AND SO THE FLOODING BEGINS...

It is reported that on friday (15/10/2010), the flooding of South East Asia's largest dam - Bakun Dam - has begun. The construction of the controversial dam which started in 1994 has been always in hassle due to various reasons such as the 1997 Asian financial crisis, internal conflict of interest among parties involved, environmental and social damage link problems. Expected to be in operation by 2003, the fate of the dam is finally sealed today in 2010 amidst all the hiccups.

However, here are some interesting facts known about the dam:

1. It will generate 2,400 MW of electricity (equivalent to Doel nuclear power station in Belgium)

2. Be the tallest concrete faced rockfill dam (CFRD) in the world

3. Be the largest hydroelectric dam in Malaysia

4. It will cover an area of 700km sq. of land underwater - the size of Singapore

5. Some 9,000 natives (Kayan/Kenyah) indigenous people have been relocated

6. About 230km sq. of virgin tropical rainforest had been cut down

7. Thousands of exotic tropical biodiversity ecology perished

8. Other environmental fallouts i.e. illegal logging, poaching and water-borne diseases

Though Sarawak's initiative of planning ahead some 20-30 years down the road is commendable, construction of such mega project - if not properly addressed - may invoke great appraisal from the public. For example, if we are to weight the whole chronology of the Bakun Dam and the purpose of it's construction against all the losses (in terms of economic loss during the 1997 recession + social fallout impacts + environmental degradations) it brings, one can easily notice that the balance is justifiably tilted towards the latter! And yet you are suggesting of constructing another 12 more dams? Seriously, Sarawak needs an election... now!

Technically speaking - according to pre-conditional design specification - dam impoundment can only be commenced after a continuous 7 days of dry weather and a water depth of below 60m. However, in today's case as reported by the news, the flooding had already begun despite the conditions and protest from the Bakun folks which lodged a police report to halt the process earlier.

A critique suggested that the flooding is rather rush and improperly regulated since the people downstream were not being adequately inform of any kind of Emergency Rescue Plan should anything happen during the flooding. Also the compensation issue of the lands that has not settled till now - as we speak - is another thing! Interestingly, this is the MD and chief engineer of Sarawak Hydro, Zulkifle Osman's reply "We found that the weather was good enough in the past two days and the river level was safe, so we went ahead with the impoundment" Excuse me, I believed that's not how we engineers were thought back in faculty. We speak based on facts and figures. And unfortunately for Balui River, the fact is that on monday (11/10/10) there was an incident of a capsized longboat and the man is still missing! Safe huh?

As for Dato' Sri James Masing remark on the assurance that the people should not worry because the dam was build to last, let me correct you technically on that sir - in engineering, lifespan of each design process always has limitation otherwise great maintenance work is carried out. Even with rigorous maintenance check every now and then, nothing is build to last! Also about the promise that the government will compensate the Bakun folks in no due time, I'll say that's just another spin for the coming election. Why? Because they have been saying and keep on repeating that same cheap trick since the preliminary process of Bakun Dam in 1994.

I think Sarawakians agree to the notion of Bakun Dam - more electricity supply, more investors coming in to the state to set up their factories, more jobs created, less unemployment, high income generation per family and voila, everyone is happy! why not? - but the problem now that culminates amidst these chaos is only one simple thing i.e. the government is not transparent enough to the people. They refused to compensate the amount of pay for the lands deserved by the Bakun folks, rushed the flooding of the dam without prior notices and plundered the land intentionally savvy for themselves.

I used to remember my grandpa told me once that the politicians nowadays fight no more like their predecessors. In the old days, each representative fights for the plights of his/her people but today it is more likely that the he/she fights for himself, families and cronies.

Good news is, changing this we can as the electorates and the time is in the next coming election, if our politicians ceased to behave.

Till the next posting.

INTERNATIONAL DAY OF PEACE

Since 1981, the world has come together to celebrate the annual 'International Day of Peace (IDP)' on September 21st every year aiming to promote peace, ceasefire and non-violence throughout the globe. Today, after almost 20 years of implementation, one can be sure of it's prevailing successes in maintaining global stability in unison.

Speaking of peace - in split seconds - one's thought will be characterized by pictures of war, disputes among nations, political stability of a country etc. Because peace is very synonymous with war free zone, we often neglect the kind of threats that may affect our peaceful existence in terms of security, sovereignty, sensitivity, social beings etc. Rarely a case whereby social hassles and impending natural disasters occurred in our mind. Critiques may argue that since social welfare and disasters alike are both internal problems within a nation's jurisdiction to combat, thus we assumed that everybody is in peace. In short, our interpretation is: No War = Peace.


However, looking at the world today, even if there was no war or disputes in a particular country, still there is no peaceful atmosphere engulfing the whole lot once the way things used to be were not in their proper set anymore. For instance, the existence of such driving forces such as the financial system and globalization, that maneuver the world today towards the destination - by default - they prefer to go, is gradually taking it's toll in plummeting world peace.

Globalization believed to benefit both investors and the host country, in the end, guarantees the latter's downfall as can be seen in the 1997/1998 Asian Financial Crisis. Win-win situation type of trades believed to deliver positive impacts to both parties, at last proved to be loop-sided. Third party involvement in engaging disputes among nations planned to end it once and for all, over time proved to be a political move deployed to gain control of the country's richness. Hence, you tell me, can those innocence who are to be the preys of such deprived situations be counted as peaceful even without 'literal' war?

Though the effort of making the world a better place to stay - by initiating IDP - is commendable, the fact remains that we are presently being coerced to face new kind of threat which transcend all nationalities and boundaries as stated above.

World War I & II may had become part of human history and they deserve condemnation of highest degree, but what about these 'virtual' wars? If they can make a stop to barbaric warheads, why not apply the same principles to globalization as well? If the idea of globalization is indeed proved to be beneficial to the parties involved, then get on with it but should it be a liability and cause detrimental effects to the people, why hesitate?

All in all, I'm grateful for this peaceful nation of mine, Malaysia. I hope you too will enjoy your peaceful time in your respective country with the spirit of fully in grasp of being peaceful and echoes it's chimes to a better melody - by choice - you want it to be!

Till the next posting.

CELEBRATING DIFFERENCES IN A COMMON WAY

It's September 16th, 2010! Marking the 47 years old birthday of Malaysia Federation. The very essence of the nation's spirit is now bequeathed to the next generation of today's youth - hoping that we will further understand each other by maintaining unity, narrowing disparity and to reduce factions among society.

In the end, though we are different - rooting from various ethnicity and beliefs - still we share a thing in common, which is to be able to call this fortunate country: Malaysia, our home. While many others who are less fortunate are currently straying on the hassle streets of New York or trying very hard to live a day to it's dawn in Swaziland. Here you are, both me and you freely breathing Malaysia's air with pride, honor and peace - the least we can do is to keep it that way for our future generation to savor too.

Happy Malaysia Day 2010 with the spirit of celebrating differences in a common way!



Till the next posting.

UNDERSTANDING NCR LAND: THE SIMPLEST WAY

The article is written based on the urge that anybody should know and understand the Native Customary Rights (NCR) Land, the simplest way from a layman perspective who doesn't read law.

By definition, land tenure is the system of rights and institutions that governs access to and use of land and other resources. In Sarawak, the customary land tenure is characterized by both formal and informal attributes. The formal attribute is that the NCR rights are recognized and protected by the Land Code. But it is also informal customary land tenure because it's recognition and acceptance are based on the Adat Law of the Iban community (Dimbab Ngidang, 1998).

The Iban land tenure system uses the concept of territory, called the 'pemakai menoa' for the exerting rights of access to land resources within a longhouse community (Henry Ling, 2010). The boundaries of this territory are usually marked by natural features such as rivers and ridges (Lambat, 1994). On the other hand (Cleary and Eaton, 1996) reported that native communities could claim customary rights to land only applied to the following:

1) Felling of virgin jungle before January 1st 1958
2) Planting of fruit trees
3) Use of land for burial grounds or shrines
4) Use of land in any class for rights of ways or any other lawful methods recognized by the Land Code.
5) Purchase or by exchange of gifts such as gongs or/and cannons.

History of NCR land in Sarawak has been in household lips since the days of the colonial rule dated from century ago. In 1863, the first land law was promulgated resulting in 'all unoccupied and waste lands' are to be the property of the government. The significance of the 1863 Land Order was that although the natives could continue to practice customary tenure within their domain, they could no longer claim rights to land outside their existing domain, which is now belonged to the state (Evelyn Hong, 1974).

In 1949, the Land Classification Ordinance introduced by the colonial government further restricted the creation of customary rights to tenure to 6 methods (Hooker, 1976):

1) The felling of virgin jungle and the occupation of the land thereby cleared
2) The planting of land with fruit trees
3) The occupation or cultivation of land
4) The use of land for burial ground or shrine
5) The use of land of any class for rights of way
6) Any other lawful method

Applications to these rights had to be made for permits issued by the district officer, which may or may not be granted. This definition of customary tenure by the government frustrate certain transactions admitted by systems of native personal law (Porter, 1967). The Adat Law and the customary tenure were codified and this further curtailed the rights of natives to land even more.

In 1946, Sarawak was ceded to the then British Crown and they introduced the 1948 Land Classification Ordinance that further denied the customary rights to land for the natives. In 1952, an amendment was made pertaining to the lawful occupation for the different classes of land created. This resulted in the following rules (Porter, 1967):

1) Native who were in lawful occupation of the NCR land were declared to be licensees of Crown Land
2) The Crown assumed total proprietorship of all land in the state of Sarawak

The ordinance was further amended in 1955 resulting in a total prohibition on spontaneous creation of further customary rights law (Idem, 1967). Direct effects of these as reported by (Henry Ling, 2010) are that:

1) Natives are now forbidden to open up new forests
2) Forbidden to exercise customary rights or operate under customary tenure in new areas
3) Natives could no longer move freely to establish new swiddens, settlements in new area as they did in the past.

Generally, a native may be said to own land if he holds a document of title issued by the superintendent or surveyor when he can claim customary rights over the said land. It is clear law that until a document of title has been issued in respect to over the land which he claimed to be NCR land, such land shall continue to be state own land.

Sarawak Land Code, 1958 (SLC) section 5 clearly recognizes NCR which may be created in accordance to the native customary law of the community concerned which is native Iban in this case. Section 22 provides recognition to native holdings where such claim to land must be registered. Section 30 provides for the compensation to be paid should the government resumes possession of any occupied land for any purposes (DayakBaru, 2010).

The current uproar lies not in the knowledge of the NCR land issue anymore. The natives are fully aware of the issuance of a document title for their NCR land claim to be approved. However, the biggest problem is that genuine native rights under the SLC are not guaranteed unless they are all given due registration of native rights with land titles. The question is how many cases such as the success story of Mr.Nor Anak Nyawai? How can one register and lawfully true to their claims if most of their applications were being tossed and rejected along the process?

We are not asking for more, we are just asking for what we believe we deserved...

Till the next posting.