Thursday, November 5, 2015

How can you Malaysia exist without it being formed first?

How can you Malaysia exist without it being formed first?
Sabah and Sarawak formed Malaysia and later federated with the other States. Nothing special about that.


 http://www.dailyexpress.com.my/news.cfm?NewsID=104268

Kota Kinabalu: A Kota Kinabalu-based legal consultant-cum- economist claims both Sabah and Sarawak did not form Malaysia – as propagated by politicians from both the Borneo states – but actually joined.
Jeremiah Yee said the proof of his argument is "conspicuous by the wordings in Article 1 of the Malaysia Agreement" which states: "… shall be federated with the existing states of the Federation of Malaya … and the Federation shall thereafter be called Malaysia"
"In Section 1 of the Malaysia Act that was passed by the British parliament on 31 July 1963, it was also undisguised: "… to federate with the existing states of the Federation of Malaya (in this Act referred to as the Federation), the Federation thereafter being called Malaysia …"
"In a nutshell, it is crystal clear that there was no new Federation but an old one called Malaya which was later renamed Malaysia," Yee said.
He also said Deputy Chief Minister Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan should advise the Sabah and Sarawak governments to jointly sue the British and Malaysian governments in a London court, instead of blaming the British.
"If Pairin thinks the British government should be held accountable for the deterioration in Sabah including seeking interpretation of the safeguards in the Malaysia Agreement, he should sue in a London court, since the Malaysia Agreement was inked by their predecessors there in 1963," he said.
He was commenting on Pairin's blaming of the British Government when debating the National Budget 2016 in Parliament, recently. Among the perennial issues which continue to plague Sabah today include the interpretation of the Malaysia Agreement 1963, and the 40pc revenue entitled to Sabah, under the 48th Schedule in Inter-Governmental Committee Report that has not been reviewed since 2004.
The Malaysia Agreement was signed in London on 9 July 1963 and is a legitimate document in spite of overwhelming evidence suggesting otherwise, he said.
To substantiate this, he pointed out that when the governments of Britain, Malaya, Singapore, Sabah, and Sarawak signed the Malaysia Agreement in London on 9 July 1963, the governments of Sabah and Sarawak were actually still at that material time British colonial governments.
On another matter that crops up every year in August that Sabah gained independence on 31 August 1963, Jeremiah opined that this is also not true, citing that "self-government" is not independence as the British flag "Union Jack" was only lowered for the final time in Jesselton at midnight of 16 September 1963.
The departure of the last British Governor from Sabah took place in the morning after the Proclamation of Malaysia was announced in the town padang (now Padang Merdeka).
"Succinctly, there was never any formal declaration of independence on 31 August 1963 for Sabah even though there were shouts of "Merdeka" in the town padang on 16 September 1963, but "Merdeka" from what when only Malaysia was proclaimed?" he contended.
As much as he concurred with Pairin's lamentation that the formation of Malaysia was done in a hurry, Jeremiah nonetheless pointed out that after the Second World War ended, the British economy both in the United Kingdom and the colonial empire was so drained to an extent that it could barely sustain existing commitments then, let alone meet new ones.
"The only justifiable and viable thing for Whitehall to do at that time was to let go of their colonies to new masters or local actors under the guise of 'Merdeka' so that they could dispose of their assets and businesses which include among others mines and estates and bring the money back to mother England.
Jeremiah further opined that the Malaysia Project of the British government was short-sighted, carelessly co-ordinated, inadequately designed, and poorly executed, to say the least.
"For one among many indicators, look no further than the controversial 20-Points which have remained a unilateral list of political demands largely unmet after 52 years," he cited.
On the 40pc entitlement from the net collection of federal revenue from Sabah by the Federal government which has not been paid for decades, a large portion of the claim, save for only a few years back, Jeremiah opined that there's nothing much the State government could do as, it is actually statutorily-barred.
"For this fiasco alone, who is to be blamed – the British government or the government of Sabah? To me the answer is the latter because out of ignorance it did not pursue the matter with the Federal government which also conveniently kept quiet.
"For so many administrations under numerous chief ministers of which some held the stewardship for 9 years or more and even set up think-tank and paid high salary to its members for advising the Sabah government, what happened?" he asked.

Introduction

This blogspot is filled with Adsense links. These google advertising links can be useful but their uses are strictly governed. I earn cash if any of you click these links but if I or my close acquaintances click them, google is very harsh in permanently banning me. Please do not click these adverts unnecessarily.

Learn how to earn money by clicking the button below: