the area.

In March 2006 the plaintiffs found out that the first defendant had encroached into their land to extract timber destroying their farms, which are the source of their livelihood, and causing extensive damages and soil erosion on their land.

In Friday’s hearing, after six witnesses of the plaintiffs had given their evidence the two parties have decided to settle the matter amicably.

Judge Sangau then recorded a consent judgment and made his ruling for the NCR land case litigated earlier before Datuk Linton Albert (now a judge in the Court of Appeal).

Commenting on the case, See Chee How of Baru Bian Advocates who acted on their behalf said that the native landowners have added their names to the list of proud native plaintiffs in Sarawak who have successfully defended the native customary rights land.

“It is not only another victory, but a great victory of the natives,” he said.

Esther Wong Zhi Hua represented the companies while State Legal Officer Zainuddin Bin Hussaini represented the Superintendent of Lands & Surveys Sri Aman, the Sarawak State Government and the Sarawak Forest Director.

There are more than 200 NCR land cases that are pending hearing at the High Court, and many more are waiting to be filed.

The Baru Bian Advocates alone is handling more than 100 cases.

This victory should serve another eye-opener to the state government which has been accused of taking away NCR land which also includes ‘pemakai menua’ and ‘pulau galau’.

Maiden Speech YB Baru Bian

MAIDEN SPEECH OF

YB BARU BIAN N. 70 BA’KELALAN

DATO’ SRI SPEAKER

Terima kasih Tuan Speaker kerana member peluang untuk saya berdebat, member kesokongan dengan Usul berkenaan dengan Ucapan Tuan Yang Terutama Yang Di-Pertua Negeri Sarawak pada 21.6.2011.

I record my sincere thanks to the voters of N70 Ba’Kelalan for giving the opportunity and privilege to represent them in this august house. I promise to do my best by the grace of God. I will not only speak up for and on behalf of the constituents of Ba’Kelalan but other Sarawakians as well that need their voices heard in this Dewan.

At this juncture allow me to begin my main maiden speech in this august House by recollecting the words of a historic leader of this land; prophetic words spoken in the forerunner of this very House ninety-six years ago. The second Rajah of Sarawak, Charles Brooke, in 1915, delivered his Farewell Address to the members of the Council Negri shortly before he retired.

Rajah Charles Brooke said, and I quote:

“I beg that you will listen to what I have to say, that you will recollect my words, and endeavour to call them to mind when I am no longer with you. I will make known of what is in my mind to my successor, but I can only be responsible during this my lifetime.

I have lived in this country now for sixty years, and for the greater part of that time as Rajah. I know that I feel as you do in every way regarding the present and future for the existence and welfare of the inhabitants. I think after so long a period you will allow me to open my mouth and give my opinion truthfully.

Has it ever occurred to you that after my time out here others may appear with soft and smiling countenances to deprive you of what is solemnly your right, and that is the very land on which you live?

This land is your inheritance (pusaka) on which your flesh and blood (daging darah) exists, the source of your income, the food even of your mouths.

If this is once lost to you, no amount of money could recover it. That is why the cultivation of your own land by yourselves or by those that live in the country is important to you now.

Cultivation by strangers, by those who might carry the value of their products out of the country to enrich their shareholders, such products should be realised by your own industries and for your own benefits.

Unless you follow this advice you will lose your birth right, which will be taken from you by strangers and speculators who will in their turn become masters and owners, whilst you yourselves, you people of the soil, will be thrown aside, and become nothing but coolies and outcasts of the island.”

DATO’ SRI SPEAKER

• Developments

In the light of this prophetic warning of Charles Brooke, the question is, whether the so called developments carried out in our State like logging activities oil palm plantations and dam constructions and the industries within the SCORE area would largely benefit the peoples of Sarawak? Will they lose their birth right and be thrown aside, and become nothing but coolies and outcasts from their own land? The questions must be in the forefront of our mind when dealing with developments.

This is because inevitably developments affect one of the most important assets of any individual, land, especially Native Customary Land. Today we hear that 12 more dams are to be constructed in Sarawak notwithstanding that the Bakun dam alone could sufficiently supply power to the whole State of Sarawak. Therefore many are of the opinion that there is no basis or logic to have 12 more dams to be built throughout Sarawak.

I agree that developments in every sense of the word, must go on in the State, but it must never be at the expense of the poor, needy and weak amongst us. I urge and propose to the Government when such big projects like dams are proposed to be carried out, a proper EIA Reports must be made and the recommendations therein must be complied with and second, people whose lives are affected by such projects must not only be compensated and resettled elsewhere but must be given certain equity shares in the project for the life of the project for the benefit of the generations to come. This is because the generations to come have rights over such area affected as well. After the project is no more viable the land be rehabilitated and reverted back to the people. Batang Ai and Bakun should give us sufficient lessons to ensure that the Government of the day is not accused of bulldozing and disregarding the rights and future of the local populace affected by such projects.

DATO’ SRI SPEAKER

• Identity Problem on Bumiputra Status

The Natives of Sarawak are not only faced with the dilemma over their rights over their land but even their identities are at times denied. The status of many of our children is now in question. The issue I am referring to now is that of “native status” or “bumiputera status” for the offspring of mixed marriages (natives and non-natives), which is in a vague and ambiguous state in Sarawak.

In West Malaysia, there is an option to register children of mixed marriages as either bumiputera or non-bumiputera. It seems that our brothers and sisters in West Malaysia have it better than us here in East Malaysia. In Sarawak, according to the law, unless both your parents are native, you are not native or bumiputera. Yet it seems that in practice for some people, this is not so. If for administrative purposes children of mixed marriages in Sarawak are considered bumiputera, then it begs the question: why is it that in the Marina Udau’s Case, the girl that was initially denied entry tertiary education was not recognised as bumiputera? When children of mixed marriages are not recognised as bumiputera, they are denied the privileges that come with the status. It is not good enough to just have administrative orders or a cabinet decision as in Marina’s case to recognise children of mixed marriages as bumiputera and native. It is high time that the State Government clarify this issue once and for all for the benefit of all the off-springs of mixed marriages in Sarawak by amending the definition of “Natives” in the Federal and State Constitution and the Interpretation Ordinance to include any children of a mixed marriage. The practice that I am aware of now in Sarawak is that if the father is a native the children are deemed a native/bumiputra but not vice versa. But there is no law that I know off, that sanctions this practice. We can even take a leaf from Sabah where in such a case an additional Certificate from a Native Community Leader can be obtained in support of such a case.

In a similar vein, I would like to draw the attention of this august house to a peculiar but crucial matter. “Natives” of Sarawak is defined by Art 161A (7) of the Federal Constitution and surprisingly, the Berawans and the Sabans who live in the northern region of Sarawak are not classified in the list. Yet anthropologists and ethnologists will tell you that the Berawans are arguably the first ethnic group to migrate into the northern region of Sarawak many centuries ago. Dato Sri Speaker I urge the SAG to look into this matter and take immediate steps to amend the State and Federal Constitutions and other relevant laws to include the Berawans and Sabans in the list.

DATO’ SRI SPEAKER

• Prioritising Medical Services

Another issue I now raise is that of prioritising medical services in the State. Indeed it is the responsibility of the Federal Government to build hospitals and provide adequate medical facilities in the State. However, the State Government, I come to understand has a very important role to play in terms of providing the suitable land for the building of such Medical facilities as land is under the purview of the State’s Government. It is a public knowledge that Sarawak needs more hospitals and clinics built especially in the semi-rural and rural areas. Our Medical services and facilities are in a very poor and deplorable state yet we make it difficult for the Federal Government to build hospitals. The proposed construction of the new Lawas Hospital for example had been delayed because of issue on availability of land. From the information that I have, this is the case too for the proposed new hospital to be built in Petrajaya. While the State Government and the Federal Government play tug-of-war over land for these hospitals, the ordinary people suffer. Some may even die.

Dato Sri Speaker, I am informed and glad that the Flying Doctor services has resumed again after a lull due to a tussle in contract issue. This is important in the meantime even how infrequent it may be, to alleviate the medical services in the rural areas. I know coming from the rural environment, you’d be surprised a person can claimed to be healed just having been examined by a doctor with his statscope.

DATO’ SRI SPEAKER

• Educational Facilities in Rural Schools

Allow me to raise the issue of our children’s education. How much have we done to assist needy rural students who should be given special consideration? Granted, rural students may not be the best or attain top marks, but still they should be given special consideration in light of their poverty and their circumstances. I came from this environment, and when I was given the opportunity to further my studies in Melbourne, Australia, I went on my own in spite of the fact that I was from a poor family. I took a loan. I was not given any scholarship or assistant from the Government. Today many are in my situation that need Government’s assistants. I urge the Yayasan Sarawak to consider this issue immediately. Not to only support the top scorer but even the mediocre must be assisted taking into that some of us a late starter in life.

Secondly, I wish to bring the issue that facilities in the rural schools are either in bad shape or totally lacking. Given proper facilities, students from rural schools can perform just as good if not better as students in urban schools. I come to know about this truth from SRK Ba’ Kelalan’s performance after having been awarded and granted special grants by the Government, school facilities were upgraded resulting in excellent performance topping many urban schools in the Division.

I understand that education comes under the purview of the Federal Government but it is shameful if we such a rich State does not offer to assist to uplift the standard of facilities in the rural schools. I would think that this is the real kind of development we want for our children.

DATO’ SRI SPEAKER

• Native Land Commission

In view of the many problems raised and faced by many natives in Sarawak over their NCR lands which I don't need to elaborate, I propose to the Government to set up a Native Land Commission as in the Philippines, comprised of credible people from the public and private sector to ensure independence and neutrality giving powers to investigate, recognise their rights and issue titles. Thus will I believe assist the Government and natives in resolving this issue of NCR over lands.

• Religious Freedom

Finally, Dato’ Sri, I believe that Sarawak is one of the best States in Malaysia in terms of maintaining racial harmony and upholding religious rights and freedom. We owe it to the wisdom and the understanding of our forefathers and those after them who had been very sensitive and conscious of the fact that Sarawak is a land of many faiths and beliefs and that such right and freedom would be guaranteed when we formed Malaysia. To this day Sarawak retained her status as a secular State. However, the recent development on the banning of the importation of the Alkitab into Sarawak is very disturbing. More alarming is that a sacred book is deemed a material that threatens the security of the Federation under the provisions of the Internal Security Act (ISA). It is a sad incident for religious freedom and for pious believing Sarawakians. It portrays a Government which is intolerant and misguided on religious freedom. I am aware of course that such action was done by a Federal Department or Agency but the State Government must ensure that such action should not be repeated in the future by any agencies or individuals because the State should ensure that none of the terms under the Malaysia Agreement is breached. I applaud the stance taken by some of the BN leaders on this issue.

I conclude Dato Sri Seaker with a prayer for Sarawak the prayer of one of the prophets of old, called Amos who lived at that time under very challenging political environment, he said, “But let justice roll on like a river, righteousness like a never-failing stream.” Amos 5:24.

I urge all of us irrespective of our political belief and inclination to ensure justice and righteousness roll and flow like the mighty Rejang River from this Dewan to the whole State of Sarawak.

MAY GOD BLESS SARAWAK