KOTA KINABALU: Alluding to raging discussions on the ‘validity’ of the 20-point document, Sabah PAS has urged locals not to get distracted by statements issued by Barisan Nasional leaders which are aimed at confusing voters.
Sabah Barisan Nasional state Speaker Salleh Keruak had sparked angry retorts from both sides of the political divide when he recently dismissed the 20-point document as non-existent.
Salleh’s statement that the 20-point document was no longer valid because it is already part of the Malaysian constitution.
But Sabah PAS claims the issue of the 20-point document is not as important as the 1963 Malay Agreement which detailed the rights of the state as a nation-member of the Malaysia.
Pointing this out its youth chief Lahirul Latigu said while no one can deny that the spirit of the 20-points document which included safeguards for Sabah, the document itself was not an official entity.
“The 20 points itself is not an official document as such has no legal basis.
“While we fight each other about the validity of the 20 points, we must not forget about the 1963 Malaysian Agreement, which clearly spells out the rights given to Sabah.
“These rights are what we should look into and focus our attention on,” he told reporters here.
‘BN confusing voters’
Lahirul said the youth wing had in recent days received many questions with regards to the 20-point document and the Malaysia Agreement.
“We are educating the public on the content and importance of the document. We are doing this in two phases, covering our members and the public.
“The 20 points (agreeement) is now a hot issue hence. We don’t want BN to confuse Sabahans. We will continue to explain and educate Sabahans about their rights, ” he said.
Yesterday opposition State Reform Party (STAR) Sabah chief Jeffrey Kitingan reminder leaders that there are in fact four documents that are pertinent to Sabah and Sarawak’s history and these were the 1963 Malaysia Agreement , the 20-18 points, the IGC Report and the Cobbold Commission Report.
He said irrespective of whether the contents of the four constitutional documents and/or conventions were incorporated into the Federal Constitution, “the documents/conventions continue to exist.”
“These are historical, political and constitutional documents which supplement/complement the constitution and must be read together with it.
“Half truths distort the true picture and do a grave disservice and injustice to our people,” Jeffrey said.
Gigitan nyamuk tidak perlu dibalas
1 week ago