By Simon Peter
KUCHING, July 21, 2024 -Human rights advocate Peter John Jaban tiday reminded political representatives of the importance of listening to the wishes of the populace instead of insulting their choices, especially on Sarawak Independence Day which came about primarily because of pressure from the people.
He urged all Sarawakians to remember why July 22 is being celebrated and the circumstances of its recognition instead of squabbling over petty controversy over the flags.
“Sarawak’s pro-autonomy movement began with the grassroots. Whether as Borneo 722 or as S4S or any other group or individual supporting this issue, it was driven by ordinary Sarawakians who educated themselves about Sarawak’s role in forming Malaysia and signing the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA 63).
“At that time, none of this appeared in our education systems. It was not discussed in publicly funded seminars. And our museums were silent on this important history,” Peter said in a statement when responding to the controversy over the old and new Sarawak flags.
“These grassroots movements took the Sarawak government flag from a time when Sarawak was an independent nation and selected a date which represented an act of our self-determination as their banner to demand that their “Ibu Pertiwiku” be appreciated in the national agenda after decades of neglect.
“All this took place at a time when our public representatives were still sleeping or, even worse, keeping silent while our rights were steadily eroded, not by Britain who had long since left, but by our own federal and state Governments.
“Our federal and state lawmakers did and said nothing while successive UMNO-led government’s amended the Malaysian Constitution to strip Sarawak of our special rights and status.
“Many of those politicians remain in office today,” he stressed.
“We have a former Chief Minister the late Tun Adenan Satem to thank for the gazetting July 22 as a Sarawak Independence Day and a public holiday.
“He understood the importance of listening to the people, and not mocking them,” Peter said, adding that Adenan saw the groundswell of public feeling and responded by making this issue his electoral manifesto and his major policy direction.
“The implementation of Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) remains a key government policy today and Sarawak is finally on the national agenda, with Sarawak establishing its own oil company, bank and airline.
“Sarawak is reclaiming its rights and Adenan will always be beloved for starting the process,” he added.
“We are grateful that autonomy continues to be promoted as one of the Sarawak government’s major policies. But they should not forget the public participation that put this on the national agenda.
“This began with the people who were threatened with actual sedition charges for raising it. We support Deputy Minister of Public Health, Housing and Local Government Datuk Dr Penguang Manggil in calling for the history of Sarawak’s role in forming Malaysia to be taught in schools.
“This is particularly important because, sadly, some of our current ministers seem to be ‘confused’ themselves on the details,” he said.
“Tourism, Creative Industry and Performing Arts Minister Datuk Sri Karim Hamzah has chosen to deride the ordinary Sarawakians who still choose to fly the flags used by the movements which gave his party its policy direction.
“Unfortunately, he is the one who needs to return to the history books. The flag in question was the Sarawak government flag, flown outside government buildings during the Brooke era.
“This was the flag of a government of a country that was fully independence from 1842 until 1888, when it became a British protectorate.
“Brooke Rajahs ruled in collaboration with local people, and were not ‘colonial masters’.
“James Brooke’s rise to be Rajah was at the suggestion and with the armed support of the Sarawak Malays, including the Premier’s direct ancestors, Datu Patinggi Ali and Datu Patinggi Abdul Gapur.
“Our history is entirely different from that of Malaya. We only became a colony in 1946, long after this flag first came into use and only after a dedicated anti-cession movement, which sought to preserve our independence.
“Our esteemed YB would paint us as victims of a small handful of foreigners when, as the first Rajah observed, his position emanated “from the will of a free people to choose their own form of Government and the functionaries by whom they shall be administered”.
“Karim’s ‘Malayan’ version of history, presumably learned in school, is particularly worrying as his ministry is supposed to be the guardian of our state’s culture and heritage.
“The museums are directly under his purview. If people don’t know the correct history, perhaps he should look to his own role in that.
“Even the Brooke Gallery continues to provide incorrect information on this flag, claiming that the points on the crown represents the five divisions of Sarawak. How can this be when Sarawak only had three divisions when this flag came into use?”
“Regardless, no sitting minister should be mocking his voters. The people flying the old Brooke era Sarawak Government flag are not a ‘confused lot’.
“They are not ignorant of their own history. Many of them were part of the movements to regain Sarawak’s rights under MA 63 while Karim was standing by.
“These movements were never about Britain. The YB is simply being insulting in suggesting this. Instead, it was always about the proper recognition of our rights within Malaysia under MA63 as the founding partner of a new nation and our rights to self-determination,” Peter said.
No comments:
Post a Comment