和砂拉越同胞谈独立

打印
分类:犀乡论坛

 犀乡论坛 余清禄

在探讨砂拉越独立问题之前我们先扪心自问:我是砂拉越人吗?要改变被外来剥削以及逾半个世纪的困境吗? (A) MA63 无效   1,1963年 砂拉越不但不是自治政府,而且只是不完整的半自治政府。 2,MA63 的基础文件和报告书,实质上并非当时砂政府所作。历史记录证明,是英国政府和马来亚联手炮制的新殖民产物。 3,MA63 在英国簽署,过后才由相关各造事后批准,这样的文件有效吗?按照国际惯例,MA63 是国际文件,其签署方必须是主权国家,而砂拉越当时尚未独立,所以无效简单如婚姻,不足法定年龄者所签的婚书是无效的

 

砂拉越反让渡运动- 维基百科,自由的百科全书

英殖民地政府在1961年杪,于古晋召开“马来西亚团结咨询会议”,图为马来半岛,新加坡、砂劳越、沙巴和汶莱的“五邦”代表合摄,图中前排左起为杨清河(砂)、翁毓麟(马来亚)、唐纳史帝芬(沙巴)、李光耀(新加坡)和汶莱的代表拿督史地亚。

葛波德民意调查团全体团员合摄于古晋法庭外。

在反对马来西亚计划的群众集会上,人联党的伊班籍党员高喊口号的情景。

人联党的反大马签名运动,广获各阶层民众的支持,图为一名老妪正在签名时摄,左侧为当年人联党的激进领袖田绍熙。

风暴原记录52

当葛波德民意调查团抵晋时,人联党中央总部举行反大马群众大集会的场面一瞥。

英国仍有政治义务要求砂拉越获得独立

 

 

根据历史记录,1963年7月初在伦敦签署此契约时,砂拉越总督府的上空还飘扬着英国国旗,即使到了7月22日那一天,砂拉越的军队,警察,外交,财政的权力都还在英国手中,到了9月16日,又直接转交给马来亚。

上述历史事实证明:
1,砂拉越当时没有独立,实质上是从原来的英国殖民地,跌入一个新殖民地陷阱;
2,砂拉越当时只是半自治政府;
3,MA63 无效,所以砂拉越有权要求独立。

 

 

和砂拉越同胞谈独立

仅问话没对付快闪活动余清禄赞警明智| 马来西亚诗华日报新闻网
(余清禄 2020年10月20日)

在探讨砂拉越独立问题之前,我们先扪心自问:我是砂拉越人吗?要改变被外来剥削以及逾半个世纪的困境吗?

(A) MA63 无效

1,1963年3月至4月间砂拉越进行第一次直选,从县,市,省选出四百多位议员,立法议会(砂拉越内阁)成员四十二位 。这不但不是自治政府,而且只是不完整的半自治政府。

2,MA63 的基础文件和报告书,实质上并非当时砂政府所作。历史记录证明,是英国政府和马来亚联手炮制的新殖民产物。

3,MA63 在英国簽署,过后才由相关各造事后批准,这样的文件有效吗?按照国际惯例,MA63 是国际文件,其签署方必须是主权国家,而砂拉越当时尚未独立,所以无效。简单如婚姻,不足法定年龄者所签的婚书是无效的。

根据历史记录,1963年7月初在伦敦签署此契约时,砂拉越总督府的上空还飘扬着英国国旗,即使到了7月22日那一天,砂拉越的军队,警察,外交,财政的权力都还在英国手中,到了9月16日,又直接转交给马来亚。

上述历史事实证明:
1,砂拉越当时没有独立,实质上是从原来的英国殖民地,跌入一个新殖民地陷阱;
2,砂拉越当时只是半自治政府;
3,MA63 无效,所以砂拉越有权要求独立。

(B) In Quest Of Independence (寻求独立) 不违宪

1,宪法里没有说不可以寻求独立,所以寻求独立并没有违反宪法。

2,《1963年马来西亚契约》,是根据几份重要的文件订立的,其中最重要的是IGCR 《政府级委员会报告书》。报告书委员会主席连斯顿勋爵回答提问时,明确的说:他们是自愿组成,当然有权力自愿离开,这是最自然不过的了。所以无需写在报告书里。

3,砂拉越寻求独立,符合国际法 ,符合联合国1960年的去殖民化1514和1541议决案。

4,前首相马哈迪於2018年5月9日二度为相。他在联合国发言后,一个记者问:据新闻报导,沙巴和砂拉越要求独立,是吗?马哈迪回答说:我知道 ,他们(沙巴和砂拉越)有权这么做,可是他们没有这样要求,他们只是要更多的自主权。

5,寻求独立,是遵循宪法途径,通过议会民主进行,是合法的权益。

我们是在马来西亚的范畴内寻求独立,我们尊重现行政府及各行政机构,以和平方式,有理有据地提出寻求独立的诉求,从而达致目标,符合"捍卫砂拉越的权利"。

各位亲爱的砂拉越同胞,
独立是我们砂拉越神圣,光荣,艰巨和长期的目标,不经三几次甚至更多的选举是不能达到的。

选举的鼓声已经响起,在寻求独立(In Quest Of Independence )的旗帜下,来届选举中,将会有许多勇敢正义的各族同胞挺身出战许多席位,他们所欠缺的是选战及宣传工作中必要的经费,期盼同胞们为《救砂拉越基金》,慷慨解囊,鼎力相助。

道路是曲折的,前途是光明的,让我们大家携手并肩,勇敢走向寻求独立之路吧!

 

Discussing independence with fellow Sarawakians

仅问话没对付快闪活动余清禄赞警明智| 马来西亚诗华日报新闻网
(Yii Chin Luk October 20, 2020)

Before discussing the issue of Sarawak’s independence, let’s ask ourselves: Am I a Sarawakian? Do we want to change foreign exploitation and the plight of more than half a century?

(A) MA63 is invalid.

1. The first direct election in Sarawak, which was held from March to April 1963, elected more than 400 members from districts, towns, and divisions, and 42 members of the Legislative Assembly (Sarawak Cabinet). Not only was it not an autonomous government, it was also an incomplete semi-autonomous government.

2. The basic documents of MA63 and reports were not drafted by the Sarawak government at that time. Historical records prove that it was a new colonial product jointly concocted by the British government and Malaya.

3. MA63 was signed in the UK. How could it be valid with the retrospective approval of the relevant authorities? According to international practice, MA63 was an international document, and its signatory must be from a sovereign country. Sarawak was not independent at the time, so it was invalid. It is like marriage, the marriage certificate signed by persons under the legal age is invalid.

According to historical records, when the agreement was signed in London in early July 1963, the British flag was still flown over the Sarawak Governor’s Residence.
Even on the day of July 22, the military, police, diplomatic and financial powers in Sarawak were still in the hands of the United Kingdom and on September 16, they were directly handed over to Malaya.

The above historical facts prove that:
1. Sarawak did not have independence at the time. In essence, it fell from the original British colony into a new colonial trap;
2. Sarawak was only semi-autonomous at the time;
3. MA63 was invalid, so Sarawak has the right to demand independence.

(B) In Quest Of Independence slogan does not violate the Constitution.

1. The Constitution does not say that Independence cannot be sought, so inquest of independence does not violate the Constitution.

2. "Malaysia Agreement 1963", was based on several important documents, the most important of which is the IGCR "inter-Governmental Committee Report". When Lord Lansdowne, the chairman of the committee, was asked a question, he answered in no uncertain terms, "They joined voluntarily and they have the intrinsic right to leave voluntarily." So there is no need to write it in the report.

3. Sarawak’s in Quest of independence is in line with international law and the United Nations’ resolutions 1514 and 1541 on decolonization in 1960.

4. The former Prime Minister Mahathir made his second appearance on May 9 2018. After his speech at the United Nations a reporter asked, "According to news reports, Sabah and Sarawak want independence, is that right?" Mahathir responded, "I know, they (Sabah and Sarawak) have the right to do so, but they did not ask for it. They just want more autonomy."

5. Inquest of independence is abiding by the constitution, adopting parliamentary democracy approach and it's our legal right.

We are seeking independence within the realm of Malaysia, respecting the current government and various administrative agencies. It is done peacefully with legitimate grounds, so as to achieve the goal of Independence which is in line with "protecting Sarawak's rights."

Dear fellow Sarawakian,
Independence is our sacred, glorious, arduous and long-term goal. It is impossible to win elections without three or more tries.

Election drums have sounded. Under the banner of In Quest Of Independence, the next election will see many brave and righteous compatriots of all races contesting in many seats. What they lack is the necessary funds for the campaign and publicity work. We sincerely appeal to our compatriots to contribute generously towards the "Save Sarawak Fund".

The road is tortuous but the future is bright. Let us all join hands and bravely march towards the road of Independence.

Monday the 30th. . Joomla 3.0 templates. All rights reserved.