Destiny of Sarawak be determined by Sarawakians

Sarawak DAP wants 20,180 postal voters in Sarawak who are mostly security personnel from Peninsular Malaysia to be barred from voting and deciding the future destiny of Sarawak.

“A fair election system should ensure that the fate of a country be determined by her own people.

“Similarly, the future destiny of Sarawak should be determined by those who are intimately connected to Sarawak and not by those who come from outside Sarawak state,” said State DAP Chairman Wong Ho Leng.

This is one of the recommendations submitted by DAP to the Parliamentary Select Committee which met in Kuching last week to seek views of various people including political parties with regard to electoral reform to be introduced by the government before the next general election.

Wong, who is the MP for Sibu said: “According to Parliament answer, as at 30^th June 2011, there are 20,180 postal voters in Sarawak.

“We believe that the bulk of these are from the armed forces and police, and most of them are stationed in P.195 Bandar Kuching (2,142), P.196 Stampin (4,147), P.197 Kota Samarahan (4,259), P.212 Sibu (3,468) and P.219 Miri (1,359).

“Much that there is nothing in the Constitution to prohibit security personnel and police from Peninsula Malaysia who are posted to Sarawak to vote in Sarawak, DAP Sarawak feels that it ought to be a public policy that only those who have genuine connection with Sarawak be permitted to vote in Sarawak, whether Parliament or state elections.

“Connections can be by marriage and not by short term posting to Sarawak. These security personnel and police should vote by post in elections of their own state of origin,” he suggested.

On  fair Representation by Sarawak/Sabah, Wong said that in accordance with the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement, 34% of parliamentary seats must be from Sarawak and Sabah but it has now been reduced to a mere 25%.

The voters of Sarawak and Sabah have thereby lost their rightful and proportionate representation in Parliament, he said.

“Instead of enhancing the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement, the present representation in the lower house of Parliament is skewed in favour of Peninsula Malaysia. This is because the Election Commission had re-delineated constituencies which reduced the representation by Sarawak and Sabah in Parliament.

“Before Sarawak and Sabah joined to form the Federation of Malaysia, it was clearly and carefully stated in the Cobbold Commission Report and the Malaysia Agreement that the number of parliamentary seats in Peninsula Malaysia must not be more than 2/3 of the total parliamentary seats.

“This is in order to ensure that Parliament shall not be able to amend the Constitution willy-nilly. In so doing, the special rights and safeguards of the Borneo states are protected.

“Any amendment thereof would require the support from the Borneo states. During those days, of the 155 Parliamentary seats, Peninsula Malaysia was allocated 104 seats, Singapore 15 seats, Sabah 16 seats and Sarawak 20 seats.

“Peninsula Malaysia had therefore 67% of the parliamentary seats. However, after re-delineation in 1974, Peninsula Malaysia had an additional 10 seats, while there was no increment for Sarawak and Sabah. With the withdrawal of Singapore from the Federation, Peninsula Malaysia is able to secure a two-third majority without the support of Sarawak and Sabah.

“The representation by Sarawak and Sabah has been further eroded recently when Peninsula Malaysia has 166 parliamentary seats. That represents 75% of the total 222 seats. With a total of 56 seats, Sarawak and Sabah has a mere 25% representation in Parliament,” he said.

Wong said the imbalance is unjustified because it violates the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement.

“It violates the sanctity of the federation that Sarawak and Sabah actually joined to form the Federation of Malaysia as equal partners.

“Further, the re-delineation by the Election Commission apparently failed to consider the geographical sizes of Peninsula Malaysia (166 seats for land size of 131,598 sq km), Sarawak (31 seats for land size of 124,450 sq km) and Sabah (25 seats for land size of 73,631 sq km).

“To rectify the imbalance, the Election Commission should reinstate the spirit of the Malaysia Agreement, and re-delineate and increase the Parliamentary seats for Sarawak and Sabah,” he said.

For Sarawak, the average population per constituency is around 30,000.00. However, pursuant to the electoral roll as at June 2011 there are five constituencies with less than 20,000 voters.

These are P200 Batang Sadong (17,898), P.203 Lubok Antu (18,334), P.206 Tanjong Manis (17,754), P.207 Igan (16,193), P.210 Kanowit (18,135), P.216 Hulu Rajang (19,900) and P.222 Lawas (17,217).

On the other hand, urban/semi urban centres show a concentration of voters. There are seven constituencies with voters exceeding 40,000.

These are P.194 Petra Jaya (44,741), P.195 Bandar Kuching (53,276), P.196 Stampin (76,494), P.211 Lanang (53,486), P.212 Sibu (60,284), P.217 Bintulu (54,821), P.219 Miri (62,147).

“Considering the geographical vastness of Sarawak, it is acceptable to give certain weightage to rural constituencies, but the larger urban/semi-urban constituencies do provide justification to increase Parliamentary seats.

“Such re-delineation will ensure that there is ‘fairer’ representation of urban/semi-urban folks in Parliament,” Wong said.

The DAP leader wanted the government of the day to be care-taker government as soon as Parliament or state assembly  is dissolved, pointing out that there is no reason why a care-taker government is allowed to use public facilities such as government vehicles, town halls, Dewan Suarah to entice voters’ support.

“The care-taker Government should not be allowed to dangle development projects as election bait. No money or monetary gratification should be distributed in the name of it being a “caring Government” in order to enhance support during the campaign time.

“The Election Commission should ensure that such unhealthy political and electoral manoeuvring is stopped once Parliament or state assembly is dissolved,” he said.

He went to say that in order to gain public trust, the Election Commission should be truly independent and not beholden to any political party, especially the Government.

“No election officer or returning officer shall practice double standard. One example of double standard was recently practiced in Sibu.

“The same Returning Officer for the Sibu by-election had disallowed the winning DAP candidate from making a victory speech on 16^th May 2010 but he allowed the BN/SUPP winning candidate of Bawang Assan to give a lengthy victory speech in the Sarawak state election of 16^th April 2011.

“Such glaring double standard ought to be avoided,” he said.

Calling on returning and presiding officers to be properly trained, Wong said that many do not even know that counting agents are to be given tally sheets such as Borang 15 and Borang 16, duly signed by the Returning Officers or Presiding Officers and the counting agents of political parties.

“Even more scary have been cases of unlawful restraint of candidates at the nomination centres until the objection time has expired.

“The candidates for Pelawan were restrained by the Returning Officers during nomination in the 2006 and 2011 state elections. The candidate for Padungan in the 2011 Sarawak state election was similarly restrained and disallowed to leave the nomination centre until after the objection time had expired.

“When candidates were at the mercy of the Returning Officers or Presiding Officers, unless they were prepared to risk being disqualified, they had no choice but to stay behind, though unlawfully restrained or wrongfully imprisoned by the Election Commission,” he said.

The Election Commission should ensure that all officers involved in election be adequately trained from nomination process to voting and counting, he added.

Malaysia at the crossroads

There is so much talk of an early election. About 7 million young voters will be eligible to vote come the 13GE.

We all know that once in a few years we are given the opportunity to vote. Why vote? It has no effect on the outcome.

One vote alone may not count but many votes together become a voice to be reckoned with. Let your voice be heard.

This election, more so than others is a vital election because we are at a cross roads. If we get it right we will prosper; if we get it wrong, we will suffer as we have seen in our neighboring countries.

To help you decide please ponder these issues:

Do you think that you have been treated fairly and equally as provided under the Federal Constitution?

Do you think our politicians in power are corrupt?

Do you think our civil service is corrupt?

Do you think the civil servants are incompetent?

Do you think the people in power sets themselves above the law and rule by law instead of rule of law?

Do you think our leadership has lost its way?

Do you think we are getting more & more divided by race, sectarian interests & religion?

Do you think we have a questionable justice system?

Do you think that they are wasting our wealth?

Do you think our children will suffer more?

Do you want to see a momentous change for you and the rest of the citizens?

If you say yes to 3 or more of these issues, don't you think we need change? YOU CAN MAKE CHANGE HAPPEN!!! Change we can and we must.

Just send this to 10 other relatives or friends and ask them to do the same to 10 of their friends and so on.

By so doing we are enlisting the power of multilevel marketing. Yes the math works and it is awesome.

By the 7th level this message would reach 1,000,000 people. Yes we can make our vote count! Better believe it!! We owe it to ourselves and to our children and to their children.

Internet is a wonderful instrument to bring change and fight authoritarianism peacefully and we must use it for the good of all.

Yes we can bring change, and we must do it as we owe that to our children and grandchildren.

Albert Einstein's statement "The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don't do anything about it" is very true and we must not let the evil people rule the country.

The biggest traitors to the nation are those who keep sitting on the fence but grab all the benefits of the efforts of others.

Let us show that 'Malaysia Boleh' applies not only to bad things but good as well. It is in our hands to make it happen for ours and our children's future.

May the force of wisdom be with you.

Thank you

Is SPDP moving backward or forward?

This is a question many observers are asking themselves after witnessing the SPDP’s recent triennial general assembly.

I was present at both the opening of Youth Wing by its deputy president Peter Nyarok 0n 28 December at the Grand Continental Hotel and also at the meeting of the main body at the Civics Centre on 29 December 09.

I could not believe what I heard coming from Nyarok and Tiong King Sing, the outgoing Youth leader and the treasurer general of the party.

Nyarok’s pantun of “Gelang emas si gelang intan, Dibeli teruna seorang budiman, pantang dicabar ayam tambatan, nanti merana sepanjang zaman” clearly warned Philip Ngo, the challenger not to fight him, a well-bred and seasoned local fighting cock, otherwise he would suffer for life.

Nyarok also labeled himself as a “rimau atas kerusi” (tiger on a chair) waiting to maul his opponent.

Tiong accused Philip as a “traitor” for contesting against Nyarok and considered such action as back-stabbing after the party supreme council had agreed to maintain status quo. Tiong wanted a disciplinary action to be taken against Philip.

Tiong repeated what he said at the meeting of the main body just minutes before the party election was to begin.

In fact Tiong in an angry and thunderous tone accused Philip of being sponsored by outsiders from another BN party. Although he did not identify the party, many think that he was referring to PBB.

Tiong also spoke of his financial contributions of hundreds of thousand of ringgit to the party and he never asked how the money was to be spent. So no one should question his statement of account he presented to the assembly.

From what I see, it is obvious that SPDP does not tolerate any challenge to the party leadership, thus cutting down young professionals to be fully involved in the party. This is not good as the young professionals may think that they are not wanted by the party.

Secondly, I notice that Tiong is really in control of the party and the way he spoke at the main body seems to me that he “is more than the treasurer general”. He is SPDP and SPDP is Tiong. As one delegate put it, “without Tiong this party ‘mati rangkai’ (die due to (financial) dehydration).

I am given to understand by those who went to China and Taiwan with Tiong was that the list of youth and the President line-ups were discussed.

After watching all this drama, one tends to ask oneself: Is SPDP becoming another SNAP or PBDS or even PRS, where one towkay controls the party? And what has happened to SNAP and PBDS and also PRS? – The Broken Shield

Source: www.thebrokenshield.blogspot.com