Indigenous Blog akan berpindah ke alamat baru seperti dibawah. Blog lama telah diserang oleh virus. Maklumat terbaru tidak boleh dikemaskini. Teruskan perbincangan untuk mencari langkah terbaik untuk ORANG ASLI MALAYSIA.
Segala kesulitan amat dikesali.
sekian
http://orgaslimy.blogspot.com/" title="http://orgaslimy.blogspot.com/" target="_blank"http://orgaslimy.blogspot.com...

CENTER FOR ORANG ASLI CONCERNS
P.O. BOX 3052,
47590 Subang Jaya, Malaysia
Tel/Fax: (603) 56340988
coac@streamyx.com | www.coac.org.my
20 September 2008
The Editor
New Straits Times
Jalan Balai Riong
Kuala Lumpur
Dear Editor,
Time for the JHEOA to take a lead from the Orang Asli
The article titled “20,000ha gazetted for Orang Asli reserve” (New Sunday Times 21.9.2008) and the accompanying features appear as if the Department of Orang Asli Affairs is going on a PR campaign to promote itself as the godfather of the Orang Asli (something at least one previous Director-General has been fond of claiming).
I can understand why it has to. The Department has come under fire not just from the Orang Asli themselves but from some government agencies as well who feel frustrated by the obstacles placed by the JHEOA in their genuine efforts to help the Orang Asli. I can personally attest to this.
But it is one thing to blow your own trumpet and quite another if in doing so you mislead the public.
For example, the Department proudly proclaims that “almost 20,000ha of land – twice the size of Kuala Lumpur International Airport and the vast land surrounding it – had been gazetted as Orang Asli reserve in Peninsular Malaysia”.
The truth is, a decade ago there was an additional 1,062 hectares of Orang Asli reserve which today has been lost to the Orang Asli.
In fact, KLIA was the homeland of two Temuan settlements that had to unwillingly make way for the airport and be resettled in a swampland 40 km away.
The Department also boasts that 31,000 hectares of land had been approved for gazetting but have yet to be formally gazetted by the states. The truth is: much of these approvals were done in the 1960s and 1970s. Decades have passed and the simple paperwork of putting out a gazette notice was not done in al these cases. As a result, due to the insecurity placed on their lands over time, the Orang Asli have lost 6,932 hectares of their traditional lands to others, often without them knowing it, let alone being consulted.
This has prompted one Court of Appeal judge in the landmark Sagong Tasi land rights case to chastise the JHEOA for making the Orang Asli victims of the Department’s negligence in not gazetting or under-gazetting Orang Asli lands.
It is also easy for the JHEOA to lay the blame for such non-action on the premise that it is federal agency while land is a state matter. If Felda, also a federal agency, succumbed to such defensive justification, the many thousands of Felda settlers would not be land-owners or even millionaires today. Why the double standards?
The JHEOA admits that poverty and hardcore poverty remain a sad situation for the Orang Asli. That a people who make up only 0.6 per of the national population should account for 20 per cent of the nation’s hardcore poor (and 46 percent of the nation’s poor), is not something anybody should be proud of. Especially for a department that has been directed by law to be responsible for the “protection, wellbeing, and advancement” of the Orang Asli, and which has been endowed with generous government funds for this purpose for the last five decades.
Yet, the basic structures that keep Orang Asli families in poverty are still in place. A case in point is the agricultural development programmes that the JHEOA touts about as a success story.
RM30 million in dividends for 2008 may sound like a lot of money. But when divided by 10,000 households, and into monthly payments, it works out to only RM500.00 per month – not enough to keep the household above the official poverty line.
But should it be so? Orang Asli who manage and sell their oil palm or rubber on their own smallholdings have been raking between RM2000 to RM3000 per month during the same period.
It is no wonder then that several Orang Asli communities have asked for these JHEOA-manoeuvred ‘agricultural development projects’ to be given back to them to manage on their own. They can see for themselves the rotten deal they are getting.
But they face uncompromising resistance from the so-called management agencies who prefer to keep the we-do-everything-for-you- for-a-fat-fee concept. The Jakun community in Bekok have been forced to take this matter to court to assert their right to work their own fields. Others, as in Betau and Buluh Nipis in Pahang, have been detained by the police, for wanting to assert their agricultural independence.
It is clear that the top brass in the JHEOA are unable to see this fundamental flaw in the development programme of the Orang Asli. And as to why many Orang Asli still live in poverty when they should not.
It is also easy to see why certain officers at the local level do not want to do away with this scheme, and why it remains a favoured programme of the JHEOA.
So, in light of the above, it is no wonder then that many Orang Asli have become more conscious of their situation and have begun to assert their right to land and economic justice.
To accuse them of being easily influenced by outsiders who harbour certain agenda or by international-linked NGOs who aspire to become heroes and champions of human rights, not only reflects the Department’s ignorance of the Orang Asli situation today but also reveals a closed mind incapable of seeing viewpoints other than the official propaganda.
The Orang Asli and natives of Sabah and Sarawak (collectively referred to as the Orang Asal) are no longer the timid natives roaming around in loin-cloths in the forest, waiting for handouts from the government.
They have participated actively in national and international fora and have made their demands clear. Orang Asal leaders have also been active in international standard-setting deliberations such as the UN Convention of Biological Diversity and the Framework Convention on Climate Change as well as in several regional initiatives on a host of issues involving indigenous peoples. Many of these interventions are available in published documents.
In fact, Jannie Lasimbang, an Orang Asal from Sabah is one of the 5 experts sitting on the Geneva-based Expert Mechanism on Indigenous Peoples Rights established under the UN Human Rights Council.
So perhaps the JHEOA should take a cue from the Orang Asal and go international. Then it would know that after 24 years of debate, discussion and consensus among indigenous peoples in the world, the Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples was finally adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 13 September 2007. Malaysia is a signatory to this convention.
The articles of the Declaration – which speak of self-determination, recognition of land rights, and the need to get free, prior and informed consent before any activity involving indigenous peoples – is now international customary law, which the government is obliged to follow.
International customary law also recognizes native title i.e. the right of the Orang Asli to own their traditional lands which they hold by custom. Our courts have also recognised native title based on common law.
Thus, for the Director-General to brush aside native customary rights as being the prerogative of the Borneon states only, frightens me into thinking that more and more Orang Asli lands are going to be lost due to fiduciary neglect resulting from an uninformed perception of the Orang Asli land issue.
It is time for the JHEOA to raise its awareness to the level of the Orang Asli and to work towards justice.
Colin Nicholas
Coordinator
Center for Orang Asli Concerns
Perarakan untuk menghantar memorandum ke DYMM Agong telah dihalang oleh pihak polis. Walaupun pada peringkat awalnya ia telah dibenarkan. Pencabulan oleh pihak kerajaan kepada penduduk asal menampakan tiada perubahan yang positif untuk memelihara kebajikan orang asal.
Deklarasi Hak Orang Asal telah ditandatangani oleh Malaysia dan menyokong deklarasi tersebut.
|
| JARINGAN ORANG ASAL SEMALAYSIA INDIGENOUS PEOPLES NETWORK OF MALAYSIA
Mailing address: P.O. Box 511 • 89507 Penampang, Sabah, Malaysia Tel: +6088 726413 • Fax: +6088 718669 • Email: joasmalaysia@gmail.com |
Submission of the
INDIGENOUS PEOPLES NETWORK OF MALAYSIS (JOAS)
ON THE HUMAN RIGHTS SITUATION OF THE ORANG ASAL IN MALAYSIA
to the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)
1. & nbsp; In accordance with the Information and Guidelines for Relevant Stakeholders regarding the Universal Periodic Review mechanism (July 1, 2008), the Indigenous Peoples Network of Malaysia (JOAS) submits this report to the Human Rights Council in relation to the 2008 Universal Periodic Review of Malaysia.
2. & nbsp; The Indigenous Peoples Network of Malaysia (or Jaringan Orang Asal SeMalaysia, JOAS) is the umbrella network for 21 organisations throughout Malaysia that represents different indigenous peoples’ organisations and communities. As the focal point for indigenous rights and advocacy in Malaysia, JOAS provides the indigenous communities with representation nationally, regionally and internationally.
3. & nbsp; The Orang Asal or indigenous peoples of Malaysia consist of more than 80 ethno-linguistic groups, each with its own culture, language and territory. Together we number about 4 million, or about 15 per cent of the national population. Collectively, also, our peoples count as among the most poor in Malaysia, a manifestation of our marginalisation and disenfranchment from the mainstream society on account of the non-recognition of our rights as contained in both national and international customary law.
4. & nbsp; Malaysia’s system of governance incorporates a two-tier system of government – federal and state – with both having legislative powers. The apex national law nevertheless is the Federal Constitution which provides guarantees to life and livelihood for the Orang Asal as it does for other citizens. Additionally, the Malaysian government has also gone one step further in openly declaring its support for indigenous rights, histories and territories by endorsing the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN-DRIP) twice: the first, on 30 June 2007, when it was a member of the Human Rights Council which supported the original draft to be submitted to the General Assembly, and the second on 13 September 2007 when it joined the majority of countries to adopt the Declaration.
5. & nbsp; Against this commitment of the Government of Malaysia to recognise indigenous rights, this report assesses the human rights situation of the indigenous peoples of Malaysia – the Orang Asal – vis-à-vis the UN-DRIP and as espoused, or otherwise, by local legislation.
Right to self-determination
6. & nbsp; The UN-DRIP acknowledges that the Charter of the United Nations, the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights1 and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action,[1] affirm the fundamental importance of the right to self-determination of all peoples, by virtue of which they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development. Article 3 in particular of the UN-DRIP state that indigenous peoples have the right to self-determination and by virtue of that right, they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.
7. & nbsp; In the context of Malaysia, however, no law or policy was found that mentions the right to self-determination for indigenous peoples, let alone accord us that right.
8. & nbsp; On the contrary, various laws, actions and programmes of the government directly oppose the principle of self-determination and violates the human rights of our people. These violations include the non-recognition of our customary lands, forced resettlement, non-recognition of cultural rights, policies of assimilation and integration, and even outright disregard for judicial decisions.
Non-recognition of customary lands
9. & nbsp; Article 26 of the UN-DRIP states that indigenous peoples have the right to the lands, territories and resources which they have traditionally owned, occupied or otherwise used or acquired, and that States shall give legal recognition and protection to these.
10. Malaysian courts have in fact endorsed this in several judgments that essentially accord native title to our traditional lands, territories and resources. These include the judgments in the cases of Adong Kuwau[2], Nor Nyawai[3], Sagong Tasi[4], Rambilin[5], and Madeli Salleh[6].
11. These judgments attest that native title arises out of native customs and that these customs, which define the content of native title, are part of the law of Malaysia and are protected under the Federal Constitution. The implementation of customs is also consistent with common law, which directs our courts to define native title with reference to native customs.[7]
12. However, despite these decisions of the local courts, the Malaysian government and its agencies choose not to accept these judgments as legal precedents and instead require indigenous communities to treat each native title claim as a fresh legal argument.
13. A former state attorney-general had even stated in a public forum that judgments by the apex court in Malaysia, such as that of Madeli Salleh cited above, which recognizes and uphold native title, do not determine how his state treats the rights of indigenous peoples to their traditional lands.
14. In the current Federal Court appeal submission in the Sagong Tasi case cited above, the Malaysian government has rejected the notion of native title. Further the government, citing sections 3 and 6 of the Civil Law Act, is also asserting that if a local, appropriate law is available, there is no necessity for it to be subjected to the articles of the Federal Constitution or to any international customary law or instrument.
15. Clearly, as such, the Malaysian government rejects the right of indigenous peoples to our traditional lands, territories and resources.
No Free, prior and Informed Consent (FPIC)
16. With such non-recognition of native customary title, the Federal and state governments have acted maliciously against the indigenous Orang Asal by forcibly appropriating, acquiring and taking Orang Asal lands, territories and resources without our free, prior and informed consent.
17. In the state of Selangor alone, about 7,000 hectares of indigenous Orang Asli reserves have been degazetted as such without the Orang Asli knowing when, where and how these areas were lost to them. In Sabah and Sarawak, an increasing number of communities are now finding out the hard way that their native customary lands have been given to oil palm plantation companies or leased to logging companies – again with out their prior consent, let lone their free and informed consent, and frequently without adequate compensation as required by Article 28 of the UN-DRIP and the Land Acquisition Act.
18. Many of these cases involve the forced and violent eviction of indigenous Orang Asal from their native customary lands, as happened in the case of Ruman Nyawin in Sarawak.[8]
19. And plans are afoot in Sarawak to build 12 more dams on the lands and territories of our peoples – again without knowledge and consent and in violation of Article 32 of UN-DRIP.
20. The establishment of so-called Growth Corridors that are designed to spur the economic growth of the country will also severely affect our land rights position.
Forced resettlement
21. In line with the government’s non-recognition of native title and the disregard for obtaining free, prior and informed consent, the indigenous Orang Asal have also been subjected to forced or involuntary resettlement.
22. A case in point is the forced resettlement of the Chewong-Orang Asli community in the Kelau dam project in Pahang where the Orang Asli were intentionally misrepresented by agents of the government in order to carry out the forced resettlement of the Orang Asli. To make matters worse, the indigenous community concerned need not be resettled as their village would not be affected by the project at all.[9]
23. This is in direct violation of Article 10 of the UN-DRIP which states that indigenous peoples shall not be forcibly removed from their lands or territories and that no relocation shall take place without the free, prior and informed consent of the indigenous peoples concerned.
Violation of right to self-governance
24. Article 20 of the UN-DRIP gives indigenous peoples the right to maintain and develop their political, economic and social systems or institutions. However, the government has increasingly interfered in our traditional systems, especially in the selection and appointment of our customary leaders.
25. For example, the Guidelines on the Procedure for the Appointment of Orang Asli Headmen[10], dictates that the government has the final say in who becomes the community head and has the right to prescribe the procedure for his election.
Pressured assimilation & Right to freedom of religion
26. We have our own unique cultures, spiritualities and institutions which we want to continue and pass on to our future generations. However, some of us face extreme pressure to convert to the state religion, especially when missionary-proselytizing programmes are conducted with state largesse and infrastructure. This is clearly in violation of Article 12 of the UN-DRIP.
27. This coupled with the stated objective, especially for the Orang Asli of Peninsular Malaysia, of integrating us into the ‘mainstream society’ has overtones of a policy of pressured assimilation.
28. Furthermore, some of us who chose to adopt a mainstream religion other than the official state religion, have found our religious structures demolished by local authorities on the weak and untenable argument that these religious structures were constructed on state land.
.
The consequence of Non-Documentation
29. A disproportionate number indigenous Orang Asal are not documented (i.e. having proper identification papers). This is mainly due to their lack of access to the government infrastructure and machinery responsible for documenting citizens.
30. However, the onus should be on the agency that is entrusted by law to carry out its function rather than blame the marginalized and impoverished indigenous individuals for their failure to be documented.
31. An undocumented citizen cannot enjoy several rights that are accorded to citizens, including social and economic benefits and the right to citizenship.
|
|
Conclusion and Recommendation
32. Because Malaysia endorsed the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the government should be held to its good intention by ensuring that the Declaration is fully implemented and enforced.
33. Article 38 of the UN-DRIP in fact requires that “States, in consultation and cooperation with indigenous peoples, shall take the appropriate measures, including legislative measures, to achieve the ends of the Declaration.”
34. This is further reinforced by Article 42 that calls on States to “promote respect for and full application of the provisions of this Declaration and follow up the effectiveness of this Declaration.”
35. Many of the human rights violations facing the indigenous Orang Asal of Malaysia can be resolved if the UN-DRIP is fully applied and if the court decisions and the principles of our Federal Constitution are upheld.
36. This is especially so in the case of native customary land rights – which is now a well-established right in Malaysian jurisprudence, provided by explicit provisions in the law and elaborated on by court judgments. From these, it is clear that undocumented native customary rights are equally valid as registered titles. The State must recognize this.
37. Doing so would also be consistent with upholding the Federal Constitution – as the abolition of native customary rights is to be regarded as violating the right to livelihood of an indigenous group. And this right is protected under Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution which states that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty save in accordance with law.”
38. Thus, in merely being consistent with the provisions of the Federal Constitution and in applying the articles of the UN-DRIP in full, we can be assured that our rights will be recognised and upheld.
39. In this regard we call upon the Government of Malaysia to follow our national laws with regard to upholding indigenous rights and at the same time honour the rights we are entitled to under international customary law.
Thank you.
Adrian Lasimbang
President
Jaringan Orang Asal SeMalaysia (JOAS)
Indigenous Peoples Network of Malaysia
7 September 2008
| Continuing Legal Education Series by Judge Aidun Naidu, Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky; Little Shell Pembina Band of North Dakota, United States of America. Rapid City, South Dakota, January 11, 2008 & nbsp; &n bsp; &nb sp; &nbs p;   ; & nbsp; &n bsp; & nbsp; &n bsp; &nb sp; &nbs p;   ; & nbsp; It is said and believed, as a rule of practice, that to succeed in any lawsuit one ought to check, recheck and cross-check all the facts surrounding any number of legal issues, and thereafter, apply those facts as evidence to the existing principles of law, maxims and doctrines, settled cases useable as precedents, statutes, customs, traditions and mores, restatements of the law, and scholarly works by recognized giants in the field of law to be played out in court as winning briefs and great oral arguments whose sole purpose and objective is to win powerful judgments in favor of the plaintiff complainant. That is the first step. You win. Then comes the enforcement phase. The Court does not have the power of the sword and the purse. That is the domain of the executive and the legislature, respectively. You can still lose. Unless you are sovereign. That is, you have your own Police Force, Prisons, and a standing army. Nobody terrorizes you without getting arrested, charged, tried, convicted and sentenced. The aim of this lecture is to apply this practice discipline and see how this applies to the land rights of Malaysia’s Orang Asli - all eighteen distinct tribes - and how these dispossessed People could use the discipline of law to redeem their land and establish their land rights for all time. Therefore, it is safe to assume, based on this maxim, that it is vexatious, unfair and unjust to legislate a property law to someone’s detriment. This is good news for the Orang Asli as long as the law is just and fair, and that it imposes no injury or mischief on anyone’s vested right and interest to property. Roman and Scots law also recognize the concept of usufructus which refers to the right to use and profit from another’s property on the condition that it remains uninjured and that a fiduciary fee is paid. These concepts stem from the recognition of allodial title held by aboriginal peoples under native customary rights. Allodium is defined as “land held absolutely in one’s own right, and not of any lord or superior. An estate held by absolute ownership, without recognizing any superior to whom any duty is due on account hereof.” (Black’s Law Dictionary, Seventh ed. page 76). If the concepts of usucapion and usufructus are to be recognized in the Malaysian Orang Asli context it follows that one ought to examine Malaysia’s Federal Constitution (FC); National Land Code (Act 56 of 1965); the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 (Act 134); the Specific Relief Act 1950 (Act 137); the Land Acquisition Act 1960 (Act 486); the Government Proceedings Act 1956 (Act 359); the Adorna Properties Case, Sagong Tasi v Kerajaan Negeri Selangor, Nor Nyawai v. Borneo Plantations Sdn. Bhd. & Others, and other cases and statutes in order to connect the dots and discover where disparity, unfairness, unconstitutional and illegal actions has been occasioned by parties – both public and private - to the detriment of the Orang Asli. There is another source of irritation that was occasioned with the introduction of the Anglo-Saxon land title system into an Asian country such as Malaya by the British colonials whose imperialistic proclivities were unabashed. This smacks of potestas gladii – the power of the sword where might is right. I will fight you for it in a nice way by introducing a civilized weapon – legislation. This is the ultimate deception especially when the laws made pursuant to an intention to steal masquerades as legal, lawful, and legitimate. There seems to be a tacit satisfaction on the part of the lawmakers that issuance of a British land title – an alien introduction stemming from an alien culture - extinguishes native customary title, or terminates the permanent tenancy of land occupation and ownership by an aboriginal. To add insult to injury an act of the legislature on the part of the lawmakers to make things right without so much as consultation with the Orang Asli is perceived as formal and normal. I wonder if this is a civilized way to steal land under the guise of an enacted law. Since there is no mention of the Orang Asli in the Federal Constitution (FC) of Malaysia, it is safe to conclude that the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 (APA) confers sovereignty on the Orang Asli based on the premise that there is no Malay Peoples Act, Indian Peoples Act, Chinese Peoples Act, Eurasian Peoples Act, etc. in Malaysia to confer the same sovereignty on Malays, Indian, Chinese, Eurasians and others born of miscegenation except for fundamental liberties (Part II, Articles 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13) that all Malaysians enjoy in Malaysia under the protection and guarantee of the FC. APA was promulgated in 1954 before the ratification of the FC in 1956 and 1957 in consequence of the Reid Commission’s findings. It may be wise also to conclude that the Orang Asli were not mentioned in the FC because of the existence of the APA, and that the APA is not to be subsumed by the FC. As the first occupants of the Malay Archipelago, the Golden Chersonese, and Malaya, there is no doubt in my mind that the Orang Asli are a sovereign people. They hunted, gathered, farmed, took care of the environment, had a native code to address grievances, disputes, and conflicts, and raised families and communities way before the arrival of Prince Parameswara, the Portuguese, Admiral Cheng Ho, the Dutch and the British. Obviously, I refer to the historical texts available that suggest that these events happened although I was not physically present to witness the course of history in the Malay Archipelago. Mind you, I happen to believe that history can be fictionalized depending on who is writing it, and who stands to gain from such distortions and misinformation. The word “sovereignty” is used to denote the concept of unlimited power and authority. In the United States, the Native Americans are regarded as quasi-sovereigns by subtle governmental insinuations rearing its ugly head as court decisions, regulations and the dastardly Bureau of Indian Affairs. There is no such thing as a “quasi-sovereign.” Either you have unlimited power and authority or you don’t. If you have limited power and authority, then, you are not a sovereign. When you apply the concepts of usucapion and usufructus in the Malaysian Orang Asli land rights and ownership context as the nation’s first peoples, there is absolutely no doubt that the Orang Alsi enjoy usucapion as first possessors while the Malaysian government – whether municipal, state, or federal – have the privilege of usufructus. A privilege is not the same as a right. The former has limited authority in terms of scope, scale, effect, and impact. The latter is a legally protected interest enforceable in a court of law – and a court of justice. Let us now examine how the various laws of Malaysia have a direct bearing on usucapion and usufructus. Bear with me as I connect the dots and I pray you will be able to come with me as I embark on a journey knowing that these are not unchartered waters. Give me your comments, inputs and suggestions as lawyers and law students, and to those who are attending the Word In Action Ministry Law College (WIAM), you will need to dig into the realms of research and thinking to see where we are going with these. The FC is a contract, a covenant, a compact, an agreement made between the government and the governed. It outlines a list of things the government is allowed under law, rationale, reason, justice, conscience and fairness without terrorizing the governed. The Lockean concept as adopted by the Framers of the American Constitution. There are those who refer to the Framers as “Founding Fathers” as if the government is a parent !!! No thanks. I had excellent parents. They made me excel in speaking my mind when it works well and to keep a lid on it when it goes south. The FC is the supreme law of the Federation which states that “any law made after Merdeka Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency, be void.” (Article 4) This is a strong and unequivocal statement which should not, and cannot be taken lightly. In the Malaysian context, I have noticed that this powerful declaration of Article 4 is taken as a spurious, if not ineffective statement of the supreme law. The fact that any law made after August 31, 1957, which is inconsistent with the FC shall be void simply states that that inconsistency need not be challenged and proved in a court of law to be made void, but ipso facto, is void if any parliamentary enactment is inconsistent with the FC. Prima facie and at first blush, it seems to say. The special jurisdiction of the Malaysian Supreme Court as to the interpretation of the FC has been repealed. See Article 129. So, where the dickens does one go to have the Constitution interpreted in Malaysia? This is serious. We seem to be cut adrift from firm moorings. We cannot afford to be bobbing up and down as a useless piece of cork in the ocean of uncertainty and inconsistency shoved hither and thither by the undercurrents of distorted and devious constitutional interpretations by some errant minister of the government dedicated to the cliché “rule of law.” Every one I know in academia, in government, in the legal profession, and in the judiciary talk about the rule of law instead of the role of justice. NOBODY has yet to convince me what “rule of law” means. You see, it has a totally different meaning, definition, and interpretation in the different and separate minds of the legislator, the executive, the judiciary, and the practising lawyer. However, the apex court, now called the Federal Court, is constitutionally mandated to have jurisdiction as a court of original or consultative jurisdiction other than its function as the final appellate court. See Article 121 (2)(b). In other words, an aggrieved party has the constitutional and legal right to petition the Federal Court to seek review of a constitutional provision - maybe - without having to go through the usual messy trial process. Another avenue available is to invoke the power of the Conference of Rulers (Article 38) and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as the custodian of executive authority (Article 39). I doubt this has been tried before. The Orang Asli can certainly give it a concerted effort. Part II, Article 13 reads as follows: (1) No person shall be deprived of property save in accordance with law. (2) No law shall provide for the compulsory acquisition or use of property without adequate compensation. Taking (1) and (2) of Article 13 together, the obvious question is whether sufficient and adequate compensation has been paid to the Orang Asli’s usucapion by the Malaysian government since the arrival of Prince Parameswara in Malacca and the inception of the Malacca Sultanate. I think not. I am sure the Orang Asli will agree that whatever they have received as compensation is grossly insufficient if not unfair. Article 5 of the FC grants a right to livelihood. When the State of Federal government takes the lands of the Orang Asli for purposes of development and progress, is the compensation adequate to meet the standards of livelihood within the expectation of the dispossessed land owner? Part IV, Chapter 5, Article 67 deals with “Restriction on introduction of Bills and moving of amendments involving taxation, expenditure, etc.” may defeat the mandates of Part II, Article 13 (1) and (2). It is saying that if you move a Bill asking for compensation for the Orang Asli, we can throw the book at you. However, there seems to be some light at the end of the tunnel with Part IV, Chapter 6, Article 69 declaring that (1) The Federation has power to acquire, hold and dispose of property of any kind and to make contracts, and (2) The Federation may sue and be sued. This is refreshing given Parliament’s apparent power to restrict Bills involving expenditure incurred by the government to compensate the Orang Asli for use of their customary land. Part VI, Chapter 4 deals with land. Articles 83 through to Articles 91 deal specifically with various matter relating to the central issue of land. There is absolutely no mention of the Orang Asli or their customary lands in these Articles 83 through to 91. Article 90 mentions “customary land” but that’s it. There is no definition or explanation of what “customary land” means. Part XIII, Article 167 - Rights, liabilities and obligations - (7) : The Federation shall make annual payments as fell to be made before Merdeka Day under Article II of the Treaty made on the sixth day of May, eighteen hundred and sixty-nine, between Her Majesty of the one part and the King of Siam of the other part relative to the State of Kedah. Subsections (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5) are repealed. Now, here we have a situation where Queen Victoria’s contract with the King of Siam and the State of Kedah is still legislatively protected at the expense of the Orang Asli. Nobody advised Her Majesty that in matters of land acquisition the rightful owners have to be consulted. In this case, the Orang Asli. There is an obscure mention of the word “aborigine” in Part XII, Article 160 (2) which “means an aborigine of the Malay Peninsula.” Apart from this definition, there is nothing. There is no mention or reference made to the Orang Asli. One could only wish that Article 160(2) had said “an aborigine is person who is also referred to as Orang Asli as a term to identify the country’s first citizens”, or something to that effect to make things palatable and acceptable to Malaysia First Citizens- the Orang Asli. The legislative intent of this Act is to amend and consolidate the laws relating to land and land tenure, the registration of title to land and of dealings therewith and the collection of revenue thereform within the States of Johore, Kedah, Kelantan, Malacca, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Selangor, Trengganu and the Federal Territory of Kuala Lumpur, and for purposes connected therewith. That just about covers all the land belonging to all the eighteen Orang Asli Tribes. The presence of any reference to the eighteen Orang Tribes is acutely felt by the absence of its mention. There are 447 Articles in the Code. The Savings Clause in Article 4 (1) states: Nothing in this Act shall affect the past operation of, or anything done under, any previous land law or, so far as they relate to land, the provisions of any other law passed before the commencement of this Act.” Usucapion and usfructus? Section 4 (2) goes further to state that “Except in so far as it is expressly provided to the contrary, nothing in this Act shall affect the provisions of (a) any law for the time being in force relating to customary tenure.” (Emphasis mine) Therefore Section 4(1) and (2) offer great statutory remedy, comfort and solace, in my opinion, to the Orang Asli to vigorously pursue their lost land rights via the aegis of usucapion and usufructus. Chapter 3, Section 19 - Information to kept secret. The statute seems to frown upon transparency when it forbids its employees and officers to “maintain, and aid in maintaining, the secrecy of all matters which come to his knowledge in the performance of his duties.” So if the land officer finds an offending document evidencing fraud, or deception, or theft, or ownership of land by the Orang Asli, he is required, by law, to maintain secrecy. He is prevented from being a whistleblower. One can only wonder what lurks behind the scenes. There goes accountability out of the window as unwanted dishwater. Talk of hidden hands. Chapter 2, Section 51 – Classification of land – again no mention of customary land titles. It classifies land as land above the shore-line (town land, village land, country land); and foreshore and sea-bed. The fact that land has been alienated in Malaysia simply puts to rest the truism and belief that it belonged to someone else eons before the Lockean concept of government by the consent emerged upon our shores. Chapter 4, Section 175A – Power to replace register document of title where the register is lost, etc., - I have always been fascinated, and amused, at the use of the word “etc.” For me, it means anything ranging from a fading memory to burning the register with intent to destroy original records so that the original owner of land does not have a leg to stand on. Chapter 5, Section 126 – Breach of complex condition (offers some solace and comfort to the Orang Asli) when it states that “ Where any condition consists of two or more separate obligations or liabilities, a failure to fulfill any of those obligations or liabilities shall constitute a breach of condition.” Do we have “complex condition” here since the municipal, state, and federal governments, through its agencies and departments, have appropriated land belonging to the Orang Asli whose only proof and evidence that they own ALL land in Malaysia is that they were here first and always enjoyed usucapion? Which brings us to the all time favorite, Section 340 - Registration to confer indefeasible title or interest, except in certain circumstances. – The dictionary definition of “indefeasible&rdquo ; – “not to be annulled, forfeited or made void” is a good foundational premise to start our enquiry into usucapion. Subsection(2) (a) of Section 340 states that where fraud or misrepresentation is evidenced and proven, then indefeasibility does not attach. In other words, where fraud and misrepresented has been occasioned, a party claiming his or her right to land fraudulently obtained by misrepresentation loses that right in that the title is voided, forfeited or annulled. But sadly, the Federal Court in the Adorna Properties Case did not think so although the statute is crystal clear in its intent, content, and extent as to fraud and misrepresentation. In the Adorna Properties case, a Thai woman who owned a piece of land in Penang lost to a fraudulent transfer of title of her land to a fraudster who sold the land to Adorna Properties. The only reason I can think of as to why the apex court did not uphold Section 340 of the National land Code in reference to fraud, misrepresentation, or forgery is that the Government of Malaysia may have had a hand in the decision because Section 340 has the authority, power, capacity, capability, and legal standing to be of great advantage and benefit to the Orang Asli’s stand on land rights. The apex court found it necessary to declare this great injustice to the hapless Thai woman as a precedent for future claims of forgery, fraud and misrepresentation. Be that as it may, Section 341 - Adverse possession not to extinguish titles or interests – clearly states that there is no time bar under the Limitation Act of 1953 for the proprietor of land to bring an action in court to recover his property. Five hundred years of land grabbing may yet be vindicated in favour of the Orang Asli if Section 341 is unleashed against the Government of Malaysia. The legislative intent of this Act is relating to the acquisition of land, the assessment of compensation to be made on account of such acquisition, and other matters incidental thereto. Part I, Section 2(1) - Interpretation – provides a definition for land as “alienated land within the meaning of State land law, land occupied under customary right and land occupied in expectation of title. (Emphasis mine) That’s it. There is no other mention or definition, hide or hair about what “customary right” means. It is to be concluded that this is a direct reference to usucapion. Then there is the ominous sounding Section 3(b) - Matters to be neglected in determining compensation – In determining the amount of compensation to be awarded for any scheduled land acquired under this Act, any disinclination of the person interested to part with the land acquired shall not be taken into consideration (Emphasis mine). Naidu Translation: I am the Government of Malaysia, or Mr. Private Party interested in buying your land Mr. Orang Asli. I understand you are disinclined to sell it. Well tough, I am going to buy it whether you like it or not, or whether your ancestors are buried under the land or not. See you in Court where the one Judge will decide who is right. Look at Section 40A(1). & nbsp; &n bsp; 4. The Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 (Act 134) The legislative intent of this Act is to provide for the protection, well-being and advancement of the aboriginal peoples of West Malaysia. [25th February, 1954] It would appear that Sabah and Sarawk were still a twinkle in the eye of the future Framers of Malaysia. Section 6 mentions in detail the meaning, definition, scope, scale, effect and impact of Aboriginal areas. Section 7 deals with Aboriginal reserves. Subsection (2) states that “within an aboriginal reserve no land shall be declared a Malay reservation under any written law relating to Malay Reservations. That’s all there is to it. Any law relating to, referring to, insinuating at, or declaring to assert Malay Reservation status is void according to subsection (2) above. Section 19 states that the Minister (no specification as to which ministry) “may make regulations for carrying into effect the purposes of this Act…..”. Naidu Translation: I am the Minister. I do not need legislation. I have the power to make regulations which is the same effect as enacted law. You understand. That is my right under the Act. Parry and thrust. I give you one hundred and take back ninety nine. Goodbye. OK. Selamat Jalan. Never mind the Legislature gave you Section 7 subsection (2). But look at Section 19. OK. This is legal terrorism. Plain and simple. This is the talk and walk of civilized people. We make laws. We break laws. Makers breakers. What the hell are you going to do about it? & nbsp; The legislative intent of the Act is that it relates to specific relief. Part 1, subsection 1.2[2] states that “it is undoubtedly good law that where a statute creates a right and, in plain language, gives a specific remedy or appoints a special tribunal for its enforcement, a party seeking to enforce the right must resort to that remedy or that tribunal, and not to others.” [RCA Sdn. Bhd. v. Pekerja-Pekerja RCA Sdn. Bhd. & Ors.[1999] 1 MLJ 309 (SC: Lee Hun Hoe CJ (Borneo), Harun Hashim and Gunn Chit Tuan SCJJ); see also Metal Industry Employees Union v. Registrar of Trade Unions [1976] 1 MLJ 220 and Electrical Industry Workers Union v. Registrar of Trade Unions & Anor. ]1976] 1 MLJ 177; Manggai v. Government of Sarawak & Anor. [1970] 2 MLJ 41; Wilkinson v. Barking Corp. (1948) 1 KB 721; Pasmore v. The Oswaldtwistle Urban District Council (1898) AC 387] Clear, concise and cogent language. Interpretation unnecessary like television on wedding night. The Orang Asli have to enforce their rights when they gather together all the eighteen Tribes, and have their day in Court. The Federal Court as a court of original jurisdiction. [Article 121(2)(b)]. No need to go through trial court phase and all. Subsection [3] – it is trite that all forms of specific relief are in the discretion of the court. It is equally trite that the discretion conferred is not a fanciful one. It is a discretion that must be exercised in accordance with sound principles. [Loo Choo Teng & Anor. v. Cheok Swee Lee & Ors. and another appeal [2000] 2 MLJ 257 (CA: Gopal Sri Ram, Siti Norma Yaakob and Denis Ong JJCA)] Section 4 stipulates five ways how relief is given. The eighteen Tribes of Orang Asli can and should avail themselves of these five methods. Section 7.5 is interesting where it mentions English cases on ‘self-help’. “English law permits though it does not encourage a person who is actually entitled to the possession of immovable property (not one who erroneously, however honestly and plausibly, thinks himself entitled) and is out of possession to re-enter without breach of the peace if he can. This concession to self-help was inevitable in days when the superior courts were closed for a great part of the year and twenty miles were counted a long day’s journey.” [Pollock & Mulla’s commentary on section 6 of the Indian Specific Relief Acts, 1963.; Low Kum Yoon v. The Kim Huah [1976] 1 MLJ 83 (OCJ: Arulandom J)] Imagine the eighteen Tribes walking all over Malaysia and exercising their right to self-help. And why not. Twenty miles is a long days journey if they cannot afford a car and petrol. Section 7.6 [4]: Self-help, however, is not to be encouraged because of the disturbance which might follow but the legality of it is beyond question. [Trustees of Leong San Tong Khoo Kongsi(Penang) Registered & Ors. v. Poh Swee Siang [1987] 2 MLJ 611 (SC: G Seah, Hashim Yeop A Sani & Wan Hamzah SCJJ); Perumahan Farlim (Pg) Sdn. Bhd. & Ors. v. Cheng Hang Guan & Ors. [1989] 3 MLJ 223 (SC: Lee Hun Hoe CJ (Borneo) (Harun Hashim and Mohamed Yusoff SCJJ)] Section 8.3 grants any person, for example the eighteen Tribes of Orang Asli, the right to recover possession of his immovable property nothwithstanding any other title that may be set up in the suit. The language suggests that if and when the Orang Asli go to the Federal Court with their customary native title it will stump and trump the English common land title adopted in Malaysia as a colonial millstone especially when the civilized world knows it is an imperfect title. All this is fine and dandy, according to this section, provided there is no disturbance to the peace or breaches of the peace. I can only hope the media does not inflame passions when the Orang Asli decide to enforce their rights under law, by law, through law, in law, at law, and, in due course of law. Sadly Section 8.6 states that even if a person is dispossessed of his land by the State with malice, he cannot bring a suit against any State. [Honan Plantations Sdn. Bhd.v. Kerajaan Negeri Johor & Ors. [1998] 5 MLJ 129 (HC: Mohd Ghazali J)] Section 8.6 is vexatious, preposterous, unfair, unjust, unconscionable and downright unconstitutional. The legislative intent of this Act is related to “proceedings by and against the Federal Government and the Governments of the States.” Section 5 highlights the liability of the Government in tort when a public officer in the employ of the Government has committed nonfeasance, misfeasance or malfeasance. Section 6 limits the liability of the Government. It exonerates any judicial activity, obviously, but removes immunity from others in the discharge of their official duties in their personal capacities. Section 18 refers to application of written law relating to procedure. The Government is, for the purposes of this Section, like any other person. There is more than hope and a prayer for the eighteen Tribes to take on the Government without fear or favor, and still keep the peace at the same time. The Court of Appeal recognized pre-existing native customary land titles of the native Ibans of Sarawak, but it narrowed the application, applicability, legality and locus standing of native customary right to “settlement areas” and not to areas used for foraging. The Court In other words, the Court restricted the meaning of native customary right and missed the whole concept of inalienable land right based on usucapion! The Court of Appeal probably never heard of usucapion and usufructus. It went on to say that although restrictions can be imposed on native customary rights to land, there is no question of extinguishing such rights. In typical English common law fashion a la potestas gladii, the Court coldly stated that native customary right can be taken away by clear and unambiguous words in legislation. Maybe my command of the English Language is inadequate. But what the hell difference is there between “can be taken away by ……legislati on” and “extinguish”? I hate the English common law system as a Malaysian of Indian origin. I am no Englishman and have NO desire to be one. Thank God. I am no anglophile, as well. But, by the same token I have lots of British friends. The natives of Sarawak have their very own native courts. Maybe it is the high noon of decision-making. These native courts ought to outlaw the findings in Nor Nyawai and entrench its very own stamp upon native customary land rights. After all, the Government of Malaysia cannot interfere as the Attorney General of Malaysia is barred from interceding in a native court suit. (Article 145 (3) FC) All said and done, the eighteen tribes of Orang Asli ought to go the Federal Court, as a Coourt of original jurisdiction [Article 121 (2)(b)] and petition the apex court to review their constitutional locus standi as a distinct people while appealing their cause with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (King) of Malaysia. The King of Malaysia has the right to appoint a Commissioner and as many deputy Commissioners pursuant to Section 5 of the Aboriginal Peoples Act. Article 39 FC vests executive authority of the Federation with the King of Malaysia who is also Supreme Commander of the armed forces of the Federation. The King is also constitutionally empowered to call on the Royal Malaysia Police Force to enforce His Majesty’s Executive Orders. The time is ripe for the Orang Asli to stand up and be counted. As well, the natives of Sabah and Sarawak do not need the intervention of a High Court Judge of the Malaysian judiciary to oversee the judicial ramifications of a Court of Appeal of the Native Court. Civil and criminal matters involving natives and/with natives, or natives and/with non-natives must be adjudicated in Native Courts. There are enough natives of Sabah and Sarawk, and amongst the Orang Asli who have read law and work as lawyers, magistrates, law professors and scholars. Surely these professionals are eminently qualified, as natives, to help adjudicate native codes and laws in Native Courts without any interference by State or federal governments. The focus ought to be on the sovereignty of native peoples in Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak. Sovereignty carries with it the attributes of unbridled power, autonomy, control authority, supremacy and immunity (The PACASI Doctrine of Judge Naidu). You snooze you lose. This is more than a wake-up call. It is time for action and reaction while keeping the peace. Thank you. THE DESTINY OF MALAYSIA’S ORANG ASLI A Preliminary Report compiled by Chief Judge Aidun Silver Eagle Naidu of the Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky; The Little Shell Pembina Nation of North Dakota; United States of America Introduction Most history books written about the Golden Chersonese, the Malay Archipelago, Malaya – the various names attached to present day Malaysia - extol the virtues of economic and political development starting with a story of Prince Parameswara as the founder of the Malay Kingdom of Malacca, A.D. 1400-1511. Rarely are the Orang Asli mentioned. There is ample mention of the Portuguese, Dutch and the British. I support the fact, as a post-structuralist, that history can be fictionalized and manipulated unabashedly. The fact that the Orang Asli were ignored in historical texts and references could be attributed to the ignorance of the designers, planners and schemers of things to come. It has happened to aboriginal groups around the world by imperialistic avarice. Oral history has proved this time and again. The Orang Asli of Malaysia are not mentioned or included in the supreme law of Malaysia – Part I, Article 4 (1)of the Federal Constitution (“This Constitution is the supreme law of the Federation ………& rdquo;) except for the natives of Sabah and Sarawak in Part XII, Article 153, in reference to “Reservation of quotas in respect of services, permits, etc., for Malays and natives of any of the States of Sabah and Sarawak.” The obvious burning question that should arise and emerge is whether this exclusion of the Orang Asli was by design which escalated into a commission by omission, or by forgetfulness on the part of the planners and drafters of the Federal Commission. Either way, a future amendment could have solved the conundrum although it has been proudly claimed that the Federal Constitution was amended some seven hundred times probably in defiance of the 1956 Reid Commission which did not include a Malayan judge, jurist, legal scholar, or an eminent lawyer. The Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954 (Act 134), enacted in 1954 as Ordinance No. 3 of 1954, was revised and published in 1974 as Laws of Malaysia Act 134. The revised Act came into force on 1.7.1974. The Act states that it is “An Act to provide for the protection, well-being and advancement of the aboriginal peoples of West Malaysia. Therefore, Act 134 is considered to be a valid Act for the protection of the eighteen Orang Asli groups identified as the Temuan, Semelai, Jakun, Orang Kuala, Seletar, and Kanaq classified as Proto-Malays; the Semakbri, Jahut,Mahmari (Pulau Carey), Chewong and Batik are classified as Senoi; while the Jahai, Semai, Temiar, Kingsiew, Lanoh and Kintah are classified as Negrito. It should be noted that this Act was enacted before Merdeka Day. As a distinct ethnic minority group the Orang Asli ought to enjoy special inalienable rights based on the rules of natural law and natural justice by virtue of the fact that they were living in, and occupying, the Malay archipelago as the original custodians of the environment and the adjoining land mass. They hunted, fished, gathered and raised families as distinct primitive communities with their very own distinct Native Code. They took care of the land as one would take care of his or her mother. Land is mother in the aboriginal thought process. Your mother is not for sale. For the Anglo-Saxon frame of mind, land is a commodity capable of being bought, sold, bartered or traded. An inevitable clash of civilizations. The fact that foreigners arrived in the Malay archipelago bringing with them their laws and ideas of socio-economic and geopolitical protocols does not justify marginalizing and sidelining the Orang Asli. The British introduced the concept of land titles -a legal fiction - which created the Malays reservations, the concept of freehold and leasehold titles. The right to land occupancy under a “customary community title of a permanent nature” was declared as settled law by the Malaysian Court of Appeals in the Sagong Tasi case in 2006. The defendants dared not appeal the decision to the apex court for obvious reasons – it would have opened a gargantuan can of worms. Surely the British who introduced their anachronistic common law system in these climes were well aware of customary community title of a permanent nature. Although several thousand Orang Asli embraced Islam, this conversion did not make them “ Malays” as defined in Part XII, Article 160 (2) of the Federal Constitution which states that “’Malay&rsquo ; means a person who professes the religion of Islam, habitually speaks the Malay language, conforms to Malay custom……&rd quo;. This conversion to Islam of the willing Orang Asli is not dissimilar to the Native Americans who were coerced into accepting Christianity so that they could become “civilized.” The Anglo-Saxon state of mind in America was that it was “manifest destiny” that the doctrine of “discovery and conquest” was inevitable. The fact that Christopher Columbus discovered America, upon which is based the dubious claim to “manifest destiny” and “the doctrine of discovery and conquest”, is akin to the child who discovered a refrigerator in the family kitchen. In the context of Islam, it has been reported that Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, in an address to the Oxford center for Islamic Studies on October 1, 2004, stated that one of the ten fundamentals which Muslim countries must demonstrate as Islam Hadhari (or Civilizational Islam) is a willingness for the protection of the rights of minority groups and women. The Orang Asli are a minority group. Has Muslim Malaysia protected the rights of the Orang Asli? It is worth remembering that a right has been defined as a legally protected interested that is enforceable in a court of law, even a Syariah Court where Islam Hadhari is valid and potent. The sovereignty of the Orang Asli, thus, as a distinct people, has to be established - notwithstanding the absence of the mention of the Orang Asli in the Federal Constitution – by employing the following protocols: 1. Appointment of a Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner for Aboriginal Affairs by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong pursuant to Article 5 of the Aboriginal Peoples Act 1954. The Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli cannot substitute this requirement as stipulated in the Act. In fact, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong has to exercise his vested executive authority (Federal Constitution, Part IV, Chapter 3, Article 39 which states that the “executive authority of the Federation shall be vested in the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and exercisable by him ………..”) to remove the Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli’s responsibilities, duties, and functions and hand them altogether to the Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner of Aboriganal Affairs. 2. Establishment of native courts outside of influence and intrusion of the federal or state governments pursuant to Part X, Article 145 (3) where the “Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings before a Syariah Court, a native court or a court martial.” (emphasis mine) There is clear, concise, and cogent language in the Federal Constitution that obviates the need for the federal or state government to interfere, intercede, or intrude upon native concerns, cases, causes, controversies and conflicts. 3. The establishment of a Orang Asli Police Force outside the sphere of influence of the Royal Malaysian Police Force. The connotation “Royal” is evidence of the executive authority of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong from a constitutional standpoint. 4. The payment of rents and royalties to the Orang Asli by all public and private sector companies, firms, organizations, agencies, departments, etc. that have constructed roads and highways, airports, hotels, schools, dams, mines, parks, stadiums, and various other amenities and facilities upon Orang Asli lands which traditionally enjoy “customary community title of a permanent nature.” Since when did the lessee not pay the lessor for the use and enjoyment of the latter’s land? If Malaysia is adhering to and complying with the British common law system, then this argument about the payment of rents and royalties is just, conscionable, fair and ethical. Five hundred years does not become a fading memory when it comes to collecting money especially when the beneficiary is the Orang Asli. 5. The establishment of a Orang Asli Bank so that the Office of the Commissioner of Aboriginal Affairs is able to make allocation of funds required for the advancement and well being of the Orang Asli without state or federal influence, control, and involvement. 6. Representation of the Orang Asli in Parliament especially in the Dewan Rakyat. Appointing a Senator from the rank and file of the Orang Asli will not cut it. An Orang Asli Member of Parliament in the Dewan Rakyat who has the confidence and support of the Orang Asli to voice their concerns and questions in Parliament is sorely and surely needed post haste. 7. Establishment of an independent educational institution solely for the Orang Asli to be trained in economics, law, politics, sociology, finance, agriculture, and other useful disciplines that would serve to advance their status quo. This Orang Asli educational institution is to be funded by the funds currently allocated from the federal government and from funds that are due and payable to the Orang Asli as outlined and mentioned in (4) above. There may be very many valid areas of constitutional import that have to be ironed out with the Orang Asli. This Preliminary Report is being sent to the Committee of the Peninsular Malaysia Orang Asli Association. Aturcara Tentatif untuk Bengkel Deraf Posisi (Pendirian) Orang Asli Malaysia Tarikh: 7 – 8 Ogos 2008 Tempat: Pusat Latihan SPNS, Kampung Chang Sungai Gepai, Bidor, Perak, Malaysia Penyelaras: Jerald Joseph (Pusat KOMAS), Colin Nicholas (COAC), SPNS Tarikh/Masa Perkara 7/8/08 3ptg Pendaftaran 4ptg Minum petang 4.30ptg Pengenalan peserta, taklimat bengkel 5.00ptg – 6.30ptg · & nbsp; Tujuan bengkel · & nbsp; Harapan peserta · & nbsp; Pengenalan badan penganjur 6.30ptg – 7.30mlm Rehat/mandi 7.30mlm – 8.30mlm Makan malam 8.30mlm – 10mlm Bengkel bahagian 1: · & nbsp; Deklarasi Hak Asasi Orang Asal Sedunia oleh Pertubuhan Bangsa-Bangsa Bersatu (UNDRIP) dan perbandingannya dengan Undang-undang Malaysia yang sedia ada berkenaan dengan Tanah, Adat dan Alam Sekitar) 8/8/08 8.00pg – 9.00pg Sarapan 9.00pg – 10.00pg Bengkel bahagian 2: · & nbsp; Implikasi (kesan) UNDRIP kepada Orang Asli 10.00pg – 10.30pg Rehat 10.30pg – 12.00tgh Bengkel Bahagian 2: · & nbsp; Perbincangan untuk bahan Memorandum berkenaan dengan UNDRIP 12.00tgh – 2.00ptg Makan tengahari / rehat 2.00ptg -- Persediaan Sambutan Hari Orang Asal Kalau mahu berbakti setahun sekali untuk Orang Asli cuba luangkan masa anda untuk turut serta didalam program tersebut. TERUTAMANYA kepada golongan cerdik pandai yang telah tamat dari universiti dan telah bekerja sendiri ataupun makan gaji. Janganlah lupa bangsa kita sendiri. Sapa lagi nak bantu? harapkan bangsa lain? mereka pun ada kaum mereka sendiri yang perlukan pembelaan. Aturcara Tentatif untuk Sambutan Hari Orang Asal Peringkat Semenanjung Malaysia Tarikh: 9 Ogos 2008 Tempat: Kampung Chang Sungai Gepai, Bidor, Perak, Malaysia Tarikh / Masa Perkara 9.00pg – 9.30pg Ketibaan MB & Persembahan 1 9.30pg – 9.45pg Upacara cenagoh (pemberkatan) · & nbsp; Mai raknak Kampung Chang Sungai Gepai · & nbsp; Mai raknak JKOAP 9.45pg – 10.00 Kata alu-aluan · & nbsp; Penerangan maksud Sambutan Hari Orang Asal (latar belakang ringkas) · & nbsp; Penerangan tujuan Sambutan Hari Orang Asal kali ini. 10.00pg – 10.30pg Ucapan SPNS 10.30pg – 10.45pg Upacara perasmian oleh MB 10.45pg – 11.15pg Ucapan MB (Usaha Kerajaan Negeri Perak ke arah Pengiktirafan Hak Asasi Orang Asli) 11.15pg – 11.25pg Persembahan 2 11.25pg – 11.40pg Ucapan POASM Perkembangan perjuangan POASM untuk masyarakat Orang Asli 11.40pg – 11.50pg Persembahan 3 11.50pg – 12.05tgh Ucapan JOAS 12.05tgh – 12.30tgh · & nbsp; Pemberian cenderahati kepada MB & POASM · & nbsp; Penerangan tentang aturcara makanan · & nbsp; Peringatan kebersihan tempat: tempat pembuangan sampah, tandas. 12.30tgh – 3.00ptg Makan dan rehat 4.00ptg – 6.00ptg Acara sukan tradisi 6.00ptg – 8.00mlm Makan malam 8.00mlm – 8.10mlm Persembahan 4 8.10mlm – 8.40mlm Ucapan COAC (Hasil Deraf Memorandum Pendirian OA) 8.40mlm – 8.50mlm Persembahan 5 8.50mlm – 9.05mlm Ucapan JKOAP Perlunya kesatuan dan kesedaran di kalangan masyarakat Orang Asli 9.05mlm – 9.15mlm Persembahan 6 9.15mlm – 9.25mlm Persembahan 7 9.30mlm Tayangan video – mapping, pendidikan (video Zuraini), perkahwinan (Nora), Slide show hasil peta dan perkongsian Abri 10.30mlm Aktiviti terbuka Diminta semua warga OA seMalaysia hadir dan beri sokongan. KUANTAN 6 Jun (Hrkh) - Ahli Parlimen Kuantan, Fuziah Salleh memuji dan mengucap tahniah kepada kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Perak atas keputusan untuk memberi geran tanah kepada masyarakat Orang Asli di negeri itu. Beliau berharap kerajaan negeri Pahang yang mempunyai ramai penduduk Orang Asli, serta negeri-negeri lain mencontohi keputusan kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat itu. Katanya, setelah lebih 50 tahun, Orang Asli di Malaysia dinafikan hak pemilikan tanah untuk penempatan pertanian/perladangan secara sah di sisi undang-undang kini sampailah masanya kaum minoriti itu diberi hak sama. "Selama ini, kerajaan Barisan Nasional sewenang-wenangnya mengambil hak 'tanah adat' orang asli di atas nama pembangunan dan mengksploitasinya untuk kepentingan ekonomi segelintir elit dengan peladangan kelapa sawit dan getah yang berjumlah puluhan ribu ekar," kata Fuziah dalam kenyataanya yang dihantar melalui e mail. Tambah beliau, Orang Asli adalah di antara rakyat Malaysia yang paling ketinggalan berbanding kaum lain dalam semua bidang sama ada sosial, ekonomi, pendidikan, dan politik. Walaupun ada pihak yang menyuarakan kehendak kaum itu, namun, suara mereka hampir tidak kedengaran, katanya. Katanya, kerajaan tidak melihat kepentingan untuk membantu dan membimbing golongan Orang Asli ke tahap yang lebih maju. Seharusnya golongan Orang Asli ini mampu mencapai tahap ekonomi sama seperti dinikmati oleh kaum-kaum lain di Malaysia, katanya. Justeru katanya, kesungguhan dalam membela nasib dan kehidupan Orang Asli di Malaysia adalah tanggung jawab yang dituntut daripada pemerintah. "Tanggung jawab ini perlu dipenuhi kerajaan seperti tanggung jawab kepada golongan-golongan lain di negara ini. Kerajaan negeri Pahang sewajarnya segera mengambil inisiatif seperti yang telah didahului oleh Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Negeri Perak itu," ujarnya. Majlis dialog bagi membincangkan permasalahan OA anjuran PKR Kuala Krau seperti berikut: Tarikh : 8hb Jun 2008 Masa : 3.00 petang tempat : Dirumah Cham bin Bakar di Kg Pian, Kuala Krau Diminta penduduk sekitar kuala Krau untuk hadir beramai-ramai. Masalah OA memang terlalu banyak maka diminta untuk memberikan pandangan dan cara penyelesaian yang terbaik utk OA di negeri Pahang. POASM akan mengadakan mesyuarat bersama masyarakat OA, khususnya di daerah Petaling dan Gombak. Maklumat lanjut seperti berikut: a) Tempat : Dewan OA Kg Bkt Lanjan b) Tarikh : 07 June 2008 (Sabtu) c) Waktu : bermula jam 10am Agenda Membincangkan isu-isu/masalah-masalah yg dialami oleh masyarakat OA khususnya di negeri Selangor. Semua OA dijemput hadir. Untuk keterangan lanjut,sila hubungi Sdr Kamarudin (016-611 8856) atau Sdr Rosli (012-336 7133). PUTRAJAYA (April 14, 2008): A directive from Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim to the state legal adviser to review its stand on the land rights of the Orang Asli has given the indigineous people a new ray of hope. Datin Paduka Zauyah Loth Khan, in seeking a postponement in the Federal Court here yesterday, told the three-member panel of judges, the instruction from the Selangor state government came late yesterday. "The state government needs some time to study the matter," said Zauyah to the panel which was headed by Chief Justice Datuk Abdul Hamid Mohamad and assisted by Chief Judge of Malaya Datuk Alauddin Mohd Sheriff and Datuk Zulkifli Ahmad Makinuddin. Senior federal counsel Datuk Mary Lim Thiam Suan, who represented the government ,requested that the appeal be heard at the earliest possible date, after a two-week adjournment. Lawyers representing the Orang Asli, Datuk Dr V.Cyrus Das and his team and Lembaga Lebuhraya Malaysia (LLM) and United Engineers (M) Bhd did not object to the postponement request. Abdul Hamid then said the panel decided to postpone the case to a date to be fixed. Outside the courtroom, more than 50 Orang Asli men and women appeared cheerful with the sudden twist of events. Zauyah declined to elaborate on the latest move by the state government except that the instructions came from Khalid at 9pm yesterday. Das, meanwhile, said the postponement is an indication the state government wishes to review the case. "We look forward to a more favourable review of the land rights of the Orang Asli," he added. Newly elected state executive councilor, Elizabeth Wong, who is in-charge of the Environment, Tourism and Comsumer Affairs portfolio, said Khalid had proposed the Orang Asli deserved a fair compensation. "He has indicated that the Orang Asli should be treated like any other citizen," said Wong. She said Khalid has also instructed a meeting be organised with the Orang Asli in the state to look at long lasting and comprehensive solution to their problems. "We are not committing to anything, but to say that it is important to listen to their grouses," said Wong. She added the Orang Asli in Selangor remain marginalised and it is the state governmentâ€&t rade;s position that no one should be left behind in development. She spoke to reporters after attending the appeal hearing of the case in the Palace of Justice here yesterday. Sagong Tasi and six other Orang Asli had sued the Selangor state government, the Malaysian government, UEM and LLM. The seven plaintiffs belong to the Temuan tribe. The first defendant, the Selangor state government, evicted them and their families from their land in Kampung Bukit Tampoi in Dengkil. The second defendant, UEM is the contractor building the highway. The third defendant, LLM is the Malaysian Highway Authority, while the fourth is the Federal Government. The Sepang District Office executed the land acquisition exercise. The plaintiffs claimed adequate compensation on the basis that the land they had been occupying for the last two centuries was customary land. They also claimed damages for illegal eviction from the first defendant, damages for trespass from the second and third defendants and special damages. The defendants refused to pay, apart from a small amount for damage caused to the plaintiffsâ€&t rade; houses and crops on the grounds that the land was, in fact, state land. In the Court of Appeal, the appellants submitted that the respondents had been over-compensated by the Shah Alam High Court. They further argued the respondents were only entitled to compensation provided under the 1954 Act, and not under the Land Acquisition Act 1960. The Orang Asli, meanwhile, argued they were treated shabbily when evicted from their land. They were only given 14 days to vacate the land that they had been occupying for more than 200 years. The Court of Appeal, on Sept 19, 2005, upheld the Shah Alam High Court’ s decision to declare Sagong Tasi and six others as customary owners of the 15.32 hectare plot in Kampung Bukit Tampoi, Dengkil, Selangor. The appellate court affirmed the High Court decision that the Orang Asli of the Temuan tribe owned the land under a customary community title of a permanent nature. Since their constitutional rights had been violated, the court ordered that the Orang Asli be paid the market value as prescribed under the Land Acquisition Act 1960. The court also ruled that it was wrong for the Selangor government to pay compensation for the loss of livelihood and damage to property when the land was taken to construct the Kuala Lumpur-Nilai highway. The Court of Appeal also ordered UEM and LLM to pay damages to the Orang Asli for trespassing on the land. The case was monitored closely, especially by the federal and state governments, in relation to their jurisdiction under the Federal Constitution, Aboriginies Peoples Act 1954 and other subsidiary laws. On Nov 22, 2006, the Federal Court allowed an application for leave to appeal against the Court of Appeal decision which ruled in favour of the Orang Asli. Perjuangan untuk memertabatkan OA harus dilakukan dgn pelbagai cara. Di negara Malaysia ini langkah yang terbaik adalah melalui undi kita semua. Kerana apa? UMNO ni apa2 pun politik la. Ayuh lakukan undi kita kepada PKR, DAP atau PAS. UMNO bukan untuk Orang Asli. Bagi duit ambil dan minta lebih. itu duit negara bukan duit UMNO. Sebarkan kepada setiap pelusuk tanah air. Kuala Krau, 10 Feb - Ketua Umum KeADILan Anwar Ibrahim telah melawat Kuala Krau hari ini untuk memberi ucapan dan menjumpa rakyat. Anwar diiringi oleh Zakarian Hamid, Ketua Perhubungan PKR Negeri Pahang. Anwar tiba di Kg. Pasu, sebuah perkampungan Orang Asli pada lewat petang dan disambut oleh penduduk kampung tersebut dan juga penduduk-penduduk dari kampung-kampung berdekatan. Anwar telah disambut oleh ketua-ketua JDM (Cawangan) Kg Pasu, Kg Penderas, Kg. Pian, Kg Lubok Wong, Kg Terboi/Galung, Kg Mendoi dan Kg Seboi bersama-sama ahli-ahli KeADILan dari kampung masing-masing. Turut hadir didalam Majlis itu adalah Dato Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man, Pesuruhjaya PAS Negeri Pahang. Didalam ucapannya Anwar menyatakan bahawa Orang Asli terpinggir dibawah pemerintahan UMNO/BN, setelah 50 tahun Negara Merdeka, tak seorang pun Orang Asli di Pahang memiliki geran untuk tanah-tanah mereka. Anwar mengajak Orang Asli berjuang bersama-sama KeADILan di dalam keluarga besar dan bersama-sama berjuang membela nasib Orang Asli dan menuntut hak milik tanah secara individu dan bergeran. “Kita akan berjuang sehingga berjaya!” tegas Anwar. Disebelah malamnya pula, Anwar berkunjung ke Felda Jenderak Utara dengan disambut oleh ribuan peneroka-peneroka Felda Jenderak Utara dan Felda Jenderak Selatan. Anwar bertanya, “Kenapa peneroka-peneroka yang menyerahkan tanah mereka kepada Felda untuk tanaman semula hanya memperolehi pendapatan sebanyak RM1,200.00 sebulan, manakala peneroka-peneroka yang membuat tanaman sendiri memperolehi antara RM5,000.00 hingga RM7,000.00 sebulan?” “Apabila Barisan Alternatif memenangi Pilihanraya Umum ke-12 nanti, kami akan memperbetulkan keadaan ini, agar tidak ada mana-mana pihak memanipulasikan pendapatan peneroka Felda untuk kepentingan orang lain selain daripada peneroka-peneroka.” Anwar mengakhiri lawatannya ke Pahang di DUN Benta, Kuala Lipis. KOTA BARU: The Temiar Orang Asli of Kampung Jias in Gua Musang have filed a suit against the Kelantan government for allegedly tearing down a church built on their property last year. The Star Tuesday December 11, 2007 United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) resident representative Dr Richard Leete said the indigenous groups, who were bumiputras, and also those from the east coast states like Kelantan and Terengganu were the poorest in the country. "The most intense poverty is not among the Indians but the indigenous groups in Sabah, Sarawak and those who live in the east coast states," he said at a press conference in conjunction with the International Poverty Conference here today. He said Malaysia had successfully reduced the poverty rate from 49.3% in the 1970s to only 5.7% in 2004. He added that 93% of the people living in poverty in Malaysia were bumiputras. In 2004, the poverty rate among the bumiputras was 8.3% while it was 2.9% for Indians and 0.6% for the Chinese. by YB LIM KIT SIANG - DAP The Budget states that the government is committed to improving the quality of life of Orang Asli, allocating RM170 million to the Department of Orang Asli Affairs to carry out numerous programmes and projects. We should listen to the views of the Orang Asli community, and the following are some feedback from the Center for Orang Asli Concerns (COAC). With regard to the financing of Orang Asli development, the issue is not how much is allocated in the annual budget but how much actually reaches the Orang Asli in real terms, in concrete benefits. Non-delivery of benefits A survey conducted COAC, POASM, YKPM and other NGOs involved with Orang Asli issues found that subsidies and allocations meant for the Orang Asli were not delivered to them. This included the education support for students coming from poor households (which the PM announced last year was increased from RM30.00 per student per month to RM50.00). In some districts, the transportation for Orang Asli schoolchildren was disrupted as the contractors were not paid their fees for months at a stretch (in Tapah this year, about 250 Orang Asli students had to skip school when the bus contractors decided to protest the 7-month delay in payment of their fees by refusing to transport the schoolchildren). In fact, in yesterday’s NST, in a report on the launching of the K9 school for the Orang Asli in the DPM’s constituency, the Education Minister admitted that the Orang Asli are now getting what the Malays got 50 years ago! Land encroachment and development Encroachment into Orang Asli traditional lands – a result of non-recognition of these lands as titled Orang Asli territories – have led to logging, land-grabbing and outside development (for others). It is now generally accepted, even by the Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli (JHEOA), that there can be no real development for the Orang Asli if there is no security of tenure. Thus far, the courts have also accorded the Orang Asli recognition of full title to their traditional lands. The authorities, however, still choose to deny the Orang Asli this fundamental right, thereby allowing the remaining lands of the Orang Asli to be slowly whittled away. Some of the lands that were approved for gazetting as Orang Asli Reserves as far back as the 1960s and 1970s were never administratively gazetted. In fact, some of these areas have now been reclassified as state land or Malay Reserve Land, or have been given to individuals and corporations – without the Orang Asli’s knowledge, let alone consent. And while it is being bandied about that the proposed Orang Asli Land Policy will address the Orang Asli land problem by setting aside some 75,900 hectares for 30,000 Orang Asli families, the reality is that the Orang Asli will stand to lose 51,798 hectares (40 per cent) of the 127,698 hectares that the government already recognises in 2003 as Orang Asli lands. Furthermore, these 6.25 acre (2.53 hectares) family plots are assigned to them on a 99-year-lease basis. Nothing can be more graphic of the Orang Asli’s fate – that their inalienable right to their land now has an expiry date. Agricultural development contracts keeping Orang Asli in poverty At a time when high commodity prices for rubber and oil palm are enabling smallholders to reap excess returns on their hard work, many Orang Asli cultivators are only enjoying dividends of about RM1,200.00 to RM1,500.00 per year. This is because the JHEOA has contracted out the development and management of such agricultural schemes to contractors such as Risda and Felcra, as well as other private contractors, who charge huge amounts as management fees, apart from deducting for fertiliser, labour (usually foreign), and other costs. The Orang Asli are treated as mere share-holders, enjoying the annual dividend that works out to about RM100.00 per month. In fact, there has been at least one case of an Orang Asli being arrested and put away in detention for tapping his own rubber trees (in RPS Betau, Pahang). Diminta kawan2 dan sahabat2 untuk menyertai perhimpuan ini. Bila lagi tunggu duduk dan diam termenung sejak dari nenek moyang kita. abad ke-21 kita cari alternatif perjuangan yg agak berbeza tetapi tujuan yang sama. tarikh: 9 Dec 2007 Jam : 7am tempat : depan Sogo ke Central Market Anjuran : Majlis Peguam Malaysia Persembahan kebudayan di CM. makan pagi disediakan. Kuala Krau, 19 November - Suasana meriah dan gembira merwarnai Balai Raya Kg. Lubok Wong, Kuala Krau, Pahang kerana majlis yang luar biasa bila mana masyarakat orang Asli di sekitar Kg. Lubok Wong, Kuala Krau telah beramai-ramai menghadiri Majlis Ramah Mesra anjuran KeADILan Bahagian Kuala Krau pada 18hb November 2007 yang lalu. Lebih dari 200 orang penduduk orang-orang Asli telah memenuhi Balai Raya Kg Lubok Wong tersebut dari jam 12.00 tengah hari lagi. Majlis yang penuh dengan simbolik itu telah disambut dengan meriah oleh Ketua Orang Asli disitu, Sdr. Alias yang mengalu-alukan kedatangan rombongan daripada pimpinan KeADILan Bahagian Kuala Krau terdiri daripada Haji Suhaimi Said, selaku Ketua Bahagian, Sdr Razak Hussin, selaku Timbalan Ketua Bahagian, Sdr. Mahmud Hassan selaku Naib Ketua Bahagian, Sdr. Abd Aziz Ismail, selaku Ketua Penerangan Bahagian, Sdri Noraini Md Isa, selaku Ketua Wanita Bahagian, dan Sdri Hendon Jaafar selaku Setiausaha Wanita Bahagian, dan Sdr Suhaimi Abdullah selaku Ahli Jawatankuasa Bahagian. Turut hadir didalam Majlis Ramah Mesra itu adalah Ustaz Naphiri M. Tozi, Ketua Dewan Ulama PAS Kawasan Kuala Krau dan Sdr. Mohd Nor, Ketua Parti Keadilan Rakyat Bahagian Jerantut. Sdr Alias mengalu-alukan kehadiran rombongan dari KeADILan serta wartawan-wartawan dari Bernama dan Siasah, serta pemimpin PAS. Beliau menyatakan bahawa orang-orang Asli telah sekian lama menyokong UMNO, tetapi pihak UMNO tidak memperjuangkan nasib orang-orang Asli di 9 buah kampong di sekitar DUN Jenderak. Beliau menyatakan bahawa lebih kurang 4000 orang-orang dewasa yang layak mengundi di sekitar 9 buah kamong itu, tetapi yang berdaftar sebagai pengundi hanyalah segelintir darinya kerana selama ini pihak UMNO tidak berusaha untuk mendaftarkan orang-orang Asli untuk menjadi pengundi. Beliau berjanji akan berusaha untuk mendaftarkan pengundi-pengundi orang-orang Asli melalui kerjasama Parti Keadilan Rakyat dan sokongan yang diberikan nanti oleh orang-orang Asli kepada calon Parti Keadilan Rakyat boleh menggantikan wakil rakyat dari UMNO yang tidak ambil tahu tentang nasib orang-orang Asli disiu. Sdr Alias menyataka rasa tidak puas hati masyarakt orang-orang Asli kerana Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang-Orang Asli telah terhutang sebanyak RM60,000 dengan pihak sekolah di kampong tersebut, dan jika tidak dijelaskan segera maka sumbangan buku teks percuma, makanan percuma dan pengangkutan bas percuma kepada anak-anak orang-orang Asli akan terjejas, dan menjadi penyebab kepada anak-anak orang Asli tidak lagi bersekolah. Beliau meminta pihak JHEOA bertindak segera mengatasi Sdr Alias juga menyeru Jabatan Bekalan Air Temerloh supaya memberikan air bersih untuk penduduk kampong itu. Sudah lama, katanya, JBA menanam paip, tetapi tidak disambungkan kepada tangki air, dan sesetengah paip yang ditanam itu sudah tersumbat dan memerlukan rangkaian paip yang baru. Begitu juga katanya beliau mengharapkan Tenaga Nasional memberikan lampu jalan di kampong-kampong tersebut. Yang paling mengecewakan penduduk orang-orang Asli disitu, kata Sdr Alias, ialah berhubung dengan Geran Tanah untuk tanah-tanah ladang mereka. Sampai bila, katanya, geran-geran itu hendakak diproses dan diluluskan. Alasan bahawa jika geran-geran itu diluluskan maka tanah-tanah itu akan dijual adalah tidak munasabah. “Inilah tempat kami dan kami tidak akan berpindah lagi dari sini. Kami bukan macam orang-orang Asli zaman dulu, kami bersekolah, anak-anak kami bersekolah, kami tahu yang baik dan yang buruk. Kenapa kaum-kaum lain dapat geran-geran tanah sedangkan bukan sedikit tanah yang mereka dapat itu telah dijualkan. Kenapa kesalahan kaum lain yang menjual tanah itu nak disalahkan kepada kami?” tanya Sdr Alias. Ketua Bahagian KeADILan Kuala Krau, telah menerangkan dasar perjuangan parti untuk membela nasib rakyat tanpa mengira kaum. Beliau gembira kerana di kalangan orang-orang Asli telah ujud keinsafan dan kesedaran untuk perjuangan membela nasib kaum mereka bersama-sama dengan perjuangan yang lebih besar oleh semua kaum yang lain. Haji Suhaimi menerangkan bahawa beliau telah pergi ke beberapa perkampongan orang-orang Asli di Kawasan Temerloh, Raub dan Bera. Nasib mereka adalah sama, iaitu mereka ketinggalan dari segi arus pembangunan, dan mereka tercicir dari semua bidang. UMNO tidak membela nasib orang-oang Asli, jelas Haji Suhaimi. Di Lembah Klau, lebih kurang 1000 orang dari keturunan Temuan sedang menghadapi tempat tinggal mereka dirampas oleh Kerajaan kerana untuk dijadikan takungan air untuk bekalan air ke Selangor. Orang-orang Melayu di Felda Lembah Klau membuat tuntutan yang tinggi sebagai ganti rugi berjumlah hingga RM1 juta bagi setiap peneroka, tetapi bagi orang-orang Asli dikampong bersebelahan, rumah mereka tidak ada nilai, dan yang boleh dinilai hanyalah beberapa batang pokok buah-buahan, dan paling tinggi pampasan mereka hanyalah lebih kurang RMl,000; sedangkan ladang mereka tidak diberikan pampasan diatas alasan bahawa mereka berladang diatas tanah kerajaan. Di sana juga terdapat kaum Cewong seramai 33 orang. Mereka itu tidak mempunyai rumah langsung, rimbunan daunan itulah rumah mereka; mereka tidak punyai kad pengenalan dan tidak punyai tanah. Apa akan jadi kepada mereka apabila hutan yang mereka huni itu akan menjadi takungan air? tanya Ketua KeADILan Bahagian Kuala Krau itu. Haji Suhaimi mengajak semua pertubuhan-pertubuhan politik dan NGO di Negara ini memberi ruang kepada perjuangan hak asasi orang-orang Asli. Beliau mecadangkan satu Konvensyen Hak Asasi Orang-Orang Asli di adakan di Kg Lubok Wong dengan menjemput semua kaum oang-orang Asli dari seluruh Negara. Beliau akan berhubung dengan NGO COAC, Centre For Orang Asli untuk merealisasikan Konvensyen ini. Diakhir pertemuan itu, KeADILan Kupala Krau berjaya menubuhkan 3 buah JDM (Cawangan) di kampong-kampong orang-orang Asli iaitu di Kg Lubok Wong, Kg Pasu dan Kg Pian. Ketua-ketua orang-orang Asli itu akan berusaha menubuhkan beberapa JDM lagi iaitu di Kg Penderas, Kg Seboi, Kg Paya Mendoi, Kg Teruboi dan Kg Paya Rekoh. Haji Suhaimi Said, Ketua KeADILan Bahagian Kuala Krau telah menerima hampir 200 borang ahli baru dari penduduk masyarakat orang-orang Asli yang hadir. admin @ November 20, 2007 Beginilah kehidupan Orang Asli di Malaysia. 50 tahun malaysia merdeka mereka pun tidak tahu. UMNO datang bawa naik bot bila dekat undi sahaja. Sampailah masanya OA minta bantuan Queen Elizebeth. Kerana melepaskan Malaysia dan membiarkan OA begitu sahaja. <a href="http://www.malaysiakini.tv/?vid=1360"" title="http://www.malaysiakini.tv/?vid=1360"" target="_blank"http://www.malaysiakini.tv/?v...;>The forgotten Malaysians</a> Parti Keadilan Rakyat Bahagian Kuala Krau, Pahang akan mengadakan Majlis Ramah Mesra dengan penduduk orang-orang Asli di Balai Raya Kg.Lubok Wong pada Hari Ahad, 18hb November, 2007 jam 12.00 tengah hari. Adalah dijangkakan seramai 400 orang penduduk orang-orang Asli dari kampong-kampong Penderas, Seboi, Paya Mendoi, Pian, Lubok Wong, Pasu,Paya Rekoh dan Sg. Mai akan hadir. Tarikh : 18hb November 2007(Ahad) Masa : 12.00pm Tempat : Balai Raya Kg Lubok Wong Jumpa saya di sana Seramai 27 Orang Asli memfailkan permohonan bagi semakan kehakiman untuk membatalkan keputusan Pengarah Jabatan Alam Sekitar yang meluluskan laporan EIA bagi projek pembinaan Empangan Kelau, Raub, Pahang untuk tujuan pemindahan air mentah dari Pahang ke Selangor. Suhakam telah mengadakan Bengkel Hak Asasi dan Motivasi untuk ibu bapa Orang Asli di Sekolah Kebangsaan Lanchang Pahang. Bengkel telah diadakan pada 3 November 2007. Ia dihadiri lebih 300 orang dari perkampungan berdekatan. Para peserta dibahagikan kepada beberapa kumpulan. ia bertujuan untuk mengcungkil permasalahan ibu bapa dan anak2 tak mau p sekolah. Setiap kumpulan seorang fasilitator yg terdiri dr jabatan kerajaan dan beberapa OA. Jabatan Pelajaran negeri dan daerah, JHEOA, Perhilitan dan KEMAS pun turut serta untuk menjayakan program tersebut. Dalam pada itu juga, SUHAKAM telah menjemput jabatan pendaftaran untuk mendaftar kanak2 yang tidak punyai surat beranak. Jurufoto bagi pihak jabatan pendaftaran pada hari itu, tidak lain tidak bukan Dr Colin dari COAC. Gambar keluarga perlu diambil untuk membuktikan mereka ini OA. Negara dah merdeka 50 tahun tetapi perkara asas pun kerajaan tak boleh penuhi. Sedih melihat nasib OA ini. Ramai yg tidak bersekolah kerana tidak ada surat beranak. Ada yg berumur 18 tahun pun masih tidak bersurat beranak. Nasib baik ada SUHAKAM. Jabatan kerajaan ini tidur lena. Terutama sekali JHEOA yang tidak proaktif dlm permasalahan OA. Pengarah JHEOA Pahang ada pada sesi perasmian sahaja. Sessi dialog lari tah kemana. Bengkel berakhir jam 2pm dgn ucapan Tan Sri Dato Asiah Pesuruhjaya Suhakam Batin Kg Bukit Rok di Mahkamah Temerloh. Kes masih ditunda ke tarikh yang belum ditentukan lagi. Pada 20 Okt 2007 saya bersama dr colin, dr frank, ms gen dan beberapa rakan lain telah melawat kg bukit rok dan ibam. kami telah disambut oleh batin kg bukit rok dan beberapa pemimpin semelai disana. saya dan penduduk kg telah membawa mereka melawat kawasan yang menjadi pertikaian sehingga kes mahkamah. kami menaiki bot penduduk kg untuk menyeberangi Sg Bera. Tujuan mereka datang untuk mengetahui dgn lebih mendalam mengenai myskt orang asli semelai. sesuatu yang menarik dr frank adalah jumlah batin semelai sehigga sekarang seramai 18 orang. ini menunjukan mysky Semelai telah menetap disitu beratus tahun. adalah baik OA menyimpan sejarah dan membuat sejarah dr sekarang untuk anak cucu dan cicit. supaya mereka tidak menyalahkan kita dikemudian hari nanti. kami bertolak ke kl jam 7pm dan sampai di KL jam 12pm. amat penat tetapi amat menyeronokan. Komen para sahabat amat baik dan amat berguna. Cuma kurang memfokus pada artikel yang dipaparkan. Sekira ada berita atau isu-isu berkenaan Orang Asli untuk dikongsi bersama sila emailkan kepada: indigenous.editor.yahoo.com sekian Source : COAC Representatives of the Orang Asli of Peninsular Malaysia and the Natives of Sabah and Sarawak, collectively called Orang Asal, met for 3 days in September 2007 in Kuala Lumpur to assess their situation and to call for action. PUAH SZE NING, who was there, reports on their gathering. Saya telah dapat artikel saudara Arsian Napitoepoeloe dari Suara Keadilan online berkenaan beliau telah menyertai Parti Keadilan Rakyat. Saya minta penjelasan dari saudara sekiranya saudara pernah masuk ke blog ini .Minta saudara huraikan lebih lanjut beberapa persoalan seperti berikut: 1. Kenapa sdr memilih PKR? 2. Apa matlamat sdr? Jangka pendek dan panjang? 3. Adakah paksaan dari sesiapa? 4. Kenapa sdr tidak menyetai UMNO yang sinonim dengan masyarakat Orang Asli? 5. Siapa yang menjemput sdr? 6. Adakah sdr kecewa maka menyertai PKR? 7. Apakah yang sdr dapat menyertai PKR? 8 DLL Segala komen anda amat berharga bagi kami. Sekian EDITOR THE 2008 BUDGET SPEECH BY YAB DATO’ SERI ABDULLAH BIN HJ. AHMAD BADAWI PRIME MINISTER AND MINISTER OF FINANCE INTRODUCING THE SUPPLY BILL (2008) IN THE DEWAN RAKYAT, 7 SEPTEMBER 2007 Improving the Quality of Life of Orang Asli 88. The Government is committed to improving the quality of life of Orang Asli. Towards this end, RM170 million is provided to the Department of Orang Asli Affairs to carry out numerous programmes and projects. A sum of RM50 million is provided for Housing Assistance Programme and social amenities in Orang Asli settlements. MINIT MESYUARAT SUBJET; BENGKEL “HAK TANAH, HAK ASLI’ TARIKH; 13-14HB. SEPT.2007 TEMPAT; CM Anexe MASA; 8.30 – 7.30 ptg TURUTAN PROGRAM 8pg – 9.30: pendaftaran - name tag dan kid file 9.30pg –10 pg: sesi pengenalan kata aluan dan penerangan mengenai “hari Malaysia dan bengkel hak tanah, hak asli. ( 10 minit) Perkenalan dan icebreaker. (20minit) 10pg – 10.15pg minum pagi 10.15 – 11pg sesi 1 “hak tanah, hak Asli” Kenapa Tanah penting bagi MOA (in put 15minit) selepas 50tahun malaysia mardeka, revolusi dasar tanah oleh kerajaan dan moa. (Soalan-soalan perbincangan dalam kumpulan kecil:)) Apakah dasar tanah oleh kerajaan? Apa pula tanggapan MOA sendiri terhadap tanah yang sedang mereka duduki? Apakah kesan-kesan dari dua perkara diatas kepada semangat perjuangan MOA untuk mendapatkan Hak dan pengiktirafan? (bentuk sesi) - perbincangan dalam kumpulan (20 minit) - perbentangan hasil perbincangan.( 5 minit) - rumusan (10 minit) 11pg – 12.30tgh sesi perkongsian “kepentingan pemetaan komuniti ) 1 wakil dari 6 kampung projek pemetaan komuniti o ( 15 minit) o Apakah yang masyarakat pelajari dari program pemetaan ini? perkongsian pengalaman sabah bagaimana peta digunakan untuk kes mahkamah. (15 minit) 12.30tgh – 1.30ptg makan dan rehat 1.30ptg – 3.30ptg sesi 2 “indah khabar dari rupa” 1. 3 kes study perak (20 minit ) points Negara lebih penting dari MOA (T.B) Orang kaya makan isi, asli makan sisa / sudah lah miskin jadi pameran pula (sg.klah) 2. kes study pahang (30 minit ) kes 1 :Temerloh Kelau Dam– Jenita ( Jahut kata tidak JHEOA kata ya) – video show kes 2: Bera kes pembalakan – Bob – slide show 3. kes study Johor (15 minit ) i. RPS oh RPS – Jali, 4. kes study N.Sembilan (15 minit ) i. kuari (video) - juli ( Orang Duit, kami Habuk )! 5. kes study Selangor ( 15 minit) a. bukit lanjan – ilam (kesan penswastaan tanah kepada moa setempat- (rumah indah, dapur kosong) 6. kes study sarawak ( 15 minit ) balak / ladang 7. kes study Sabah (15 minit ) sawit/ taman 3.30ptg – 4ptg minum petang 4ptg – 4.30ptg sambungan sesi kes study 4.30ptg – 7.30ptg perbincangan kumpulan, pembentangan dan rumusan. 7.30ptg – 8.30ptg makan malam 8.30ptg – 11ptg malam budaya. 14hb. Sept. 2007 7pg – 8pg sarapan pagi 8.30pg – 11.pg sesi 3; Dialog bersama JHEOA dan SUHAKAM JHEOA: - Apakah tindakan menangani isu-isu pembangunan dan Tanah MOA. - Apakah hasil program atau projek yang diusahakan utk MOA SUHAKAM : - pandangan suhakam berkaitan dengan isu-isu MOA dan cadangan penyelesaian yang disyorkan. 11.pg – 11.30pg tea break 11.30pg – 1.30tgh perbincangan kumpulan, perbentangan dan rumusan 1.30tgh – 2tgh makan tengahari 2ptg – 4ptg Sesi 4: MOA , Akta 134 dan Dasar Tanah Penyelaras : Jerald Josef Cadangan Jemputan: 1. B. Tony william hunt --- - kekuatan dan kelemahan akta 134 - pindaan akta - dan dasar Tanah 2. Gerald Gomez, Augstine dan Heng ( perkongsian pengalaman kes moa) - kesulitan dan keperluan membawa kes kemahkamah. 4ptg - 4.15ptg tea break 4.15ptg – 5ptg Rumusan dan Draf Resolusi/tututan MOA 5ptg – 5.30ptg Sidang Akhabar Malaysia sebuah negara majmuk. pelbagai kaum seperti Melayu,Cina dan India (yg orang umno selalu sebut). Kalau setakat 3 kaum saya rasa belum mencapai majmuk yang sebenar. Atau mungkin mereka ini majoriti dalam kepala yang mengundi? Sebab pemimpin yang macam ini, yang diterajui oleh UMNO, apa pun politik. Menyambut kemerdekaan pada tahun ini amat meriah. Almaklumlah ulang tahun yang ke 50 tahun. Orang Asli paling meriah mereka raikan. Saya sempat pergi ke beberapa buah kampung di Selangor, Pahang dan Negeri Sembilan. Hampir setiap rumah pacak bendera Malaysia. Pondok benderanya lagi besar. Ada juga kg yang mengadakan joget lambak tahun 50an. Saya amat bangga dengan cara mereka tunjukan cintakan negara. Mereka bukan dapat percuma seperti poster dacing dekat mengundi. Tapi mereka beli dari pasar2 malam dan kedai berdekatan. Saya harap pihak kerajaan jangan menghampakan cinta dan sokongan mereka kepada kamu setiap lima tahun. Disini saya senaraikan beberapa kejayaan kerajaan terhadap Orang Asli: Sebelum 31 August 1957 1) Akta Orang Asli 134 2) Hospital Orang Asli Gombak 3) Klinik di perkampungan Orang Asli 4) sekolah Orang Asli 5) Siaran Radio Orang Asli 6) Sakai Rezab 7) Sekolah Dewasa 8) Jabatan Orang Asli 9) 80% Orang Asli Bekerja di JOA 10) 80 % Orang Asli bekerja di hospital OA Gombak 11) wakil OA didalam sesuatu perlantikan di istana negeri 12) keciciran dalam pendidikan 50% Selepas 31 August 2007: 1) Tanah OA yang telah diwarta telah berkurangan kepada 76% dari 5302 (tahun 1990)kepada 1263 hektar (tahun 1999) 2) Sekolah Orang Asli (saya pun tak tahu hilang ke mana) 3) Sekolah dewasa - bilik gerakan undi 4) 10 % OA dalam JHEOA 5) 10% OA dalam hospital Batu 12 6) Radio Asyik 7) Kawasan OA telah dibangunkan menjadi lapangan terbang, padang golf, jalanraya, empangan, kondo mewah, kawasan perumahan, industri, projek perladangan dan yang sealiran dengannya. 8) 90% Orang Asli telah masuk UMNO 9) 40% Orang Asli telah masuk sekolah 10) Orang Asli tiba2 tinggal didalam rezab melayu, hutan dan tanah kerajaan. Walaupun mereka tidak pernah berpindah dan tinggal beratus tahun. 11) sudah pandai tampal poster dacing 12) OA yang berpelajaran boleh baca Berita Harian, Utusan Malaysia dan Sinar Harian. 13) Kepada yang ada TV boleh tonton TV1, TV2 dan TV3. tanpa apa2 bayaran 14) Boleh jumpa wakil rakyat UMNO. Pembesar suara dan microfon. 15) Mendapat tempat memancing dengan mudah di empangan yang berdekatan. 16) Boleh melihat Airbus terbang atas bumbung rumah. 17) anak2 OA boleh melihat lori dan buldozer lalu depan rumah. Ini adalah serba sedikit kupasan KEJAYAAN ORANG ASLI SEBELUM DAN SELEPAS MERDEKA 50 TAHUN. Maka itu saya rasa salah dan bodohnya kita kalau kita tidak terus menyokong kerajaan yang memerintah
Tarikh : 12hb. Disember, 2006
Rujukan Kami :
Y.B. Datuk Dr. Chua Soi Lek
Menteri Kesihatan Malaysia
Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia
Blok E1, E6, E7 & E10, Parcel E
Pusat Pentadbiran Kerajaan Persekutuan
62590 Putrajaya, Malaysia
Datuk,
MASALAH KESIHATAN MASYARAKAT ORANG ASLI DI BAWAH PENTADBIRAN PENGARAH BAHAGIAN KESIHATAN YANG ADA SEKARANG DI HOSPITAL JABATAN HAL EHWAL ORANG ASLI GOMBAK
Adalah dengan hormatnya saya merujuk kepada perkara di atas.
2. Sebagai Orang Asli yang prihatin, saya ingin membongkar segala permasalahan yang timbul di bawah pentadbiran Pengarah Kesihatan (Dr Sai’ah Bt Abdullah) yang ada sekarang di Hospital Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli Gombak (JHEOA). Ini adalah disebabkan beliau tidak tahu dan tidak berminat membuat kerja-kerja yang melibatkan Orang Asli. Kebanyakan kerjanya adalah melibatkan kerja sosial di luar hospital yang tidak melibatkan masyarakat Orang Asli seperti berkempen, berceramah di sekolah-sekolah sekitar Gombak dan tempat tertentu yang langsung tidak melibatkan masyarakat Orang Asli sedangkan peruntukan yang digunakan adalah peruntukan Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli antara contoh aktiviti yang tidak melibatkan Orang Asli seperti kempen anti merokok di sekolah-sekolah sekitar Gombak. Program mengahwinkan masyarakat Orang Asli yang memeluk Agama Islam menggunakan perkhidmatan helikopter yang ditanggung oleh Bahagian Kesihatan. Kami masyarakat Orang Asli tidak melarang perkahwinan ini, tetapi masalahnya peruntukan Bahagian Kesihatan telah diseleweng ke arah lain. Ini akan merugikan masyarakat Orang Asli seterusnya akan menjejaskan peruntukan Bahagian Kesihatan yang sedia ada. Saya difahamkan beliau merupakan ahi kumpulan Rufaqa dan bekas ahli kumpulan al-Arqam di mana beliau menerapkan ajaran kumpulanya di beberapa buah kampung dan individu Orang Asli di pedalaman dengan dibantu oleh beberapa orang pegawai JHEOA Gombak (Saidon Bin Ishak, Mohd Sharifuddin Bin Ishak dan Hatimurrudzi). Kami berharap kerajaan dan pihak yang berkenaan dapat memantau kegiatan kumpulan ini yang bergerak aktif di perkampungan masyarakat Orang Asli. Kami bimbang jika masalah ini tidak dibendung dan ditangani dengan sewajarnya ia akan memesongkan dan merosakan masyarakat pribumi, malah menyukarkan hasrat kerajaan untuk membangunkan masyarakat Orang Asli dan seterusnya akan menjadi menjadi masalah negara.
3. Pernah pada suatu masa, Transit di Gombak yang mana untuk penempatan pengiring pesakit Orang Asli digunakan untuk asrama jururawat yang baru dilantik sedangkan Orang Asli yang sepatutnya duduk di transit tersebut di tempatkan di wad lama yang tidak berpintu dan bertingkap.
4. Kami juga mendapat maklumat dari pos-pos pedalaman yang mana terdapat ubat-ubatan yang dihantar telah luput tarikhnya. Keadaan ini sudah tentu membahayakan kesihatan masyarakat Orang Asli. Di samping itu juga, ubat-ubatan yang sepatutnya dibekalkan kepada pesakit Orang Asli tidak diberi sehingga hancur dan bertukar warna kerana sudah rosak dan luput tarikh. Selain dari itu, berlakunya penyelewengan peruntukan ubat untuk Orang Asli di mana beliau mengarahkan kakitangan Unit Farmasi supaya membekalkan ubat-ubatan dan peralatan perubatan tertentu ke sekolah-sekolah di sekitar Gombak. Kami berharap pihak Datuk dapat menyiasat perkara ini. Beliau juga jarang berada di hospital sebaliknya banyak masanya adalah di rumah dan di luar hospital. Jika ada kes-kes tertentu sahaja dia akan datang itupun setelah diberitahu oleh pembantu peribadinya melalui telefon ataupun pemandu JHEOA akan mengambilnya di rumah dengan kereta JHEOA yang digunakan khas untuknya sahaja. Kalau dicongak dalam seminggu dia berada di hospital hanya lebih kurang dua atau tiga hari sahaja dia ada. Untuk pengetahuan Datuk, pada penghujung bulan September 2006 sehingga akhir bulan Oktober 2006 beliau tiada di hospital hampir sebulan tanpa rekod. Dengan ini kerja-kerja penting yang melibatkannya diabaikan. Ini menunjukan beliau memang tidak prihatin dan tidak berminat untuk meningkatkan tahap kesihatan masyarakat Orang Asli sedangkan tahap kesihatan yang baik di kalangan masyarakat Orang Asli merupakan agenda utama Bahagian Kesihatan Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli.
5. Oleh kerana segala aktivitinya tidak diketahui umum dan tiada bantahan dari masyarakat Orang Asli selama bertahun-tahun maka, beliau dan beberapa orang kakitangan JHEOA (antaranya Dr Mohd Akmal, Wan Razuki, Mohd Shamsudin, Saidon dan Mohd Sharifuddin). Mereka merasakan begitu selesa bekerja di Bahagian Kesihatan JHEOA, tambahan lagi tiada pegawai atasan yang memantau jadi, beliau mengatur strategi untuk kekal lama di Hospital Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli. Antara strategi kotornya adalah dengan menubuhkan Unit Kecemasan dan Unit Hemodialisis. Kedua-dua unit ini langsung tidak releven ditubuhkan di Hospital JHEOA memandangkan ianya telah terpesong dari tujuan Bahagian Kesihatan Hospital JHEOA kerana yang dirawat bukannya Orang Asli tetapi kebanyakan orang luar dan telah menggunakan peruntukan Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli. Penubuhan Unit Kecemasan merupakan satu perkara yang amat merugikan Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli begitu juga dengan dibukanya Unit Pesakit Luar kepada umum, ini kerana kebanyakan kes bukan dari kalangan Orang Asli tetapi kes yang diambil adalah di kalangan orang luar dan yang amat menyedihkan lagi pendatang Indonesia di sekitar Gombak pun mendapat rawatan dengan menggunakan peruntukan Orang Asli (adakah ini hasrat Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli?). Begitu juga dengan Unit Hemodialisis, jika dilihat secara halus adalah sangat jarang Orang Asli yang terlibat dengan rawatan sebegini dan ini memandangkan taburan penduduk Orang Asli yang berselerak di seluruh negara, oleh itu penubuhan Unit Hemodialisis dan Unit Kecemasan langsung tidak relevan. Pihak Bahagian Kesihatan JHEOA sepatutnya lebih menumpukan kepada rawatan-rawatan untuk membendung penyakit-penyakit berjangkit yang ada dan melibatkan masyarakat Orang Asli seperti penyakit TB, Kusta, Malaria dan lain-lain. Kami percaya tindakan Pengarah Hospital Orang Asli Gombak menubuhkan unit ini akan menyebabkan pembaziran peruntukan yang disediakan oleh kerajaan kepada Orang Asli. Penubuhan unit ini juga menyebabkan banyak perjawatan yang tidak releven dengan Hospital JHEOA. Ini menyebabkan ramai pegawai yang melakukan tanggung tugas dan ini tentulah menyebabkan pembaziran tenaga kerja memandangkan pesakit Orang Asli yang berada di keseluruhan wad tidak ramai (jumlahnya tidak sampai 50 orang) di Hospital JHEOA, di mana sepatutnya pegawai berkenaan lebih diperlukan di tempat lain. Jumlah pesakit Orang Asli yang tidak ramai di Hospital JHEOA juga adalah kerana ramai pesakit Orang Asli dari pedalaman yang tidak diambil untuk rawatan lanjut dan tidak dirawat dengan sewajarnya. Keadaan Hospital JHEOA kini tidak sama seperti zaman pentadbiran doktor dari luar negara di mana pada zaman itu pesakit Orang Asli tidak diabaikan seperti sekarang.
6. Rentetan dari penubuhan kedua-dua unit ini juga menyebabkan pengambilan kakitangan yang baru di hospital JHEOA yang majoritinya adalah dari golongan bukan Orang Asli. Contohnya jawatan Atenden lebih 90% lantikan adalah bukan Orang Asli, walaupun ramai Orang Asli yang memohon jawatan ini tetapi mereka tidak dipilih. Di sini berlaku diskriminisi kerana yang dipilih kebanyakan saudara-mara kakitangan yang bukan Orang Asli. Ini juga bercanggah dengan hasrat jabatan dan kerajaan untuk mengutamakan Orang Asli bekerja di Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli. Atenden-atenden bukan Orang Asli ini pula diletakkan di bahagian pentadbiran dan diberi kerja-kerja pentadbiran sedangkan sepatutnya mereka ini bertugas di wad-wad untuk menjaga pesakit dan keluar bertugas di pos-pos pedalaman apabila dikehendaki. Kebanyakan Atenden yang diambil langsung tidak tahu mengenai kehidupan masyarakat Orang Asli, malah ada sesetengah mereka yang jijik dengan masyarakat Orang Asli dan merawat pesakit Orang Asli alakadar sahaja. Kebanyakan kakitangan Bahagian Kesihatan JHEOA yang bukan Orang Asli bekerja hanya untuk mendapatkan gaji sahaja. Pengarah Hospital JHEOA juga selalu menukar kakitangan dari satu unit ke unit lain sesuka hati tanpa berbincang dengan ketua unit sehinggakan unit tersebut kekurangan kakitangannya. Ada unit yang hanya tinggal dua atau tiga pekerja contohnya Unit Kebajikan (seorang Pembantu Pembangunan Masyarakat, dua orang Pekerja Rendah Awam ), Unit X-ray (dua orang Juru X-ray, seorang Pekerja Rendah Awam).Dari segi logiknya, bagaimana unit boleh beroperasi dengan kakitangan yang hanya ada dua atau tiga orang sahaja. Keadaan ini jika dibiarkan akan menyebabkan Hospital JHEOA berada dalam keadaan huru-hara dan yang menjadi mangsa adalah masyarakat Orang Asli. Saya berharap Ketua Pengarah JHEOA mengambil tindakan segera supaya kakitangan JHEOA tidak teraniaya seterusnya dapat memberi perkhidmatan yang baik kepada golongan sasar (Orang Asli).
7. Baru- baru ini beliau (Pengarah Hospital JHEOA) telah dinaikkan pangkat dari jawatan U48 ke jawatan U52 tapi yang menjadi persoalannya , kenapa beliau masih lagi berada di Hospital JHEOA? Sedangkan jawatan U52 tiada di Hospital JHEOA.. Lagipun, pada kebiasaannya Pengarah Hospital yang telah naik pangkat akan bertukar ke tempat lain. Kami masyarakat Orang Asli tidak mahu lagi Pengarah Hospital sekarang yang hanya mementingkan diri dan berharap diganti dengan Pengarah yang lebih prihatin demi meningkatkan tahap kesihatan masyarakat Orang Asli.
8. Kebanyakan jawatan yang dipegang oleh Orang Asli yang telah bersara diganti dengan kakitangan baru bukan Orang Asli. Keadaan ini menyukarkan dari segi pertuturan, adat resam, cara hidup dan selok-belok mengenai kehidupan masyarakat Orang Asli. Selain itu juga, ianya menimbulkan masalah komunikasi antara penduduk kampung di pedalaman dengan kakitangan JHEOA, seterusnya menyebabkan masyarakat Orang Asli di pedalaman kurang minat dengan program anjuran JHEOA.
9. Jangkamasa berkhidmat pegawai yang bukan Orang Asli di Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli yang terlalu lama terutamanya di Bahagian Kesihatan menyebabkan kualiti kerja mereka semakin menurun. Ini dapat dilihat dengan membuat perbandingan kakitangan yang bekerja di JHEOA melebihi 10 tahun kualiti kerja mereka terlalu kurang. Pengarah Bahagian Kesihatan JHEOA sekarang juga sudah terlalu lama (pengarah sekarang hampir 7 tahun) menyebabkan kualiti kerja semakin teruk. Pihak kami juga mendapati tiada perubahan pada tahap kesihatan masyarakat Orang Asli di kawasan pedalaman. Terdapat kakitangan yang datang dari kementerian lain, pada awalnya mereka berat untuk datang berkhidmat di JHEOA dan setelah mereka datang bertugas mereka juga berat untuk meninggalkan JHEOA kerana mereka telah dilayan oleh masyarakat Orang Asli dengan baik sehingga mereka lupa akan tanggungjawab mereka untuk memajukan masyarakat Orang Asli dan ada sesetengah kakitangan yang bukan dari kalangan Orang Asli membuat masalah di kampung-kampung Orang Asli.
10. Kami masyarakat Orang Asli tidak nampak banyak perubahan pada tahap kesihatan di kalangan masyarakat Orang Asli di bawah pimpinan Pengarah Bahagian Kesihatan yang ada sekarang malah tahap kesihatan masyarakat Orang Asli di kawasan pedalaman semakin meruncing terutamanya yang melibatkan kes TB, Malaria, Kusta dan pelbagai kes penyakit berjangkit lain menular di kawasan pedalaman. Untuk pengetahuan Datuk, kes-kes penyakitTB dan kusta pada suatu ketika dahulu hampir pupus di kalangan masyarakat Orang Asli tetapi sejak dipimpin oleh Pengarah dan kakitangan Bahagian Kesihatan yang ada sekarang yang tidak pernah bertukar-tukar, masalah penyakit berjangkit ini mula menular semula.
11. Untuk meningkatkan tahap kesihatan dan menangani masalah kesihatan dan penyakit berjangkit di kalangan masyarakat Orang Asli maka, kami mencadangkan supaya Kementerian Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah, Kementerian Kesihatan Malaysia dan dengan dibantu oleh kementerian-kementerian yang berkaitan dengan masyarakat Orang Asli supaya kakitangan yang berkhidmat di Hospital JHEOA selain daripada masyarakat Orang Asli perlulah:
a. Menukar Pengarah Bahagian Kesihatan setiap 3-5 tahun.
b. Mengilirkan kumpulan Doktor, Jururawat Terlatih, Pembantu Perubatan, Kakitangan Farmasi, Kakitangan Kesihatan Awam, Jururawat Masyarakat, Atenden, Kakitangan Makmal, Kakitangan X-ray dan Pegawai Tadbir (semua jawatan tersebut yang bukan Orang Asli) sekurang-kurangnya 3-5 tahun.
12. Sehubungan itu, saya sebagai generasi prihatin Orang Asli ingin melihat tahap kesihatan masyarakat Orang Asli lebih baik selaras dengan misi dan visi kerajaan umumnya dan khasnya JHEOA untuk memaju dan meningkatkan tahap kesihatan di kalangan masyarakat Orang Asli. Oleh itu, saya berharap agar pihak Datuk dapat membantu menyelesaikan segala permasalahan yang ada di Bahagian Kesihatan JHEOA demi memelihara kesihatan generasi Orang Asli akan datang. Kami percaya masalah ini dapat di atasi sekiranya Pengarah Bahagian Kesihatan JHEOA Gombak ditukar dan diikuti oleh kakitangan lain (kakitangan bukan Orang Asli) yang terlalu lama bekerja di bahagian ini.
13. Besarlah harapan kami agar segala aduan dan permasalahan kami dapat diambil tindakan dan siasatan menyeluruh dari pihak Datuk.
Sekian, terima kasih.
Yang benar,
(KARIM B PUTAL)
Pesara JHEOA Gombak
s.k
1. Y.B. Dato’ Seri Abdul Aziz Bin Shamsudin
(Menteri, Kementerian Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah)
2. Y.B. Osman Bin Bongsu
(Senator Orang Asli)
3. Dato’ Fadzil Bin Mahamud
(Ketua Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Orang Asli Malaysia)
4. En. Majid Bin Suhut
(Presiden Persatuan Orang Asli Malaysia (POASM))
5. Prof. Hamdan Bin Yaakob
(SUHAKAM)
KeADILan MARAN - 17 Ogos : Ketua Umum KeADILan, Anwar Ibrahim mempunyai musuh yang sama dengan bekas perdana menteri, Dr Mahathir Mohamad iaitu menantu Perdana Menteri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, Khairy Jamaluddin. Dalam ucapannya Anwar membidas Khairy yang didakwanya menyalahguna kuasa untuk mengaut kekayaan dalam usia yang begitu muda. Anwar dengan tegas mengumumkan akan memfailkan saman terhadap Khairy di atas beberapa tindakan dan kenyataan yang dibuat Khairy terhadapnya. Katanya, beliau mempunyai bukti yang mencukupi untuk menyaman Naib Ketua Pemuda Umno itu. Anwar dalam ucapannya turut menafikan kehadiran beliau dalam arena politik tanah air adalah untuk merampas jawatan menteri dan sebagainya. Katanya, beliau berjuang kerana prinsip, jika inginkan jawatan, kedudukan dan sebagainya beliau boleh menggunakan saluran hubungan baik antara keluarganya dengan keluarga Perdana Menteri. “Keluarga saya dengan keluarga Abdullah sememangnya rapat dan saling kenal mengenali,” katanya ketika berucap pada majlis Lawatan Bertemu Rakyat Pahang di Felda Kemboja, Jengka 4, dekat sini pada 15 Ogos lepas. Menurut Anwar beliau telah melalui kehidupan di dunia yang tidak pernah dirasai oleh orang lain, dari layanan sebagai Pemangku Perdana Menteri hinggalah kepada layanan seperti binatang, diaibkan dan di penjarakan selama enam tahun dimana makanan pun dibaling kepadanya seperti memberi makanan kepada binatang. “Saya telah melalui kehidupan daripada kehidupan mewah sebagai pemangku perdana menteri hinggalah kepada kehidupan hina di penjara,” katanya. Pada majlis itu Anwar menerima 244 borang ahli baru menyertai KeADILan daripada setiausaha Badan Perhubungan KeADILan Pahang, Rabidin Kasmawi. Sebelum itu beliau mengadakan lawatan ke Jerantut dan Temerloh. Di Temerloh Anwar menerima 30 borang permohonan menyertai KeADILan daripada masyarakat Orang Asli yang diketuai oleh Arsian Napitoepoeloe. syukree @ August 17, 2007 Semelai Take Government to Court Over Land Eviction Source:COAC 31 May 2007 The application for leave for judicial review over an eviction order served on the Semelai of Kampung Bukit Rok and Kampung Ibam in Pahang was postponed to 27 June 2007 by the Temerloh High Court today. The government’s Federal Counsel pleaded that he was not ready to argue against the application (not the case itself), despite being given the required 10 days' notice. The Semelai batins (headmen) of Kampung Bukit Rok and Kampung Ibam plus 4 others, in their personal and representative capacity, applied for a judicial review of the eviction order from the Pahang State Government served on them on 12 March 2007 from lands which the Semelai claim as their traditional land, and which the State had approved for gazetting as an Aboriginal Reserve in 1974 but has yet to administratively gazette it as such. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||