Oni wat nyaa doik ngajar otto itih no'uh eh?
 |
| Ibu pertiwiku...jauh juak aku merantau, nasib agik kat negeri sama |
After all the hoopla and chaos that echoed around Bersih 2.0, I began thinking about our the nation's political landscape and it's relationship towards our socio-economic make-up. One of those things that I have always thought about was about the relationship between our beloved Sarawak with Malaysia.
For a little flashback, and if there's anyone reading this blog ever noticed, in the week before the state election a few months back, The Star ran an article showing The 18 Points Agreement for Sarawak in establishing the federation of Malaysia. To be honest, prior to reading that article (as well as other propaganda material during campaign season) I have absolutely no idea about this agreement. Then, when I reflected back at my time studying Sejarah from Form 1 to Form 5, I noticed that nothing about this 18 Point Agreement was ever 'elaborated'. Something about it was mentioned, in the form of - certain rights that are exclusive to Sabah & Sarawak, but nothing was even noted about each and every one of those 18 points. Now how the hell was that possible when this is an article that was so important for the birth of MALAYSIA????!!!
So fellow readers, try to digest this: Why is our history not being properly taught? Why are certain 'facts' of our history is being blanked out from the knowledge of our future generations? No wonder so many academicians made such a fuss about or History syllabus last year. By red taping certain information, it simply reflects that you are trying to hide something under the rug? History teachers are also of no help coz they teach History as if you're suppose to memorize the subject. I remember half my class almost dozing off during hisotry lessons and I believe that to is the same scene accross the country for all secondary school students.
I believe history is one of those subjects that require 'nurture' and not some kind of 'forced brain implants'. It's a subject that should spark the imagination and create debate, and every student has his or her right to agree or disagree on actions made by people in the past. They should be able to look at the scenario, study the facts surrounding it and create their own conslusions. That is how you breed critical thinkers and not cows! Notice that History is not 'always' a favourite subject? To be factual, I base this fact from remarks made by my own classmates during schooldays.
But if there is redtape for certain information to be taught about history and biasness in its message, then what is the value of that knowledge? No wonder our university students these days are all dependent on being spoonfed! And no wonder they work like mindless zombies in once they graduate coz their have been brainwashed into thinking that thinking for themselves is of no use, and that memorizing everything is the key to success! Notice how one thing leads to another here?
So all these thoughts flooded my mind the minute I was told that there was an EXCLUSIVE AGREEMENT for Sarawak to agree to before CREATING Malaysia. I am stressing the word 'CREATING' because before the actual federation was finalized, there was only Sarawak, Sabah and Tanah Melayu - no Malaysia yet. I think only those born in the early 70s and prior to that are probably the only people who were even aware of this AGREEMENT with some depth of knowledge. However, that may also be exclusive to people who actually studied Malaysian history in their tertiary education. Everyone else seems unaware of this AGREEEMENT.
So to all fellow readers, if you are truly considerate about the state of our nation (or state) do look up this 18 Point Agreement to enrich your knowledge about Sarawak. Do reflect the contents of that agreement and see if any of it has been strictly adhered to all this while. I doubt so.
So here for your viewing pleasure is the list of the 20 point agreement for North Borneo whereby only 18 is applicable to Sarawak. I got this from http://longsemadoh.wordpress.com/2010/11/25/sarawak-18-points-sabah-20-points-agreement/ but I have a feeling that it was also obtained from Wikipedia. So here they are:
The Agreement:
Point 1: Religion
While there was no objection to Islam being the national religion of Malaysia there should be no State religion in North Borneo, and the provisions relating to Islam in the present Constitution of Malaya should not apply to North Borneo
- a. Malay should be the national language of the Federation
- b. English should continue to be used for a period of 10 years after Malaysia Day
- c. English should be an official language of North Borneo for all purposes, State or Federal, without limitation of time.
Whilst accepting that the present Constitution of the Federation of Malaya should form the basis of the Constitution of Malaysia, the Constitution of Malaysia should be a completely new document drafted and agreed in the light of a free association of states and should not be a series of amendments to a Constitution drafted and agreed by different states in totally different circumstances. A new Constitution for North Borneo (Sabah) was of course essential.
The Head of State in North Borneo should not be eligible for election as Head of the Federation
“Malaysia” but not “Melayu Raya”
Control over immigration into any part of Malaysia from outside should rest with the Central Government but entry into North Borneo should also require the approval of the State Government. The Federal Government should not be able to veto the entry of persons into North Borneo for State Government purposes except on strictly security grounds. North Borneo should have unfettered control over the movements of persons other than those in Federal Government employ from other parts of Malaysia into North Borneo.
There should be no right to secede from the Federation
Borneanisation of the public service should proceed as quickly as possible
Every effort should be made to encourage British Officers to remain in the public service until their places can be taken by suitably qualified people from North Borneo
The recommendation in paragraph 148(k) of the Report of the Cobbold Commission should govern the citizenship rights in the Federation of North Borneo subject to the following amendments:
- a) sub-paragraph (i) should not contain the proviso as to five years residence
- b) in order to tie up with our law, sub-paragraph (ii)(a) should read “7 out of 10 years” instead of “8 out of 10 years”
- c) sub-paragraph (iii) should not contain any restriction tied to the citizenship of parents – a person born in North Borneo after Malaysia must be federal citizen[
North Borneo should retain control of its own finance, development and tariff[8], and should have the right to work up its own taxation and to raise loans on its own credit.
In principle the indigenous races of North Borneo should enjoy special rights analogous to those enjoyed by Malays in Malaya, but the present Malaya formula in this regard is not necessarily applicable in North Borneo
- a) the Chief Minister should be elected by unofficial members of Legislative Council
- b) There should be a proper Ministerial system in North Borneo
This should be seven years and during such period legislative power must be left with the State of North Borneo by the Constitution and not be merely delegated to the State Government by the Federal Government
The existing educational system of North Borneo should be maintained and for this reason it should be under state control
No amendment modification or withdrawal of any special safeguard granted to North Borneo should be made by the Central Government without the positive concurrence of the Government of the State of North Borneo
The power of amending the Constitution of the State of North Borneo should belong exclusively to the people in the state. (Note: The United Party, The Democratic Party and the Pasok Momogun Party considered that a three-fourth majority would be required in order to effect any amendment to the Federal and State Constitutions whereas the UNKO and USNO considered a two-thirds majority would be sufficient.)
This should take account not only of the population of North Borneo but also of its size and potentialities and in any case should not be less than that of Singapore
Yang di-Pertua Negeri
Sarawak or Sabah
The provisions in the Constitution of the Federation in respect of the powers of the National Land Council should not apply in North Borneo. Likewise, the National Council for Local Government should not apply in North Borneo
Now, which two is not applied to Sarawak, I honestly don't know. Could anybody help me find out? I read in a Facebook link and it was quoted from there that this is the reason, but I'm still not sure about its validity. Is it true that Sabah has no control over immigration like Sarawak? (or is it simply because I couldn't really understand what point 6 actually meant, hahaha):
"Yes, 18 points apply to both Sarawak and Sabah with the Sarawak exception to point 6. Point 19 and 20 only applies to Sabah. The rest of the points applies to both states" - Salahuddin (http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=53139424716&topic=11834)
The writer said that point 19 and 20 does not apply to Sarawak, but I think point 19 still does, because it notes that the 2 North Borneo states should be either named Sabah or Sarawak, and they both ARE named Sabah and Sarawak when joining Malaysia. So how can point 19 be excluded for Sarawak?
So if anyone has anything more specific to add, please..do share.
Food for thought:
How was it possible for Singapore to leave the federation? I read somewhere that Singapore was 'kicked out' but did they have an agreement that actually denied them the right for secession (Point 7) similar to the North Borneo states? If that is so, then how do we get ourselves 'kicked out'? Hahaha. I don't mind a secular government, because secularism suits a multicultural society more.
Actually I am quite pissed off for realizing that I actually knew of this this year! To me, this was something that people should have told me in Form 4 or Form 5. It gives me the suspicion that something fishy was going on regarding to the formation of Malaysia. I have some idea of what it may be about, but I'll keep it to myself for now. For this post, I'm just rambling about my dissatisfaction of not being made aware of this 18 point agreement during my secondary school days.
lorrh. muu gituong puan pasal that agreement? ahaha. i am only going to say this, the history we learnt in school, are history they want us to believe. not the facts.
ReplyDeletebaru muu perasan you've been brainwashed since kid kan.sedih.hahaha
-MM-
oku natong ogik something mentioned about the certain exclusive rights that were given to East Malaysian states...pak yoh doik pernah exactly highlight content 18 point agreement noh. kan ogik chapter dang sejarah form 4 ka form 5, berkenaan hak istimewa ke atas pentadbiran tanah, hak ke atas imigresen and beberapa koyuh lagi. but they never said anything else about the 18 point agreement, nor did they even mention '18 point agreement'. jadi oku seakan-akan blur. if i never actually search it for myself, i don't think i would know exactly the contents and the many curves in the historu of our state. plus the textbook contect allocated for sarawak is only a few pages. if sejarah malaysia was a subject, i preferebly think that half a textbook should be dedicated to sabah n sarawak (if not, just teach sabah and sarawak history for the whole of form 2 or form 3)
ReplyDeleteBTW, to MM - i know they were brainwashing, but I only realized the EXTENT OF THE MANIPULATION when I read other sources of history other than the ones written in the secondary school textbook. I think the syllabus are all ajaran sesat la.
ReplyDeletesejarah.. try to ask any student in the secondary school.. "siapa minat matapelajaran sejarah, tolong angkat tangan?"
ReplyDeletemaybe only 1 out of 40 student in a class.. or sometime 0