Read Part 1 here: https://dayakdaily.com/an-honourable-irishman-in-sarawaks-civil-service-part-i-of-ii/
Commentary
By Lian Cheng
IN the 1950s, there was only the Council Negri, which was the legislature of Sarawak, the highest lawmaking body in the land then.
Dato Dr Sir Peter Mooney who succeeded his predecessor George Strickland as Attorney General (AG), assumed the responsibility of tabling one of the most important bills in Sarawak’s history — the Land Code 1958 which was drafted under the latter, among several other Bills.
An expert from New Zealand had also been commissioned to ascertain its comprehensiveness while a Select Committee of the Council Negri comprising Malays, Ibans and Chinese had been set up to oversee the drafting and later, the approval before tabling it.
After looking into the drafted Land Code Bill, even as early as 1950s, Mooney identified several parts of the Bill which he deemed to be flawed. A major flaw was the natives not being given legal rights but only customary rights over their land, as Mooney highlighted on page 184 in his memoir “A Servant of Sarawak: Reminiscences of a Crown Counsel in 1950s Borneo”.
He also took note of the commercial value of timber and foresaw that “concessions could be granted which would encroach on the customary rights of people… people could lose their homes as well as the source of their livelihood.”
Taking his responsibilities with utmost seriousness, he took it upon himself to look into the possibility of amending the said Bill. Unfortunately, at the time, as the British government was preparing to withdraw from Sarawak, his superiors refused to make further amendments and preferred to leave the thorny issue to government elected following a foreseeable independence. As such, Mooney had to table the controversial Bill without amendments.
As the AG, Mooney needed to explain the Bill and as well as an unprecedented number of other bills and the necessity to pass them. Among the Bills tabled that day, it is believed one of them was the Oil Mining Ordinance 1958, which after 60 years, granted the foothold and grounds for Sarawak to fight for its oil and gas rights in the present, even in the face of Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74), a law drawn more than two decades later.
For Mooney, the Land Code Bill was “by far the most important piece of legislation that had been put to the Council Negeri. It affected everyone and I had to anticipate a host of questions” (P187).
He described the tabling of it as a “nightmare” and the process as a “baptism of fire”.
The day came and Mooney chose to present the Bill in Bahasa Malaysia because he “wanted to be able to speak directly to members” since the whole House, except for the new Chief Secretary and Financial Secretary who were European, all spoke the language.
He outlined the provisions and explained the necessity of them before he sat down and expected “a torrent of questions and detailed objections”. (P188)
Despite being the most important Bill ever drafted, the irony was, not even one question was raised. The Bill was passed unanimously. One Bill, however, was objected to and debated on. It was the simple Bill to stop unlicensed members of the public collecting wild orchids, a subject where a few Council Negri members took a strong stand.
“The experience was a striking illustration of how business is done not only in legislative assemblies but on many boards and committees. Major complicated matters are dealt with in a very short time because many members do not understand the issues and have not taken the trouble to study them. They keep quiet. But when the item of the agenda is something very simple, everyone has an opinion.
“Professor Parkinson in his entertaining treatise on Parkinson’s Law says that a board of directors contemplating a project costing many millions will approve it in a matter of minutes. The next item on the agenda is where the office boy parks his bicycle and two hours is spent arguing on it,” said Mooney. (P189)
This was Mooney’s experience concerning lawmaking 64 years ago. As an expatriate working in Sarawak, Mooney understood that being a guest here, he should not be too harsh and was commenting on the issue with much reservation and courtesy.
In the course of time between then and now, we cannot help but question, have our lawmakers improved?
During the crucial time of tabling of bills of significance such as the PDA74, did Parliamentarians from Sarawak understand the long-term negative impact of the Bill? Moving forward, another question has also risen: why are Sarawakian MPs not objecting to the Territorial Sea Act 2012 passed a decade ago? Have they studied the Bill and are fully aware of its implications and effect? Or did they just vote as directed by the party whip?
We can forgive our forefathers and predecessors for being ignorant and uninformed due to limited education opportunities in Mooney’s time. Today, following ubiquitous education opportunities, can our elected representatives continue to excuse themselves and push the responsibility of understanding bills tabled to only their party colleagues who have legal backgrounds while continuing to play dumb and only join debates on lesser bills?
What is even more disappointing is that some elected representatives just sit through the august House without uttering a word in their five-year term, or for much more than five years.
Both MPs and State assemblymen are lawmakers. Like it or not, they have no excuse to be ignorant of the content and implication of any Bill just because it does not pertain to their area of training or professional expertise.
As a late-bloomer State, we can forgive those in the past for failing to protect our land, natural resources and coast. However, it is totally senseless and unforgivable that after entering the new millennium, we continue to choose elected representatives who fail to understand the Bills introduced and let ourselves to be continued to be fooled by greedy outsiders who pretend to be caring big brothers. — DayakDaily
