Jeffrey’s personal wealth estimated around RM1 billion ringgit.

Taken from Antu Beduru

Page 240 (click to enlarge)

Taken from an unpublished doctoral dissertation by David Walter Brown, Why Governments Fail to Capture Economic Rent: The Unofficial Appropriation of Rain Forest Rent by Rulers in Insular Southeast Asia Between 1970 and 1999.

Click to view: http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage

The allegations are on pages 235-248.

Jimat jimat kitak SNAP neh?

Read also UBF = United Beli’ Followers?

If you haven’t read this article, Jeffrey’s secret Miri meeting triggers rumours, read it first so that you can better understand the context of this posting. 

If you haven’t heard of the UBF or United Borneo Front, then read this article, Jeffrey wants to put deprived Borneo on world stage.

A Sabahan is now speaking on behalf of us Sarawakians without our consent, and apparently Jeffrey wants Sabah, S’wak ‘longhouses’ back.

Who is this Dr Jeffrey Kitingan?

“You can trust me.”

 

Let us be frank and honest. He is a professional frog. His long track record and vast experience in jumping from party to party and forming party after party must surely rank as the most prestigious after Ibrahim Ali of Perkasa. He has made a very successful career out of using political parties to best benefit himself. 

Is this professional frog corrupt? According to an unpublished doctoral dissertation by David Walter Brown, Why Governments Fail to Capture Economic Rent: The Unofficial Appropriation of Rain Forest Rent by Rulers in Insular Southeast Asia Between 1970 and 1999, Dr. Jeffrey Kitingan is corrupt. Allegations are made by Dr. Brown in the document, which you can read online or download: http://english.cpiasia.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=frontpage. The allegations are on pages 235-248.

This corrupt professional frog has just formed yet another platform, this time called the UNITED BORNEO FRONT. Would you trust a corrupt professional frog who makes a living out of forming political parties, movements, and platforms?

Apparently, some Iban would.

September 16th,1963 is our Grave Mistake!!!

“I would like to repeat and emphasize again, that Malaysia is a Nation formed of equal partners, Sarawak did not join; but Sarawak formed Malaysia together with Malaya, Sabah and Singapore.Malaysians are all equal under the Law and Constitution, irrespective of race, color or creed. There should not be distinction or discrimination. The rights of each component state are inviolable and inscribed in the IGC and London Agreements.”

~~Datuk Amar James Wong Kim Min~~

‘Tunku’s Malaysia Project a failure’, forum concludes

KOTA KINABALU: The Malaysia Project envisaged by the former premier Tunku Abdul Rahman and Borneo leaders, Donald Stephens and Temenggong Jugah 47 years ago is a failure, according to a wide spectrum of the intelligentsia.

In a series of papers submitted at a one-day forum on the ‘Formation of Malaysia Revisited and The Way Forward’, presenters concluded that what had been conceived by the trio and what eventually transpired in the intervening years was similar to a pendulum swing.

All the five papers presented and deliberated at Saturday’s landmark forum to discuss the birth of the Federation of Malaysia and the effects on Sabah and Sarawak 40 years after noted how state rights had taken a backseat to political convenience.

Kanul Gindol, secretary-general of CigMa, said the forum managed to achieve an intellectual discussion of the pros and cons of the formation of Malaysia.

“It was lively (discussion) and managed to attract people from all walks of life including past and present public figures like Ayub Aman, an elder brother of Sabah Chief Minister, Amirkahar Tun Mustapha, PKR leaders like Christina Liew and Baru Bian, retired civil servants, academicians, lawyers, teachers, politicians, students and laymen,” he said.

Kitingan, the younger brother of Sabah deputy Chief Minister Joseph Pairin Kitingan, in his paper highlighted facts and ‘secrets’, notably how the federal powers had subdued the state through many manoeuvres since 1963, and how Sabah leaders were duped into believing in whatever Peninsular Malaysian leaders pledged and promised them.

Using figures, he demonstrated how the Kadazandusuns, who were once the majority and dominant in North Borneo/Sabah were being disenfranchised.

He spoke about the emergence of a new group called Melayu in Sabah which today stands at more than 300,000 but was only 18,000 in 1970’s.

Split Sabah into five state

The Harvard graduate also cited how Malayan subsequent leaders managed to tilt the equation of power to the peninsula ever since the inception of the federation in 1963.

“In 1963, we had a 50-50 equation in Parliament representation vis-a-vis the 11-states in Malaya and the group of Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore.

“When Singapore left or was kicked-out of the federation in 1965, their 15 seats should have been distributed to Sabah and Sarawak but what happen was Malaya took seven seats and the remaining eight were distributed to the Borneo states.

“Then in 1972/73, 73 new Parliament constituencies were created, and all of them were in Malaya. From here on, Sabah and Sarawak lost its power to block any passing of laws in Parliament, so peninsular leaders can do whatever they want to the federation,” he said.

Kitingan, a PKR vice president, in his paper proposed that Sabah be split into five states and Sarawak into seven and that Parliament representation in the Borneo states should be balanced with that in the peninsular.

He noted that the Cobbold Commission Report had forewarned that: “If the idea of Malaysia was a ‘take over’ of Sabah and Sarawak and the submersion of the individualities of Sabah/Sarawak, Malaysia would not be acceptable or successful.” Read more here

Pengayau comment

Federation of Malaysia was form with Sabah&Sarawak TOGETHER with Malaya and Singapore 1n 16th September 1963.It means that we are an EQUAL PARTNER  and we are a SEPARATE ENTITY in the spirit of Federalism.This is why the 20/18 Point of Agreement was drafted to SAFEGUARD us(Sabah&Sarawak)But now,we have ended up with being one of the states in Malaysia.

The Original Article 1 of the Federal Constitution which came into force on Malaysia Day reads:

(1) The Federation shall be known,in Malay and English by the name Malaysia

(2) The States of the Federation shall be:

(a) The states of Malaya,namely Johore,Kedah,Kelantan,Malacca,Negeri Sembilan,Pahang,Penang

Perak,Perlis,Selangor and Terengganu and

(b) The Borneo states namely Sabah and Sarawak and

(c) The state of Singapore

From the start there was no real concept of “Malaysia”, but a very real Malayan hegemonic control and interference over the states of Sarawak and Sabah. Singapore rebelled and was rewarded by being kicked out of the federation, which turned out to be a much better thing for it. Sarawak and Sabah opted to remain under Malayan dominance and were rewarded by the crumbs of their own resources – the main bulk of which fuelled the modern development of Malaya and the greed and power of the Malayan elites.

Why?It is very simple,because the 20/18 Point of Agreement has been eroded either being ammended or axed from time to time for their Political Agenda and not to mention the Federal Constitution itself.In fact,this 20/18 Point of Agreement were such a “Sacred Promise” to us by the Malayan Government prior to the formation of Malaysia.From Colonism to Federalism,and from Federalism?we are now were under Imperialism of Malaya

It clearly stipulated in the 18/20 Point of Agreement that:

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

Federal Constitution:

Article 11

Though Islam is the religion of the Federation, Article 11 provides that every person has the right to profess and practice his own religion. Every person has the right to propagate his religion, but state law and, in respect of the Federal Territory, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religion, doctrine or belief among persons professing the Muslim religion. There is, however, freedom to carry on missionary work among non-Muslims.

But yet,the Allah issue has prove that there are “some” parties who are above the Law and Constitutionand showing disrespect to the Agreement for the sake of their Political Agenda

It clearly stipulated in the 18/20 Point of Agreement that:

Point 3: Constitution

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.

Is there any NEW Document being drafted prior formation of  Federation Of Malaysia as in the Agreement?

It clearly stipulated in the 18/20 Point of Agreement that:

Point 8: Borneanisation

Borneanisation of the public service should proceed as quickly as possible.

From what we see today,there is no such thing as Borneonisation but more to Malayanisation of Borneo

It clearly stipulated in the 18/20 Point of Agreement that:

Point 11: Tariffs and Finance

North Borneo should retain control of its own finance, development and tariff, and should have the right to work up its own taxation and to raise loans on its own credit.

In laymen terms,i believe we can called it an Autonomous Power to control over those matter which has been stipulated.But are we?

It clearly stipulated in the 18/20 Point of Agreement that:

Point 12: Special position of indigenous races

In principle, the indigenous races of North Borneo should enjoy special rights analogous to those enjoyed by Malays in Malaya

Are we?Perhaps maybe we are 3rd Class Bumiputra here in Sarawak and we have been marginalised for so long.It seems like there are 2 categories of Bumiputra which is:

1.Muslim Bumiputra

2.Non Muslim Bumiputra

It clearly stipulated in the 18/20 Point of Agreement that:

Point 17: Representation in Federal Parliament

This should take account not only of the population of North Borneo but also of its seize and potentialities and in any case should not be less than that of Singapore

With 31 Parliamentary seats in Sarawak and 25 in Sabah make up total of 56 out of 222 Parliamentary seats in total?

Is it a Grave MISTAKE for us to form the Federation Of Malaysia together with Sabah,Singapore and Malaya in 1963??

For further reading:Push for Sabah, S’wak’s independence: Next stop UN
http://freemalaysiatoday.com/fmt-english/politics/sabah-and-sarawak/4128-push-for-sabah-swak-independence-next-stop-un

Malaya Tipu Borneo
https://pengayau.wordpress.com/2010/03/19/malaya-tipu-borneo/

The Debate On The Malaysia Bill In The British Parliament on 19th July,1963
http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1963/jul/19/malaysia-bill

How Sarawak was conned into the Formation Dr Ooi Keat Gin
https://pengayau.wordpress.com/2010/04/23/how-sarawak-was-conned-into-the-formation-of-malaysia/

Separate but equal by N Shashi Kala and Ooi Ying Nee
https://pengayau.wordpress.com/2010/04/23/separate-but-equal/

Things fall apart By Sim Kwang Yang
https://pengayau.wordpress.com/2010/04/23/things-fall-apart/

Malaysia is made up of 3 countries as equal partner by Dr John Brian Anthony
https://pengayau.wordpress.com/2010/02/09/malaysia-is-made-up-of-3-countries-as-equal-partner/

SHATTERED HOPES AND BROKEN DREAMS
http://thebrokenshield.blogspot.com/2010/03/shattered-hopes-and-broken-dreams.html

‘Why oil blocks handed over in secrecy?’

Taken from Free Malaysian Today

By FMT Staff

KOTA KINABALU: The federal government has forfeited the right to serve out its term in office if it has surrendered Malaysian territory to a foreign nation, PKR leader Jeffrey Kitingan said today.

The Sabah leader said that if the Barisan National government was indeed guilty of surrendering three million acres of territory, it has then been misleading the people and has committed an offence under the constitution.

“It is bound by law and has a moral obligation to make honourable restitution by resigning to allow the people to secure a new mandate or allow a national referendum to be carried out in order for us to gauge the feelings of the people on the issue,” he said in a statement.

Kitingan said that from what he read about this “explosive issue”, it looked like the government did not comply with the provision of Article 2 of the Federal Constitution which says that any portion of the country can be ceded only with the approval of the relevant state legislative assemblies or parliament and the conference of rulers.

Former prime minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, during whose rule the handover of Sabah territory was made, said that he had secured the approval of the federal Cabinet.

Kitingan, who is a PKR vice-president and its chief for Sabah and Sarawak, pointed out that based on Abdullah’s statement it was clear that he did not comply with the country’s constitution.

“He needs to answer a lot of very serious questions with regard to the country’s sovereignty,” said Kitingan who also heads the Common Interest Group Malaysia (CigMa), an ad hoc apolitical NGO dedicated to ‘reversing the re-colonialisation of Sabah and Sarawak since 1963’.

“There is also a serious doubt whether the territorial dispute with Brunei on the sovereignty over Limbang was actually resolved because Brunei disclaimed any such surrender after the cession of Sabah maritime territory. There was no rebuttal form Malaysia on Brunei’s disclaimer.”

Hari Perpaduan Nasional??

Taken from MalaysiaKini

‘Jangan usik Hari Malaysia’

 

Cadangan pengerusi Yayasan 1Malaysia (Y1M), Chandra Muzaffar pada Rabu lalu agar Hari Malaysia yang jatuh pada 16 Sept setiap tahun digantikan dengan Hari Perpaduan Nasional mendapat reaksi negatif, khususnya di kalangan penduduk di Sabah dan Sarawak.

 Antara yang lantang menentang cadangan itu ialah naib presiden PKR, Jeffrey Gapari Kitingan yang mempersoalkan kewajaran dan kebijaksanaan cadangan itu.Beliau seterusnya mempersoalkan isu hak rakyat di Sabah dan Sarawak dengan menimbulkan kuasa autonomi, Perkara 20 dan Perjanjian Malaysia.

“Selepas sekian lama berjuang dan bersusah-payah bagi mendapatkan pengiktirafan dariapada kerajaan persekutuan untuk hari Malaysia, mengapa harus kita korbankan semua itu untuk kepentingan pihak lain,” persoal Jeffrey yang juga adalah bekasa tahanan ISA.

“Perpaduan nasional”  harus bermula dengan politik yang menyatukan semua sebagai rakyat. Ia tidak seharusnya dijadikan alasan untuk mengketepikan sejarah dan realiti politik.”

Hari Malaysia, menurut Jeffrey adalah selaras dengan Perjanjian Malaysia yang mengikrarkan hak Sabah dan sarawak, termasuk kuasa autonomi menerusi Perkara 20.

“Setiap Hari Malaysia, adalah peluang sekali dalam setiap tahun bagi menilai semula kebaikan dan keburukan keputusan Sabah dan Sarawak menyertai Persekutuan Malaysia,” tegasnya. 

 Beliau membidas Chandra yang mengemukakan cadangan itu yang didakwanya bertujuan menyelamatkan Umno daripada malu besar kerana membantu British mengheret Sabah dan Sarawak menyertai Malaysia yang disifatkannya sebagai idea yang buruk.

“Maka tidak hairanlah, ketika itu Presiden Sukarno dari Indonesia menentang Malaysia kerana ia bentuk penjajahan baru terhadap Sabah dan Sarawak?”