Report on the Situation of the Forest People of Malaysia/Sarawak
1/1/99
*******************************
RELAYED TEXT STARTS HERE:
Title: Report on the Situation of the Forest People of
Malaysia/Sarawak
Source: Netherlands Centre for Indigenous Peoples
P.O. Box 94098
1090 GB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel (31)(20) 6938625 Fax (31)(20) 6652818
e-mail: nciv@antenna.nl
Status: Contact source for reprint permissions
Date: 1/1/99
Byline: Eddie Roos
Introduction
In October 1995 a discussion took place between the Malaysian Timber
Council and the Heart for the rainforests groups in the Netherlands at
the Malaysian Embassy in The Hague. During this discussion the
importance of recognistion of Native Customary Rights of Indigenous
Peoples in the process of attaining sustainability of forest manage
ment was stressed. The booklet, "Indigenous Peoples of Malaysia", was
offered to the Ambassador and the Malaysian Timber Council delegation.
After this meeting a letter was sent to the Dutch Ministry of Economic
Affairs in which the Indigenous issue was asked to be put on the
agenda of the negotiations between Malaysia and the Netherlands on
sustainable forest management. In 1993 the same request was made.
In 1991, the Dutch governement accepted a policy on tropical forests.
Once accepted, the Dutch government was asked to start a dialogue with
the main countries from which the Netherlands imported tropical
timber. In Octobre 1992 the Joint Working Group Malaysia - the
Netherlands started with the aim to have a dialogue on the subject of
tropical forest management. Since then three meetings of the Joint
Working Group have taken place.
During the second meeting of the Joint Working Group (JWG) it was
decided to form an Ad-hoc Expert Group. In December 1994 this expert
group made recommendations to the Joint Working Group. Some of the
recommendations were: - ITTO (International Tropical Timber
Organisation) criteria and indicators for sustainable tropical forest
management provide a useful framework for the Malaysian forests; - It
is necessary that a Forest Management Unit is setup; - The relation
between people living in and around the forest and the sustainable
mana gement of these forests might for the JWG be a subject of
elaboration;
In January 1996 the second meeting took place of the Ad-hoc Expert
Group. They discussed implementation of the criteria, indicators and
activities for sustainable forest management at the operational level
in Malaysia. Among other things during this mee ting they also made a
field visit to the Ministry of Forestry in Sarawak. Statements of the
Department of Forestry of Sarawak were included in the report of the
Expert Group. The third meeting of JWG in April 1996 decided that the
proposed elabolation on the relationship between people living in and
around the forest and sustainable forest mana gement will be based on
the statements made by the Deparment of Forestry of Sarawak to the
Expert Group. The Netherlands will consult with relevant parties on
the basis of this information. And the outcome of these deliberations
will be reported by the Nether lands in the next JWG meeting. The
present report was made for this consultation.
After the meeting in April 1996 of the JWG the Malaysian Timber
Council instructed SGS-Malaysia to execute an independent test study
on forest management of PFE's (Permanent Forest Estates) in three
states of West-Malaysia (Selangor,Teranganu and Pahang). Also the
Chain of Custody of forest products was tested and controled of 4
enterprises in these states (CHG Industries Berhad, Berjaya Finewood
(Malaysia)Sn Bhd, Asrama Raya Sdn Bhd and Pesama Timber Corporation
Sdn Bhd). This test was done on basis of the Malaysian Criteria and
Indicators and Activities (MCIA), which are based on ITTO guidelines
for sustainable forest management. In 1997 a test load of forest
products (with a declaration of SGS Malaysia) from these States
(600 cubic metres) has been sent to the Netherlands. The Heart for the
rainforest groups welcomed this step, but were critical when was tried
to sell the testload as "certified timber".
The report "People in and around the forest" consists of two parts.
Part I deals with statements of the Department of Forestry of Sarawak
and an indigenous reponse on these statements from Sarawak. Part II
deals with the protests and arrests (and background of it) of "people
living in and around the forests" , defending their Native Customary
Rights. Arrests took place in the period between Octobre 1996 and
December 1997 on 8 different locations. Recently (December 1997) one
Iban was killed when police opened fire on unarmed indigenous people
protesting the takeover of their lands by oil palm plantations.
A correspondence with the Dutch government (Economic Affairs) on
Sarawak started in 1990, when the ITTO sent a mission to Sarawak to
investigate the logging situation. Before the report of this mission
was discussed, the Dutch government was asked to act on behalf of the
urgent situation of the forests and the indigenous peoples of Sarawak.
In a correspondence between 1990 and 1996 about the situation in
Sarawak with the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Ministry could not
answer questions why the recommendations of the ITTO report were not
implemented.
Since 1987, protests against large-scale logging and implementation of
oilpalm planta tions has been widespread in Sarawak. The reason of the
protest is, that large scale logging and oilpalm plantations threaten
the very base of existence of forest peoples. This report shows that
Native Customary Rights of forest peoples in Sarawak continue to be
ignored. It is important to stress that unless the rights of the
people in and around the forests are respected, sustainable forest
management can not be reached.
Eddie Roos
Amsterdam, December 1997
I EXPERT GROUP ON SARAWAK AND INDIGENOUS RESPONSE
From 16-25 January 1996 the second meeting of the Malaysia-The
Netherlands ad-hoc expert group on sustainable forest management took
place. From the report of this meeting:"The deliberations of the
Expert Group were centered on the implementation of the criteria,
indicators and activities for sustainable forest management at the
operational level in Malaysia as agreed during the first meeting; the
attainment of sustainable forest mangement in the State of Sarawak
since the ITTO mission (1990), with special emphasis on the management
of the peat swamp forest and in particular the species Gonystylus
bancanus (ramin), as well as the rehabilitation of BRIS (sandy)soil in
the State of Kelantan and Terenganu." Field visits were made to
Sarawak and Kelantan and Terenganu. During the field visit to
Sarawak the Forest Department was visited. The Forest Department made
statements about the situation in Sarawak which were recorded in the
report of the expert group as (3.1.1 - 3.1.13). What follows are the
statements of the expert group/forest department on Sarawak and an
indigenous reaction to these statements from Sarawak.
STATE OF SARAWAK
3.1.1 The Director of Forestry, Sarawak, explained that the
implementation of ITTO's criteria and indicators at the field level is
hindered by the lack of manpower. In this regard, Sarawak plans to
train forest workers in the private and public sectors through a
certificate course on issues related to sustainalble forest
management, for instance, to reduce logging damage and environmental
impact of logging. It is expected that the understaffing of the
Forestry Department will be resolved through the forthcoming
corporatization. In this respect, the Sarawak Forestry Corporation
Bill was passed in November, 1995 by the Sarawak State Legislative
Assembly to corporatize the State Forestry Department. This would
enable the Sarawak Forestry Department to have more flexibility in
staff recruitment and thus overcoming the shortaqe of manpower at the
operational level.
3.1.2 The Director also emphasized the urgent need for rehabilitation
and reforestation of logged-over areas and areas that are affected by
shifting cultivation. This is an area where technical assistance from
the Netherlands was solicited. This technical assistance could be in
the form of practical research in developing a model for
rehabilitation and reforestation.
3.1.3 The Netherlands complimented the Sarawak Government for setting
aside approximately 200.000 ha of mixed dipterocarp forest to form a
Transboundary Biodiversity Conservation Area together with
approximately 800.000 ha of the same forest type on the Indonesian
side. This protected area was set-up and will be managed with
assistance from ITTO. The Expert Group discussed in general terms the
possibility of the Netherlands providing financial support through
ITTO towards the management of this unique 1.000.000 ha of the
Transboundary Biodiversity Conservation Area.
3.1.4 The total percentage of mixed dipterocarp forest that has been
logged for the first time was estimatied to be 45%, while for the peat
swamp forest was estimated to be almost 100%. The harvesting cycles
adopted for the mixed dipterocarp and peat swamp forest are 25 years
and 45 years respectively.
3.1.5 The need to set aside a complete and intact peat swamp forest
ecossystem should encompass all the phasic communities of the peat
swamp forest.
3.1.6 A large amount of data has been collected by the Forestry
Department of Sarawak. The data include details on distribution and
relative abundance of peat swamp species. The data need to be analysed
to further enhance the susrtainable management of the peat swamp
forests.
3.1.7 It is proposed that a collaborative research project involving
the Forestry Department of Sarawak and Netherlands scientists be
initiatied to identify and delineate an area of virgin peat swamp
forest for the purpose of conservation and long-term ecological
observation. In the selection of partners on the Netherlands side,
attention should be given to the use of high technology for ecosystem
and species identification, including remote sensing and satelite
imagery.
3.1.8 It is observed that there is still a significant percentage of
ramin trees in the logged-over stand of the peat swamp forest.
Nevertheless, there are variations in the occurrence of ramin in
different localities in the State of Sarawak. A preliminary
observation of the data available in the Silviculture Research Office
of the Forestry Department of Sarawak indicates that there is a
greater percentage of ramin trees in the upper diameter classes than
in the lower classes. Generally, ramin seedlings are also observed
to be present in substantial quality in the logged-over stands.
However, they do not appear to be able to compete with other faster
growing species in the residual stand. The reason for this is not
fully understood.
3.1.9 Therefore, there is a need to reactivate studies to investigate
the ecology and physiology of ramin, to understand why ramin seedlings
could not maintain dominance in the logged-over forest stand and to
determine how the forest stand can be silviculturally manipulated to
induce greater ramin dominance. Technical assistance would be sought
from the Netherlands for such an ecological research project.
3.1.10 Insight was given into the system of land classification and
division as provided for in the Land Code of Sarawak (Cap.81). More
specifically, Native Customary Rights (NCR) and Native Communal
Reserves were discussed in general with the Court cases as published
by the Lands and Survey Department of Sarawak. No new NCR were
recognised after 1958 under the provisions of the Land Code. All NCR
would have been extinguished prior to the legal constitution of the
PFE (Permanent Forest Estates). In this context, the issue of NCR on
the PFE should not arise as this issue would have been resolved prior
to its gazettment. However, occasionally the issue of NCR is still
being disputed on land that had been previously cultivated by the
indigenous people.
3.1.11 Under the provision of Section 65 of the Forests Ordinance of
Sarawak (Cap. 126), any inhabitant in the State of Sarawak may,
without licence or permit, cut and remove from Stateland forest which
is not a forest reserve any timber or other forest produce required by
him exclusively for his own domestic use and not for sale, barter or
profit.
3.1.12 Furthermore, if the indigenous people already possess the
rights to enter a forest reserve, a protected forest, national park or
wildlife sanctuary, and cut and remove timber and other forest produce
or for other purposes prior to its legal constitution, such rights
would still be recognised and specifically stated in the gazette
notification for the forest reserve, protected forest, national park
or wildlife sanctuary.
3.1.13 In addition, Stateland forest areas are frequently constituted
as communal forest for the sole use of the community. Any member of
the community may, after the constitution of the communal forest,
remove free or royalty or fee, any forest produce for his own use and
not for sale, exchange or direct profit.
INDIGENOUS RESPONSE FROM SARAWAK
The following comment was made on the statements by the Malaysia-The
Netherlands ad-hoc expert group on sustainable forest management
regarding Sarawak (3.1.1. - 3.1.13)
1. Lack of Manpower for implementation of ITTO's Criteria and
Indicators
These comments made by the Director of Forestry, Sarawak are true. But
it also shows the continual lack of political will and serious
committment of the government of Sarawak to achieve such an important
and urgent need. This problem had been highlighted by them for so many
years already and therefore there is no excuse for them not to have
resolved it by now.
The Sarawak Forestry Corporation Bill had been passed and
corporatisation of the Forestry Department had been undertaken. This
alone will not solve the problem unless there is a serious political
will and commitment on the part of the government both at policy
making and departmental levels to ensure that policies made and the
rules and regulations on sustainable forest management are really
implemented on the ground.
All this while, the Sarawak government assumed that its policies and
the rules and regulations on forestry and loggings in the State have
been enforced by the Forest Department and/or complied with by the
logging companies. But this is not true when one really goes down to
the actual logging sites where the situation is such that the
companies are just left to do anything they like. As the areas being
logged is very extensive i.e. practically overall the remaining
forest areas throughout Sarawak, the lack of manpower as acknowledged
by the Director of Forestry himself had resulted in the lack of
supervision of the logging activities and /or the effective
enforcement of the forestry rules and regulations on the ground.
The question is: Why should the Sarawak government issue and continue
to issue licences for logging throughout the State when all along they
know themselves they lacked the necessary manpower to supervise and
enforce the rules and regulations on logging activities? This is also
the question SAM (Sahabat Alam Malaysia) had been asking the Sarawak
government since ten years. We have also proposed to them to slow down
or reduce loggings to an extent where the government can provide the
necessary manpower to supervise and control loggings and enforce
the laws effectively. But they refused to do so. Now they admitted the
problem and yet are still not taking serious steps to overcome it.
2. Urgent need for rehabilitation and reforestation of logged-over
areas and areas affected by shifting cultivation.
The Director is right. There is an urgent need for this. But again,
although they are fully aware about this need there is no serious
efforts being done on the ground. And while Sarawak is already having
problems to rehabilitate and reforest its logged over forests, it
still continues to issue logging licences for more loggings in new
areas and it still allows logging to be continued in already logged
areas when these areas should be urgently rehabilitated or reforested.
This is the reason why SAM says Sarawak logging policies and practices
do not allow the forest any opportunity to regenerate at all.
On the areas affected by shifting cultivation, this is only very
minimal compared to areas affected by loggings. There are also many
scientific studies that already proved shifting cultivation as
practised by the Sarawak natives is in fact a model for sustainable
forest management practices. And also, the Sarawak natives have been
practising their system for generations but Sarawak never had any
problem with its forest and environment until there was logging all
over the State.
The Director's proposal for technical assistance from the Netherlands
in the form of practical research to develop a model for
rehabilitation and reforestation is therefore not realistic and
unnecesssary. The Sarawak government should seriously stop issuing new
logging licences over new areas and also stop renewing existing
licences over presently logged areas as well as reduce drastically the
areas allowed for logging immediately.
3. Logging within peat swamp forests
Logging within these forests should be immediately stopped otherwise
these forests will never recover. At present, although these forests
have been 100% logged as admitted by the Sarawak government, they are
still being logged. It therefore does not make any sense for the
government to recognise and stress on its importance but at the same
time allow it to be logged over and over again. The Forest Department,
Sarawak itself also admitted there is still lack of sufficient
research and knowledge of peat swamp forests and its ramin timbers.
This clearly justifies the proposal by SAM to immediately stop logging
within these areas which will destroy these forests before we even
have sufficient knowledge or understanding about them.
For any research programmes on these forests to be meaningful they
should not be logged pending the completion of the research since
there will be no need for such research when these forests are
destroyed.
4. Native Customary Land and Native Customary Rights
Native Customary Rights (NCR) of the natives of Sarawak over their
native customary land (NCL) are recognised and protected by the
Sarawak Land Code cap.81 and also the land laws enacted before it i.e.
all the land laws existing during the time of the Brooke's and British
Administrations in Sarawak.
The extent of the NCL of each longhouse community is defined by
boundaries mutually agreed between that particular longhouse community
and all the other longhouse communities surrounding it. These land
boundaries are also recognised by the law and they are officially
recorded in the government Land Boundary Register kept at the District
Offices following a legislative decision through the Secretariat
Circular No. 12 of 1939 which requires all landboundaries to be
recorded.
But although NCR to land and the land boundaries defining the extent
of NCL are recognised and protected by the law, the Sarawak government
had issued licences for logging over NCL on which the natives have
acquired NCR i.e. these logging licences also covered or included land
within the land boundaries of the longhouse communities.
To the logging companies, their licences allows them to log within the
licenced areas. So when they start to log, the natives protest against
them. But when both complain to the government, the government sides
with the companies. And the companies will proceed to log, the natives
will suffer damages to their land, crops, burial grounds, destruction
of their forests and its resources as well as pollution or their
rivers and water supplies. When the natives protest, they are arrested
by the Forest Department and the Police. But when the case goes to the
Court the natives were acquitted or the Forest Department and the
Police withdraw the charge against them.
In one case, the natives sued the Police for wrongful arrest and false
imprisonment (Wan Jok & others V Malaysian Government) and the Court
had ruled the natives were right to put up a blockade on the logging
road of a company that goes over their NCL and it was wrong for the
police to arrest and detain them. The Court also ordered the police to
pay compensation to the natives. There are also cases whereby the
logging companies have applied to the Court to stop the natives from
blockading their logging roads. But in all these cases they have
simply withdrawn them apparently after they realised the natives have
very strong claims of NCR over their NCL. e.g. Limbang Trading Limbang
Sdn. Bhd. which sued the Penans and Kelabiths of Ulu Limbang in 1987
for putting blockades on its logging road. And also the case of
Samling Timber Sdn.Bhd. who sued the Kenyah of Long Geng, Belaga in
1991.
These scenarios and cases clearly proved the natives have NCR over
their NCL and it was illegal for the government to issue logging
licenses over their said land and therefore it was also illegal for
the companies to log thereon.
As a compromise, SAM had proposed to the government to suspend logging
within the disputed areas pending investigation to be carried out and
completed on the claims of the natives. But this was ignored by the
Sarawak government and so the disputes and protests had continued
unresolved.
Rather than seriously taking steps to investigate and resolve these
problems, the Sarawak government chose to arrest the natives for
protesting against the logging within their NCL. It also alleged that
the natives are simply being instignated by outsiders or that they are
anti-government or anti-development.
5. Constitution of Permanent Forest Estates (PFE) and Extinguishment
of Native Customary Rights
The Sarawak Forest Ordinance cap.126 requires that before any PFE is
established, notice must be given to the local communities in or
around the area to be constituted as PFE. This is to enable them to
submit their claims of NCR over the area concerned which will then be
investigated by the authorities after which their NCR are to be
extinguished and compensation paid to them for loss of their NCR.
In most cases where these PFE were already constituted particularly
during the period of the Brookes' and British Administrations, we have
found that these were constituted without compliance with the
prescribed procedures. In all cases we have investigated, the PFE
were established over the NCL of the natives. The constitution of
these PFE are therefore illegal for breaching the procedures required
by the law.
It is therefore also illegal and wrong for the present Sarawak
government to assume that all NCR of the natives over their NCL on
which these PFE were established are deemed to have been extinguished
in the process. The onus is on the government to prove that the
mandatory procedures as prescribed by the law have been complied with
when these PFE were established over NCL on which the natives have
prior and existing NCR. These are serious legal issues concerning
rights of the natives to land/property and it is morally and legally
improper for the government to simply dismiss these issues outright
and just presume they have been resolved prior to the gazetting
of the PFE. That is totally irresponsible!
6. Rights to take forest produce within PFE
The rights under section 65 of the Forests Ordinance cap.126 are only
very restricted rights subjected to the absolute discretion of the
Direcor of Forests. They are therefore not rights of exclusive
ownership over the land as previously enjoyed by the natives. No
property/land owner would ever accept such a lesser right over his
property/land in exchange for a real and exclusive right thereon!
This claim by the Sarawak government is therefore only an insult to
the natives who are deprived of their NCL as a result of establishment
of the PFE over their said land.
If the Sarawak government is a responsible, accountable and
transparent government, it should immediately take serious steps to
investigate the complaints of the natives who alleged that they have
been illegally deprived of their NCL as a result of the establishment
of the PFE over their said land. If the claims of the natives are
found true then it should revoke the PFE and restore the land back to
the natives instead of taking advantage of the situation/confusion by
giving out licenses to log such areas.
7. Communal Forests Reserves
Sections 40 to 48 of the Sarawak Forest Ordinance cap.126 do provide a
procedure for a native community to apply for a communal forest
reserve for the use of their community. But in the last fifteen years,
no applications for such a reserve has been approved by the government
of Sarawak. Instead, existing areas of such reserves have been revoked
and reduced drastically by the government.
For example, in 1968, there were 303 sq. KM of communal forest
reserves areas in the State. But through degazettement or
excision/revocation by the government, these had been reduced to only
56 sq. KM in 1984 The Sarawak government is therefore misrepresenting
the truth because it is not true at all that stateland forests are
frequently constituted as communal forest reserves for the use of the
natives.
8. Additional questions that the Malaysian/Sarawak governments should
reply to:
a) Forfeiture of passports of Sarawak natives If the Malaysian/Sarawak
governments are democratic, liberal, accountable or transparent as
they claim concerning the management of the Sarawak forests and in
their treatment of the Sarawak natives concerning the problems related
to logging in the State, why is the government even resorting to
confiscating the passports of the natives who come out of Malaysia
merely to give their views on loggings and forest management issues in
Sarawak? E.g. cases of Thomas Jalong and Jok Jau Evong of SAM whose
passports were forfeited when they wanted to attend the meeting of
the International Alliance of the Indigenous Peoples of the Tropical
Rainforests in Japan and Peru in 1992 and 1993. Recently (March 1997)
Raymond Abin was stopped for going to a meeting of the International
Alliance in Nagpur (India).
b) Use of the Internal Security Act and Emergengy and Public Order
Ordinance against natives Why did the government arrest and detain
Sarawak natives under such laws when they only tried to assist their
own people to protect their rights to their NCL against illegal
loggings thereon. There is no Court Order which said the companies can
log over the NCL of the natives and if the natives are indeed guilty
of any offences why are they not charged in Court but instead
detained without trial? E.g. of cases: Harrison Ngau detained under
the ISA in 1987 and Anderson Mutang detained under the Emergency and
Public Order Ordinance.
c) Deportation from/Ban from entry into Sarawak Why is the Sarawak
government refusing entry and deporting persons from Peninsula
Malaysia who work with legitimate organisations wanting to find out
more about the actual situation on loggings and forest management
issues in the State? On the other hand the Sarawak government said
people from outside who criticised Sarawak for its forest management
policies and practices are ignorant of the truth. How are the people
from outside able to know the truth when the Sarawak government tried
its best to stop people from knowing the truth by deporting and
banning their legitimate entry into the State? E.g. of cases:
Thayalan Muniandy, Secretary general and Legal Advisor of SAM whose
wife is from Sarawak itself, Chee Yoke Ling former Sercretary General
of SAM, Meena Rahman who is Legal Advisor of Consumers Association of
Penang, Aster Soong SAM staff from Sabah.
d) Police raids on SAM office Why did the police raid SAM office in
Marudi three times and the SAM Penang office once?
e) No transparency in the issue of timber licences in Sarawak Why is
the issue of timber licences not made by tender or made by a
collective cabinet decision in Sarawak just like other States in
Malaysia so as to make it transparent?
f) Penan Biosphere Reserves Why are these reserves not gazetted until
today and instead are being logged despite the government announcement
to the world at large since 1987?
g) Conversion of forest land into oil plantations Why are forest land
including the Permanent Forest Estates being clearcut and converted
into oil palm plantations resulting in the irreparabled loss of
forests and its entire biodiversity?
h) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study on logging Why are EIA
Reports on logging not done in Sarawak as required by the
Environmental Quality Act 1974 and the Sarawak Natural Resources and
Environment Ordinance 1994 (SNREO)? Why does the Sarawak law i.e.
SNREO requires EIA to be done on logging activities over already
logged areas only and not in respect of logging activities in
virgin/primary forest areas?
9. Additional Notes
a) Helicopter Loggings
The Sarawak government claimed these logging methods are now used in
the State and this had resulted in very significant reduction of
adverse environmental impacts from loggings. This method is used only
in very limited areas and is also mainly resorted to by the loggers to
extract timbers in areas which otherwise would be impossible to
extract the timbers by the conventional method. It is therefore not of
that much improvement to the problems caused by loggings in the State
as claimed or exagerated by the government. In most areas where they
have started, they have stopped this logging method because it was
found too costly to operate and maintain.
b) Field visits conducted by the participants of the Meeting to
Sarawak. The field visits were entirely a government arranged one
which only gives the government and logging companies side of the
story and was also conducted to selected sites only. For a balanced
and an objective judgement to be made, participants should also visit
other areas and meet the natives in their longhouses or the Penan at
their settlements. Meeting the various NGOs would also provide a
broader and balanced perspective on the whole situation.
c) Recent events: Issue of logging licences over NCL by Forest
Department Recently, the Forest Department, Miri, on the instructions
of the Director of Forests, Sarawak issued two logging licences over
NCL of seven longhouses in Sungai Bong, Teru/Tinjar, Baram. The
conditions of the licences stated that they would be immediately
suspended if the owners of the NCL covered by the licences object to
the said licences and/or logging over their said land. The Miri High
Court granted an injunction stopping logging from being carried out
within the NCL of the residents of the seven longhouses. The Order of
the Court was also sent to the Forest Department. Letters were also
sent by the residents to the Department appealing for the revocation
of the licences immediately. But until today, inspite of the Court
Order and letters sent by the residents to the Forest Department, the
Department had failed to revoke the said logging licenses. This is
very clearly another excemple of how the Forest Department in Sarawak
acted without regard to the law and the rights of the Sarawak natives.
Harrison Ngau
Sarawak, December 1996
Recently, the State Legislative Assembly has amended the law to give
the Chief Minister powers to extinguish native customary rights not
only in the national interest but also in favour of private
enterprises. The constitutionality and legality of this amendment has
been disputed and it appears to be a clear example of racial
discrimination, whereby the property rights of natives are treated as
inferior to the property rights of other citizens. Plans exists to
develop in Sarawak 1 million hectares of land into oil palm plantation
by 2010, from which 400.000 hectares is Native Customary Land. It
means that 30.000 hectares of Native Customary Land would be used for
this annually the next 13 years. (Sarawak Tribune 4 September '97).
The recent shooting on unarmded indigenous people who were in protest
against implemenation of oilpalm plantation and whereby 1 Iban died,
gives fears for intensifying of conflicts about Native Customary
Rights.
II PROTESTS AND ARRESTS IN SARAWAK
From October 1996 till the end of December 1997 indigenous peoples
were arrested on different locations in Sarawak. In December 1997 1
Iban was killed and 2 wounded as police opened fire on unarmed
indigenous people protesting the take over of their lands by oil palm
plantations. In the following pages I give an overview of the cases.
As far as possible I give also the background situation of the
communities and their history.
1. Logging blockade in Limbang.
Iban longhouse residents blockade logging road; 7 arrests in October
1996; no charges at the Court case.
2. Encroachment of NCR land at Niah Suai, S.G. Sebatu.
Iban longhouses oppose implementation of oilpalm plantation; 5 arrests
in January 1997, released on self bail.
3. Brutal treatment op Penan. (13 March-29 March 1997) In March 1997 a
group of 75 Penan went to a logging camp near Long Kerong, Ulu Baram
to deliver a letter to the head of the logging company with the
intention to negotiate peacefully. Having arrived at the logging site,
they met a group of Police Field Force who started to arrest and to
hit the Penan. Many Penan were injured and 4 Penan arrested and
severely wounded during the arrest.They were charged on illegal
assembly and rearrested on a charge of stealing. The arrested Penan
have complained about their treatment in prison.
4. Iban longhouse Rumah Riggie, Tinjar in Baram, April 1997,
The Iban longhouse Rumah Riggie filed a lawsuit to stop the activities
of the oil palm plantation and successfully obtained an Interlocutory
Injunction against LCDA and Nation Mark. Several months later Nation
Mark started again and 9 Ibans were arrested for obstructing the
workers. The Iban were ordered to execute a bond of peace for six
months. Three Iban refused and made an apeal at the Miri High Court.
On August 5 the Miri High Court squashed the lower Court decision
and ruled that the police had arrested the Iban without just cause and
that the bond to keep the peace had been ordered withour proper
inquiry.
5. Ensika. Twenty five Iban have been arrested in May 1997 for their
efforts to negotiate with a timber company.
6. Iban from Sungai Bong, Teru Tinjar in Baram, June 1997.
Three hundred natives from Sungai Bong stopped the logging activity of
Ogawa Sdn Bhd. In July 1996 the natives obtained an Interlocutory
Injunction restraining the logging company to encroach their NCR
land.In May 1997 they were heard before the Court in Miri. In June
surveyers from the Sarwak Land and Survey Department came to Sungai
Bong to survey the implementation of an oil palm plantation scheme.
They were told to stop their survey work by the longhouseresidents.
The next day 42 Iban were arrested, during the arrest several Iban
were severely injured. The Magi state ordered them to sign a bond to
keep the peace. Most Iban were bailed out but while in prison they
made an appeal against the order to keep the peace at Miri High Court.
On August 6 the Miri High Court squashed the order to keep the peace.
7. Arrest of Jaili bin Sulaiman November 1997 Bintulu - The chairman
of a native committee struggling for fair compensation for land to be
used for a paper producing plant had been arrested for menacing
behaviour. Jaili bin Sulaiman was arrested after a police report was
lodged at the Tatau Police Station. Jaili, who is Rumah Munggun in Ulu
Tatau was escorted from Tatau to Bintulu Central Police Station for
questioning. On October 10, Jaili in a press conference in Bintulu
declared that disgruntled natives were mulling over blockading the
implementation of the RM 3 billion proposed Borneo Pulp and Papers
(BPP) project. (Borneo Post 5/11/97)
8. Rumah Bangga longhouse, Sungai Sebukut, Lutong, Bakong, Baram,
December 1997
Ibans from Bakong, Baram, Sarawak try to protect their Native
Customary Land from the encroachment of an oilpalm plantation company.
Although they wrote several appeal letters and lodged a report with a
police station no action was taken by the authorities. As a last
resort, they confiscated three bulldozers. On the 19 th December 1997,
3 Ibans were shot by the Police Field Force. One was shot at the head,
he died the 24th December. In total 28 Iban were arrested.
Cases 1,3 and 5 have to do with logging on Native Customary Land.
Cases 2,4 and 8 have to do with oil palm plantations on Native
Customary Land. Case 6 has to do with logging as well as oil palm
plantation. Case 6 shows that a court decision was not respected by
the Forest Department and police. Case 4 shows that a court decision
was not respected by LCDA and police. Cases 3,4,6 and 8 deal with
severe physical violence against indigenous people. It is very
worrying that police opened fire on Iban people in December, when
Enyang Ak Gendang was killed. All cases where physical violence was
used originate from Miri Police Station.
On several other places protests against extinguishing of Native
Customary Lands has been recorded: 10 longhouses in Sibu Sg Durin Road
(Nov. 1997), residents from Rumah Jau and Rumah Nuga in Tubau (Nov.
1997) Not mentioned in this list is the Bakun area, where a serious
threat exist that indigenous people will be forcefully relocated,
however the dam itself has been deferred.Protests of indigenous
peoples against the implementation of the Bakun dam has been going on
since the project was announced.
1. Logging blockade in Limbang/ 7 arrests in Octobre 1996
The longhouse residents of Rumah Bugah are continuously mounting road
blockades in their efforts to stop logging operation within their
native customary land boundary. The Rumah Bugah longhouse is an Iban
native community situated in Tubai, Ukong river in Limbang division,
the northern region of Sarawak. They are farmers, hunters and
gatherers. The Ibans are putting up the blockade against the timber
company known as Syarikat Gunung Utama Sdn. Bhd, a contractor company
to Limbang Trading Limbang Ltd owned by Datuk Amar James Wong, who is
the Sarawak Minister for Environment.
Syarikat Gunung Utama Sdn Bhd purportedly encroached and trespassed
onto their native customay land (NCL) area in June '96 and started to
carry out logging activities illegally within the area without their
consent and permission. This is a serious violation of the Iban adat
or custom. The timber company had built a logging camp for its
operation in the area. Logging bridges and roads were constructed
which caused massive destruction to their land and forest and
severe soil erosion.
According their longhouse Headman TR Siran, the timber company has
encroached into their communal forest area which their people have
preserved and managed since the time of their ancestors. It is the
only remaining intact jungle in the area from which they collect
products for handicraft, herbals, resin, palm shoots for food and
building materials for houses and boats. This is also where they
carried out hunting activities.
They have taken several means to solve their problems amicably by
writing appeal letters to authorities concerned and had met many times
with government officers regarding their situation and their need to
safeguard, preserve and protect their communal forest from being
logged. However, their complaints fell to the deaf ears of the
government officers.
On October 17, 1996 a group of men and women started to put up a
blockade on the logging road of Syarikat Gunung Utama. On October 19,
1996 Linus Urud and 6 others were arrested by a team of policeman from
Limbang Police station and were detained in the police custody for 36
hours. They were alleged of committing an offence under Section 341 of
the Criminal Procedure Code. On Noverber 20, 1996 the criminal case
against them was heard at Limbang Magistrate Court. They were not
charged and released unconditionally.
Since the beginning of 1997 the blockade started again. The people
staged the blockade at Ulu Sungai Tubah Eka which is about eight hours
walking distance from their longhouse. Day and night, men women, young
and old kept vigil across the logging road. Through out the blockade
period, the Ibans have encountered several incidents and
confrontations with the Police personel and the officers of the timber
company.
2. Encroachment of NCR Land at Niah-suai, SG.Sebatu
5 arrests in January 1997
Four Iban longhouses of Niah-suai strongly oppose the encroachment of
Johnson Enterprise setting up an oil palm plantation on their NCL. The
encroachment started in September 1996: the longhouse residents
requested the District.Officer. to write a letter to the company
asking them to respect N.C.R. land. The company ignored the protest
and the letter. In December 1996 the longhouse residents lodged a
report about the destruction of their NCR land. This report was
refused by the Batu Niah Police and only accepted after it was
offered to the Bintulu Police. On 16 january 1997 60 persdons from 4
longhouses gathered at their temuda to stop the company workers; 5
Iban were arrested and accused of stealing a bulldozer. On 27 January
they were released on self bail.
Chronology of events.
In July 1996, Tradewinds Plantation Services SDn Bhd from West
Malaysia announced its joint-venture with Sarawak State government in
setting up oil palm plantations in Sarawak. One of it is at Niah-Suai,
affecting about 20 longhouses in the area covering 10,000 hectares. In
July 1996 its contractor company, Johnson Enterprise, sent an undated
letter to the affected longhouse people offering RM 100/-per acre
for the purchase of their NCR lands (temuda) and stated the date it
took over ground operation. Out of the 20 longhouses, residents of 4
longhouses have strongly rejected such an arrangement: Rh Junit, Rh
Kimen, Rh Ulut and Rh Tukok.
On 17 Sept. 1996 Tuai Rumah (Headman) Junit and his people met with
the District Officer (D.O.) of Miri, Mr William Nyuallau. They
requested the D.O. to write a letter to Johnson Enterprise informing
the company to respect the Native Customary Rights (NCR) of the
longhouse people and stop encroaching into these temuda. The company
was advised to seek the understanding of the lonhghouse people before
any work commence. The people have stayed there since 1954 and
hold document proof over their NCR lands. However, Johnson Enterprise
continued to bulldoze these temuda and ignored the people's protest,
as well as the letter from Miri District Officer (DO).
On 3 Dec. 1996, longhouse folks held a "Miring Bebuling Menoa"
ceremony on the bulldozed land according to their Customary Laws (Adat
Asal). This ceremony was to clean and bless their temuda from bad
fortune and harms as the lands have been intruded by offender of the
Adat. The offender has to pay all things used and spent for this
ceremony and after that the offender is to discontinue actions of
encroachment. At the same time with this miring ceremony, following
the "Adat Batu Pegai" the longhouse folks also withheld the company's
bulldozer key and sent it to the Batu Niah Police station in the
hope their land would not be disturbed further.
On 4 Dec 1996 at 8.30am, policemen from Batu Niah together with
manager of Johnson Enterprise, Mr Kuang, came to the longhouse in two
landcruisers. Mr Kuang then asked one of the policemen named Luhat
Wan: "Besok boleh kerja kah?" (Can we start working tomorrow?) "Boleh,
besok boleh kerja" said Luhat Wan, the policeman. Since then Johnson
Enterprise went into full swing bulldozing the temuda and all things
planted by the longhouse people.
On 7 Dec. 1996, 5 persons from Rh Junit and Rh Kimen came to Batu Niah
Police Station to lodge a report on the destruction of their NCR land
and their properties such as rubber trees, cocoa plants and fruit
trees by Johson Enterprise, but the police there refused to take their
report. Not giving up easily, they went all the way to Bintulu Police
Station to do that. They were then asked by the Bintulu policeman to
hand their report back to Batu Niah police station. The Batu Niah
police on duty promised to give the people a copy of their report on
13 Dec. and informed them to be prepared to pay RM 2.00 for it. The
next day, the longhouse folks then stopped the company worker from
bulldozing their land by withholding the bulldozer key and sent it to
the policestation.
On 13 Dec. the longhouse folks came to Batu Niah Police Station to
collect the photocopy of the report but it was refused by the police
on duty. Meanwhile Johnson Enterprise continued to bulldoze the
longhouses' temuda lands.
On 16 January 1997, about 60 persons from these 4 longhouses gathered
at their temuda to stop the company workers from carrying on their
work at the same time withheld the bulldozer key and later submitted
it to the Batu Niah Police Station again. On the next day at 2.30 pm,
about 15 policemen from Batu Niah, some in uniform and some without,
arrived at Rumah Junit longhouse. They were headed by a Mr. Paul,
together with the Manager of Johnson Enterprise. The police then took
five persons from the longhouse to Batu Niah for investigation and
told the longhouse folks that they would not take long to come home.
However, after arriving at Batu Niah the five were brought straight to
Miri. Many of the longhouse folks that went down to Niah by their own
transport also wanted to go to Miri but were rejected by the police.
Johnson Enterprise had accused the five of stealing its bulldozer and
therefore the police remanded them for investigation. The five denied
stealing of the bulldozer, the bulldozer was withheld to prevent
further destruction of their temuda and properties. The five were
being remanded for 10 nights in Miri Police cell and being
interrogated. On 27 Jan. 1997, they were released on self bail of RM
1000/- each. Presently they are engaging a lawyer from Bintulu to
represent them in this case. All the longhouse folks continue to worry
about their land and fruit trees being bulldozed by the company for
oil palm plantation. Up to March 1997, most of their temuda lands are
already bulldozed except a small portion close to the longhouse (about
500 meters) remain undisturbed.
Note: Main portion of this record was narrated by abang ak Rasmba and
Sating ak Abang on 1 Feb. 1997 and recorded by David Kimay in Iban
language.
3. Report on the brutal treatment of Penan
13 March 1997-29 March 1997
On 13 March 1997 a group of 75 Penan went to a logging camp near Long
Kerong, Ulu Baram area. They wanted to deliver a letter to the head of
the logging company with the intention to negotiate peacefully. Having
arrived at the logging site, they met a group of Police Field Force
(PPF), who started without reason to arrest and to hit the Penan.
Thirty Penan were injured. Four Penan were arrested and severely
wounded during the arrest. The four Penan who were arrested on 13
March were charged on illegal assembly on 21 March at Marudi
Magistrate Court. They were rearrested for a second charge on stealing
soon after they were bailed out.
The Penan have strongly denied all allegations by the police regarding
theft and attempts to attack the police. On 29 March they were
released without charge on stealing.
This report is based on interviews with Penan made on video about the
Penan encoun tering the Police Field Force on 13 March 1997 and on
interviews with relatives and friends of the arrested Penan.
Ijack Lagoi (Long Pigen), 20 March 1997:
"Our problems are getting worse now. I myself was almost caught by PPH
(Police Field Force) on 13 March, 1997. On that day, I went to a
logging camp near Sungai Seketa, about 75 of us from various villages
were following. When we arrived, several company workers were working,
we called them and delivered this letter (he showed the letter) to
them. We asked them to deliver the letter to their boss. But we
encountered PPH nearby. They did not respect us at all, they fired at
the sky with their M16 (He showed the cartridges/bullets) to warn us.
Actually we were there to have a peaceful negotiation with the company
(Samling). Our group were led by several chieftains (Tai Kampung) and
followed by some interpreters (including me) and other villages. But
PPH did not give us any chance to speak nor did they allow us to
negotiate. This person (he shows his picture), he is a PPH chief,
he said during the incident on 13 March:" This is a big problem, we
can not solve it here, by right now one of you should follow me to
Miri". As soon as he spoke, he jumped towards me and grabbed my hand,
my left hand was grabbed and injured, but I managed to get rid of his
catch. Another PPH tried to catch my right arm, but with no success.
Another PPH, I don't know which one, sliced me with a parang (knife).
Earlier on I 've seen the PPH chief with his parang on his waist.
Above 30 of us were injured, some of us were fallen on the ground, the
PPH personnel were trying to grab whoever they could grab. Several of
our people suffered serious injury. Rostina John and Mina Perawi
(both are women), got swollen in their feet and the pain last for
several days. We tried to send them for treatment at a clinic in Lio
Matu but we couldn't. Because the PPH were blocking all the roads,
they intended to arrest those who are trying to seek medical
treatment.
This guy (he showed the photo of the chief of PPH) please look at this
carefully to recognise him. He is the one who led the operation on 13
March, he treated us Penan so badly. I asked him to arrange a
negotiation between the company and us on that day (13 March), but he
said he couldn't and detained and beat us without further saying any
words.
Jau Lirong (Long Kerong), 20 March 1997
"On 13 March, I went to the logging road at Sg Seketa for negotiations
with the company. When we arrived, PPH wanted to catch my friend
Ijack, but they failed. After that, several PPH ttried to catch me.
They caugh us without explaining us the reason. When I fled, I was hit
at the back by the M16 gun. It's still painful. When I was running,
the PPh were chasing me and shouting:"we"ll shoot you because you came
here!" I ran away from them, when I was looking at my back, I saw Wan
Musong was caught. A PPH stepped on his chest with his jungle-boot.
Company workers called "jangut" and broke Wan's blowpipe. Wan was hurt
on his chest." Actually the purpose of our gathering on 13/3/97 was
to negotiate with the company. We never meant to create any trouble.
We used to put our hope on the government to solve our problems, but
now we realise that the government is always siding the company, they
just ignore us, the Penans. We have even produced maps to demarcate
our territority and our land, to show the company which part of the
forest is not allowed to be entered. However, they just ignore what we
have said."
P.S. Maps have been surveyed and produced by Penans in several areas
to demarcate their boundaries and customary land.
ARRESTS
Four Penan were arrrested on 13 March and were charged on illegal
assembly on 21 March. They were rearrested for a second charge soon
after they were bailed out. On 29 March they were released without
charge. The four Penans are Pusu Bujang (Long Benali), Jangin Jalong
(Long Benali), Wan Musong (Long Sait), Beripin Wan (Long Sait)
Relatives and friends of the four Penan made the following statement:
"We are also sad and worried about the conduct of the Police in Miri
who took brutal action. They tortured our four friends while under
remand at Miri Police Station. When we met our friends in court, they
told us about the bad treatment they had undergone at Miri Police
station on 13/3 and 14/3. After 14/3 they were brought to Marudi
Police Station without knowledge of their lawyer, relatives and
friends. At Miri Police Station about midnight of 13/3/97 the shoulder
of Pusu Bujang was hit 3 times by the police. His watch was robbed and
thrown away. Wan Musong was punched 3 times on his chest until he
fainted. Police had kicked the body of Wan. After that he was lifted
and pushed. When they were at the Police Station in Miri and Marudi,
they were given a half Packet of noodle, shared by four persons once a
day for a period of 7 days."
4. Rumah Riggie Longhouse, Iban, Tinjar, Baram
9 arrests in April 1997
A provisional lease of State land was granted to LCDA which covers
part of the NCL of the Rumah Riggie longhouse. The plantation company
Nation Mark tried several times to start the implementation of the oil
palm plantation, but was stopped by the longhouse residents. Police
Field Force was stationed in the area. Longhouse residents were
harrassed by the police. The Rumah Riggie longhouse filed a lawsuit to
stop the activities of the oil palm plantation and they successfully
obtained an Interlocutory Injunction against LCDA and Nation Mark.
Several months later Nation Mark started again and 9 Ibans were
arrested for obstructing the workers. The Iban were ordered to execute
a bond of peace for six months. Three Iban refused and made an appeal
at the Miri High Court. On August 5 the Miri High Court squashed the
lower Court decision and ruled that the police had arrested the
Iban without just cause and that the bond to keep the peace had been
ordered without proper inquiry.
On 1 April 1996, Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA) was
granted and issued a provisional lease of State land known as Lot 15
(leased land) containing approximately 4827 hectares without the
consent of the Rumah Riggie longhouse residents. The said leased land
covers part of the NCL owned by Rumah Riggie longhouse residents.
According to the terms and conditions of the provisional lease, a
proper lease shall be given to LCDA upon the completion of a proper
survey of the said leased land, after which such lease shall be
granted a 99 years term from the date of the provisional lease.
The longhouse residents were shocked to discover that an oil palm
plantation company known as Nation Mark Sdn Bhd encroached onto the
boundary of their NCL with bulldozers, trucks, lorries, landcruisers
and felled and removed trees/timbers from their land. They
immediately protested and stopped the company from continuing their
activities within the boundaries of their NCL. The company ceased
temporarily.
Around the end of September 1996, the company came again and
tresspassed on their land. The natives stood strong and maintained
firm protest and objection against the company activity. The situation
caused tension between the company workers and the natives. In
retaliation, the company called a group of seven (7) Police Field
Force (PFF) personel to ensure peace and order. A few of the longhouse
residents were brutally harassed by the PFF personel. On the 14 th
October 1996, TR Riggie lodged a police report at Marudi Police
Station on this harassment.
On 26th September 1996, a PFF Unit led by Chief Inspector Chan Kuang
Yu appeared at the longhouse of Mr Insom. They first went to the room
of the Chief but as the Chief was not in, they went to meet Mr Insom
and demanded his Identity Card. However, when Mr Insom was about to
get his Identity Card he was suddenly assaulted by the Chief Inspector
and then handcuffed with his hands folded to his back. He was then
repeatedely punched and kicked on his head, face, chest, head and
fingers. As a result he suffered several cuts and bruises. The PFF did
not explain their purpose of raiding the longhouse. However, their
motive was clear, that is to intimidate and stop the natives from
stopping the establishment of the oil palm plantation of LCDA on their
land. Mr Insom filed a suit against Chief Inspector Chan Kuang Yu for
damages.
October 19, 1996 Nation Mark Sdn Bhd again encroached illegally and
caused destruction to their lands and about 20 acres of rice fields
were bulldozed. On the 24 th October 1996, TR Riggie travelled down to
Marudi town to lodge a police report on the illegal encroachment and
damages done by the company to the land and the rice fields.
TR Riggie and the members of his longhouse committee have met and
reported these trespasses to the other relevant authorities such as
the District Office Marudi and the Divisional Resident Office, Lands
and Surveys Department and the Forest Department in Miri, however
there is no action taken to stop or discourage the company from
encroaching and further damaging their land, gardens and forest.
On 2 December 1996, TR Riggie Ak Belulok, who is the Headman of his
community together with Insom Ak Uban and Ungkok Ak Atau representing
themselves and sixty other families who are all natives Iban of Rumah
Riggie, Sungai Nat, Teru, Tinjar in Baram filed lawsuit to stop the
activity of oil palm plantation within their native customary land
(NCL). In the suit they name LCDA (provisional lease holder), Nation
Mark Sdn Bhd (Developer of the oil palm plantation) and Superintendent
of Lands and Surveys (Authority granting the provisional lease)
In their writ, the natives sincerely affirmed that their community
through their forepa rents initially moved to and settled at their
present longhouse in 1920s and have had acquired Native Customary
Rights in the area:
1. By cultivation and planting on the said land with rubber trees,
fruit trees, rice, pepper and vegetables;
2. By rearing of livestocks and/or poultry/s;
3. By clearing and/or felling virgin jungle and the occupation of the
same;
4. By using the said land as burial grounds;
5. By traditionally gathering jungle products like rattan, wood,
herds, shoots, mushrooms and other edible and medical plants;
6. The boundary of our NCL was confirmed and recorded by the
Government pursuant to the Government Secretariat Circular No. 12 0f
1939 and accordingly kept and recorded in the Land Boundary Register
Book at the District Office, Marudi,Baram.
On 6 January 1997 TR Riggie Anak Belulok and 2 others successfully
obtained a court declaration after the High Court in Miri granted an
Interlocutory Injunction against Land Custody and Development
Authority (LCDA), Nation Mark Sdn Bhd and Superintendent of Lands and
Surveys Miri by restraining their agents or servants or
subcontractor/s and assignee/s from further tresspassing on and
commencing their oil palm plantation scheme within the communal native
customary rights lands of the Rumah Riggie community.
On 10 April the work of Nation Mark started again and on 17 April 9
Ibans (including Riggie Anak Belulok) were arrested for obstructing
the workers of Nation Mark to carry out their work. What had happened?
From a letter from Miri prison by Riggie Anak Belulok and 2 others
dated 26 April:
"But on the 10th April 1997, we were shocked to discover that the
workers of the company were bulldozing our garden and cultivated land
resulting in extensive damages to our land and crops such as fruit
trees and vegetables. The last portion of our forest was also being
cleared. As we feared that the company would continue to damage our
land, crops, properties and forest we stopped the workers working on
our land. We told the manager of the company to stop work and
explained to him that our case against them in the High Court in Miri
is yet to be determined. However, on the morning of the 17th April
1997, we were again shocked to find out that our farm huts on our land
in which we store padi (rice) seeds and agriculture tools for our farm
had been blazed or burned down. We strongly suspected it was the work
of the company workers because the workers were bulldozing the sites
of these farm huts on the morning of the 17 th April, 1997. We
reported all this to the Police Field Force who were stationed there
at the site with the workers of the company as well as the Police in
Marudi and Beluru without any success. With all these acts of the
company that caused extensive and continued damages to our land,
forest destruction, losses of crops and properties and with the
indifference of the authorities towards our repeated complaints, we
beleive we are lawfully justified in exercising our right of private
defence against the company by using reasonable force to stop
their activities on our land."
As said 9 Ibans from 3 longhouses from Tinjar, Baram were arrested on
17 April 1997. On 19 April 1997 they were brought to the Magistrate
Court in Miri whereby the police requested that they would be further
remanded for investigation in connection with a report lodged by the
oil palm plantation, Nation Mark that they intimidated and threated
their workers. The Court ordered that they would be remanded for eight
days.
On 23 April the 9 Ibans were ordered by the Magistrate's Court Miri
tto execute a bond of peace fo six months and to be released on RM
3000 bail in two sureties each. Six of them were released. However,
another three (Headman Riggie Anak Belukok, Ungkok Ak Ata and Genga Ak
Timbang) were dissatisfied and disagreed with the order made by the
magistrate. The three were sent to Miri Central Prison on the 24th
April.
The three were released on May 3 1997, but only after they had made an
appeal against the said order at the Miri High Court. Also they
declared with the application that the land belongs to them.
On August 5 the Miri High Court squashed the lower Court decision. The
High Court ruled that the police had arrested the Ibans without just
cause, and that the bond to keep the peace had been ordered without a
proper inquiry by the Magistrate. Apperently the interlocutory
injunction was still valid in April, when the Iban were arrested.
5. Ensika / 25 arrests in May '97
Twenty-five Iban natives have been arrested on 10 May, 1997 for their
efforts to negotiate with a timber company. The Iban natives from
Ensika village were verbally invited by one police officer, Assistant
Superintendent of Police (ASP) Mohd Faizal to negotiate the villagers'
demand to temporarily stop logging on their NCR land. Upon reaching
the logging camp, ASP Mohd Faizal changed his mind and refused to
accept a letter from the villagers seeking negotiation with the
company officials. Instead he ordered the Police Field Force (PFF) to
arrest the 25 villagers.
Chronology of events
January 1997 - Ensika villagers were shocked when their NCL (Native
Customary Land) was encroached by a logging company without any prior
notice. The logging company, Hua Seng Sawmill Sdn Bhd, started logging
activities on NCL of Kampung Ensika, Ulu Sebangan, Simunjan District,
Samarahan Division. Heavy machines used to drag logs from forest to
riverside, caused problems (soil erosion and diesel waste) to Ensika
villagers and some other downstream villages, e.g. Kampung Meranti,
Kampung Tungkah Melayu, Kampung Tungkah Iban, Sebangan and a few more.
February 18 - The villagers sent a letter to the camp manager, Kamal
b. Budol, who is the representative of Hua Seng Sawmill Sdn Bhd,
calling on the company to respect their NCR (Native Customary Rights)
on their land. The company did not respond and thus no agreement was
reached.
February 25 - Again the representatives of Ensika villagers sent
another letter of appeal to the camp manager, Kamal b. Budol, to
request the company to stop logging activities before the involved
parties reach any solution. Copies of the letter were also sent to:
Director of Forest Department, Sarawak; Residen of Samarahan Division;
District Officer of Sadong Jaya; Penghulu Sebangan; YB Julauhi b.
Waram, State Assemblyman of Sebuyau.
February 28 - Fed up with the inaction of the authorities, Ensika
villagers decided to launch peaceful protest on the railway track to
prevent the logging activities before any agreement or solution is
reached.
April 7 - Mr Lau Phang Ting and Mr Tiong, the representatives of the
company, invited representatives of Ensika villagers to a meeting in
Simunjan District Office. The meeting was attended by: Simunjan
District Officer;1 Forest officer; Pemanca; 2 representatives of Hua
Seng Sawmill Sdn Bhd; 6 representatives of Ensika villagers. The
meeting could not achieve any agreement because the representatives of
hua Seng could not promise anything to resolve the matter. The demands
of the representatives of Ensika villagers are:
1. Compensation of RM2.000 for each door (household),
or
2. Build a bund road connecting the longhouse to the estuary of Sungai
Ensika (about 12 km) and compaensation RM1.000 for each household, or
3. Compensation 5 tonnes of Meranti plank to each door (household) In
April another three meetings were held (April 11, April 17 and April
21) between Ensika representatives and Hua Seng; these meetings were
also attended by forest officers from Kuching and policemen. No
agreement was reached.
May 2 - One inspector ASP Mohd Faizal and another 6 policemen and
policewomen arrived at Ensika Longhouse at 12.00p.m. He offered a
helping hand by asking longhouse villagers to write a letter to him
(ASP Faizal) to arrange a final dialogue with the company. The
villagers agreed.
May 5 - A letter of request to arrange the dialogue had been faxed to
Simunjan Police Station for SSP Faizal, according to the policeman who
received the fax, ASP Faizal was having a meeting in Kuching at
that time.
May 6 - Police Field Force (PFF - paramilitary) personnel from Batu
Kawa (KUching District) were sent to Sungai Meranti Logging Camp.
Ensika villagers were so shocked to see so many (around 20 persons)
PFF uniformed personnel armed with automatic firearms. One of the
villagers approached them and asked: What is your purpose of coming
here? They said: We are taking instruction from the authorities on
security purposes.
May 8 - Four representatives of Ensika villagers were verbally invited
to the logging camp to deliver a letter to ASP Faizal about the
arrangement of the dialogue between villagers and timber company, but
one of the PPF told them that ASP Faizal returned to Simunjan. He
themm asked them to turn up on the following day.
May 9 - 26 villagers went to the logging camp to meet ASP Faizal about
the same matter but he was not there. Meanwhile, the villagers
discovered that the camp workers were building the railway track into
NCL of Ensika village. The PFF personnel were guarding them. When the
villagers approached PFF personnel and asked them about ASP Faizal,
they told Ensika villagers to come on May 10.
May 10 - Saturday. Again the Ensika villagers went to the logging camp
to send their letter to ASP Faizal. They still remember his promise
and put their hope on him. This time ASP Faizal was there, but he
refused to accept the letter. He said that he has no power to arrange
any discussion or dialogue for them. Instead he ordered the villagers
to line up at the camp site, and announced that the villagers were
arrested under Section 506 of the Penal Code and Section 27 (5) of
Police Act 1967. Then the PPF personnel brought the villagers to
Simunjan Police Station for remand. All the villagers were shocked of
his unexpected treatment.
May 11 - Sunday. The condition in Simunjan lockup was poor. No
blankets, no pillows and insufficient food was offered. There was also
a lot of mosquitoes. They complained to ASP Mohd Faizal. The police
promised them to provide blankets, pillows, enough food, and mosquito
coils. ASP Faizal also promised their family members who came from
Ensika and their friends (who have to travel for 180 km to Simujan)
from Kuching to fulfil the required of the 25 Ensika villagers. At the
end the police only provided mosquito coil for the second night. Since
the police never keep to their promises, the poor condition caused
some of the villagers, including the eldest villager, Bohoi ak
Meling, 74 year-old, who already had health problem, fall sick. The
police refused to provide any medical attention.
May 12 - Monday. Some of the villagers of Ensika obtained permission
from the policer to send Bohoi ak Meling to a clinic in the afternoon.
Unfortunately the clinic was closed. They had been brought before the
Magistrate of Simunjan Court, Mr Tom Hem, and after that they were
released at 4.00 p.m.
6. Sungai Bong, Teru, Tinjar in Baram/ 45 arrests in June '97
Three hundred natives from Sungai Bong stopped the logging activity of
Ogawa Sdn Bhd. In July 1996 the natives obtained an Interlocutory
Injunction restraining the logging company to encroach their NCR
land. The longhouse residents were heard in this case before the Court
in Miri in May 1997. They argued that one of the special conditions in
the 2 licences to the company stated that if there is any dispute with
the landowners whose land is affected or included, the licences shall
be revoked immediately.And that since the time they first discovered
the first licence over their land, they have made repeated
representations to the Forest Department to withdraw the licence. On
24 th June 1997 surveyers from the Sarawak Land and Survey Department
came to Sungai Bong to survey for the implementation of an oil palm
plantation scheme. They were told to stop their survey work by the
longhouse residents. The next day 42 Iban from Sungai Bong were
arrested.
During the arrest several Iban were severely injured. The Magistrate
ordered them to sign a bond to keep the peace, which was refused by
the Iban. Most Iban were bailed out on 12 July, but while in prison
they made an appeal against the order to keep the peace at Miri
High Court. On August 6 the Miri High Court squashed the order to keep
the peace. Longhouse Chief Tr Rayong Ak Lapik was arrested seperately
on 28 June and accused of stealing a bulldozer and obstructing a
public servent. This had to do with the prevention of the illegal cut
of illeput trees by the longhouse residents.
Longhouse Chief TR Rayong Ak. Lapik led about 300 natives of his
longhouse to stop logging activity of the timber company Ogawas Sdn
Bhd., which illegally encroached and commenced its logging operations
within the native customary land boundary that stretches from
Tanjung Kibal to the confluence of Sg Litot and Bukit Merambun in
Teru, Tinjar. The said timber company was granted a logging license to
operate in the area by the Forest Department without the consent of
the natives of Rumah Rayong.
In June 1996, TR Rayong filed an ex-parte injunction against Ogawa Sdn
Bhd. On July 20 last year the natives succesfully obtained an
Interlocutory Injunction order to restrain the said company from
encroaching and commencing logging operations on their communal land.
Since then the court mention for hearing of the case have been
postponed for a number of times until it was decided to hear the
natives on this case on 7 May 1997.
May 1997
From a report of 7 May: Longhouse Chief TR. Rayong Ak Lapik suit
against timber company, Ogawa Sdn Bhd recieved the full support of
Dayak communities from different parts of Sarawak when more than 100
Dayak representatives, men and women turn up to show their solidarity
support in front of the building of Miri High Court here this morning.
TR Rayong together with a group of elders from his community were
dressed with their traditional gears with the women featuring their
native customes marched along the corridor of the court building. They
performed a short symbolical ceremony with an elder enchanted a tribal
spirit and invoked the spirits of their ancestors to inspire them
in their struggle and guide their counsel in pursuing the case. He
whispered a message into the air by saying:
"Our ancestors, we are here today confronting a human written law
which is not in favour of us as it is not in accordance with our
system of customs and laws. Help, inspire and guide us in our struggle
against the plunderers of our land and forest which you had passed
onto us and on which we continue to occupy and use for our survival;
it contend the burials of our dead relatives and friends which we care
for, from generation to generation."
From a press release by the Iban on 7 May 1997:
"We came down from our respective longhouses in Ulu Sg. Teru, Tinjar,
Baram, Sarawak two days ago. We are here at the Miri High Court today
to seek vindication of our rights over our native customary land.
Sometime last year (1996), without our knowledge or consent, the
Director of Forests wrongfully issued occupation Ticket licenses for
the extraction of rubber woods and other timbers on our land to a body
called Ahli Jawatankuasa Kemajuan Kawasan (Area Devvelopment
Committee) Ulu Teru. The said body is neither registered as a company
or society and therefore does not has a legal personality in law.
Indeed, we are very surprised that the Director of Forests can issue
such a license which carries it rights and obligations to such an
unregistered body. One of the special conditions in the two licenses
clearly stated that if there is any dispute with the land owners whose
land are effected or included in the licesed areas, the licenses shall
be revoked immediately. Since the time we first discovered the first
license was issued over our customary land, we have made repeated
representations to the Forest Department to withdraw or revoke the
said license. We have also filed a case in the Miri High Court against
the contractor of the said licensee Ogawa Sdn Bhd for trespassing and
obtained an ex-parte injunction. But despite our said appeals to the
Forest Department which was also notified about our said case in the
Miri High Court, the Director of Forest had issued a second Occupation
Ticket License over the same area of our said land. We had also lodged
reports with the Police over the destruction of our customary land,
crops and forest by the logging contractor but the police had simply
advised that this is not a criminal matter which warrants their
action. Left to ourselves, we had appealed to the company to stop
their activities on our land but we were ignored. This is the reason
why we now come before the court. Later today, we will bring a report
to the Anti-Corruption Agency on this matter."
June 1997
On 25 June 1997 forty two Ibans were arrested by platoons of Malaysian
Police and Police Field Force within their native customary land area
in Sungai Bong, Teru, Tinjar in Baram District of Miri Division,
Sarawak. The 42 Ibans were from five longhouse communities namely:
Rumah Rayong, Rumah Jawing, Rumah Pong, Rumah Janda and Rumah jambo.
From a letter from Miri Central Prison (30 June '97): "On 24th June
1997 we met with surveyers from the Sarawak land and Survey Department
who came to survey our Native Customary Land in Upper Teru River,
Baram for an oil palm plantation company to implement an oil palm
plantation scheme which is against our consent. We told them to stop
their survey work so they told us to wait for their boss to come the
next day. At about 3.30 pm on 25th June 1997, it was not their boss
who came but about not less than forty Para-Military Police and Police
Field Force. As soon as they arrived they immediately proceeded to
arrest us without telling us our crime. We refused to be arrested. But
they resorted to assaulting and beating us by kicking, punching us and
butting us with their M16 rifles. As a result many of us were bruised
and suffered cuts and pains all over our body." As stated by a letter
of 39 prisoners in Miri prison.
On 26 June, the arrested Ibans were produced by the police before the
Miri Magistrate Court. Upon hearing the application made by the
police, the Magistrate ordered them to sign a bond to keep the peace
for six months and to be released on RM3000 in two sureties each
pursuant to Section 67 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Ibans
disagreed with the order and refused to sign the bond to keep the
peace because the land on which the oil palm plantation is to be
established is their native customary land. On 27 June they were send
to Miri Central Prison in lambir. Meanwhile two more Iban from Sungai
Bong area were arrested.
On 28th June three Iban were bailed by their family members to enable
them to seek medical treatment as their health detoriated. The three
are: Tait Ak Barau, Alau Ak Ngira, Bugul Ak Ugap. They made numerous
requests to the police to obtain medical treatment during the entire
period of their detention but their requests were rejected by the
police. As their health condition was getting worse, their relatives
were forced to arrange their immediate release to seek medical
attention. Soon after they were released, they lodged a police report
at Miri Police station regarding the assault, and violent and brutal
treatment of the police on many of the Iban during the arrest.
On July 12 most of the Iban were bailed out by their relatives. While
they were in prison, an appeal against the order to keep the peace was
filed in the High Court.
On August 6 the High Court squashed the order made by the Magistrates
Court to execute a bond to keep the peace for six months.
Arrest of Tr Rayong Ak Lapik
Longhouse Chief Tr Rayong Ak Lapik from Sungai Bong was arrested by a
group of policeman on 28 June in Miri town. Chief Tr Rayong came down
to Miri town upon receiving news that Ibans of Sungai Bong were
arrested by the police. The week before the arrest Tr. Rayong and his
longhouse residents had stopped the workers of a logging company,
Ogawa Sdn Bhd from felling and extracting various species of illeput
trees which the Iban call "Engkabang" near his longhouse in Sungai
Bong. This tree specie is protected under the Sarawak Wildlife
Ordinance 1990.
Last year longhouse Chiefs in Baram District were formally appointed
by the Sarawak Minister of Environment and Housing, Datuk Amar James
Wong to be Honorary Wildlife Rangers to help the Sarawak Forest
Department to enforce the said Ordinance in their respective areas. Tr
Rayong was one of those appointed.
Before stopping the company from felling and extracting these
"Engkabang" trees, TR. Rayong had reported the matter to the Sarawak
Forest Department several times without success. According to the
police, Tr. Rayong was arrested because a report had been lodged in
Marudi last week alleging that he stole a bulldozer of the company,
which was used for extracting the Engkabang trees.
On July 10 he was bailed out, but immediately re-arrested and charged
for obstructing a public servant in discharge of his public functions.
After that he was again bailed out.
7. No further details
8. Rumah Banga longhouse, Sungai Subukut, Bakong, Sarawak
1 Iban killed, 2 wounded, 28 arrests
Iban from Rumah Bang, Bakong try to protect their Native Customary
Land from the encrouchment of an oilpalmplantation company. Although
they wrote several appeal letters and lodged a report with a police
station no actions were taken by the authorities. As a last resort
they confiscated three bulldozers. On the 19 th December 1997 three
Iban were shot by the Police Field Force. One was shot at the head, he
died the 24th December. In total 28 Iban were arrested.
Without notice or consultation with the Iban of Rumah Banga, the Land
and Survey Department issued a provisional lease to Empresa (M) Sdn
Bhd, an oil palm plantation company. The land area covered with the
lease includes the Native Customary Land of the Iban. The conditions
stated in the lease were, inter alia, that "the holder of this
provisional lease shall not be entitled to a lease of an area equal to
the area (of the provisional lease) but only to such an area as the
Survey shows to be available" i.e. a survey must be done first by the
lessee over the leased area to determine whether other people have
rights over the same area of land, if so, such an area will be
excluded from the lease.
The Iban first and only came to know of the issue of the provisional
lease to Empresa when Segarakam Sd Bhd and Prana Sdn Bhd (contractors
to Empresa) tresspassed and started clearing their customary land on
November 16 1997. The companys started to cut down rubber and fruit
trees of the longhouse residents. Longhouse chief Banggau anak Andop
lodged a report against the company on December 1 at the Beluru police
station stating what damage had been done and requesting them to stop
Empresa and their contractors from operating. In Beluru as well as
Marudi Police station the report detailing the peoples objections to
what was happening to their land was not accepted. Banggau anak Andop
wrote also letters to the Land and Survey Department and other
Departments requesting that the lease be withdrawn or revoked or that
a survey be done so that there land could be excluded therefrom. No
action was taken by government authorities and the companies continued
to trespass and clear their land and more of their crop were
destroyed.
As a result of this inaction by the police and the continued
destruction of their lands the villagers took control of three of the
companies bulldozers and removed them to the longhousse. The action of
the people were designed firstly, to stop Empressa from operating and
secondly, to initiate a dialogue with the company. The company's
response was to call in the police to help them get their machinery
back. After a visit from one truckload of police on the 18 th of
December the people refused to return the bulldozers as the company
still had made no promise to stop working on the Native Customary
Rights land.
The following day the Police Field Force returned in greater force, in
plain cloths and in uniform but without identification and armed with
side arms, M16 rifles and batons.
The people of the village made a peaceful gathering outside of their
longhouse when the police arrived, holding a banner tied between two
poles bearing the statement, 'Land is our life'. Photographs from the
site show the people smiling and joking with each other. Offerings
were also being made to the ancestors, called a 'Miring', using rice,
eggs and other food. The banner was to act as a line over which
negotiations with the company and the police officers could take
place.
After the exchange of a few words however one of the leading Police
Field Force officers rushed forward and tried to arrest some Iban. The
Iban tried to prevent the arrests. At the same time the Police Field
Force officer gave the orders to the other PFF officers to charge and
to open fire on the unarmed villagers. Without any warning or warning
shots, three of the Ibans were shot, one in the head. Also several of
the Iban were beaten up with batons or punched and kicked. Several
Ibans were arrested.
Five days later, on December 24 th Enyang Ak Gendang died in hospital
where a postmortem revealed a bullet lodged inside his head. Indit ak
Uma, who was sshot in the stomach, chest an wrist, and Siba ak Sentu,
who was shot in the abdomen, were detained by the police until their
release on 29 December. Indit is reported to have returned to the
hospital for treatment to his stomach wound which became infected
while he was in detention. Six people of Rumah Banga were detained.
The Iban were released from police custody on 23 December. The
remaining detainees were released on 29 December with no charges
having been laid against them, but they all are due to appear at
Marudi police station and Magistrate's Court on 22 January 1998.
It was reported that up to 22 other Iban from neighbouring communities
have been detained briefly before 23 December 1997. They are also
released wihtout charge but ordered to appear at the Magistrate's
Court in Marudi on 22 January 1998.
On 22 January 1998, all the Ibans who were arrested were present at
Marudi Police station. They were asked to hold a flat bearing their
name written on it as the police took their photo one by one inside a
room in the police station. The police have not charged them
yet. However, they are ordered to appear again at the Marudi Police
Station on March 9, 1998.
On 29 December 1997, Iban Headman Banggau and 2 others on behalf on
themselves and all the members of their longhouses filed a suit to
stop the activities of the oil palm plantations within their Native
Customary Land. They also name Land Custody and Development Authority
(LCDA) and the Sarawak State Government as defendent in the case. They
are challenging the issue and declare as illegal, null and void the
provisional lease by the LCDA.
23 January 1998, the Miri High Court adjourned the injunction
application filed by Iban Headman Banggau and 2 others to February 11,
1998. More than 100 members of the Iban longhouses from Bakong
gathered outside the court building to show their moral
support.
Immediately after the courtcase of 23 January, Iban Headman Banggau
was arrested by the police. There was no explanation given to him on
his arrest. The period of his detention is not known yet. He is
detained at Miri Central Police Station.
Netherlands Centre for Indigenous Peoples
P.O. Box 94098
1090 GB Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel (31)(20) 6938625 Fax (31)(20) 6652818
e-mail nciv@antenna.nl