Orang Asal (Original People) stand Defined as ‘Native’ even if not Defined in law, and there are also non-Orang Asal who may be ‘Native’ in law!
Commentary And Analysis . . . In law, the Orang Asal (original people), as demanded by 75 NGO in Memorandum, cannot be declared “Momogun”, “Native”, or under related term in the MyKad and government forms.
There are non-Orang Asal, if declared by the High Court, who may be “Native” in law. These include many in the Indian diaspora and Chinese diaspora, in Malaysia, listed as automatic citizens under Article 14 in the Federal Constitution. Many Malay speakers in Malaya also stand defined under Article 14. Those declared automatic citizen under Article 14 are descended from citizens, no matter where born. They carry no citizenship certificate.
In any case, there’s no reason for declaring the Orang Asal and/or the Orang Asli (aboriginal people) as “Native”. They stand Defined as “Native” even if not Defined in law. Also, if Native enters the Constitution, it risks challenges, especially by the non-Orang Asal who inherently stand defined as “Native”.
The Constitution, Parliament, and the court of law — colour blind institutions — cannot get into “divisive” elements like “Native”, colour, looks, “race”, “form of identity”, religion, theology, DNA and geographical origin, among others.
In law, Article 8 in Malaysia, there can be no discrimination.
Orang Asal
There’s Narrative on DNA.
DNA remains the warehouse for genes i.e. the instructional manual for making the physical body of species based on energy, intelligence and luck. All human beings — homo sapiens — have the same DNA protected on procreation with other species by genetic evolution spanning millions of years. Homo sapiens remains the only “race” among human beings. They have almost the same DNA as certain unmentionable animal and cucumber, for example. The difference may be less than one per cent.
Orang Asal, for those unfamiliar, are about ancestral and historical property rights in the form of NCR (native customary rights) land under Adat — customary practices having force of law — and under Article 13 (property rights), Article 5 (right to life) and Article 8 (no discrimination).
Adat is the 1st law in international law.
Orang Asal were the first settlers, working the land, in the emptiness and vastness of geographical expanse bounded by water, jungle and mountain. The acquistion of NCR land, heritage, was by the right of first settlement.
“Malay” in the Constitution, under Article 160 (2) as “form of identity” for pre-Merdeka Singapore and Malaya, remains aberration in law, which disallows “Native” as form of identity. Malay “form of identity” was rendered redundant in 1972 when the 15 year sunset clause, propping up Article 153, expired. The facilitating clauses for Article 153 have also been rendered redundant. These include Article 3 (Islam), Article 152 (national language), Order 92, Rule 1, Rules of the High Court 2012 (national language), NEP (New Economic Policy 1970 to 1990) and quota system.
Article 4, the pre-meeting Council and the Conference of Rulers keep alive the redundant Article 153 and related facilitating clauses, all rendered equally redundant.
“Native”
JPN (Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara or National Registration Dept), charged under the National Registration Act 1959/1963, has since dropped Lain Lain (Others). JPN uses linguistic groups as “form of identity” in the identity card i.e. MyKad. Again, “Native” was never used in the MyKad and government forms.
Momogun (i.e. People implying Orang Asal), Pasok (non-Orang Asal) and PasokMomogun (Non-Orang Asal living in the land of the Momogun i.e. Orang Asal) are not about language. The Momogun term for example, highly misleading, remains form of euphemism for tribalism and feudalism under the guise of democracy.
It’s the Church which keeps local languages and dialects alive. The Church in Malaysia also conducts mass in English and Latin, and the languages and dialects used by foreign workers in the country. Ironically, except in the deep hinterland, the Orang Asal in North Borneo habitually speak Bahasa Sabah, the local variation of Bahasa Melayu as spoken in Johor, and two islands in Indonesia viz. Rhio and Lingga.
Dusun
When I wanted PasokMomogun listed in the MyKad, not so long ago, JPN said that it wasn’t listed and cannot be listed. I was advised that Dusun, for example, would be acceptable as “form of identity” based on language. I declined. I don’t speak Dusun.
I habitually speak English. So, in taking the cue from former British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, I will be filing at JPN HQ for listing as English. There’s no English DNA, for example. British remains nationality. Indian isn’t language but nationality. I am Malaysian.
Interestingly, International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) listed me as Malayalee (people of the hills/mountains).
I informed them that it should be Malayalam (hilly/mountainous world), not Malayalee, i.e. if I habitually spoke the language. Malayalam, spoken by Malayalee (people of the hills/mountains) should be listed just as Tamil, Punjabi etc has been listed by IIUM, I argued.
Tamil, Punjabi, and others are listed as language by IIUM and not as term for the speakers. Of course, Tamil speaker can be considered Tamil, Punjabi speaker as Punjabi etc.
Another odd listing in IIUM was “Sikh but not Punjabi”.
Sikh is religion. Punjabi is language. Sikh in India, Pakistan and Afghanistan and elsewhere habitually speak Punjabi.
Punjabi “speakers” speak Hindi if they are Hindu.
Rishi Sunak speaks neither Punjabi nor Hindi. He said on St George’s Day this year that he was “proud English”. He told the media that he was proud of Hindu heritage and Indian roots.
Sunak blames society for his English form of identity. His mother, taking the cue from society, made sure that he was “accepted by society”. That means habitually speaking English.
Indian languages
In West Punjab, Pakistan, the Muslim speak Urdu which remains Hindi by form of variation.
Languages in the south also include Dravidian loan words. Brahui in Pakistan and Medes in Iran are more than half Dravidian.
Negrito in India was spoken mostly in the mountains of Kerala in southwest India. Negrito was also spoken in the mountains of Malaya. They came 40K years ago from Kerala. Negrito, the first people in India, entered the subcontinent 70K years ago. They came from east Africa by hugging the African, Arabian, Persian and Indian coasts. The Negrito are still there in the mountains of Kerala and Malaya.
Tibetan-related languages are spoken by 50m “Chinese looking” people in Ladakh and eight states in northeast India.
The people in south China came originally from Afghanistan as Dravidian speakers, and later from south India, also as Dravidian speakers. In south China, where’s there’s less direct sunlight, the number of pigment cells decreased.
Almost all the languages in India, including those in the south, originate from Sanskrit which was developed by Albino Dravidian speakers in mountain valleys in the north.
People here still have blue, grey, green eyes, blonde hair, and fewer pigment cells.
There are no genes for blue, grey and green eyes and blonde hair. Pigment cells are immune system reaction when sunlight falls on the skin. Pigment cells unleash melanin which protect the eyes, hair and skin from burning up in the sun.
Blue, grey and green eyes, and blonde hair were exposed when the brown genes disappeared. Blue, grey and green eyes are not rare in the rest of India including in the south and east where people, generally, have more pigment cells.
Buddha, it’s little known, had blue eyes, goldish hue skin, and hair worn in small curls.
Important
There are more important issues in Sabah and Sarawak than “form of identity”, not based on language, in the MyKad and government forms.
The people of Sarawak lost sovereignty in 1966.
The people of Sabah, as evident from the 2013 RCI (Royal Commission of Inquiry) Report on Projek IC Mahathir, lost sovereignty in 1990.
Although the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA’63) was inserted in the Federal Constitution recently, the High Court may still discover that it was not valid on 16 September 1963, under international law.
Already, Sabah and Sarawak have been internally colonised since 16 September 1963. Both Territories merit compensation and also the right of self-determination under international law.
Also, proxy government imposed on Sabah and Sarawak since 1994 and 1966 must be ended.
The onus, whether MA’63 was valid or otherwise, still lies on Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak.
The Federal government can still comply fully with MA’63. Sabah and Sarawak can accept full compliance.
The Malaysia Parliament, based on the Federal government’s non-compliance on MA’63, can pass the Sabah Separation Act and the Sarawak Separation Act. This can be advised by the UNSC and UNGA based on Advisory Opinion of the ICJ and ICC. — NMH
External Related Links . . .
Longtime Borneo watcher Joe Fernandez has been writing for many years on both sides of the Southeast Asia Sea. He should not be mistaken for a namesake formerly with the Daily Express in Kota Kinabalu. JF keeps a Blog under FernzTheGreat on the nature of human relationships.
Facebook Comments
Facebook Comments