Hornbill Unleashed

February 1, 2012

Land tribunal ‘judges’ must know ‘native adat’

Joseph Tawie

A prominent Sarawak NCR lawyer believes that a land tribunal would only be effective if it is bestowed with ‘power’.

Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum’s proposal for the authorities to set up a land tribunal in Sabah to hear native land-related cases must ensure that the body is bestowed with full “powers”, a prominent native customary rights (NCR) lawyer here said.

Baru Bian, who is also state PKR chairman, while lauding Malanjum’s suggestion, said the more important factor in setting up such a tribunal is its composition and authority.

“This is very encouraging news which is line with our earlier proposal. Now the most important thing is the composition and power of the tribunal.

“The basic requirements and qualifications of a High Court judge are that he is familiar with natives ‘adat’ and culture.

“They must be independently appointed,” Bian said.

He was responding to a statement by Malanjum that a native land tribunal should be set up in Sabah to provide a more effective alternative to resolving disputes involving native land.

Malanjum said that a dedicated body, similar to the Waitangi Tribunal in New Zealand, would be more flexible and therefore able to settle disputes faster and more efficiently.

He has suggested that it “may be time for the state to consider setting up such a commission, instead of just throwing native land dispute cases to civil courts”.

“In some cases, judges from Peninsular Malaysia, who may not be that familiar with Sabah’s native customary land rights, have to preside in local cases and as a result, these cases may be decided as they would have been in similar land cases in the peninsula,” Malajum reportedly said.

Pakatan’s idea

Bian said Pakatan Rakyat Sarawak comprising PKR, DAP and PAS had, in the last election, included the setting up of a land commission in its manifesto.

Among others, the commission would assist the state and the natives to solve the increasing problems connected to NCR land.

Bian, who is Ba’Kelalan assemblyman, had raised the proposal at the State Legislative Assembly in its June meeting last year and urged the government to set up the land commission.

He had argued that establishing a land commission was “crucial” because the court and the state government had different ideas on NCR land.

The government is of the view that NCR land covered only areas farmed before Jan 1, 1958.

But the court had ruled that NCR land also included “pemakai menua” and “pulau galau”.

Bian’s suggestion was rejected outright by the state government.

Currently, there are more than 200 NCR land cases pending hearing in the High Court, and many have been in the court for more than five years.

“Lately there has been some improvement. With the setting up of the tribunal, many of the cases can be expedited,” Bian said.

About these ads

2 Comments »

  1. RADICAL LAND REFORMS – IMPOSE RENTAL & ROYALTIES FOR NCR

    We must preserve all existing NCR land as it is the heritage of all Sarawak.

    The land code should be amended so that ownership remain in the hand of NCR owners. The forested lands must be protected from further logging to allow the land to recover from over logging.

    If any non-owners want to use the land they can lease and pay rent based on the loss of income and the income to be generated subject to strict environmental requirements.

    No more dams of plantations.

    Dams and plantations take up huge areas and those involved must be bound to pay royalties to the NCR owners.

    The ownership of NCR land previously seized must be return to the owners and the above suggestion of rental and royalties be paid . In this case the payments would be back dated as compensation and compounded for interest.

    This will be fair to the NCR owners.

    This idea came from a couple of earlier bloggers.

    Comment by anon — February 2, 2012 @ 7:26 AM | Reply

  2. Whatever the amendments onto the Land Code concerning the NCR land and Native Communal land and without the occupants’ consents must be fully reinstated. Even 3 decades ago we rarely heard of someone carrying a single land title that bears an acreage of more than 15 acres. Hardly. But today it is mad. As now the majority elderly natives do not owned land of 50 acres per se even though they may be subjected to customary rights claim and occupations but outsiders, they can be even allocated hundreds and even thousand hectares. Who is the Judge Shredder?

    Comment by miaOwkia — February 1, 2012 @ 9:40 AM | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 416 other followers

%d bloggers like this: