Native Laws and Rights according to Sarawak Attorney General

By Editor

Rengah

2007-04-17 | Want to know how restrictive and limited the Sarawak Government interpret Native Customary Laws and Native Rights over lands in Sarawak?

The legal arguments put forward by the Sarawak Attorney General seem jargonistic but the fundamentals are being questioned. That is, even though the indigenous peoples existed long before any written law came into existence, but the Sarawak Government, through the State Attorney General is arguing that written laws take precedent. Its legal opinion (not what the laws are) is that first the colonisers and then the "independent" state can ignore such existence.

Herewith lies the common law.

Indigenous peoples all over the world have rightly exerted their existence, with laws among those existence, long before the colonisers ever thought of sailing, least of all, "discovered" new areas.

So while there is the legal argument to say that "The indigenous population had a pre-existing system of law, which along with the rights subsisting thereunder, would remain in force under the new sovereign except where specifically modified or extinguished by legislative or executive action.", such cannot be done without compensation.

In the Sarawak context, what would be the political implication to have specific laws to annual Native Customary Rights over lands? So if politically it is not possible to take away native rights over lands, then you begin the process of eroding that rights and over a period of time, you watch those rights disappearing.

Simultaneously, you line up key political family members, proxies and cronies of all races to take over native lands and you back them up with state institutions such as the various government departments, administrative units, the police and the army and collectively you ensure all dissent, however peaceful and legitimate, is smashed.

In another way, you line up some communities who may or may not have any alternative, as "joint-venture partners" to parade the government's "success" stories.

Nothing wrong and in fact should be the case, if, only if partners have equal rights and the intent is sincere and is base on the fundamental principles of justice and equality, and on good governance principles of openness, transparency, consultation etc.

Does any of the government's "success" stories contain such principles?

Rengah Sarawak has highlighted just some of the situation arising from this Sarawak Government doing.

For the legal minds, an alternative is offered by groups engaged in supporting communities in the numerous legal battles in courts with the Sarawak Government over land rights.

Read on in the PDF files below.

Attached files

• PDF: Native Customary laws and native Rights over lands in Sarawak
• PDF: What the Sarawak Attorney General does not want you to know