Hornbill Unleashed

July 19, 2013

Ibans warned of ‘people with agenda’

Joseph Tawie

The Dayak community, especially the Ibans, is told to welcome a Federal Court decision which recognises the existence of NCR land.

A former president of the Sarawak Council of Native Customary Laws has taken Dayak leaders with ‘hidden agendas’ to task for the furore over a federal court ruling disallowing the transfer by sales and purchase agreements of native customary land.

Sidi Munan said the Dayak community, especially the Ibans, should instead welcome the court decision which recognises the existence of NCR land

“We should be thankful to the Federal Court for finally recognizing our native customary rights over land.

“To me, the most important decision of the courts is the recognition of our NCR land, and this decision will once and for all erases the government’s perception that ‘all land not surveyed or any land not issued with a land title, including land under NCR claim is government land’,” Munan said.

He said asking to amend the adat and land laws on NCR land would eventually put the community “in a disadvantageous position.”

Munan was responding to calls by several Dayak leaders to amend the adat and land laws on NCR land.

The calls came about following last week’s Federal Court decision in the Bisi Jinggot case.

The court had ruled that NCR land cannot be transferred by sale and purchase agreements, nor can a native customary rights so acquired over the temuda (farm land) by a native be sold to another person who does not belong to the same community.

The decision also affects Dayaks entering into joint venture with persons outside their community.

“If these people want the adat and land laws changed then they have to be specific as to what sections of the laws to be amended.

“You cannot simply say amend the adat and the land laws. We need to sit down and study the judgments of the courts including the Federal Court, the adat and land laws.

“If need be, there should be a forum to be organized by an independent body so that both leaders of the government and leaders of the Dayak communality including those from SADIA (Sarawak Dayak Iban Association) can attend and freely express their feelings and concerns.”

“Reviewing the adat and land laws without going into details could put the community in a disadvantageous position later on as there are certain people who really wished for them (natives) to fight the court’s decisions.

“These people are still eyeing our NCR land,” Munan said without being specific as to who “these certain people” were.

Government is not stupid

Sidi, said however, should there be an amendment or review, the Dayak community should urge the government to relook at Section 5 (3) (4) of the Land Code which extinguishes native customary rights and where the burden of proof of ownership is on the land owners.

“The burden of proof should be on the government if it wants the NCR land.

“The government cannot presume all land is state land. It must prove it is state land,” he said, pointing out that the landowners had been there generations after generations.

If the government disputed their existence, then it should be the one to provide proofs, he said.

Munan said that the government had also been using Section 6 of the Land Code to take away NCR land and converted it to other similar initials – NCR land (native communal reserve land).

“All land reserves including native communal reserve land are under the purview of the government, and any time the government wants the land, it will just take it like that without paying compensation.

“Why pay compensation, when you have already lost your native customary rights over the land after you agreed for your land to be perimeter-surveyed.

“The government is not that stupid,” Sidi said.

Advertisements

7 Comments »

  1. PEOPLE WITH AGENDAS APPEARS ON OUR SHORES IN THE 1960s

    Comment by anon — July 20, 2013 @ 8:51 PM | Reply

  2. In addition to the suggestion by Mr. Sidi Munan that the burden of proof should be on the Government if it wants the NCR land, I suggest the cut-off year (Feb’1958) should also be reviewed as we (natives) never stop our shifting/NCR land cultivation by that date : if we did not cultivate the land, it’s because the area was purposely reserved for ‘pemakai menua’. Hence, NCR land definition should cover all the area regarded as the “rural districts’ areas” in the early days of independence.

    I also hope that if the ‘adat and land laws’ are to be amended, it should be initiated through a forum of native leaders regardless of gender or political lineage; we should not leave any such native issues to the decision of non-natives. Either we are aware or not, some of our native rights were left to be dictated by subtle ‘non-native’ moves, example :-
    – there was a book on NCR land issues written by a prominent non-native lawyer which to some extend may influence the Government definition of our NCR land;
    – most of the important posts in the Land & Survey Department are held by non-Dayak and these people are the front-line witnesses to our NCR land existence;
    – even most of the Federal judges who decide on Besi’s case were also non-Dayaks.

    Comment by Concerned NCR Land Owner — July 19, 2013 @ 10:32 PM | Reply

    • GIVE ME BACK MY LAND
      With shock of surprise I could not believe that the ruling made by the Federal Court of Malaysia dated 11th July, 2013 delivered upon me at Putra Jaya was not in my favour due to the obsolete, outdated, so confusing and vague law on NCR land in the state, the so-called “Tusun Tunggu” or “Iban Adat” or Native Customary Law, very messy, very contradictory, difficult to understand, some gazatted, legislated and some just in the form of books written by the so-called “experts” and many of these laws are irrelevant to our present day society. These laws must be changed and updated, reviewed, gazatted and legislated.
      The Sarawak and Sabah High Court’s ruling in Kuching refering to my case [Ref: Malayan Law Journal (2008) from page 415 to 437] and the recently concluded ruling by the Federal Court Of Malaysia at Putra Jaya are using those outdated Laws, the law of using “Tungkus Asi” and what that surprise me even more is that, Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah, a religious organisation, not even a party to the contract and do not even own those NCR Land in question could have titles to those land and the names of the original owners of the land as listed in questions were erased by the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys Kuching Division and the original owners of those NCR Land in questions are still waiting for the titles to come out today.

      While many Iban Laws had been abolished as time passed by, such as the requirement for an Iban male who wanted to court a female he must be able to cut some heads. In the olden days, under the Iban Law, a man who has not collected any head will not be able to get married because they branded you as “coward” and today you need not have to collect any heads in order to get married as it has long time been abolished.
      Actually, there are 224.41 acres, more or less, comprising of the owners who are genuine owners of NCR Land under dispute in Matang including those I newly bought, 120.33 acres, more or less, altogether, up to today, including the several lots of land totaling 37.24 acres, more or less, in question as disputed in this judgment.
      These new parcels of land were also purchased by me from the Iban Landowners by modern conveyancing instrument, by way of sale and purchase agreement and not by way of “Tungkus Asi” as insisted by our State Attorney General, Datuk Jong Chung Fong, a Lawyer for the 1st and 2nd Defendants.
      The old style of buying and selling by “barter trade” or “Tungkus Asi” were no longer practicable to our present day society and common sense is telling us it is wrong for the third party like Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah to force the vendor to sell to the buyer by way of “Tungkus Asi” so little as almost no value, an equivalent to a meal or a dinner or as much as a pig where that is no longer applicable to our present day society and I do not see any thing wrong for me to pay the seller at an agreed price using dollars and cents with money value where the seller is willing to sell and the buyer is willing to buy which in my opinion is a very legitimate and legal transaction.
      Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah was not even a party to a contract as at that time of buying and selling process, the titles were still not issued out under their name. Their name did not appeared in the site plan as they were not the owner of that NCL land in question and why on 15th April, 1993 the two (2) titles were issued out under their name comprising of 224.41 acres, more or less, under mixed zone title land by the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys Kuching Division. In fact, all those arguments and judgements ruled out by the High Court and Federal Court were drifting very far away from recognising rightful ownerships of the NCR Land that does not required to have so many laws to interprete and so many “Iban Adat” to refer to.
      OWNERS OF LOT 85 & 86, BLOCK NO. 1, MATANG LAND DISTRICT (SUNGAI AGAS)

      NO. NAMES AS APPEARED IN THE OLD SITE PLAN WAITING FOR ORIGINAL TITLES AT LAND & SURVEY OFFICE, KUCHING DIVISION PART OF LOT AREA (IN ACRES)
      1. Theresa Bajik Anak Keling
      1) Lot 19 …………………………………………………………………. 6.32 acres
      2) Lot 23 ………………………………………………………….…….. 1.22 acres
      (Surrendered by Tuai Kampong Jetan, K399370 ____
      dated 09/11/71 To Rex Clement & Theresa Bajik) . 7.54 acres
      3) Lot 12 (100/470th share ………………………………………1.00 acre
      4) Lot 22 …………………………………………………………..…… 4.54 acre
      5.54 acres
      86
      86

      86
      86

      13.08
      2. Layau Ak Embak. Ref: Caveat Registered on 16/12/1997
      vide L.29180/1997 on Parcel/Lot 86, Sub-lot:-
      1) Lot 11 …………………………………………………………………. 3.99 acres
      2) Lot 38 ……………………………………………..…………………. 4.03 acres
      8.02 acres

      86
      86

      8.02
      3. Angat Ak Eyau (Lot 17) ……………………………………………………. 0.25 acre 86 0.25
      4. Apek Ak Meramat (Deceased):-
      1) Lot 14 ……………………………………………..………….. 1.09 acres
      2) Lot 40 …………………………………………….…………….. 0.63 acre
      1.72 acres
      Claimants: –
      1) Muslim Abdullah @ Atong anak Apek
      (New I.C. No: 720813-13-5371) – (1/2 Share)
      2) Sara anak Apek (New I.C. No: 630802-13-5852) – (1/2 Share)
      Surrendered To:-
      Caroline Sangga anak Demi
      (New I.C. No: 780324-13-5762)
      86
      86

      1.72
      5.
      Jilom Ak Macha (Deceased: Claimant: Adrin Ak Jilom:-
      Lot 12 (370/470th share)………………………………….………3.70 acres
      86
      3.70
      6. Bisi Ak Jinggot @ Hilarion Bisi Ak Jenggut (Ref: Caveat Registered on 08/07/1996 vide L.12580/1996 (Against part of Lot 85, Block 1, MLD) & L.12580/1996 (Against part of Lot 86, Block 1, MLD):-
      1) Letter of Authority No. 06/93 ……………….……. 34.00 acres
       For “Projek Lembu Tenusu” Under SEDC
      Adoption Scheme dated 19/07/1991.
      2) Lot 2 (S&P Agreement dd.10/07/1991) ……… 18.00 acres
       Purchased from Angat Ak Eyau
      (BICK.282349)
      3) Lot 34 (SEDC Letter dd. 19/07/1991) ………….. 2.94 acres
       For “Projek Lembu Tenusu” Under SEDC
      Adoption Scheme dated 19/07/1991.
      4) Lot 29 (S&P Agreement dd. 29/10/1990)…….. 1.68 acres
       Purchased from Jimbu Ak Bujai
      (BICK. 284436)
      5) Lot 3 (S&P Agreement dd.29/10/1990) ……….. 7.39 acres
       Purchased from Jimbu Ak Bujai
      (BICK. 284436)
      6) Lot 9 (S&P Agreement dd 11/12/1984) ………… 2.59 acres
       Purchased from Oled B. Sulong
      (BICK.591843)
      7) Lot 7 (S&P Agreement dd. 08/12/1984) ………. 1.65 acres
       Purchased from Kon Ak Sumot (f)
      (BICK.664298)
      8) Lot 36 (S&P Agreement dd. 08/12/1984) ….… 0.88 acres
       Purchased from Kon Ak Sumot (f)
      (BICK.664298)
      9) Lot 43 (S&P Agreement dd. 08/12/1984)……… 2.66 acres
       Purchased from Kon Ak Sumot (f)
      (BICK.664298)
      10) Lot 35 (S&P Agreement dd. 08/12/1984)………. 3.89 acres
       Purchased from Apek Ak Maramat
      (BICK.557507)
      11) Lot 85 (Compensation Agreement dated
      18/05/2011) ……………………………………………….. 44.27 acres
       Purchased from Layau Ak Embak (f)
      (New I.C. No. 320810-13-5146)
      17915/39217th share
      12) Lot No.1 (Surrender Of Land Agreement
      dated 07/01/2013) ….………………………………..… 1.88 acres
       Purchased from Regina Samabo (f) Anak
      Tubias Kling (Iban) New I.C.
      No.510125-13-5102 ______
      Total : 121.83 acres
      Less: Old Cemetary (Pendam Lama) ……………….…………… 1.50 acres
      Net Total : 120.33 acres
      85 & 86

      85

      86

      86

      86

      86

      86

      86

      86

      86

      86

      85

      86

      86

      120.33
      7. Margaret Lunggan Amid, Mena Ak Selang &
      Oled Ak Sulong (Lot 10: Claimant – Aled Ak Sulong)……..…. 9.06 acres
      86
      9.06
      8. Lasom Ak Leman:-
      1) Lot No. 21 ……………………………………..…………………… 2.72 acres
      2) Lot No. 32 …………………………………………………………… 3.21 acres
      5.93 acres
      86
      86

      5.93
      9. Nyangon Ak Galang (Lot No. 33) ………………………………..….. 6.41 acres 86 6.41
      10. Boniface Jarraw (Lot No. 8) ……………………………..…………….. 2.20 acres 86 2.20
      11. Mena Ak Selang ( Lot. No. 39) …………………………………….….. 0.61 acre 86 0.61
      12. Ibang Ak Pengarah (Lot No. 27) …………………………………..….. 0.21 acre 86 0.21
      13. Margaret Lunggan Amid (Lot No. 41) ………………………….….. 0.25 acre 86 0.25
      14. Entebang Ak Linggih (Lot No. 15)…………………………………… 1.04 acres 86 1.04
      15. Kathleen Atam Ak Bujang (Lot No. 20) ………………………….. 2.70 acres 86 2.70
      16. Ijaw Ak Nyangon (Lot No. 13) …………………………….…………. 4.70 acres 86 4.70
      17. Nancy Ak Anyau & Imas Ak Beriki:-
      1) Lot No. 4 ……………………………………………..……………… 2.00 acres
      2) Lot No. 5 ……………………………………..……………………… 1.96 acres
      3.96 acres
      86
      86

      3.96
      18.

      Lasa Ak Incham
      1) Lot No. 44 ………………………………….……………………….. 1.96 acres
      2) Lot No. 31 ………………………………………………………….. 1.75 acres
      3) Lot No. 6 …………………………………………….……………… 2.74 acres
      6.45 acres
      86
      86
      86

      6.45
      19. Malom Ak Bujai ( Lot No. 16) ………………………………….…….. 3.29 acres 86 3.29
      20.
      Roman Ak Sibat (New I.C. No. 610201-13-5437) &
      Jeragan Ak Labang (New I.C. No: 721012-13-5341)
      Formerly Cattle Ranching Scheme Under SEDC.
      Lot No. 47 (Jerami People of Kpg. Siol):-
      Surrendered on 11/01/1998 to:
      (1) Iba Anak Dagang (New I.C. No: 560203-13-5075)…..10.00 acres
      (2) Nelson Ngelambai Anak Wam (New I.C.
      No: 610101-13-6483) …………………………………………10.00 acres
      (3) David Anak Ribut (New I.C. No: 741207-13-5593) .. ..9.00 acres
      29.00 acres

      86

      86
      86

      29.00
      Sub-total 85 & 86 222.91
      21. Add: Old Cemetery (Pendam Lama)………………….…….………1.50 acres 86 1.50
      TOTAL 85 & 86 224.41

      In the olden days, our forefathers were illiterates, could not read and write and never go to school, never have Lawyers, they used “Tungkus Asi and even use “Barter Trade”. They never used sale and purchase agreement as they could not understand English to read sale and purchase agreement, some living in caves, and maybe some living on top of trees and all these are nothing to do with the legalities of these contracts.

      The actual truth was that the names of all the landowners were erased from the site plan in the Land and Survey Ofiice Kuching Division without landowners’ consent and the titles came out under mixed zone land in the name of Lembaga Amanah Kebajilkan Darul Falah under two (2) titles Lot 85 & 86, Block 1, Matang Land District. These two (2) titles were located on prime land in Matang, Kuching, Sarawak and because the transfer was not by way of “Tungkus Asi”, as a token sum and with purchase price of value measured in dollars and cents, the transfers were not recognised up to today by the High Court and the Federal Court of Malaysia.
      Just take a simple illustration that there is an acre of NCR Land just located next to an acre of a mixed zone land both located in a prime area in Kuching city with mixed zone land value at RM3,000,000.00 per acre and that one acre of NCR Land valued at so little as almost no value, an equivalent to a meal or a dinner or as much as a pig or a token sum with something of little value supposed to represent a meal which might reach the level of a pig and because the transfer was not done in that way, the transfer was not recognised by the court.
      To my opinion as an ordinary people, not a Judge or a Lawyer, these sorts of transfer by “Tungkus Asi” is very strange indeed and very unpractical and nobody can ever be willing to sell to you in the style of “Tungkus Asi” where one has to pay so little for such a valuable prime land in Kuching and if there are such offers, I would be the first one to grab the opportunities and I could be the richest man in the world because I can buy all properties in Sarawak by way of “Tungkus Asi”.
      Another ruling is that “I am an Iban, born in Julau and I cannot buy an Iban land in Matang” is another great joke. I bought that land with my hard earned money. Common sense is telling me that it is nothing wrong for such a very legitimate transaction where the seller is willing to sell and the buyer is willing to buy at an agreed price.
      Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah did not buy the land neither did they use “Tungkus Asi” to own the land. They just dreamed only for what is not theirs. Can you imagine that since I lost the case, Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah just grab my land like that. What about my house which I built on my land with my hard earned money? How can they just own them? And what about all the rambutans, durians, langsat, mango, tamadak, etc. which I planted on my land, do they have the right to own them? I have been staying in my land there for twenty nine (29) years now, since 1984 working with my own sweats and paying people to do fishponds, tar-sealed the roads, etc. and Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah just own all these things which I have on the land just like that without even buying the land after they have won the case. Where is justice? Can you imagine? How can Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah stop us from buying and selling the land and then grap the land? What Law is that?
      For the above reasons, I would like to repeat it again and again that it is definitely wrong for the Superintendent of Lands and Surveys Kuching Division to grap our NCR land and issued titles to a religious organisation, Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah without our consent knowing very well that the land is an NCR land belong to the Iban there with their names appeared in the site plan and erased them.
      BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LAND
      In 1982 or later then, the 1st dependant should have not erased all our names from the Imperial Cadastral Sheet with the claimants’ names and the acreage already there when in 1972 which was forty one (41) years earlier that the NCL rights had been investigated by Investigation Survey Team by the “Demarcator” from the 1st dependant’s office and that the field lots had been charted on the Imperial Cadastral Sheet with the claimants’ names and the acreage already done and that the Investigation Survey by Pickets were also done by the 1st defendant then using Prismatic Compass Survey.
      How could that be, on 15th April, 1993 after they have erased all our names then they issued the titles to the 4th dependant without considering our cattle grazing on our land including rubber trees and fruit trees such as rambutan, durian, longan, langsat, tamadak, cocoa, etc were already bearing fruits including our concrete houses were taken by the 1st defendant and issued with titles to the 4th defendant where I have spent a few hundred thousands of ringgit to buy and develop the land.
      The previous landowners have been cultivating the land from generation to generation, take for instant in the case of Jembu anak Bujai: Jembu was born in 1938 and he is now 75 years old and his father Bujai anak Mundu was the registered owner of the land as stated in the Imperial Cadastral Sheet taken from the 1st dependant’s office and his land was sold to me.
      And take for another example: Puan Layau anak Embak (deceased) was born in 1932, her grandfather Jalin from the mother side was the one who first cultivated the land. Layau is 81 years old now if she is still alive and she owns a concrete house on her land also taken by 1st defendant and issued title to the 4th dependent. She is paying an assessment rate every year to Padawan Municipal Council until today.
      Also, our Tuai Rumah Nyitan anak Salang (deceased) was appointed Tuai Rumah on 31/01/1960 before Sarawak joined Malaysia in 1963 and was recognized by the Brooke government.
      It is very unfair for the 1st and 2nd defendant to issue the land titles to the 4th defendant on 15th April 1993 knowing very well then that we were the owners of the land and we have been cultivating the land from generation to generation and keep on cultivating the land until today. The 1st and 2nd defendants had not just abused their powers, they committed a very serious offence for erasing all the Landowners names in the site plan at the Land & Survey Office and issued titles to Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah. This is a very serious offence, a criminal offence in the eyes of the law.
      Taking advantage of the whole situation, a man from Malacca by the name of MR. ONG AH THYE (New I.C. No. 62062121-04-5015) coming all the way over to Sarawak together with many others were buldozing my land and planting Kelapa Sawit in my land and a Police Report was made on 5th March, 2013 (Report No. GITA/002650/12 dated 05/03/2012) but no action were taken. The Police Report was read as follows:-

      POLICE REPORT DATED 05/03/2012
      PENCEROBOH TANAH SUNGAI AGAS, MATANG
      On 25th July 2011, I discovered that a group of Indonesian workers were encroaching and tresspassing illegally without my knowledge into my land at Sungai Agas, Matang with total area of about 81.21 acres, more or less, all inside part of Lot 85, Block No.1, Matang Land District.
      About 34 acres, more or less, were part of Lot 85, Block No.1, Matang Land District and 2.94 acres, more or less, were part of lot 86, Block No.1, Matang Land District where I reared cattle about twenty one (21) years ago, that was in 1991 under Sarawak Economic Development Corporation (SEDC) Adoption Scheme and about 44.27 acres, more or less, were also part of Lot 85, Block No.1, Matang Land District bought from Layau Ak Embak (deceased). Altogether, there are about 81.21 acres, more or less.
      That 34 acres and 2.94 acres, more or less, is inside 74.18 acres, more or less, which are inside lot 85 & 86, Block No. 1, Matang Land District, still under Court Case since 2002 and up to today it is already ten (10) years or one (1) decade to wait and still cannot be resolved.
      That 74.18 acres, more or less, was wrongly issued out titles by the Superintendent of Land and Survey Kuching Division to Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah on 15th April, 1993 despite the facts that I have bought the said land long time ago from the original native people there in Sungai Agas who have been living there long before Sarawak joined Malaysia in 1963.
      In 1972 or about forty (40) years ago, the Native Customary Land (NCL) Rights had been investigated by Investigatiion Survey Team by the “Demarcator” from the office of the Land and Survey Kuching Division and that the field lots had been charted on the Imperial Cadastral Sheet with tha landowners’ names or the claimants’ names and the acreage already done and that the Investigation Survey by Pickets were also done by the office of the Land and Survey Kuching Division using Prismatic Compass Survey.
      Ten (10) years later, in 1982 or about thirty (30) years ago, the Superintendent of Land and Survey Kuching Division illegally erased all the landowners’ names or the claimants’ names together with the acreage already there from the Imperial Cadastral Sheet.
      In 2002 or about ten (10) years ago, I summoned the Superintendent of Land and Survey & three (3) others for the unlawfull issued of title deeds to Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah and I lost the court case in the High Court in Sabah and Sarawak at Kuching, Sarawak where the High Court Judge, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer ruled out as follows:-
      1) NCR in Sarawak can only be transferred in a limited sense for example by gift or inheritance, etc within the community members of the native;
      2) A native from a community residing in south of Sarawak cannot purchase NCR from a native in a community residing in north of Sarawak; and
      3) High Court Judge, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer also concluded that he does not think that NCR can be transferred by modern conveyancing instrument of transfer such as by way of using ordinary Sale and Purchase Agreement and all the nonsenses.

      “Making these sorts of judgement, did that High Court Judge, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer ever asked himself whether Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah got the transfer by gift or inheritence from the Iban community in Matang and/or is that Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah within community members of the native Iban in Matang and how can a native from a community residing in south of Sarawak cannot purchase NCR from a native in a community residing in north of Sarawak. High Court Judge, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer also concluded that he does not think that NCR can be transferred by modern conveyancing instrument of transfer such as by way of using ordinary Sale and Purchase Agreement and then what sort of transfer can be used? If NCR cannot be transferred then how can it be transferred to Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah? How can thousands of NCR land have been transferred from old NCR owners to new NCR owners in the past? Are they going to be transferred back to the old NCR owners if they cannot be transferred? How can Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah got the right to just simply own the land by declaring that, they got the title in 1993 and just say: look we got the title and the land is ours, which they never cultivate, never have anything there on the land, never buy and never know whereabout is the land and how can they just own the land and have everything on the land which does not belong to them, all the houses including all the fruit trees, rambutans, durians, langsat, tamadak, mango trees, rubber trees including livestocks in the land such as cattle, chickens and everything already there in the land belonging to the former real NCR owners who already owned the NCR land long time ago before 1993 and all of those things including the land belong to them. If modern Sales and Purchase Agreements done by the Lawyers cannot be used then shut down all the Law firms, close all the schools where we study law and go back to the old days or the stone age days where there is no law and order where Sarawak once became the Land of Headhunters because of improper law.”
      I was not happy with the above ruling and I appealled to the Court of Appeal at Kuching, Sarawak and upon hearing submissions from counsels, the Appellate judges Dato’ Sri Abu Samah Bin Nordin, Mohd Hishamuddin Mohd Yunos and Datuk Azhar Alis Izhar Ma’ah thus upheld the High Court decission as follows:-
      1) Native Customary Rights (NCR) land is not transferable;
      2) Native Customary Rights (NCR) land could not be transferred by way of Sales and Purchase Agreement from other Ibans for valuable consideration; and still upheld that
      3) NCR in Sarawak can only be transferred in a limited sense for example by gift or inheritance, etc within the community members of the native; and
      4) A native from a community residing in south of Sarawak cannot purchase NCR from a native in a community residing in north of Sarawak, etc.
      My counsels have since then written letters dated 15/12/2010, 25/02/2011, 25/04/2011, 15/06/2011 and the latest one was written on 10/02/2012 (a copy of which is enclosed) requesting for the grounds of judgement from the Court of Appeal at Kuching, Sarawak for the said ruling and only on 22nd February 2012 that I received the grounds of judgment dated 18/01/2012 from Judge Court of Appeal Malaysia, Dato’ Azhar Haji Ma’ah.
      The grounds of judgement are needed for the purposes of the said application, in particular to identify the findings of fact or law upon which the issues was decided by the court and to frame the proposed questions of law.
      Now, somewhere along the line, a new chapter with a new subject matter altogether is coming up with new scenario before the above court case is over, whereby a contractor from Bintangor and workers from Indonesia together with their big boss from Melaka encroached and tresspassed into my land by bulldozing and cutting down all my timber logs and destroying all my gaharu trees & fruit trees inside my land and plant Kelapa Sawit illegally without my consent as discovered at the later part of this report.
      Also enclosed are photographs showing all the 78.27 acres, more or less, of the said land being bulldozed, timber logs and gaharu trees, fruit trees including durian trees, temadak trees, etc. being cut down, stollen and sold and Kelapa Sawit were planted together with workers pondok erected on my land without my consent.
      They worked day and night cutting and bulldozing my timber logs including my gaharu trees, fruit trees and they said that they were Madura coming from Indonesia and that their boss is Lau Yung Soon @ Ah Soon from Bintangor. They gave me Ah Soon’s telephone number, 016-8709723.
      Later on, I contacted Ah Soon and got all his particulars as Lau Yung Soon, with New I.C. No: 800515-13-5285 of c/o Sungai Bakong, 96500 Bintangor. I asked Ah Soon why he bulldozed all my land with his two (2) units of Long-arm “Hitachi” bulldozers and he said that he is only a sub-contractor. He is only working for his big boss by the name of Mr. Ong from Semananjung Malaysia. I asked for Mr. Ong’s full name and he said he doesn’t know his full name but he got Mr. Ong’s telephone contact, 0123579449.
      I then contacted Mr. Ong but he didn’t want to talk to me. I tried to contact him again and again and so many times I tried but he didn’t want to answer my call. So many times he off his handphone. I was very desperate. I reported the matter to the Forest Department and the Chief Forest Enforcement Officer, Tuan Nicholas Bin Sabastian sent three (3) of his men together with me to see the land and met these people, but they didn’t want to stop operating. Tons of timber logs including gaharu trees and fruit trees were extracted and sold illegally from my land with total value yet to be assessed. Until finally some of the timber logs were confiscated by the Forestry Department for illegal felling without permit/licence from Forest Department which they marked them as “Sarawak Forest Department Property”.
      On 21st August 2011, I went to see my land again looking for Mr. Ong but he was not around again and could not be contacted. By this time, almost all my land was bulldozed and cleared together with the one I bought from Layau Ak Embak. They were planting Kelapa Sawit on my land and when I asked them to stop planting, they said they did not know anything as they were only wages earners “makan gaji” from their big boss and many of them didn’t even know who was their big boss and I took photographs of the kelapa sawit and the timber logs together with their workers. The workers said their big boss normally cannot be contacted because he is always very busy and always not around.
      On Saturday, 31st December 2011 at 11:00 a.m. I went again for surprise check to see my land looking for Mr. Ong together with my uncle, Michael Buban and Mr. Ong again was not around. However, that day we found one of his workers by the name of Ng Wee Hong with New I.C. No: 801110-13-5513 of c/o No. 659, Kenyalang Park, 93300 Kuching driving a Land Cruiser “PRADO” bearing a plate No. WGP5221 belonging to his big boss Mr. Ong whom I have been looking for a long time. On that day, we discovered that even the “Old Cemetery” was bulldozed by them just to get the timber logs. To the Iban: It is taboo even to cut down the big trees inside the Cemetery “Pendam” and what more to say if you bulldozed the Cemetery “Pendam” with bulldozers.
      Later on, I checked the registered owner of that Land Cruiser “PRADO”, bearing a plate No. WGP5221 and found out that it was registered under ONG AH THYE, with New I.C. No: 620621-04-5015 of c/o Lot 7523, Kawasan Perindustrian, Jalan Lama, Air Keroh, Melaka encroaching and tresspassing illegally into my land without my knowledge destroying all my fruit trees and timber logs and planting Kelapa Sawit in my land.
      On 26th January 2012, I went again for surprise check and found out two (2) Indonesian workers inside the “pondok” erected on the land which I bought from Layau Ak Embak and I interviewed them and they said that they were general workers working for Mr. Ong. I requested for their Identity Card and they produced me their Indonesian Passports with their names as follows:-
      1) Musni Jumli, Indonesian Passport No. U 183916 born on 21/05/1982 in Kalang Bahu, Sambas; and
      2) Sahril, Indonesian Border Crossing Pass No. MA 053358 born in Sambas on 08/07/1995.
      Beside my land, part of “Jerami People of Kampung Siol” formerly belong to Roman Ak Sibat and Labang Ak Rebi (deceased) where they reared cattle in 1991 was also bulldozed and tresspassed by them and now they are planting Kelapa Sawit on their land. This land is part of lot 86, Block No 1, Matang Land District under Sub-Lot No. 47 with total area of about 29.00 acres, more or less, sold to:-
      1) Iba Anak Dagang, New I.C. No. 560203-13-5075 (10 acres);
      2) Nelson Ngelambai Anak Wam, New I.C. No. 610101-13-6483 (10 acres); and
      3) David Anak Ribut, New I.C. No. 741207-13-5593 (9 acres).
      The purpose of this report is to get the police to take immediate action to check the status of those foreign workers whether they got their working permits or not, especially their big boss from Melaka, Semenanjung Malaysia, whether he got the permit to extract timber and plant kelapa sawit on my land and if so under what authority.
      Justice must be done and justice delay is justice denial and the authority concern, especially the Court of Justice must not delay cases like this for too long to put things right, as in my case above, for ten (10) years and until today still pending.
      – that is the end of the Police Report –
      Now, I want to make clear that we have no reasons to move out from the land. The land is our land. These two (2) parcels of land under Lots 85 & 86, Block 1, Matang Land District comprising of an area 224.41 acres, more or less, must be revoked from Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah and must be returned to twenty five (25) rightful landowners as listed above, including our graveyard “Old Cemetery” as soon as possible as there is nothing more to wait, the time is over, the Federal Court Decision is not in our favour.
      These two (2) parcels must be returned to us with time frame, say, within thirty (30) days or within a grace period of sixty (60) days from the date of this Federal Court’s ruling.

      We have learnt enough from our Rumah Dayak at Jalan Satok without time frame where I was personally invited to witness the Laying of the Foundation Stone of Rumah Dayak, Jalan Satok, Kuching by YB Tan Sri Datuk Amar (Dr.) Alfred Jabu anak Numpang who was then, the Deputy Chief Minister Sarawak and Minister for Agriculture and Community Development at 4.00 pm on 27th August 1997, that was Sixteen (16) years ago, until today not completed.
      Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah cannot hold those land titles, “the longer they hold it, the hotter would be the issues”. I will blow it out and it shall spark like fire and you will hear more of me, I will expose it to the whole nation and let the whole nation know our laws and let our nation use it, judge it, take it as case study and see whether our laws are good laws or bad laws and I will not stop at that, I will make it global.
      “Sarawak, Land of Hornbill”, was formerly known as “Sarawak, Land of Headhunters” because in the past Sarawak got so many laws, many of them are stupid laws, obsolete, outdated laws, people cut heads because of stupid laws, yet we are still holding fast to those laws and this is the time where we should not hide those laws underneath the carpet.
      There is no reason for me to just raise the “white flag” yet although my appeal against the lower courts’ decision to refuse me a declaration that I had acquired Native Customary Rigjhts (NCR) Land at Sungai Agas in Matang had been dismissed by the Federal Court recently.
      Even that neighbouring Kuching Politeknik was a Native Area Land belonging to the people of Sungai Agas as at those times but was taken by the state government and in the old plan it still appears as Native Area Land vide Gaz. Notif. No. SWK.L.N.65 dated 4.11.82 in which part of those land were cultivated by Jalin and a few others.
      The educated Dayaks must wake up, open our eyes and ears. It is time for us to review our laws, our stupid, outdated laws which are still effective and in forced today, since joining Malaysia fifty (50) years ago, still applicable to so many cases in Sarawak where there are so many court cases lining up, one summoning the others, left unsolved.
      Now, I have just received a letter dated 19th July, 2013 from Ee & Lim Advocates, Lawyers for Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah addressed to my Lawyers, Messrs. Sandhu & Co. Advocates which is no longer acting for me, since I have lose, asking me to withdraw my caveat within fourteen (14) days from the 19th day of July, 2013, the date of their letter issued, failing which their client, that is, Lembaga Amanah Kebajikan Darul Falah, will make application to the High Court for an order that the said caveat be removed and in which event I may have to bear the cost of such application, a copy of their Lawyers’s letter is attached.
      I have been living and staying, developing my land for twenty-nine (29) years since 1984 and I have spent few hundred thousands to buy and develop the land, chased out from the land which I bought with my hard earned money and which rightfully belongs to me. If you were me how do you feel? This is not a game!!
      I have so much to write, so much for you to read. So, just for me to stop writing here and have nothing much to write, just Give Me Back My Land!! Those are our land.

      Submitted by:
      BISI ANAK JINGGOT @ HILARION BISI AK JENGGUT
      For & On Behalf of Twenty Five (25) Landowners, Sungai Agas, Matang
      (Lots 85 & 86, Block No.1, Matang Land District)

      Comment by BISI ANAK JINGGOT @ HILARION BISI AK JENGGUT — July 29, 2013 @ 3:08 PM | Reply

  3. In west Malaysia there are two NGOs which protect, preserve and prioritize Malay right, culture, language, custom and crown. Quite effective in their struggle because they are vocal, daring and mean. Ibrahim Ali is the head of PERKASA and he was fielded in the last general election. In the same vein could the SDNU, DBNA and OUNA unite on the sensitive issue of NCR in Sarawak. There must be a champion such as Ibrahim Ali of Perkasa and Hassan Ali for JATI (Jalur Tiga – Islam, Malay and Sultan). Somebody must champion the cause ……..

    Comment by i knowit all — July 19, 2013 @ 11:58 AM | Reply

  4. TELL TAIB ALL THAT!

    Comment by anon — July 19, 2013 @ 9:25 AM | Reply

    • Yes, taib must be told and asked to respect the court decisions. He himself is good at asking us to respect any decision his gov’t make so he must respect any decisions made in our favour!

      Now lets scraped all those damned dams which when built will drown and flood our NCR lands unless taib is willing to pay us rentals for as long as our Communal Reserved Lands and NCR lands are submerged by His DAMNED DAMS!

      What about those existing NCR lands bought buy non Natives in Native names and held under PA (Power of Attorney)? There are currently so many of such kind of NCR land deals which are supposed to exploit the loop hole in our land code.

      Comment by brian — July 19, 2013 @ 12:07 PM | Reply

    • For this particular matter I would not blame Right Honorable Pehin Sri Taib. It seems that Taib has been a scapegoat if there are any mismanagement, misuse and misappropriation of resources in Sarawak. Natives are partly to be blamed if misfortune befell them. In this auspicious month dedicated to the holiness of God Almighty let all Sarawakians examine themselves in all honesty. Have they been truly honest of themselves. Poverty has been synonymous with natives but let them all be equipped with knowledge, courage and will to defend their land ….. finally they will overcome all injustice, cruelty and evil facing them ….

      Comment by i knowit all — July 19, 2013 @ 3:34 PM | 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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: