The debaters (from left) Baru Bian, Patrick Anek and Michael Tiang
By Peter John Jaban,
Organising chairperson of S4S movement
The first debate of its kind in Sarawak achieved it goals
and provided an interesting and informative afternoon for the audience.
The goals of the debate were threefold: to raise
awareness on the issues surrounding the greater calls for Sarawak autonomy, to
represent the views of various parties to the voting public and to push forward
political discourse towards a new frontier.
On all three counts, the event can be judged a success.
Many chose not to come, but those that did found an open platform for their
views and the chance to debate those views with their opponents.
One thing was clear from the event; while the parties may
have disagreed on the hows and whys of many issues, all three want greater
autonomy, greater recognition of Sarawak within Malaysia and most importantly
all three see long and difficult negotiations ahead with the Federal
Government, whoever that might be.
This is why Sarawak 4 Sarawakians (S4S) movement is now calling on the next State
Government to set up its Special Select Committee to review the terms of the
Malaysia Agreement 1963 as a priority and further, to make it cross party, just
as the original motion was, so as to make full use of the passion and expertise
of Sarawakians for their state.
This is the beginning, not the end of our journey.
Yesterday, the audience were able to see a different way of doing things in
which the people set the agenda and not the political parties.
Already we are receiving calls for more events of this
type or even longer! I applaud the participants – Michael Tiang of SUPP, Baru
Bian of PKR and Patrick Anek Uren of PBDS.
They saw a new way of working and they really showed what
they were made of – knowledgeable, spirited and motivated about the future of
our home state.
Now, it is up to the people who were there to judge who
came out of it best. That is what we
wanted all along. This was always about advancing political discourse in
Sarawak.
We hope that others will learn something from the
event. We certainly did and now we know
how to make our next one even better!’
When we or another group organize a follow up, we hope
the rest will be more open-minded and responsive. Some YBs only seem to know
how to fight to the death.
They accuse everyone and see enemies everywhere, perhaps
because they are so busy making them.
Unfortunately, with this mentality, they will just be
left King of a broken and bleeding state should they ever prevail. We gave all
parties the chance to come and express themselves in an open and balanced
debate.
Some took up the challenge and some chose to throw
spiteful accusations at the organizer, just as they have done at previous
events which did not go entirely their own way. I contend that they are the
losers.
They missed out on a chance to meet members of the
rakyat, the greatest chance that any politician can have. It’s a shame for them
and a shame for Sarawak.”
Topics at the debate ranged far and wide: Sarawak’s
constitutional position in Malaysia and the decision to be taken between
pursuing political redress and judicial redress to settle any diagreements; oil
royalties – 20% seemed the consensus; freedom of religion and whether Sarawak
in fact had a state religion; the need for a referendum ordinance but also the
difficulty of passing one given that this would need to be done at Federal
level; Education in the various Sarawak native tongues and in English;
administrative devolution of powers; protection of the indigenous peoples of
Sarawak, especially those in the rural areas, with the removal of the term
lain-lain from official forms; the Borneonisation of the civil service.
On most of these topics, the parties were in broad
agreement. The major bone of contention was in the implementation. With one BN
coalition local party, one local chapter of a national party and one
locally-based opposition party, much of the debate centred around which formula
would have the best chance of success at the negotiating table.
This is why we are calling for a cross-party committee,
as suggested by one audience member at the event. They could even draw from
civil society experts.
Sarawak’s future is too important to be left to chance.
While Malaysia may have had the same ruling party at Federal level since its
formation, this does not mean that this will always be the case.
We cannot allow any progress to stall simply because
there is a change in government, either at State or at Federal level. Nor can we simply wait for a change of
government at both levels.
This negotiation must begin now and must move forward
consistently until it is completed. On that, at least, I believe all
Sarawakians agree.’
S4S movement wants to thank all involved for their
participation – speakers, audience, volunteers, media, police and even the
people in Kenyalang Park for putting up with any disruption to their day.
The group feels that this was indeed a pioneering event
in pioneering spirit and hope that it will establish a new paradigm for
politics in the state.
As the group have maintained all along, nothing is more
important than the future of Sarawak and therefore all politics and petty
differences must be put aside to further this. All Sarawakians must stand for
Sarawak.- April 11, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment