KUCHING: Malaysia will host the Consortium of Institutes on Family in the Asian Region (CIFA) Regional Symposium for the first time this November, as concerns grow over rising mental health challenges across the region.

The CIFA Regional Symposium 2026 will take place from Nov 18 to 20 at the Borneo Convention Centre Kuching, bringing together more than 500 delegates from across the Asia Pacific.

The event comes amid increasing pressure on families, with rising cases of anxiety, loneliness and digital dependency among young people reported across Southeast Asia.

In Malaysia, mental health concerns have also intensified. Official data shows that suicide cases rose to more than 1,000 in recent years, reflecting a broader need for early intervention, stronger support systems and reduced stigma around mental wellbeing.

CIFA platform to drive regional action

Co-organised by the National Coalition for Mental Wellbeing (NCMW) Malaysia and CIFA Hong Kong, the symposium aims to move beyond awareness towards practical, coordinated solutions.

Held under the theme “Building Bridges: Mental Health and Resilience Across Generations in the AI Era”, discussions will focus on strengthening resilience among children, adolescents and parents in an increasingly digital environment.

Key areas include improving access to affordable mental health services, expanding community-based support, and exploring financial assistance mechanisms, insurance coverage and workplace protections.

Kuching chosen as host city

Kuching’s selection underscores Sarawak’s growing role as a hub for business events that prioritise long-term social impact alongside economic value.

Kuching South mayor Dato Wee Hong Seng said hosting the CIFA symposium reflects the city’s commitment to inclusive development and community wellbeing.

“Addressing mental health stigma and strengthening suicide prevention must remain key priorities through education, open dialogue and compassionate community responses,” he said.

Call for multi-stakeholder collaboration

CIFA Regional Symposium 2026 co-chair Siti Subaidah Mustaffa said meaningful progress will require collaboration across sectors.

“Policymakers, researchers, corporate partners and communities must work together to shape policies, invest in mental health and create environments where families are supported to build resilience,” she said.

Turning dialogue into real outcomes

Business Events Sarawak acting chief executive officer Jason Tan Chin Foo said the symposium highlights the importance of regional cooperation in addressing mental health and family-related challenges.

He noted that Sarawak offers a platform where discussions can be translated into actionable outcomes aligned with broader development priorities, including social wellbeing and human capital development.

Focus on resilience in a digital era

At the soft launch, speakers highlighted how resilience is shaped by early life experiences and parental influence, as well as the growing impact of digital platforms on emotional wellbeing.

They noted that while technology presents challenges, it also offers opportunities for support and connection, underscoring the need to bridge generational gaps in communication and coping strategies.

The CIFA Regional Symposium 2026 is part of a series of regional engagements and biennial Asian Family Summits, with additional pre-event programmes planned ahead of November. – NMH

The post CIFA to Drive Regional Action on Mental Health at Kuching Symposium first appeared on NMH.

Commentary and Analysis . . . Philippine President Diosdado Pagan Macapagal, distant cousin of Sulu Sultan, reportedly warned the Colonial Office in London in 1962 that Malaysia in British Borneo was controversial. Indonesia’s President Sukarno immediately launched “konfrontasi” (confrontation) and the “Ganyang Malaysia” (hang Malaysia) campaigns.

Macapagal stressed that the Sabah claim would not arise if British North Borneo was granted independence before it participated in Malaysia.

The Sabah claim, for those unfamiliar, covers the southern part of the Eastern Sabah Security Zone (EssZone) under the Eastern Sabah Security Command (EssCom), and by arbitrary extension — disputed by Brunei — covers areas north of the southern part.

The High Court of Borneo, sitting in Sandakan in 1939, disregarded the territorial and sovereignty claims by nine Sulu Heirs. The claims were based on the 1878 Deed between the Sulu Sultan and two merchants viz. Baron de Overbeck and Alfred Dent. The High Court recognised that the Sulu Heirs were eligible to receive RM5,300 per annum in compensation for giving up toll collection along the main waterways. Malaysia, under Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, stopped the annual payment after the 2013 Lahad Datu intrusion.

The Colonial Office in London, brushing aside Macapagal’s caution, transferred the Administration of British North Borneo and Sarawak and placed them under the central government in Malaya on 16 September 1963.

The Equal Partnership of British North Borneo (renamed Sabah), Sarawak and Malaya (Singapore merged), under the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA’63), was the proverbial fig leaf. Independence for Sabah and Sarawak, after 60 years, emerges as an idea whose time has come. More on independence later.

British Borneo

No matter how much we wish well for Malaysia and the former British North Borneo in their tussle in European Arbitration with the Sulu Heirs, it remains uphill task, probably losing battle if ex-parte Award becomes inter-parte tussle bogged down in legal minefield. Opinion, in any case, isn’t law. Only the court can declare law.

Malaysia, so far, has evaded setting aside the ex-parte US$15b Award handed down by Arbitration court in Spain. In law, the Sulu Heirs can only agree on setting aside the ex-parte ruling if there’s inter-parte Arbitration.

Therein the matter lies.

The 11 December date in Madrid court on the jurisdiction of Spanish Arbitrator Gonzalo Stampa may not pan out as reported by local media.

Arbitrators are appointed for fixed tenure which probably may not be renewed as integrity in the alternative dispute resolution method must be maintained. There isn’t any issue in conflict if Stampa announced the ruling and Award after tenure expired in June 2021. He would have concluded hearing the ex-parte application before tenure ended.

Malaysia has complained that the ruling and Award was announced in February 2022 in Paris, the separate jurisdiction, and not in Madrid where the ex-parte application was heard. Stampa’s discretion would cease if abuse of power can perferably be proven in the court of law. There may also be cause for complaint on breach of ethics. In that case, the body responsible for ethics would meet. The matter, being redundant, may be academic i.e. there’s no “live” issue.

Sulu Heirs

We learn, based on media reports, that Stampa would probably be fined and jailed on the grounds that he handed down fraudulent Award for the Sulu Heirs. We don’t know whether Intention can be proven. Malaysia’s complaint against Stampa would be heard in the Madrid Court on December 11.

Malaysia, if it does not set aside the Award, can only fall back on fire fighting techniques in fighting off attempts by the Sulu Heirs eyeing diplomatic and other assets in jurisdictions abroad. The opposition against freezing, seizing and forfeiting assets hangs by slender thread: the US$15b Award wasn’t based on ruling after inter-parte hearing.

Malaysia will not take risks in inter-parte Arbitration. So, it’s highly unlikely that Putrajaya will endorse any application for setting aside the ex-parte ruling if inter-parte hearing comes in.

If the Malaysia Parliament takes the cue from Singapore being granted independence in 1965, then Sabah and Sarawak would be set free as well. That would take the wind out of the sails on the Sulu Heirs US$15b Award in Paris. In science, we learn that there are mathematical directions on the behaviour of forces in nature and the universe. Also, chaos has been observed as the only predictable property of the universe. The moral of the story: nothing remains static.

If so, 60 years may be good time for the Malaysia Parliament on the former British Borneo. It can deliberate on independence for Sabah and Sarawak. The two Borneo territories can still remain in the Malaysian Common Market with Brunei and Singapore added as well. In fact, Singapore left Malaysia after being denied Malaysian Common Market accces. Now, times have changed.

Proxy government

Sulu Heirs, or no Sulu Heirs, there are other reasons for Sabah and Sarawak exiting Malaysia. It’s open secret that the IGP, MACC, AG and Bank Negara are sleeping with eyes open on bribery and corruption cases in Sabah and Sarawak, money laundering activities, nepotism, cronyism and collusion.

Malaysia, instead of complying on MA’63, virtually imposed proxy government on Sabah and Sarawak since 1963. The Pairin government in Sabah from 1990 to 1994 and Sarawak’s Stephen Kalong Ningkan government before 1966 were exceptions.

Immigration, the High Court and the English language are among the few powers that Sabah and Sarawak retain.

Najib was working on the devolution of greater administrative powers for Sabah and Sarawak before the ruling BN (Barisan Nasional) lost power in GE14 on Wednesday 9 May 2018.

Najib became scapegoat, victim of Trial by Media, and was dragged before the court for numerous cases, criminal and civil. The jury may no longer be out on whether he suffered selective political prosecution and selective political persecution.

The people of Sarawak, under international law, have in fact lost sovereignty. The small group in power maintains absolute control.

The First Past the Post System (FPtPS) fell on undemocratic soil in Sarawak.

In the absence of straight fights, there’s no run off and winners are declared even where they get less than 51 per cent of the votes. Then, there’s the notorious practice where candidates are returned unopposed on D-day. Nomination forms are taken for all seats and allegedly exchange hands for fees. The highest bidder collects the forms and gets declared unopposed on D-day itself. Postal votes, allegedly another scam, can be added where the government party candidate risks losing.

No Government Change

The government in Sarawak has not changed since 1966. It’s the duty of the international community, under international law, that sovereignty be restored where the people have lost it. In 2006, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was hanged after sovereignty was restored. There were also other reasons for the Iraq War launched by the “UN sanctioned” Coalition of the Willing in 2003.

Proxy government has facilitated the Federal government’s non-compliance on MA’63, allowed internal colonisation policies and created inaction in law on the Southeast Asia Sea which Beijing claims almost in its entirety. Sabah in particular has been plagued by PTI (pendatang tanpa izin or illegal immigrants) allegedly on the electoral rolls. That has compromised consent of the governed, legitimacy, democracy, sovereignty, territorial integrity and the rule of law.

Many people may not be aware that the Federal government remains the ultimate loan shark (ah long) for the sultanates and states in Malaya and the Malaysian territories in Borneo.

International law, after World War II, outlawed colonialism, nazism, facism, apartheid, the caste system which prohibits upward social mobility, political Islam, and ketuanan Melayu, among others.

Colonialism stands defined in international law as form of criminal enterprise for accumulating capital. Wealth, it has been observed, risks being transferred out from those who have no power. Those who have power are the ultimate beneficiary.

The Federal government has real power as evident from the fact that it has removed local tyrants and control freaks who go rogue and virtually thumb their noses at their Master.

There’s also case for Sabah and Sarawak having their own separate Federal government before independence comes. The Federal concept delineates power at three levels viz. Federal, state and local. The Federal government protects the people from local tyrants and control freaks at the state level.

Place In The Sun

Ironically, Malaysia risks Sabah and Sarawak emulating the Sulu Heirs and freezing, seizing and forfeiting Federal government assets in overseas jurisdiction.

Petronas, operating in Sabah and Sarawak waters, also risks its assets being frozen, seized and forfeited in overseas jurisdictions, allegedly for denying Sabah and Sarawak their place in the sun. — NMH

The post British Borneo Back As Malaysia Runs Out Of Time first appeared on NMH.

Commentary and Analysis . . . Senate President Tan Sri Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar didn’t mince his words in an interview with Twentytwo13 on the plight of former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak still awaiting Full Pardon in jail.

The former British Borneo territories suffer great loss with Najib in jail, unrepresented, since Tuesday 23 August last year. The former Prime Minister merits Full Pardon, having suffered lack of representation before jail, and plagued by legal incompetence. Local lawyers, lawyer in Singapore and two lawyers in India — all consulted by Najib — explained legal incompetence in the media.

Earlier, it was Sarawak Minister Datuk Nancy Shukri who said immediately in the days following GE14, on Wednesday 9 May 2018, that the Borneo Territories — Sabah and Sarawak — want ousted Prime Minister Najib back in Putrajaya. Also, she notoriously added that the Bumiputera will steal “if the government doesn’t help them”.

Najib, for Shukri and Wan Junaidi, was the best thing that ever happened on this side of the Southeast Asia Sea — mistakenly called South China Sea — where China has aggressive designs on Sabah and Sarawak waters as the Federal government looks the other way.

Nancy, like other leaders and common folk in Sabah and Sarawak, caution against Borneons being victims of the bitter power struggle splitting Malaya down the middle between Malay/Islamic and Chinese-led groups. The latter, in act of treason, refuse to condemn China on its encroachment in Sabah’s Spratly Islands and Sarawak’s Beting Patinggi Ali Atoll off Miri.

The Orang Asal (Original People) see nothing in common with the Chinese locked in “do or die” political struggle, under multicultural euphemism, with the “Islamic” bogeyman and Malay, whether in or out of government.

Full Pardon Ends Weaponisation

They remember it was Lee Kuan Yew who betrayed them on 10 August 1965 when Singapore left Malaysia. It was Lee who persuaded Donald Stephens that Malaysia would be good for them. Stephens perished in the fiery aircrash on 6 June 1976 after open warfare with the Federal government on oil and gas reserves in Borneo.

Patently, the Borneo Territories, having suffered non-compliance on the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA’63) and Borneo rights, and lost oil and gas rights, want the weaponisation of the judiciary ended and the rule of law, the basis of the Constitution, restored.

It’s also about regaining oil and gas rights, among others.

The jury may no longer be out on whether the court in Malaysia was swearing by the letter of the law by itself, as law, and ruling with impunity on Najib, amidst concerns about the weaponisation of the judiciary.

If the nature of human relationships need regulation, it can be done by the rule of law or other approaches. Other approaches, except for out of court settlements and prerogative and discretionary powers, may be unsustainable. The war in Ukraine refers.

Chief Justice Tun Richard Malanjum’s Farewell Address, schooling the court and lawyers on the rule of law, refers. There could be no greater proof that the rule of law was being observed in the breach in Malaysia when Najib was jailed.

Borneons Unhappy

Already, Borneons are unhappy that the court in Sabah and Sarawak has been given the short end of the stick by the Judicial Ethics Committee (JEC) and the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) in Putrajaya when they have their own Attorney General (AG) in Kota Kinabalu and Kuching.

The social media in Borneo feel that it was the weaponisation of the judiciary by dictatorial Prime Minister Tun Mahathir Mohamad which saw Najib jailed, unrepresented, on Tuesday 23 August last year. At the same time, they see the US President granting Pardon, every Tom, Dick and Harry getting them, during the last days in office.

The Pardon covers even those who did no wrong.

Sabahans and Sarawakians can’t believe that Najib, as former Prime Minister would actually “rot in jail” for 12 years, creating dangerous precedent in the process. If so, they agree with the Johor Sultan that Najib should either not be in jail alone or should be released. The Sultan hinted at big names — read Mahathir — who should be in the cell next to Najib.

Consensus On Full Pardon

Therein also lies the consensus in the social media on Full Pardon for former Prime Minister Najib. It was Najib who recognised Malaysia Day — 16 September 1963 — as public holiday in 2010, initiated the RM30b Pan Borneo Highway before GE14, and began the process of reversing, by devolution, the British transfer of Borneo’s Administration to the central government in Malaya.

Sabah and Sarawak, the political grapevine whispers, also support Umno’s Memorandum on Najib’s Petition for Full Pardon. The Memorandum, some insider sources confide, will be placed before the Conference of Rulers. The Memorandum isn’t the Petition for Full Pardon. It will have persuasive authority, in mitigation, on Najib’s sterling record of public service on both sides of the Southeast Asia Sea.

The Memorandum will also persuade the Agong and brother Sultan that the weaponisation of the judiciary — read Mahathir — continues and was behind Najib’s plight in several court cases. Obstruction of justice remains a heinous crime in Commonwealth jurisdisction. There would be blood bath if heads roll.

Najib, or no Najib, the Conference of Rulers cannot look the other way on the weaponisation of the judiciary phenomenon allegedly created by Mahathir. The facts, the issues arising, and the law/s applicable on the phenomenon are in the public domain. It merits the Father and Mother of all Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) on weaponisation of the judiciary. It includes returning Borneo rights.

Full Pardon Based On Petition

If Najib’s Petition for Full Pardon was filed properly, it would not be under the Pardons’ Board. The Petition could have been decided by the Agong long before Friday 31 March when the Federal Court Review Panel ended with the Ruling on DNA (discharge and acquittal) by Federal Court Review Panel Head Judge Datuk Abdul Rahman Sebli. Najib did not reinstate the Judicial Review in the High Court for Order on the DNA.

Full Pardon probably cannot be based on the Federal Court Review although Judge Sebli had opinion. It’s unthinkable that the court of law influences the discretion of the Agong on Ful Pardon. It’s pertinent that the other four judges, led by Judge Datuk Vernon Ong on the Federal Court Review Panel, could not find jurisdiction.

Lawyer Shafee Abdullah allegedly argued the Review, despite being cautioned by Judge Ong on 27 February this year, as Appeal for another bite at the cherry. Lawyer Shafee can perhaps file Originating Summons (OS), based on certificate of urgency, for declaration on a point of law on the Judge Sebli ruling. There’s always a first time.

It’s better that the court of law sort out Judge Sebli’s Ruling and not belabour in the delusion that the Agong will rectify their mistakes. The court as in India for example should have kept the widespread ramifications in mind when Ruling, or not Ruling, on the Najib case. Malaysia does not belong to Mahathir and Family for political Dynasty.

Basic Features Doctrine

There should be no breach of the Basic Features Doctrine (BFD) which, written or implied, permeates the Federal Constitution on “acts in office”. Najib stands indemnified, has immunity, and implicit Pardon for “acts in office”. The Federal Court, sitting as the Constitutional Court, should rule on the matter which has been left hanging since Merdeka (independance) on 31 August 1957 and Malaysia Day on 16 September 1963.

The BFD should be read together with the Federal Court ruling recently that Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Tommy Thomas breached Article 145 and committed abuse of power on the Asian Arbitration case. Najib was twice denied this approach and may make another attempt.

Based on what the Pardons’ Board said on Friday 28 April in a media statement, they would look at the Petition for Full Pardon. There are procedures on this. In law, under Article 8, there can be no discrimination, save as provided by law. In that case, i.e. discrimination allowed by law, there must be sunset clause.

It can be argued that the Petition, based on specific criteria, comes under the Agong’s sole discretion. Najib’s Petition for Full Pardon can’t go through the Pardons’ Board if conviction hasn’t been perfected in law for perfection in law. The Petition was probably not filed properly. In that case, we will only have an inkling when the Petition was re-filed. The Agong can even decide on the Petition within a week as with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.

End Controversy

Alternatively, the Agong can disregard parts of the Petition, and grant Full Pardon before he steps down on Monday 30 January next year. The controversy, if any on Full Pardon, would fizzle out when the Johor Sultan becomes Agong. Hopefully, there would be tsunami in the Southeast Asia Sea and the media would stop reporting on Full Pardon for Najib.

Filing the Petition properly means not including matters which should not be included. Agong must be persuaded that there was miscarriage of justice arising from Tainted Ruling based on mistrial. He would not accept complaints against specific judges although they may have been found wanting in more ways than one. He can’t be seen as condoning “collateral attack” on the RM42m SRC International conviction no matter the merits.

Weaponisation of the judiciary, a phenomenon allegedly created by Mahathir, can be included in the Petition as Affidavit in Support (weaponisation).

Full Pardon cannot be hyped by the media, an unthinking animal which can be manipulated, as sending the wrong message. The Pardons’ Board exists. Agong has discretion. The court has nothing to do with Pardon, Full or otherwise. Again, Full Pardon isn’t an attack on the judiciary or the “conviction” on the RM42m SRC International case.

Subject matter experts caution that if an issue in the media doesn’t end in two weeks, it will become controversial. The controversy will not end unless there’s closure. The last word must come in as all thoughts flow and the Debate goes back and forth. There must be finality in litigation as well.

The UN Review will come in before Christmas this year. It can only find, based purely on the rule of law, that the SRC case was incomplete before “conviction”. — NMH

The post Najib Gets Full Pardon Support From Sarawak Leaders first appeared on NMH.

The former Sarawak MP, Tan Sri Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar, said that many Sarawakians still appreciate the former prime minister, Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and then Barisan Nasional (BN) chairman, who is serving a 12-year jail sentence for corruption linked to the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) scandal.

In a recent exclusive interview with Twentytwo13, Wan Junaidi said, “Until (Tan Sri) Abang Johari (Openg) became chief minister (now known as ‘Premier’), the state had been largely ignored. No one cared about Sarawak, until Najib became prime minister.

“Najib not only came with the money, but he also came personally. If I am not mistaken, (former prime minister Tun) Dr Mahathir (Mohamad) in his 22 years as PM, only visited Sarawak about five or six times. Najib, during his nine years (as prime minister), visited Sarawak 61 times.

“We know Najib had a soft spot for Sarawakians … whether it was genuine or political,” said the Dewan Negara president.

On Tuesday, Najib, 70, was sent to hospital from prison and subsequently tested positive for Covid-19.

BN’s downfall started at the 2008 general election. Following the coalition’s poor performance, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi stepped down as prime minister, and Najib took over in 2009. Najib too, was forced to quit after BN were handed a humiliating defeat at the 2018 General Election. The coalition was booted out of the federal government for the first time after being in power for six decades.

Najib Came Personally

“Maybe Najib was motivated by the fact that Umno was losing support, so he needed our (Gabungan Parti Sarawak) support as we were solid in Sarawak. But that’s immaterial. He still came, not just with what Sarawakians call ‘air liur basi’ (mere words)… but he came with tangible improvements, for example, the UTCs (Urban Transformation Centres). Sarawakians are very happy with the UTC, till today.”

Urban Transformation Centres were Najib’s brainchild. The idea was to house different government agencies under one roof to ease the service delivery process and to cut red tape and bureaucracy. Strategically located nationwide, UTCs offer various services, such as the application of identification cards, passports, road tax, and licence renewals.

Najib had also set aside funds for the Pan Borneo Highway, and his efforts were acknowledged by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri’ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah, during his Kembara Kenali Borneo tour in September.

“Every trip that he (Najib) made to Sarawak, he gave (something) … even if it was a small thing. Sarawakians are very appreciative of Najib until today because he was real, as far as we are concerned. Not like Dr Mahathir (when he was prime minister), and even Ahmad Badawi, who, during his short term, only came for functions and didn’t offer anything solid.”

Wan Junaidi admitted that the lack of attention to the state since it became a part of Malaysia in 1963, had caused a little bit of resentment.

“Sarawakians felt they were being marginalised.

Najib Created MA’63 Committee

“But over the years, Sarawak became a bit more vocal. Najib also encouraged this as well, because he was the one who created the committee to look into MA’63 (Malaysia Agreement 1963) in 2016. It was co-chaired by (Datuk Seri) Nancy (Shukri) and (Datuk Seri) Anifah Aman. The committee was formed in 2016, but in 2018, when Pakatan Harapan (PH) came into power, (then) prime minister (Dr Mahathir) took over as chair. Later, (during Datuk Seri) Ismail Sabri’s (Yaakob) time, it was chaired by someone else,” he said.

Nancy was the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, while Anifah was the foreign minister when they co-chaired the committee in 2016.

MA63 had set several terms under which Sabah, Sarawak, and Singapore would come together with Malaya to form the Federation of Malaysia. Singapore, however, left the federation in 1965. The autonomy granted to Sabah and Sarawak under MA63 has since been diluted, much to the displeasure of Sabahans and Sarawakians.

Wan Junaidi highlighted that Nancy and Anifah had solved several administrative issues, which Najib agreed with, in 2016 and 2017. He added that the abolition of the draconian Internal Security Act during Najib’s time in office had somehow contributed to Sarawakians being more ‘vocal’.

More Open

“Even the government became more open, and accepted people with different opinions, voices, and ideas. This made it (the discussions) more open to the public. But some in Peninsular Malaysia thought we (Sarawakians) were becoming more ‘demanding’. We were not. We were merely asking for our rights, accorded in MA63, to be honoured. MA63 was shrouded in ‘mystery’ for the longest time and the federal government made use of that mystery, the shadow, the silence, by not honouring it, and eroding what had already been agreed to.

“We have become more knowledgeable, and we know our rights. We cannot be blamed for talking about it today, asking for it (our rights) to be given to us. West Malaysians must also understand that it has been our right since 1963. We are only asking for our rights because the government has not voluntarily given them to us.”

PH’s reign following GE 2018 ended after 22 months. Political infighting saw several changes in leadership, culminating in the general election held on Nov 19 last year. Following a hung Parliament, PH joined forces with BN and several other political parties to form a so-called ‘unity government’. Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof was made deputy prime minister –cementing his name in the history books as the first Sarawakian to hold the post.

When asked if he was happy with the progress in Sarawak today, Wan Junaidi replied: “Yes, I’m quite happy … since Najib’s time, I’ve been happy. I can’t blame Pakatan Harapan as they are all new.” – NMH

Editor’s Note: Article was first published by Twenty-Two 13 and reproduced here with slight amendments.

Also Read:-
Malaysia One Country, Three Immigration Systems, 60 Years Later

Three Attorney General In Malaysia Have ‘Equal Status’

M’sia Day ’22 No Mention Of Najib’s Compliance On MA’63

The post Wan Junaidi: No One Cared About Sarawak Until Najib Became PM first appeared on NMH.