Sabah Sarawak Rights - Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)

 SSRANZ President Robert Pei said the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Liew Vui Keong may not have carefully considered the full implications of what he said as reported on 25 March 2019, quote: “Besides that, the government will not agree to any suggestion and issue raised in relation to the dissolution of MA63 and self-determination,” he said in reply to an oral question by Jeffrey Kitingan (Star-Keningau).

He said for the same reason, the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) was void ab initio (invalid from the beginning) and there is nothing to be “dissolved” contrary to what the Minister was saying. MA63 was made in violation of the said legal principle when North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak were still colonies. The formation of Malaysia under MA63 was intended by the UK as part of its decolonization of Sabah and Sarawak by “integration with an independent state” (Malaya under UN Resolution 1541XV). If MA63 was invalid and not binding, there is no “Federation of Malaysia” to speak of and Sabah and Sarawak should indeed be talking about self-determination.

Summary of the Event:

• The flag-raising event held in Melbourne, Australia, on 15 September 2024, marked the 61st anniversary of the British "decolonization" of Sabah and Sarawak on 16 Sept 1963, and their subsequent absorption into the Malayan Federation with its name changed to Malaysia under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63, if valid).  Malaysia was formed under dubious legal conditions which questioned its legitimacy. The NGOs noted that it was a perfectly legitimate expression that with one flagpole the flags had to be raised and lowered in turn.
• The event was also to highlight 61 years of Malayan humiliation, subjugation and exploitation of Sabah and Sarawak, reducing them to colonial dependencies in Malaysia.
• The peaceful gathering was given significant media attention in Malaysia and abroad, with sensational news headlines with reports accusing the event as seditious, such as “Cops probe video of M’sian flag being replaced with that of Sabah, Sarawak”, “Investigate the mastermind of the incitement to lower the Malaysian flag - AMK Marudu”, “In Malaysia, viral video linked to Borneo secessionists sparks police investigation”.  Sabah UMNO Media Chief made inflammatory allegations that the rally was “inciting and destabilising” the country. 
• The Malaysian police was instigated to launch an investigation on a viral video showing the Jalur Gemilang (Malaysian flag) being lowered and replaced with the flags of Sabah and the Kingdom of Sarawak (flown as independent Sarawak national flag from 1870 to 1946 and also under British colonial rule from 1946 to 1963 and then as Sarawak's state flag from 1963 to 1973), following police reports lodged by UMNO and PKR members in Sabah. 

SSRANZ and RSNB strongly refute the Sedition Allegations and state that it was a lawful rally to highlight a number if issues concerning the legitimacy of Malaysia Formation and 61 years of Malaysia misrule:

1. The Flag-Raising Was Not An Incitement To Violence Or Sedition: The NGOs strongly condemned the politicisation of the event by UMNO and PKR, in spreading politically motivated misinformation and manipulating the police to suppress freedom of expression and legitimate grievances. They criticised the Malayan-controlled Sabah UMNO Party and Sabah PKR members for orchestrating baseless accusations such as “inciting and destabilising” the country, aimed at discrediting calls for self-determination and rights restoration. This highlights that Malayan parties will always prioritise Malayan interests over those of Sabah and Sarawak, perpetuating domination and exploitation of the two territories.
   
   
   Regarding allegations of sedition: Contrary to the portrayal of the rally by Sabah UMNO Media and the police, the event was a peaceful expression of dissatisfaction with Malaysia's ongoing failure to honour its international law obligations under MA63. The flag-raising was not an incitement to violence or sedition but symbolised the continued marginalisation of Sabah and Sarawak. It was a call for the people of these regions to remember the loss of their sovereignty and to raise awareness of their situation to the world. The response of Malayan Sabah political parties only exposed their colonial mindset and subservience to Malaya.
   
   
   Legitimate Grievances Suppressed:  The peaceful rally, held in a country that protects free speech, was not a call for violence but a statement against the systemic marginalisation of Sabah and Sarawak. Attempts to criminalise this protest are part of ongoing efforts to suppress legitimate grievances. 
   
   
2. Neo-colonial Misrule and Exploitation in Sabah and Sarawak: The real source of instability in Sabah and Sarawak stems from decades of federal misrule, corruption, exploitation, and demographic manipulation, including UMNO’s political engineering by granting citizenship to illegal immigrants to secure federal control over Sabah. This has created widespread and deep dissatisfaction against the federal government.
   
   
3. Right to Self-Determination: SSRANZ and RSNB stressed that the event underscored Sabah and Sarawak’s legal right to self-determination, recognized by international law and the UN 1945 Charter on Human Rights and UN General Assembly Resolution (UNGAR) 1514. The formation of Malaysia was an external interference by the United Kingdom in collusion with Malaya to deny this right in breach of the United Kingdom’s undertaking to grant independence to both countries when it annexed them as crown colonies in 1946 and UNGAR 1514.
   
   
   This legal right allows for peaceful expressions of national independence and sovereignty, and, if Malaysia is truly a voluntary federation, also implies the right to exit. The British Inter-Governmental Committee (IGC) Chairman Lord Lansdowne in response to calls for the right to exit Malaysia confirmed in 1963 that in a voluntary federation it was an “intrinsic right to secede at any time”. PM Tunku Abdul Rahman in agreement stated that if the 2 regions were unhappy with Malaysia, they could always leave. International law does not prohibit the right to exit any political union for independence.
   
   
   SSRANZ and RSNB view that Malaysia was unlawfully set up in a manner inconsistent with the Borneo people’s right to self-determination in breach of international law.
   
   
   The event symbolically commemorated the 1963 so-called British decolonisation of North Borneo (Sabah) and Sarawak, which occurred through the unlawful transfer of their sovereignty to Malaya. This transfer, carried out without a proper referendum, relied on the flawed findings of the 1962 Cobbold Commission and the 1963 UN Mission, leading to the forced inclusion of these regions into the Federation of Malaysia. It was for this reason that Indonesian and Philippines Governments opposed Malaysia on the ground that the process of Malaysia formation did not have legal basis. Rather than achieving true decolonization, the process was intended to impose PAX MALAYSIA by expanding Malaya’s territories, perpetuating colonial dominance under centralised control. Indeed Sabah and Sarawak were taken over by Malaya under coercive emergency conditions and ruled under centralised control with the use of emergency laws from 1963 to 2011, with mass suppression, detention in concentration camps and bloodshed. Malaysia was created in conflict, not consensus!
   
   
   It is a historical fact that the British Union Jack was lowered symbolising the end British colonial rule on 16 September 1963 and replaced by the Malayan Jalur Gemilang representing a new ruler and also raising the Sabah and Sarawak flags to show their achieving self-government. Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman claimed that Malaysia was formed to free North Borneo and Sarawak from British colonial rule. However in reality, it was not liberation or freedom from colonialism as the Malayans claimed, but merely replacing the old colonial ruler with a new ruler.   President Sukarno of Indonesia condemned this as neo-colonial transfer of the colonial office from London to Kuala Lumpur. The late Sarawak Chief Minister Adenan Satem reminded the Malayans that Sarawak did not become free from one colonial rule to be ruled by another power.
   
   
4. No new nation was form as Malaysia. The renaming of Malaya to Malaysia and the inclusion of Singapore, Sabah, and Sarawak in 1963 was presented to the UN, not as the creation of a new nation, but as an expansion of the existing Federation of Malaya.  The UN Legal Opinion of 19 September 1963 referring to Malayan UN representative Dato Ong Yoke Lin’s letter to the UN Secretary General, confirmed this legal interpretation, ensuring that Malaysia was seen as a continuation of Malaya rather than the creation of a new state or country. This did not require an application for new UN membership. This was a key British planned diplomatic manoeuvre to ensure that Malaysia did not face the same level of scrutiny that a newly independent country would face, preventing strong international challenges to its legitimacy.
   
   
5. The Malaysia Agreement 1963 as an Neo-colonial Territorial Expansion Agreement and at the same time, fulfilled the British Grand Design to continue maintaining it strategic military base of Singapore and economic interests in the region.
   
   
   Legal Continuity: The decision to form Malaysia was pre-determined and formalised in the secret “Agreement to set up the Federation of Malaysia” signed by the UK and Malaya on 31 July 1962, one year before MA63 was concluded. The people of Sabah and Sarawak were not represented by their own elected representatives in the negotiations which were held between the UK and Malaya from 1958 to 1963. 
   
   
   The Malaysia Agreement 1963 was framed as an agreement to expand the Federation of Malaya by admitting three new territories (Singapore, Sabah, and Sarawak). Rather than creating a new political entity, it merely amended the 1957 Malayan constitution to accommodate the entry of new members. This gave the appearance that Malaysia was simply an extension of the Federation of Malaya, rather than a newly formed country.
   
   
   Constitutional Amendments vs. New Constitution: A critical point is that Malaysia did not adopt a new constitution, but rather amended the existing Malayan constitution to reflect its new territorial composition. This reinforces the argument that Malaysia was a continuation of the existing state of Malaya, not a newly constituted country. 
   
   
6. The event sought to highlight the fact that Malaysia was formed through the invalid Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) signed on 9 July 1963, in violation of the people’s right to self-determination.  MA63 was void ab initio as Sabah and Sarawak were still British colonies at the time and not sovereign states with the legal capacity and free consent to enter into binding international treaties. By including them and Singapore as signatories, the British and Malayan governments deliberately perpetrated a fraud as they were well aware that the three colonies had no legal capacity to be parties to the treaty. If they were, it would not have been necessary for the UK to be involved in the federation process.
   
   
   The process of Malaysia formation was designed by the British Government in collusion with the Malayan government to circumvent the UN decolonisation laws and international law with an invalid international agreement. This parallels the 2019 ICJ ruling on the Chagos Islands Case, where the court found that the UK's separation of the islands from Mauritius violated international law because colonies were not sovereign states with the right to make such agreements. Similarly, MA63 is considered invalid from the beginning as the colonial territories of Sabah and Sarawak were not sovereign and thus lacked the capacity to consent freely, making Malaysia's formation legally questionable.
   
   
   In reality, Malaysia was set up as a de facto neo-colonial creation. The illegality of MA63 underlines the external British Malayan interference and violation of the right to self-determination for the people of Sabah and Sarawak. Their futures were significantly shaped by unlawful external powers (the UK and Malaya) interference, and that they were not given a genuine opportunity to decide whether to join Malaysia or choose real independence. Moreover, the breaches of MA63 over the decades are seen as ongoing violations of their autonomy and rights, further justifying the claim that MA63 was invalid or has since been rendered invalid.
   
   
7. Breach of the Manila Accord 1963. Owing to local and international opposition, the Malayan government signed the Manila Accord on 31 July 1963, (22 days after MA63 was signed), with the Philippines and Indonesia governments agreeing to two pre-Malaysia conditions. The Accord required both a fresh survey of the people's wishes in Sabah and Sarawak and the resolution of the Philippines' claim over Sabah before forming Malaysia. The British and Malayan acceptance of these conditions amounted to an acknowledgement that the earlier Cobbold Commission process and MA63 were defective or flawed. However, the British and Malayan governments pre-empted the completion of the UN Mission assessment by announcing prematurely on 28 August 1963, that Malaysia would be formed on 16 September 1963 regardless of the assessment’s outcome. This  breach of the accord further undermined the legitimacy of MA63 and Malaysia’s formation. The failure to resolve the Philippines Sabah claim also questions whether the UK had the legal right to transfer Sabah to Malaya and therefore whether the process of forming Malaysia was legitimately completely. If not then this only confirms that Malaysia is a de facto federation.
   
   
8. Highlighting 61 Years of Violations: The rally aimed to shed light on 61 years of multiple Malayan violations of MA63 basic foundational terms for a secular state now replaced with a extremist and divisive apartheid-like race-religion based New Economic Policy (NEP) or Ketuanan Melayu supremacist system, resource exploitation, suppression of civil and human rights and the treatment of Sabah and Sarawak as virtual colonies and the peoples severely discriminated as 3rd class citizens. The event was to expose the real neo-colonial nature of Malaysia and its ruling regime which failed to honour but instead violated the rights and autonomy originally promised under MA63.
   
   
9. Symbolic Protest for Unfulfilled MA63 Promises: The lowering of the Malaysian flag and raising of Sabah and Sarawak flags was a peaceful symbolic act highlighting Malaysia's failure to honour MA63, which promised self-determination and equal partnership. The continued political and economic marginalisation of these regions contradicts those promises. Those who support this immoral and tyrannical system and agenda of fascism and race-religion supremacy, fear any challenge to their false privileges.
   
   
10. Core Grievances Highlighted by the NGOs: Prime Minster Tunku Abdul Rahman had declared that one of the prime objectives to form Malaysia was to develop Sabah and Sarawak. However, decades of neglect and deprivation of funds and exploitation of Sabah’s and Sarawak’s resources to  enrich the elites and develop Malaya have kept Sabah and Sarawak as the most backward, underdeveloped and impoverished parts of the federation. This is seen in the  continuing Malayan denial of Sabah’s 40% revenue entitlement under MA63, while Sarawak is forced to self-fund its development despite its oil and gas wealth being siphoned off to Malaya.

SSRANZ and RSNB’s Demands:

The NGOs said that they are prepare to consider ceasing advocating for independence if the following conditions are met by the federal government:

• Seek an International Court of Justice review of the validity of MA63 and legitimacy of Malaysia formation in the light of the ICJ ruling in the 2019 Chagos Island Case, that colonies are not sovereign state with legal capacity to make binding international agreements and to abide but its decision on whether MA63 is binding. If not binding, then decolonise Sabah & Sarawak.
• Restore the MA63 secular system by repealing ACT 354 and dismantle the anti-human rights New Economic Policy (NEP) race-religion based institutions which have used apartheid-like policies to discriminate against Sabah and Sarawak and their peoples for decades.
• The immediate implementation of Borneonisation in the civil service and education sectors and withdraw all federal officials to empower Sabah and Sarawak with real self-government and autonomy as agreed.
• Restore full immigration powers to Sabah and Sarawak in their original form.
• Return control over oil and gas resources to Sabah and Sarawak.
• Transfer of all Petronas’ assets to Sabah and Sarawak to compensate for 61 years of resource loss and development opportunities.
• Full restoration of MA63 rights, including the repeal or amendment of the Continental Shelf Act 1966, Petroleum Development Act 1974, and Territorial Sea Act 2012.
• Restoration of 34.6% parliamentary representation for Sabah and Sarawak.
• Withdraw all Malayan political parties from Sabah and Sarawak.
• Resolve the Philippines’ Sabah claim which challenges the legitimacy of Malaysia, pursuant to the Manila Accord 1963. 
• Resolve Sabah refugees problem by repatriation to their homelands or to Malaya.

Conclusion:

SSRANZ and RSNB said that Malaysia's legitimacy will remain in doubt as long as the issue of MA63’s validity along with the unresolved Philippines' claim on Sabah, are not addressed. Even if MA63 is deemed valid, the numerous breaches of its fundamental terms by Malaya, effectively amount to a unilateral termination of the agreement, which entitles Sabah and Sarawak to exit the federation.

The attempt to criminalise peaceful protests and suppress the legitimate demands of Sabah and Sarawak will only intensify calls for independence. The NGOs reaffirm that Sabah and Sarawak, like Singapore, have the inalienable right to self-determination and will pursue independence if their grievances continue to be ignored.

Signed 30 September 2024

Robert Pei
President  
Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand - SSRANZ 

Mosses PA Ampang
President
Republic of Sabah North Borneo - RSNB 

Protes ini memperingati ulang tahun hari di mana pada tahun 1963, Malaya, atas alasan membentuk "Malaysia," meluaskan sempadan politiknya untuk memasukkan Sabah dan Sarawak. Para penunjuk perasaan berhujah bahawa tiada negara baru yang dibentuk pada hari tersebut; sebaliknya, ia merupakan peluasan strategik kawalan Malaya ke atas Borneo. Dalam ucapannya, Ampang menyatakan, “Pembentukan Malaysia yang kononnya berlaku adalah satu muslihat politik yang dilakukan melalui paksaan, penipuan, dan tanpa persetujuan rakyat Borneo. Tiada referendum yang pernah diadakan, menjadikan ia satu penjajahan yang tidak sah ke atas tanah kami.”

Demonstrasi ini bertujuan untuk meningkatkan kesedaran di kalangan rakyat Australia dan masyarakat antarabangsa mengenai tuntutan keadilan oleh rakyat Borneo. "Rakyat Sabah dan Sarawak berhak untuk mendapatkan kemerdekaan, dan mereka perlu diberi peluang untuk meluahkan hak demokratik mereka," kata Ampang, sambil menyeru penamatan apa yang beliau anggap sebagai “penjajahan Malaya” ke atas negara-negara Borneo. Beliau menambah, "Demonstrasi aman ini adalah satu seruan untuk mendapatkan sokongan antarabangsa bagi mendesak Malaysia supaya menghormati hak-hak rakyat Borneo. Sudah tiba masanya untuk keadilan, dan dunia perlu berdiri bersama kami."

Acara ini menggariskan usaha berterusan oleh NGO Republik Sabah North Borneo dan kumpulan-kumpulan kemerdekaan Borneo lain untuk menimbulkan kesedaran tentang konteks sejarah dan politik seputar Perjanjian Malaysia. Ampang dan para penunjuk perasaan menegaskan semula tuntutan mereka agar komuniti antarabangsa mengakui ketidaksahan perjanjian tersebut dan mencari penyelesaian aman yang menghormati hak rakyat Borneo untuk menentukan nasib mereka sendiri.

Ketika demonstrasi berakhir, para penganjur menegaskan komitmen mereka untuk terus memperjuangkan kemerdekaan Sabah dan Sarawak, sambil menggesa badan-badan antarabangsa untuk campur tangan dan memberi sokongan yang diperlukan bagi menamatkan apa yang mereka anggap sebagai penjajahan yang tidak adil.

This date, celebrated in Malaysia as Malaysia Day, is viewed by the organizers as a reminder of the historical grievances experienced by the people of Sabah (formerly North Borneo) and Sarawak. These two Borneo states were originally led to believe that they were part of the formation of a new country, but, according to the organizers, this promise was never fulfilled. Instead, they claim that the reality was an expansion of the Malayan Federation into Borneo, later renamed Malaysia, resulting in what the NGOs argue is an ongoing occupation by Peninsular Malaysia.

A Peaceful Call for Awareness and Justice

The demonstration aims to raise international awareness about the ongoing situation in Sabah and Sarawak, which the NGOs argue is one of systematic suppression, injustice, and exploitation by the central government in Kuala Lumpur. According to the organizers, this is an opportunity to educate the international community on what they perceive as a 61-year-long oppression and to correct misconceptions surrounding the creation of Malaysia.

The demonstration will also highlight:

1. Injustice and Misrepresentation: The organizers will address what they call the "betrayal" of Sabah and Sarawak, emphasizing that the Malaysia Agreement of 1963 (MA63) misled the people of both states into believing they would be equal partners in a new federation. Instead, they argue, the agreement enabled Malaya to consolidate control over their territories.
2. Harassment and Intimidation: The NGOs will present instances of alleged harassment, intimidation, and political suppression of individuals and groups advocating for Sabah and Sarawak's rights. This includes accusations of legal threats, arrests, and a lack of autonomy for local political leaders, all of which contribute to what they describe as a stifling of free expression in the Borneo states.
3. Cultural and Economic Exploitation: Another focus will be on the alleged economic exploitation of Sabah and Sarawak, particularly in terms of natural resources like oil and gas. The groups argue that the wealth generated from these resources has not been equitably distributed to the people of Borneo, leaving both states impoverished while contributing significantly to Malaysia's overall economy.

A Broader Movement for Independence

The peaceful demonstration is part of a larger movement led by these NGOs advocating for the independence of Sabah and Sarawak from Malaysia. The Republic of Sabah North Borneo (RSNB) has been at the forefront of these efforts, with its president, Mosses PA Ampang, calling for international support for the right to self-determination. The Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia & New Zealand (SSRANZ) organization lead by Robert Pei, founded in July 2017, has also been actively organizing forums, live talks, and public meetings to strengthen the push for independence.

Advocates point to historical grievances dating back to the signing of the Malaysia Agreement 1963, which they argue was neither fully understood by the people of Borneo nor implemented in the way it was initially promised. Calls to revisit or even nullify the agreement have been mounting, especially in light of a growing sense of disenfranchisement among the indigenous peoples of Sabah and Sarawak.

Voices of Resistance Amidst Threats

Despite the peaceful nature of their demonstrations and outreach efforts, activists involved in the independence movement have faced numerous challenges. RSNB, SSRANZ, and SSKM have all reported receiving threats, including warnings that members could face imprisonment if they return to Malaysia. However, the growing international presence of these organizations, particularly in Australia and New Zealand, has allowed them to continue their advocacy while highlighting the plight of Sabah and Sarawak on the global stage.

Rallying for Global Attention

As the peaceful demonstration approaches, organizers are hopeful that it will not only shed light on the issues faced by the Borneo states but also garner international support for their cause. The event, they hope, will serve as a platform for the people of Sabah and Sarawak to share their stories and push for a resolution to what they perceive as a long-standing injustice.

With the upcoming demonstration on September 15, 2024, the voices of Sabah and Sarawak are growing louder, calling for an end to what they describe as six decades of occupation and a new chapter of independence and self-determination.

In rural areas, not many have yet ever heard about MA63 and even in towns and cities in Sabah and Sarawak, many people never heard about MA63.

Legal opinions in UN Secretariat clearly mentioned that Malaysia is not a new nation but a nation with a change of name to Malaysia. This means Malaysia is Malaya and Malaya is Malaysia. UN secretariat legal opinions are also of the opinion that Sarawak, Sabah and Singapore were gifted by UK to enlarge Malaya. Tunku in a book titled Conversation with Tunku Abdul Rahman at page 86 also mentioned Singapore Sabah and Sarawak were a gift to Malaya and Tunku also wrote a letter of thanks to the Queen for the gift.

Therefore, it was a fraud because there was no referendum at that time for people of Sabah and Sarawak to decide for themselves whether or not they wish to join Malaya to create Malaysia.

UK and Malaya cleverly overcome the need of a referendum to settle this issue by circumventing United Nations General Assembly Resolution 1514 of right of colonized countries for self determination by way of assessment of 4000 odd Sabahans and Sarawakians by the Cobbold Commission and came with a doctored report to say peoples of Sabah and Sarawak wanted Malaysia. How could these 4000 odds could represent the voice of 1.3 million Borneo people at that time? 

Please read the book by Prof Michael Leigh the demands by Tunku that Cobbold Commission Report must show that peoples of Borneo Territories wanted Malaysia.None of the members of Cobbold Commission could speak and understand the native languages of Sabah and Sarawak and most of our people were illiterate and could not at that time understand English. They could not understand the purpose of the Cobbold Commission which came with a report within weeks only. How could they able to travel the length and breadth of Sabah and Sarawak to find the true wishes of the people?

There are evidence in our hands that those who disagree with MALAYSIA were arrested and tortured and branded as terrorists and communists. They had to save their lives and hid themselves in the jungle and took arms to defend themselves. To take arms to defend yourself against being killed is legal under domestic and international law. 

Indonesian President Soekarno and the Philippines were against MALAYSIA and this caused the border wars in 1960s which also led to peace settlement by signing the Manila Accord with a promise by Malaya to hold a referendum but until now this was not fulfilled.

Records also showed that officials from the United Nations were "handpicked" to agree with the Cobbold Commission Report. A guy was said known could be bribed.

When fraud was involved in the creation of Malaysia, we could not allow the dead child Malaysia be revived.  In law, the law could not help any fraud.

Although in the federal constitution etc it mentioned that Sabah and Sarawak are federated with Malaya or helped formed Malaysia, but in reality, politically Sabah and Sarawak are colonies of Malaya. 

Malaya controls parliament and the federal cabinet and controls the state government by proxies in past 60 years. Malaya also have political parties from Malaya like PKR, PAS, Bersatu, DAP, MUDA fighting for seats in Sabah and Sarawak. Seats won by them are seats taken away from Sabah and Sarawak. 

Sabah and Sarawak are only given 56 out of 222 MP seats. 

At the moment, not many could be bothered to say MA63 is a fraud or that Sabah and Sarawak are colonies of Malaya. At the same time, not many feel the pain of loss of marine wealth, oil and gas and natural resources being taken by Malaya because things are not from their pockets.

Under international law, colonizers have the legal right to impose their wills on their colonies including their religion and imposing their culture, language and administration on the colonised. This gave rise to slavery by colonisers against the colonized. Please see Africa until now.

PBK has no means at the moment to set the matter straight due to lack of support, manpower and fund. It is the people's power that is important in politics. I personally believe time will come people will seek justice in the streets and there will be a peaceful revolution against MALAYSIA or the federal government. We have seen this in many African countries and even in the Philippines, Indonesia and Thailand had "tasted" street revolution.

You couldn't seek justice in many matters in Malaysian Court and I had discussed this with an eminent foreign law professor and a foreign judge.

Voon Lee Shan
President Parti Bumi Kenyalang

Perhatikan perbezaan kemasukan Scotland ke dlm UK dan kemasukan North Borneo ke dlm Malaysia. 

Parlimen Scotland meluluskan Act of Union 1707 untuk bergabung atau memasuki UK. Tapi Parlimen Britain yg meluluskan Malaysia Act 1963 supaya North Borneo bergabung dgn Malaysia pada 16.09.1963 kerana North Borneo belum mempunyai Parlimen atau Dewan Undangan Negeri pada waktu itu. Ia hanya mempunyai Parlimen atau DUN sendiri pada 25.09.1963.

Konon referendum Cobbold Commission yg menentukannya. Ketahuilah bahawa walaupun keputusan referendum 100% memihak cadangan utk memasuki Malaysia, ia WAJIB dibentangkan di Parlimen/DUN negara itu sendiri sebelum menjadi Akta. 

Oleh sebab North Borneo belum mempunyai Parlimen / DUN sendiri,  keputusan referendum tersebut terpaksa dibentangkan di Parlimen Britain hingga termeterainya Malaysia Act 1963.

Jadi sudah jelas bahawa Parliamen Britain yg membuat keputusan supaya North Borneo memasuki Malaysia, bukan North Borneo atau Parlimen/DUN North Borneo yg membuat keputusan tersebut."

Source: Jack Situn II