Nov 14, 2016
I’m saddened by the news. The FDS is especially important to assist the far-flung rural areas which otherwise have no way out for medical treatment
Desperate villagers, especially sick old folks, pregnant women and children may end up walking to the nearest town for medications and medical attention, which might take between two hours to two days, depending on the location of their villages, aggravating their already frail condition.
Apart from that, patients with major illnesses such as high blood pressure, diabetes and hypertension will lose their monthly supplies and have to resort to walking, too as the cost of transportation to the nearest town is simply too much for them to bear
Replacing the service with rural clinics or intensifying provision of medical services via land and water will not be sufficient as the lack of proper infrastructure in many areas will prove to be a major obstacle for the efforts.
Most of the villages do not have proper roads even. No public servant will be willing to work in clinics located as such remote areas.
Apart from that, using water and land transportation is just as risky as it also depends on the weather conditions. Therefore, air access is the fastest and most efficient way to reach these villages.
The Health Department must find another way to cut costs instead of scrapping the service altogether as the lives of many poor people which cannot be bought with cash is at stake.
Technical solutions such as switching to single-engine choppers as suggested by officials to manage costs can be done.
The rights of these rural people to minimal medical access should not be overlooked on humanitarian grounds.
Just because most of them are illiterate, live in poverty and can’t voice out their predicaments, they should not be marginalized.
YB Christina Liew
Sabah PKR Acting Chairperson
Sabah PKR Acting Chairperson YB Christina Liew conveyed her sadness over the termination of the Flying Doctor Service (FDS) which will affect the rural folks in the state.
Liew, who is also Api Api assemblywoman said the service, which provided medical assistance to those living in interior Sabah without access to medical facilities and services, is crucial as they have no other means to obtain healthcare services as well as medications.
The termination of the service by the Sabah Health Department was effectively in place on Sept 30. The department cited rising costs as the reason for the termination.
KOTA KINABALU, November 7, 2016
The State government should put its foot down in no uncertain term when it comes to safeguarding the autonomy of the state and interest of its people
We agree with the hardline position taken by the Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Adenan Satem in safeguarding the interest of Sarawak and its people insofar the closing of the two IPG is concerned
We urge our State government and our Chief Minister Datuk Seri Musa Aman in particular, to adopt a similar stand in protecting the interest of our state and its people, and to send a clear message to the Federal government to object any plans in closing down the two existing teachers’ training colleges in Sabah and to convert them into some vocational colleges, as reported recently.
It is time that our Chief Minister speaks up in the best interest of the state and the people. Don’t just simply accept decisions passed down from the Federal government, especially when they are detrimental to the interest of the state and the people of Sabah. Worse still when such decisions were made without any consideration nor consultation with the State government.
This is clearly another glaring example where our State government had failed to exercise its autonomy, if it really exists.
There is no justification for the Federal government to attempt to close down the existing two teachers training colleges in Sabah, instead, the Federal government should further upgraded the two teachers’ training colleges in Sabah to meet the state’s increasing demand for homegrown teachers, especially for the semi rural, rural and interior of Sabah.
I call for the State government to reclaim its jurisdiction and management over education, so that it could have a better say on it, in the best interest of the State and its people and emulate its Sarawak counterpart in recognizing the importance of English language, and to strive to reintroduce it in public schools, as well as in the government departments and agencies.
Sultan of Johor Sultan Ibrahim Sultan Iskandar said, Malaysian politicians are hypocrite in playing politics with education by talking about nationalism when they too send their children to boarding schools in overseas.
Sultan Ibrahim is popularly-recognized as a staunch advocate in championing the restoration of English as the medium of instruction in public schools
The Sultan also cited Singapore as a good example where it had not only through English education system achieved development way ahead of Malaysia, but also successfully forged national unity.
YB Christina Liew
Acting chairperson for Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Sabah.
KOTA KINABALU, October 23, 2016
Malaysia had been independent for 53 years, and never a judge from Sabah and Sarawak holding the top position in the judiciary. Since the Chief Justice will retire soon, it is time such position be held by a qualified judge coming from these two Borneo states. If not now, when?
Tan Sri Richard Malanjum is both a qualified and worthy candidate for such a position as he has held his present position as the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak for the last 10 years.
His track record holding the position as the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak shows he is capable in carrying out his duty without fear and favor. He is also well respected and recognized for his remarkable effort of introducing the Mobile Court to reach out to the rural poor in the interior of Sabah who could not afford to seek justice in courthouses otherwise.
In addition, Tan Sri Richard Malanjum was the first judge who initiated the computerization of the courts in Sabah and Sarawak which had greatly improved the judiciary system and benefitted members of the bar, lawyers and judges likewise including the general public who are parties to the litigation.
His (Malunjum) appointment as the Chief Justice will also bridge the gap between Peninsular Malaysia and the 2 Borneo states of Sabah and Sarawak insofar the judiciary system is concerned.
Tan Sri Richard Malanjum’s appointment as the Chief Justice would also reflect well on the Federal government’s sincerity in treating Sabah Sarawak as equal partners in Malaysia.
The Federal government must seriously consider appointing the position of Chief Justice to qualified judges from Sabah Sarawak. Otherwise, the people of Sabah Sarawak will not believe that the Federal government has the political will to treat Sabah and Sarawak fairly and as equal partners of the Federation.
If appointed as Chief Justice of Malaysia, I trust that Tan Sri Richard Malanjum will carry out his duty fairly and without fear and favor like what he is doing now as the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak. His appointment as Chief justice will argue well for the federal government in respecting and promoting qualified judges from Sabah and Sarawak to its highest position in the judiciary.
Many may not know about the judicial hierarchy, where the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak is of the same status as the Chief justice of Malaya. According to the Federal Constitution section 121 (1) (a) and (b), the status of the Chief Justice of Sabah and Sarawak and Chief Justice of Malaya are of equal status, ie 3rd in judicial hierarchy, with the Court of Appeal president to be of second place.
After 53 years of independence, it is time the people of Sabah and Sarawak to claim our rightful positions in all aspects including appointment of Chief justice from Sabah and Sarawak. Appointing Malunjum as Chief justice will be seen as a significant step forward for Sabahan and Sarawakian.
YB Christina Liew
Sabah PKR Acting Chairperson
Sabah PKR acting Chairman Christina Liew has expressed her full support for the recommendation by the retired Court of Appeal judge Datuk Mohd Hishamudin Mohd Yunus and the retired Federal Court Judge Datuk Seri Gopah Sri Ram for Tan Sri Richard Malanjum to be appointed the Chief Justice when the term of current Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria expires in March 2017.
Speech by ADUN N.15 API API – Christina Liew
Salam Sejahtera dan Selamat petang kepada semua Ahli ahli Yang berhormat di Dewan yang mulia ini.
1. Saya ingin membahaskan beberapa isu mengenai tanah khusus nya sections 120 dan 70 di bawah Sabah Land Ordinance Cap 68. Izingkan saya bebahas dalam bahasa Malaysia dan English.
2. According to the Police Commercial Crime Department Statistics, the State in Malaysia with the highest number of cases involving land fraud occurred in Sabah. The Police Commercial Crime Department issued the statistics sometime in year 2010.
Regrettably since then land fraud in Sabah continues undiminished. Registered owners and innocent purchasers fall victim to unscrupulous persons using forged documents to transfer land. In Sabah, most of the land fraud cases involving registered being transferred away to 3rd party without the knowledge and consent of the registered owner. They fall victim to unscrupulous fraudster using forged documents to transfer land.
Land fraud is a big problem faced by the people of Sabah. The Land Office must address the problem by taking steps to amend certain provisions of the Land Ordinance. This is to avoid fraudsters taking advantage of the weakness in our land law that may be subjected to mis interpretation.
If amendments are not made to strengthen the Land Ordinance, then fraudsters will continue exploiting its weaknesses and continue committing land fraud. This would have far-reaching effects on the people and potential foreign investors.
Untuk matluman Dewan yang mulia ini, di bawah fasal 120 kurungan (1), (2) dan (3), peraturan dan kaedah untuk memohon salinan geran yang sah, daripada Pejabat Tanah dan Ukur, apabila geran asal telah hilang dalam simpanan pemiliknya.
Section 120 of the Land Ordinance is a provision that allows the Collector to approve an application for a replacement title.
9. Section 120 (1) states that:
“if any document of title is lost or destroyed the person lawfully entitled to the custody… thereof together with the other persons, if any, having knowledge of the circumstances may file in the Land office of the district in which the land is situated an affidavit or statutory declaration containing a full description of such document of title and the circumstances under which it was lost or destroyed”.
10. Maksudnya ialah: If a title has been lost or destroyed, any person – even if that person is not the registered owner, may file an Affidavit or Statutory Declaration to explain the circumstances of the loss or destruction of the land title. That person can affirm the Affidavit or Statutory Declaration so long as he is entitled to lawful custody to the land title.
Fraudsters have exploited the weakness of section 120 to fraudulently transfer land to innocent third parties at the expense of registered landowners. I will explain shortly on how a fraudster can exploit this section to gain certified copies of title and transfer it to a 3rd party.
12. The other weakness of section 120 is the proviso, which states: “provided that the collector shall not in any case issue such certified copy unless he is satisfied as to the truth of the affidavit or declaration and the good faith of the applicant for the same.
13. A fraudster’s modus operandi or method of operation in exploiting the provisions of sections 120 (1) (2) and (3) of the Land Ordinance goes like this:
First, the fraudster will forge a power attorney purportedly given by the registered land owner, with complete powers to him. . The forged power of attorney gives power to the fraudster to deal with the land including the right to sell and transfer the land to a third party.
Using the forged power of attorney the fraudster makes a false police report and then affirms a false Statutory Declaration stating that he had lost the original land title.
He then applies to the Land Office for a replacement land title. The Land Office will hold a hearing where the fraudster appears before the officer in the Land Office. The Land Office then publishes a notice in the local newspaper regarding the loss of the land title.
After expiry of the time period for objections stated in the notice, the Land Office can then issue a replacement land title.
With the replacement title, the fraudster then sells the land to a third party. The fraudster – after having been paid for the fraudulent sale of the land – disappears.
Eventually when the fraud is discovered, the registered owner and the third party suffer losses.
14. The weakness in section 120 is in the wordings of the provision: the Collector is satisfied as to the truth of the affidavit or declaration and the good faith of the applicant.
15. The question is: how does the Collector satisfies himself that all the documents submitted by the applicant, including the contents of the police report, the power of attorney, the affidavit or the declarations are true and genuine and not forged documents?
16. This is very subjective. According to section 120 of the land ordinance, it all depends on the discretion of the particular Collector.
17. Under the present law, the Collector owes no duty of care to the registered landowner. The Collector needs only be satisfied as to the truth of the affidavit or declaration and the good faith of the applicant.
18. The question that arises then: How can the Collector say he is satisfied as to the truth of the affidavit or declaration if the fraudster produces a false affidavit or false declaration and the Collector is misled into saying he is satisfied as to the truth of the affidavit?
19. A related question that arises: How can the Collector say he is satisfied on the good faith of the applicant when most fraudsters are smooth talking and presenting himself as acting in good faith to the collector, and then striking at the victim by committing fraud.
20. What then is the solution? Should the Collector be responsible for the losses suffered by the registered landowner or the innocent buyer?
21. Due to the very subjective provision of section 120, I propose an amendment to the law that requires the registered owner to be present personally to meet with the Collector when applying for a replacement title. This would enable the Collector to satisfy himself as to the truth of the affidavit or declaration and the good faith of the applicant.
There will be cases where it is not possible for a registered landowner to be present before the Collector. For example an elderly registered owner who is overseas and cannot travel. In this kind of situation, there must guidelines for the Collector on how to exercise his discretion.
Saya ingin mengucapkan Tahniah kepada Pejabat Tanah dan Ukur, in their Fast Track Programme called the Sabah Natives Land Service, or PANTAS, in short form.
Pantas has the objective of managing and administering Native land affairs. Baru baru ini, kita di beritahu melalui laporan di surat khabar, bahawa Pantas telah berjaya mengukur, daftar dan keluarkan 57 keping communal geran untuk 24,016 hectars, kepada berapa penduduk mengenai tanah NCR.
While PANTAS assists in processing NCR land, kita tidak boleh nafikan masih banyuk masalah masalah mengenai tanah adat yang di tuntut oleh penduduk di kg masing- masing. Misal nya, hari khamis minggu lalu, kira kira 100 penduduk dari Kg Solob membentuk sekatan jalan untuk menghalang orang luar masuk ke tanah tanah adat atau NCR. mereka menuntut perbincangan rasmi diadakan antara mereka dan pihak berkaitan untuk menyelesaikan perkara tersebut.
Many Sabah natives still live off the land. Not by choice, but because the land is all what they have for their livelihood and survival
27. It is common knowledge that some natives in Sabah have grievances on land upon which they claim to have native customary rights – especially land which their forefathers have been occupying and which the present generation of natives continues to occupy for their livelihood. Land is the only thing they have.
It is a common knowledge that many native land applicants have applied for land years ago. They wait for the outcome of their applications but nothing is known about it. So they continue to wait. Years go by and still no results.
All these years they do not know if their applications have been rejected or approved. This happens despite many visits to the Land Office inquiring about the status of their land applications.
However, they often come to know that their applications have been rejected only when someone gives them a visit and tells them to leave the land because the land now belongs to someone else.
Many of the natives are too poor to engage lawyers to resolve their claims on the land. Those who can afford face many years of waiting for the court process to be completed to resolve their claims.
32. Section 70 (1) of the Sabah Land Ordinance is an important provision. Under section 70(1) Collectors in Districts must exercise their statutory duty to process land applications by natives. Section 70 (1) requires the Collector to deal with land applications by natives without delay and as far as possible in the order in which the applications are received. Section 70 (1) is a mandatory provision.
33. Collectors should therefore comply with section 70 (1). Compliance with the law would go a long way in addressing the current plight of natives’ land applications.
34. Walau bagaimanapun, saya difahamkan bahawa jabatan tanah dan ukur mempun -yai polisi, mengenai pemohonan Tanah di Sabah, ia itu, sesiapa sahaja boleh memohon Tanah ke pejabat tanah, sekiranya tanah yang dipohon ada kekosongan. Tetapi saya menggesa agar setiap Pejabat Tanah di Daerah dapat melaksanakan sistem pendataan yang lebih berkesan dan di kemaskinikan dari masa ke semasa, yang mana setiap pemohonan sepatutnya di terima mengikut masa yang pemohon apabila mereka menyerahkan borang permohonan.
35. Sekali lagi saya merayu kepada kerajaan dan Pejabat Tanah dan ukur, untuk menubuhkan sebuah pusat atau Center untuk mem bantu rakyat dengan masalah yang me nge nai Tanah, khususnya tanah adat or NCR.
36. I propose that a Native Land Dispute Resolution Centre be set up, di bawah Pejabat Tanah dan Ukur atau di bawah Pejabat Ketua Menteri, to include officers from all the relevant Departments such as the Director of the Lands & Surveys, the State Attorney General Chambers, the Forest Department, the Sabah Law Association and ACLRs from all the Districts. The role of the Native Land Dispute Centre would be to arbitrate and resolve land disputes concerning native land or native customary rights on land.
37. The Centre would include a pool of experienced adjudicators who would become specialists to deal with native land disputes.
38 Most natives do not know about their rights or because they are poor they cannot afford seek to legal advice. The Native Land Dispute Centre would be a place where native can seek help on land matters.
39 The Centre should not charge for the services it provides. If fees are charged they should be minimal and affordable.
I wish to add further what YB Kepayan had said earlier on the issue of citizenship. Saya ingin mengtarik perhatian dewan yang mulia ini, issue mengenai warganagaraan is a oleh penduduk Sabah is a probamatic issue. Rita Thomas case is only a tip of the ice berg. There are many thousands of our qualified natives who are not given the cetizenships. In the case of Rita Joan Thomson, she was born in Papar before independence. Her mother is a baju from Bongawon. 79 years old. Today, still only a permanent resident of Sabah, unable to obtain her citizenship sampai sekaran. What are we going to do?
I urge the state government to set up a special body or department to assist the thousands of Rita Joan Thomson in Sabah. Who are genuine Sabahan but denied the citizenship while we have hundreds of thousands of foreigners who came to Sabah and became instant Sabahan and registered as voters to vote the government of the day. Even though immigration and NRD are udner the jurisdiction of the federal government, we urge the state government to intervene and assist our Sabahan to get their status correlated. This special body should include, among others, assisting the non muslim natives on the issues of bin and binti on thir MyKads. Their status should be corrected as non muslim. Just because their mykads has bin or binti does not make them automatic muslim. The NRD must recognize the uniqueness of our Sabah natives. The thousands of Sabahan who are still deprived of their status as citizens and the issue of birth certificates also must be handled under this special body or department.
41. Saya ingin mengucapkan taniah kepada DBKK for the no litter policy in KK city.
A fine of RM30.00 to be imposed on people who litter. However, I wish to suggest that more rubbish bins must be placed around KK city. Without rubbish bins the people may just throw their rubbish on the ground. The cleanliness campaign should include the back lanes of the shops in KK. KK city is the capital of Sabah, a clean environment will be helpful to our tourism industry.
42. Dengan ini, saya menyokong ucapan oleh Tuan yang Terutama yang Di- Pertua Negeri Sabah.
Selamat bersidang kepada semua ahli- ahli yang berhormat di dewan yang mulia ini.
Sekian dan Terima kasih
A group of 35 investors headed by Edward Chong invested in the Gold discovery Investment Scheme, a Gold Trading Investment sometimes between 2011 to 2012. These 35 investors were among the hundreds who participated in this Gold trading investment Scheme in Sabah. This Gold Trading Company is called Worldwide Far East Bhd (the Company) and the CEO is Dato Noor Ismahanum Binti Hj Mohd Ismail of the Company, from KL.
These 35 investors later discovered that their investment in the Gold trading Company was very dubious and they demanded that the Company and the CEO of the company returned them their capital investment together with interest, as stipulated in the terms of their investment.
When their demand was not met and the CEO started to avoid meeting them, they engaged a lawyer Christina Liew, of C J Liew & Co to act for them, on the demand of the return of their capital investment plus interest.
C J Liew & Co filed the writ of summons on 31st July 2012; naming the Company and the CEO as first and second Defendants in the suit.
On 7th March 2013 the investors/Plaintiffs obtained a judgment against the first and second Defendants (the Company and the CEO) for the sum of RM1,203,148.77 together with interest at the rate of 5% per annum from the date of judgment to the date of full payment, and the first and second Defendants are to jointly and severally pay the all the plaintiffs’ cost in the sum of RM100,000.00.
The Judgment was served to both of the Defendants accordingly.
On 24th June 2013, the lawyer acting for the 35 Investors/Plaintiffs met with the officers from Bank Negara, to serve them a copy of the judgment from the court and to discuss, among others, the release of the judgment sum from the money seized by the Bank Negara on both of the Defendants’ accounts.
Subsequent meetings were held at various dates with the Bank Negara Officers. The investors/plaintiffs were told to wait as the Bank was pursuing the legal proceedings against the same Defendants.
Today all the media reported that on Friday, 11th December 2015, the Judicial Commissioner Gabriel Gumis of the KK High Court found the Company and the CEO guilty of money laundering and receiving deposits illegally from the public.
The news report prompted some of the 35 investors/plaintiffs to rush to their lawyers’ office, to discuss about the refund of their investment money based on the judgment they obtained on 7th march 2013; a copy of the judgment was served to the Bank Negara officers as early as 24th June 2013.
Edward Chong, who was acting on behalf of all the 35 Investors cum plaintiffs, wanted their lawyer to pursue the matter with the relevant authorities in getting their money back.
“It has been a long wait and we are very glad the culprit is finally found guilty. We feel justices been served. We want to get back our money and move on with our life, the whole episode is a nightmare to us.” He said.
UCAPAN MESYUARAT KETIGA PENGGAL KEDUA DEWAN UNDANGAN NEGERI SABAH YANG KEEMPAT BELAS
7-13 NOVEMBER 2014
YB LIEW CHIN JIN @ CHRISTINA LIEW AHLI DEWAN UNDANGAN NEGERI SABAH
TAJUK: ISU BANJIR KILAT
Saya merujuk kepada peruntukkan (RM. ) kepada DBKK untuk 2015. For the repair and maintence of drains.
If Compare this amount (…..) with the previous years, pada tahun 2012, kerajaan negeri memperuntukan RM2.5 juta, pada 2013, RM2.14 juta, pada 2014, RM1.3 juta kepada dbkk. Peruntukkan ini adalah untuk menbina dan memperbaiki parit parit dan sebagainya under jurisdiction of dbkk. Ini adalah jelas tidak mencukupi memandangkan salah satu penyebab utama banjir kilat adalah kekurangan dari segi pembinaan parit yang tersumbat atau runtuh di kawasan-kawasan berkenaan.
Setiap kali apabila hujan lebat turun melebihi dua jam, banjir kilat akan berlaku dan membanjiri jalanraya dan kawasan perumahan di Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu termasuk kawasan-kawasan sekitarnya seperti Penampang, Inanam dan Putatan. Keadaan akan bertambah buruk jika berlakunya arus pasang. Ini jelas kelihatan dalam banjir besar yang berlaku pada 7hb Oktober, 2014 dengan Daerah Penampang paling terjejas, di mana ramai penduduk terpaksa meninggalkan rumah kediaman mereka yang ditengelami air, manakala kedai kedai di Pekan Donggongon termasuk pusat membeli belah Megalong Mall terpaksa ditutup.
Keadaan ini telah mengakibatkan kesusahan dan kerugian yang amat besar kepada orang awam dan pembayar cukai. Walaupun masalah banjir ini adalah berpunca dari cuaca buruk, masalah ini sepatutnya boleh diatasi atau impaknya dikurangkan. Pihak berkuasa tempatan yang berkenaan seperti Dewan Bandaraya Kota Kinabalu (DBKK), Majlis Daerah Penampang, Jabatan Kerja Raya (JKR), Jabatan Parit dan Saliran (JPS) haruslah bertanggungjawab bersama untuk menebat banjir demi mengurangkan kesan banjir.
Selepas banjir kilat pada tahun 2011, kerajaan negeri telah menubuhkan satu jawatankuasa pencegahan banjir untuk mengkaji dan mencadangkan pelan penebatan banjir yang merangkumi kawasan Kota Kinabalu, penampang dan putatan. Malang sekali, tiga tahun selepas penubuhan jawatankuasa tersebut, kita telah mengalami satu lagi banjir besar pada 7 Oktober 2014, malah lebih teruk dari banjir pada tahun 2011.
Saya mengalu-alukan pengumuman yang mengatakan Kerajaan telah melantik sebuah syarikat pakar perunding untuk mengkaji masalah banjir serta mengemukakan satu pelan induk untuk menebat banjir. Malang sekali, pakar perunding tersebut mengatakan bahawa beliau memerlukan masa dua tahun untuk menyiapkan kajian serta rekomendasi. Ini bermakna kita terpaksa menunggu dua tahun lagi dan hidup dalam kebimbangan akan banjir kilat setiap kali bila berlakunya hujan lebat.
Sementara kita menunggu rekomendasi dari pihak pakar perunding, saya menyeru supaya Kerajaan Negeri memberi keutamaan kepada rancangan pendek untuk tebatan banjir. Dengan izin, short term flood mitigation. Ini adalah wajar kerana para penduduk di kawasan Kota Kinabalu, Inanam, Penampang dan Putatan tidak sanggup lagi menghadapi penderitaan yang dibawa oleh banjir. Kerajaan haruslah memberi peruntukan kewangan yang mencukupi kepada jabatan dan agensi kerajaan yang berkenaan termasuk Pihak Berkuasa Tempatan (PBT) di daerah Kota Kinabalu, Penampang dan Putatan, untuk pengurusan banjir kilat yang berkesan, apabila berlakunya hujan lebat.
Untuk mencegah berulangnya banjir besar seperti apa yang berlaku pada 7 Oktober 2014, PBT haruslah membina parit dan saliran dengan kerap, selain daripada menambah-baik parit-parit yang tidak lagi dapat menampung keperluan. Ini semua memerlukan peruntukan yang mencukupi dari Kerajaan Negeri. Maka, Kerajaan Negeri haruslah lebih berhemah dengan pengunaan sumber yang ada yang disumbangkan oleh pembayar cukai.
Tiang-tiang lampu di sepanjang jalan raya seperti Jalan Lintas dan Jalan Bundusan adalah dipasang dan dibiayai oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan, tetapi bil elektrik setiap bulan adalah ditanggung oleh DBKK. Ini adalah tidak berpatutan. DBKK tidak harus dibebankan dengan bil elektrik untuk projek-projek yang dibiayai oleh Kerajaan Persekutuan.
Ini adalah memandangkan para pemilik kereta di Sabah membayar cukai jalan kepada Jabatan Pengangkutan Jalanraya (JPJ) yang di bawah naungan Kerajaan Persekutuan. Maka, JPJ seharusnya dipertanggungjawabkan untuk membiayai penyelenggaraan tiang-tiang lampu jalanan dengan hasil dari cukai jalanraya yang dipunggut dari para pemilik kereta di Sabah. PBT di Sabah seperti DBKK Cuma harus membiayai bil elektrik bagi lampu-lampu jalanan di bawah bidang kuasa mereka.
UCAPAN MESYUARAT KETIGA PENGGAL KEDUA DEWAN UNDANGAN NEGERI SABAH YANG KEEMPAT BELAS
7-13 NOVEMBER 2014
YB LIEW CHIN JIN @ CHRISTINA LIEW AHLI DEWAN UNDANGAN NEGERI SABAH
TAJUK: ISU PERUMAHAN RAKYAT
Saya ingin mengemukakan, aspirasi rakyat untuk memiliki sebuah rumah kini merupakan satu impian yang agak susah dicapai di kalangan orang ramai, khususnya mereka yang berpendapatan rendah. Ini adalah kerana harga rumah kini semakin melambung tinggi, khususnya di kawasan bandar seperti Kota Kinabalu dan kawasan-kawasan berhampiran seperti Penampang, Putatan dan Inanam.
Saya sedar bahawa kerajaan persekutuan telah/sedang mengimplementasikan pelbagai skim perumahan mampu-milik di seluruh negara. Antaranya ialah seperti skim Rumah Mampu Milik and Rumah Mesra Rakyat yang dilaksanakan oleh Syarikat Perumahan Negara Berhad (SPNB); skim PR1MA di bawah Pejabat Perdana Menteri Malaysia; dan juga skim MyHome yang memperuntukkan subsidi kepada individu yang layak untuk membeli rumah tertentu dengan harga yang lebih rendah daripada harga pasaran.
Namun demikian, usaha-usaha tersebut masih jauh daripada mencukupi untuk menampung keperluan rakyat di Sabah, khususnya di kalangan generasi muda.
Bagi mereka yang bernasib baik terdapat membeli rumah mampu-milik, yang biasanya dibina di kawasan yang jauh dari bandar, mereka terpaksa membeli kereta untuk bertolak-alih ke tempat kerja yang biasanya berdekatan dengan kawasan bandar. Ini adalah disebabkan oleh sistem pangangkutan awam yang sedia ada kurang memuaskan. Ini sudah pasti membebankan lagi kewangan mereka bukan saja dari segi bayaran ansuran setiap bulan untuk pinjaman membeli rumah, tapi juga dari segi bayaran bulanan untuk pinjaman beli kereta, perbelanjaan untuk petrol, parking, dan kos pengendalian semasa (periodic maintenance). Dan memandangkan kos saraan hidup di Sabah adalah jauh lebih tinggi dan gaji pula lebih rendah berbanding dengan Semenanjung Malaysia, rakyat Sabah terpaksa berbelanja dengan lebih berhemah.
Kajian dan pengumpulan data yang dibuat oleh pejabat saya baru-baru ini menunjukkan ramai pasangan suami isteri yang bekerja di sector awam/swasta dengan pendapatan bergabung sekitar RM4,500 dengan seorang anak bersekolah rendah/tadika, tidak mampu memiliki rumah sendiri atas sebab-sebab tersebut, dan terpaksa kekal tinggal bersama ibu-bapa mereka, atau pun menyewa rumah atau apartment yang berhampiran dengan tempat kerja mereka.
Ramai di antara mereka juga merungut tentang harga barangan keperluan harian (makanan terutamanya), yang meloncat tinggi. Mereka juga bimbang kehidupan mereka akan lebih tertekan apabila Goods and Services Tax (GST) dilaksanakan pada 1 April, 2015 dan percaya ini akan memudaratkan lagi pelambungan harga barangan. Oleh yang demikian, saya menyeru Kerajaan Negeri supaya membawa isu Polisi Kabotaj yang telah lama dikenalpasti sebagai punca utama kepada harga barangan dan servis yang lebih tinggi di Sabah berbanding dengan Semenangjung Malaysia, kepada perhatian Kerajaan Persekutuan, untuk dikaji semula dan dimansuhkan sekiranya tiada cara penyelesaian yang lebih berkesan.
Sudah tiba masanya Kerajaan Sabah membentuk suatu Polisi Perumahan Rakyat yang komprehensif lagi efektif dnegan isu perumahan yang kini semakin runching di Sabah. Bagi permulaan, agensi Kerajaan Negeri seperti Lembaga Pembangunan Perumahan dan Bandar (LPPB) membina rumah mampu milik sahaja, sama ada untuk disewa atau dibeli oleh rakyat yang benar-benar berkelayakan. Sebagai sebuah agensi kerajaan, LPPB berkewajipan untuk membantu Kerajaan Negeri untuk memperuntukan perumahan subsidi kepada golongan rakyat yang berpendapatan rendah. LPPB seharusnya menggunakan tanah yang dimilikinya unuk tujuan tersebut. Maka, adalah amat sesuai sekali bagi LPPB membantu Kerajaan Negeri membina rumah mampu-milik untuk rakyat Sabah yang berpendapatan rendah. Ini sudah tentu akan menampung usaha Kerajaan Persekutuan dalam aspek ini.
Ingin juga saya menarik perhatian Dewan yang mulia ini, bahawa ramai juga di kalangan rakyat Sabah yang mengalami masalah untuk mendapat pinjaman dari bank dan institusi kewangan untuk membeli rumah. Apa kata Kerajaan Negeri ambil initiatif untuk mengkaji masaalah ini? Adakah institusi kewangan yang dimiliki oleh Kerajaan Negeri, sama ada milik penuh atau sebahagian, memberi pinjaman perumahan kepada mereka yang layak, tak kira samaada mereka dari sektor kerajaan atau pun sektor swasta? Saya yakin, sekiranya Kerajaan Negeri dapat berbuat demikian, ini akan dapat membantu mereka yang layak untuk membeli rumah idaman mereka. Pada kesimpulannya, pembinaan lebih banyak rumah mampu-milik oleh LPPB dan pemberian pinjaman perumahan akan memanfaatkan rakyat Sabah, khususnya golongan yang berpendapatan rendah.
It is my case that the smallholders came to see me in 2005 with their grievances on the JVA. After hearing them out and did my due diligence, I decided to accept their appointment to act for them. Taking instructions and acting on their behalf.
I had in the past 10 years taken more than 10 class actions against relevant parties or authorities when there seemed to be injustices done. It was my professional duty to accept their briefs and instructions once I accepted their appointments. I had encountered difficulties acting as lawyer for clients on class actions before but this is the most challenging one above all.
The media report last SUNDAY was sensational but nonetheless it was a selective reporting on the Court’s decision. Without the benefits of the whole judgment. The publication has given rise to a real or perceived public bias against me in my professional as a lawyer and politician.
It amounts to damaging my credibility and integrity both as a lawyer and an elected representative of the people. However, despite this hardship, it will not deter me to continue working, representing and acting for the people.
I will continue to serve my constituency and other areas where necessary, to the best of my ability and serve the cause of justice for the poor, the vulnerable especially the poor community who cannot afford legal fees to seek justice in court.
YB Christina Liew
Adun Api Api
This Press statement was called for the purpose of clarifying the media report issued by Borneo Samudera Sdn Bhd last Sunday. The 3rd Defendant having read the newspaper article realized that it was a selective report on the court’s ruling without considering and explaining the whole judgment.
1. It was the defendant’s case that the 3rd Defendant was at all time acting in her capacity as lawyer with instructions from her clients. She took instruction or acted on instructions from the clients.
2. It was the defendants’ case that there was no coercion and it was clear to her as a lawyer at the material time all parties knew what they were entering into.
3. The defendants have filed an Appeal to the Court of Appeal against the Judgment and at the same time had also filed an application for stay of execution against the order of the judgment.
4. It was also explained during the trial as to the issue of the 3rd defendant’s ex staff acting as buyer (the 1st defendant). It has been explained by the 3rd Defendant during the trial the role and the purpose of the 3rd Defendant ex staff in the transaction and that it was in accordance to the instruction given to the 3rd Defendant. We would take the argument further during the appeal proper of this matter.
5. Borneo Samudera (BSSB) from the day of Joint Venture in 1998 until today, was and still is in possession of the 817 smallholders’ lots. The Possession was never taken away from them.
6. It is the defendant’s case and based on the instructions given to her by the smallholders, that no dividends were ever declared and given to the smallholders since they entered the JVA with BSSB between 1998 to 2005 (the material time). According to the JVA terms, the smallholders injected their lots into the JVC (Cemasjaya sdn bhd) as their equity when they signed the JVA in 1998 and in return, they would receive share certificates to the value of their individual lots. They would become shareholders of the JVC (Cemasjaya). With no more than 30% of profits to be declared by the company annually. However for 8 years (1998 to 2005) they received only advances from a third company called Bagahak Plantation Sdn Bhd, not dividends or advances from the JVC (Cemasjaya). As a result of these 8 years of non-payment of dividends the smallholders were unhappy and came to see the 3rd Defendant with their grievances on the JVA.
7. It was also explained during the trial that the 3rd Defendant after listening to their grievances, studied their documents and consulted two other senior counsels, that the 3rd defendant formed the legal opinion that BSSB had breached and repudiated the JVA.
8. It is the defendants’ case that 817 smallholders instructed the 3rd defendant that they wish to get out of the JVA and sell their lots away to salvage their losses.
9. Therefore the 817 smallholders then commenced action against BSSB in 2006, inter alia, for not paying dividends.
10. With reference to the police report as stated in the media. We were shocked to note that what was reported in the media that most of the smallholders had lodge a police report against the three defendants. It was not part of the reason for the decision and the finding of the Judge but it was reported in the media as if giving the impression that it is part of the reason for the decision. The issue of some of the smallholders police report lodge against the three defendants on the purported misleading them into signing the sales and purchase agreement are now ongoing in the Lahad Datu Arbitration.
11. We were more surprised on the issue that the smallholders were asked to sign or thumb print document in blank as stated also in the media report. (2nd last paragraph of the media report). This allegation was also not part of the consideration and finding of the court.
12. There are two arbitrations going on presently. One is in Singapore whereby the arbitrator has yet to decide on the validity, effectiveness and enforceability of the JVA. Whether the condition precedents of the JVA were fulfilled at the material time as these condition precedents were found to be contingent. The other arbitration that is going on is in Lahad Datu. The arbitrator has yet to decide, inter alia, whether the Sale and Purchase Agreements were entered legally and whether these Sale and Purchase Agreements would be binding to the parties.
Nelson W Angang
Legal Counsel Representative for YB Christina Liew