Raziah Raids Reserve Forest lands and Taib Profits – Major Exclusive!

Raziah Raids Reserve Forest lands and Taib Profits – Major Exclusive!

14 Jan 2011

This post is also available in: Iban, Malay

Bejewelled - Raziah's huge wealth owes to handouts of land titles and contracts from her brother the Chief Minister

We can reveal that Taib’s tycoon sister, Raziah Mahmud, has once again been seizing land from Sarawak’s people.  And our investigations have exposed a clumsy cover-up that has lifted the lid on a massive land-grab that implicates the Chief Minister, Taib Mahmud himself. 

Raziah’s attempts to conceal her involvement in plans to replace Reserved Forest Lands at Ensengei with yet another vast oil palm plantation have exposed a far wider scandal.  We can now show the method by which she and Taib have extracted around a hundred thousand of hectares of state land – an area amounting to roughly half the size of Brunei – over the past decade alone! 

Alienation of traditional Native Lands  

Ensengei, is one of the few remaining areas of Forest Reserve Land left in lowland Sarawak.  The traditional Native Customary Land Rights of the indigenous tribes of the area were recognised by the British in 1947, but in 1984 Taib ruled that it should be acquired by the State as a Forest Reserve.  However, in a series of deals between 2005 and 2008 he then handed on roughly twenty thousand hectares of this supposedly protected land to his own sister!   

As so often happens in Sarawak, the first the Bidayuh communities of the area knew about these secretive transactions was when a series of logging companies turned up in their foraging areas and fruit tree plantations waiving licences to cut them down.  This is the way Taib and BN have chosen to run Sarawak.  

Disputed areas

However, thankfully, by 2008 human rights lawyers, like the PKR leader Baru Bian, had developed successful strategies for opposing Taib’s seizures of Native Lands in the courts.  His team has launched a number of cases against these companies and also against the Government of Sarawak, who sold the land and issued the licences.  Until these matters are resolved the loggers have been ordered to pause their activities in the contested areas.    

Raziah’s clumsy cover-up  

Hamid Sepawi - Taib's favoured cousin and major shareholder of Usiha Jasamaju

Meanwhile our investigations now demonstrate what few of the local people and their lawyers have been aware of till now, which is that the person behind the actions they are fighting is Taib’s own sister, Raziah Mahmud.  Not only has she got close connections with the two largest palm oil companies to be awarded licences to destroy Ensengei, Lambang Sinar Mas and Usaha Jasamaju, but we have also established from the official records that she clearly secured and probably still controls their land titles.  

We can confirm that Lambang Sinar Mas is currently owned by the Yu brothers of the construction company Hock Seng Lee Bhd (HSL), well-known business cronies of the Taibs, while  Usaha Jasamaju is owned by a number of companies of whom a major shareholder is Hamid Sepawi.  Sepawai is the fabulously wealthy cousin of the Chief Minister, who has received numerous lands and favours from the State of Sarawak, to become one of Malaysia’s richest men.

Lambang Sinar Mas, owned by the Yu brothers

Usaha jasamaju, owned largely by Hamid Sepawi

However damming evidence in the Land Registry records reveals that the company which negotiated the issuing of the Ensengei land titles was in fact neither of the above, but Kumpulan Parabena, which is owned and managed by Raziah herself.  You can tell this fact because the address and contact details given in the land registry ( as shown above) is the same for both sets of land titles and it is the address for Kumpulan Parabena –  154/56 Jalan Sungai, Padungan, Kuching – and not the companies mentioned (see entry for Kumpulan Parabena in the Register of Companies below).

The address and telephone in the Land Registry matches that of Kumpulan Parabena

Sarawak Report can futher confirm that the two managers named as the contacts in the Land Registry concerning these two sets of transactions with Lambang Sinar Mas and with Usaha Jayamaju (whose concessions are next door to each other) work directly for Raziah Mahmud.  Chia Hon Thin and Paul Yu Chee may appear to be representing the two other companies but they give the same Kumpulan Parabena address!  Likewise Chia’sgiven telephone number Kuching 082 41 3877 matches Kumpulan Parabena’s number in the telephone directory.

Its all in the yellow pages!

Of even greater worry is that our exclusive research has shown that Chia has used these contact details in numerous other transactions that have been registered in the Land Registry.  We will be detailing this further explosive material in later reports, but it means that land titles which have been handed out to dozens of apparently different companies worth hundreds of millions of ringgit were clearly in fact secretly owned and controlled by Raziah Mahmud! 

Sarawak Report believes that the extent of these lands could amount to roughly half the size of Brunei, all acquired from the State of Sarawak at nominal prices by the sister of the Chief Minister!

Taib himself has profited! 

Even more shocking than this fraud is the fact that we have recently proved that another major shareholder of  Kumpulan Parabena is actually Taib Mahmud himself !  We have established that he personally owns shares in Mesti Bersatu, which in turn owns shares in Miri Properties,which in turn holds shares in Kumpulan Parabena!  This directly implicates him in the profit that has been made in this fraudulent activity and raises even further questions about why he has chosen to hand out so much land to his own sister.

Raziah's daughter Elia Abas - rather young to be a Director of a major Oil Palm Plantation enterprise! Nevetheless she was one of two Directors of Lambang Sinar Mas when it was handed 16,000 hectares of Forest Reserve Land. Her Dad was the other and her Mum was the Secretary!

The remaining shareholders of Kumpulan Parabena are also members of the Mahmud family and Sarawak Report also intends to detail shortly the enormous number of profitable Sarawak State contracts and indeed Federal projects that have been handed to this company.  This means that Taib has also been handing vast amounts of state money directly to a company that he owns himself !  Is this what his Political Secretary Karim Hamza meant when he recently suggested there is nothing wrong with a politician taking advantage of  ‘business opportunities’ that come their way ?  

 More proof  

This is not the only proof of Raziah’s involvement in the Ensengei Land Titles.  We can show that in a further attempt to conceal the details of this shabby land-grab, she carried out the common family practise of obtaining land titles through a little-known company and then quickly selling that company on to a trusted third party for a fat profit.  This way she clearly hoped to disguise her  original acquisition of the title! ( We have exposed this practise in earlier reports). 

A historical research of Malaysia’s official Register of Companies proves that while Lambang Sinar Mas is now listed as belonging to the Yu brothers,  at the time the land titles were granted by Taib’s office the company belonged to his sister and her third husband Robert Geneid!  The official records (see below) show first that the company, which was incorporated on 25th Dec 2003, was taken over by Razia on 28th Jan 2004, at which time its address moved to to that of Kumpulan Parabena. 

The Geneids (Mrs Geneid is Razia Mahmud) took over Lambang Sinar Mas 28.01.04 and located it at Parabena's Offices

A Directors’ Report filed in 2005 also shows clearly that the company was taken over by the Geneids in January 2004, with her husband and young daughter Eliah Abas in the position of Directors, before being later passed on to the Yu brothers in January 2005 (below). 

Raziah's husband and daughter were Directors of Lambang Sinar Mas during the key period 28.01.04 - 25.01.05 when the land titles were issued

We can then see from the current Land Registry that a raft of Land Titles covering around 16,000 hectares of land were issued to Lambang Sinar Mas on 21st May 2004 for a very reasonable price of RM11.5 million. 

Lambang Sinar Mas receives its land titles in Ensengei a few months later in May 2004

 At this time, as the copies below prove, the shareholders of Lambang Sinar Mas were Raziah Mahmud, holding 70% of the shares directly and a company called Mahligai Naluri Sdn Bhd, with 28% of the shares.  Mahligai Naluri is jointly owned by Raziah and her 3rd husband Robert Geneid, who is also the director of Lambang Sinar Mas!

Lambang Sinar Mas's shareholders at the time the land titles were given were 70% Raziah and 28% a company owned by Raziah and her husband. Mystery surrounds the remaining 2% of the shares and whether these held a controlling vote!

Even more proof!

If there remain any doubters that the Geneids were the ones who received the native lands from Taib then the Land Registry’s historical records will further confirm the fact.  Because RIGHT UP UNTIL 2008 (by which time various criticisms had been published about the Geneids and Lambang Sinar Mas), Robert Geneid was STILL listed as the contact point for the company!  This means that although the company was apparently sold on in January 2005 to the Yus, Robert Geneid remained the contact point with the State Government as late as 2008 with regard to the land titles of the palm oil plantation.

Even so, the clumsy cover-up bears little scrutiny.  Although it was clearly decided to alter the name on the Land Register to camoflage Raziah and Robert, placing Mr Paul Yu as the contact instead, the address and phone number remained that of Raziah and Robert’s offices at Kumpulan Parabena!  We therefore state that it is plainly obvious that this was merely another half-baked attempt to conceal the Geneid’s continuing illegal interests in this land that was confiscated from the Bidayuhs and Ibans of Ensengei.

Land Registry 2008 - this extract is proof that Robert Geneid is the real contact at the Land Registry - he only changed his name to Yu's as camoflage. The address and telephone remained that of his company Kumpulan Parabena!

Once Lambang Sinar Mas had acquired the Land Titles we can see that Raziah quickly passed on formal ownership of the company to the Yu family on 25th January 2005.  The rapid sale was clearly designed to disguise the fact that Taib had handed the land to his sister, who has doubtless made a very handsome profit out of the transaction.  Between the acquisition and the sale the company issued a financial report showing that the company’s assets as of 31st December 2004 (days before the sale) had gone from zero to RM13.8 million worth of  land titles.  New Year’s Eve was apparently regarded as a sensible quiet time to register this sudden acquisition of assets from the state!

Moving the ownership in January 2005 meant changing directors!

Even so, despite the sale, Raziah and her husband Robert’s company has continued to be the contact registered in the official records of the land registry!  This represents a clear signal that despite the public transfer of ownership she has continued to exercise a controlling interest over the concessions and is effectively the real manager of the venture to log the Native Customary Lands of Ensengei. 

Decked in jewels - Raziah Mahmud

With these details now made public can Mrs Geneid dare to claim that she has not profited from this venture, which represents a clear conflict of interest for her brother the Chief Minister of Sarawak? 

Does not the series of attempted cover-ups prove that she knew full well that it was unacceptable for her brother to alienate Native Customary Lands, so that they could then be handed to his sister to cut down and turn into palm plantations – all without a shred of compensation to the poor owners of the land and only a nominal payment to the State of Sarawak?

Is this why Abdul Taib Mahmud has become so widely known as the ‘Thief Minister’ and not the ‘Chief Minister’?

How much has Raziah made?  

Parabena's offices at 154/156 Jalan Sungei Padungan have in fact been kept closed for the past half year. The company moved out of these premises at around the time Sarawak Report began mentioning it in its investigations!

According to the Land Registry the state government handed just under 20,000 hectares of Ensengei Forest to the two Kumpulan Parabena companies for the bargain price of RM13 million.  Other sales of plantation land would suggest that the true value would have been nearer RM100 million.  So it is inconceivable that this secretive series of transactions between Taib and his sister did not make them a very large sum of money at the expense of the State and the traditional native owners of the land.  

We request that the Yu brothers and the shareholders of Usaha Jasamaju disclose how much they actually paid for the hand-over of the valuable titles and whether Mrs Geneid does indeed continue to exercise a level of control over their dealings with the Land Registry as indicated by the fact that as late as 2010 Kumpulan Parabena remained the key contact for the concession-holders?

Peter Runin, one of the representatives of the 14 Iban and Bidayuh longhouse villages who have taken the State Government and the licence holders to court over the land-grab, says that the people of the area are very angry and will not be bought off by paltry compensation packages.  He explained:  

“They want to cut down our trees and plant oil palm, but we want to keep our lands” 

What seems likely is that Sarawak Report’s latest revelations will add a new dimension to their meeting this weekend to discuss their case against the government and it is likely to strengthen their legal case as well. 

A case of fraud?  

Ruling on the case in January last year the Judicial Commissioner, Y.A Puan Rhodzariah Bt. Bujang, observed that  

 “Mr. Baru Bian is right .. Native customary rights land should not be alienated, period”  

However, she judged that the natives of Ensengei should only make their case against the State Government and not the title-holders who had received the concessions, UNLESS they could prove fraud. On this she said:  

“the claimant of these native customary rights land has a legitimate complaint against the issuer of the land title and should take issue with them; not the title holder unless they can prove fraud as stipulated in section 132(1) of the Land Code”.  

Fancy new office location - Raziah now runs her multi-million ringgit Empire of properties and contracts handed to her by the state from her grandiose new offices in Kuching. But all she does is pass on the cheap land titles and state contracts to others for a massive profit!

Given that we have now shown that the title-holder was in fact the sister of the issuer of the land titles and that clearly all parties were well aware of the issues regarding the native land rights, it will be interesting to know whether the courts indeed do in the end decide that a fraud has taken place.  If so, this fraud will be a fraud carried out by the Chief Minister of Sarawak against his people with the collusion of his sister and crony companies.  


Sign up to receive regular updates from Sarawak Report

Your views are valuable to us, but Sarawak Report kindly requests that comments be deposited in suitable language and do not support racism or violence or we will be forced to withdraw them from the site.

  • najibrazak

    When I see friend Taib at the banquet to which I am kindly invited by the Sarawak taxpayer I must congratulate him and sister Raziah on a series of swindles that would do credit to my predecessor Mahatir whose corruption activity, at least in part, appears on Wikileaks today. Taib is still the winner in the bribery and corruption stakes by several billions and I will have to acknowledge that. Maybe he can give me some tips over the dinner table on how to get richer quicker!

    • Papa Orang Utan

      The whole state of Sarawak is Taib's business interprise. That's the reality. He owns the state & the people & if he wins this coming state election, he will own your soul!!!. He makes whatever decision he wants for himself to build his empire at the expense of the people because majority of the Sarawakians are poor in thoughts & reasonings. They just follow as long it is BN, nothings else. Pity!!!!!!!!!! Just mention BN the rural people will vote but they don't know what the real Politics Of Development advocated by Taib. Taib even owns their taie, what a shame in this modern world, things like this still happen!!!!

  • http://none Raja Manggeng says..

    Too bad, all the rubber garden that where the people at Kpg Mugu Kopi earned their living have all been cut and made way for HSL oil palm plantation.

    Bidayuh's loss and Chinese gain . No body compensated them poorly.The state paid paltry sum and the land handed to HSL.YB Roland Sagah also closed bothy eyes.Is this the type of wakil rakyat that we people want?? NO.So i hope that the Bidayuh at Kpg Mugu Kopi,Kpg Rayang and nearby areas have to think twice.Kiss their bloody ass out

  • http://none Watch Dog says…

    We will get you when we are in office and charge you especially Raziah Mahmud for:

    1.Money Laundering-money earned in

    illegal ways.

    2.Tax Evasion- We will pursue and see how

    much income are declared and how much

    tax are paid.

    3.Cronyism and abuse of power.

    4. Bank Negara Malaysia to probe

    illegal money transfer overseas.

    **Ministry of Finance too to help

    address the situation.**

    5.Replace head of MACC Sarawak,no more

    bite as he is scared or unqualified.

    The thieves are getting serious.Let them all flee away .We will ask UN and Swiss Government to return any funds hold in Swiss Bank notably UBS,Zurich.

    • Strategist

      "Watch Dog",agree fully with all that you said. For the last 30 years or so, the brains of the Taib family and cronies are all dead and immune to their country folks' suffering and hardship after having plundered, and robbed Sarawak and grabbed natives' NCR lands.

      These people have no more human feeling left in them any more and are very thick faced and daring in spite of extensive critism and exposure hurled against them. they couldn't less and they don't see what is right and wrong anymore because they take pleasure in doing all these illegal activities

      The day will come when you charge and drag all of them to court and upon conviction, throw all of them into jail and recover everything of all that they have stolen,stripping them all off everything except only the clothes on their bodies and without leaving any stone unturned. Then they will regret too late.

      • http://none Watch Dog says…

        Thanks Strategist. Can you imagine the rubber garden at Kpg Mugu Kopi being cut down and the land sold to China man .This rubber garden are the livelihood of the Kampong people and just gone like that. I did warn them before but they do not believe me and their YB said that opposition only bark but you see the barking is dead serious.Now no more income and rubber fetches RM12.50 per Kg.Now you go and slave for Chinaman earning RM15.00 per day,that is slavery pay,well below the poverty line at RM750.00 per month in Sarawak.

        We mus change and now is the time for bargain plea Mr Thief minister.

    • Observer

      Wake up all of you. if Eygpt can do it – why can't the people demand for the downfall of Taib's regime and start investigate the corruptness on their land deals!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • http://nil YPL

    In the Batu Sapi bye-election which BN won handsomely, the OPP never attacked the candidate, not even any mention that by consenting to be a BN candidate she actually was supporting the BN power abuse and corruption.' which caused poverty. After the campaign the people on the ground said "Bn visit us every festival to eat and celebrate with us bringing many gifts Opp never" " BN build us roads ,supply us with water and electricity ,housing and many other things like schools and we get profitable sub-contracts, how can you Opp people say making good profit is corruption or bad. " " We are poor people and we think only rich,BN people can help us not you Opp people who are as a poor as we are" So the BN has sowed Conservative politics which is as acceptable as Labour politics. So you have to find new ways to overcome the political problems in the rural areas including attack the BN candidates for personal weaknesses.

  • Patriot My

    Another great research and report on the total fraud by the CM. So disgusting to cheat the Sarawakian. How did we allow this decay to reach to this stage? Next Ge is the best time in our enitre My history to address and stop this rot.

  • Mohamed

    After acquiring all the illegal wealth, all they do is screw around with whites or a race fairer than the taibs. Look at the many daughters and sisters of Taib. Almost all of them married whites. Taib could not charm a White lady despite the enormous ill-gotten wealth and he settle down to the next best thing a fair looking Arab.

    Bloody thieves have low self-esteem of their own race n religion. May Allah send his great curse on these families for not protecting the wealth of its own citizens. After all to Allah the almighty, Taib is nothing as he had toppled in a second even more rich n evil emperors like the Pharos and the rest!

  • Vigilante

    With the state election looming, the state Barisan Nasional (BN) was yesterday given a briefing by senior officers from the national security officials from the federal capital.

    They said the briefing was to tell the state BN on the tactics used by the oppositions in Peninsula Malaysia, and which could be applied here in the coming state election. Hogwash!

    They are getting extremely worried and we got to understand how UMNO/BN's

    Strategy works. UMNO/BN enjoys a 6% vote incumbency advantage in elections. (From gerrymandering, misallocation of voters, phantom voters, postal voters, SPR, police, govt machinery biased, even outright cheating and bribery). This is a huge handicap against the opposition. That is why UMNO/BN has always won the GE over the past 53 years!

    Typically, in a general election, the voter support between BN and PR is 30% each with 40% fence-sitters in the middle. BN enjoys an incumbency advantage of 6% which means that BN has 36% support, PR 30% and Fence-sitters reduced to 34%. The fight is over this 34%. PR has to win 60% of the fence-sitters to get a simple majority, a very fragile one.

    UMNO has accepted that they cannot rely on MCA, MIC and Gerakan anymore. So they have decided to dump them, go direct to the voters and concentrate on Sabah and Sarawak. It is possible that if UMNO is still successful in the next GE, they will drop the 3 Peninsular Malaysia stooges (MCA, MIC & Gerakan) and team up with Sabah and Sarawak. It will still possible for them to cobble together a working majority with 115 to 120 seats. See more details from

    Their strategy here on is becoming clearer, using memes. Find out more at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meme [ quite similar to Obama’s Use of Hidden

    Hypnosis Techniques in His Speeches and in his presidential campaigning and there is evidence to prove that he used a little-known and highly deceptive and manipulative form of “hack” hypnosis on millions of unaware Americans, when he was stumping.

  • mount merapi

    This greedy Raziah Mahmud is filthy rich. Ask her how many houses she owns in Paris, Singapore, Canada, Australia, Kuala Lumpur. How many shops she owns in Pavilion, KL? How many condominiums in Singapore, KL, London etc? She is a real pirate, grabbing lands from poor people. .Muka tak malu! If you want to be rich ask her how she did it. Get the projects from Taib or the Federal Govt, then subcon them. Easy money. Is it true that of all the siblings Taib trust her the most?

    • anynomous

      what for,usless.

  • http://yahoo Free Sarawak Informa


    BREAKING NEWS 15/01/11



    (Demos spread to Algeria)


    It has just been reported that Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali has fled Tunisia following a month of mass demonstration against corruption, unemployment, high food prices and demands that the repressive dictatorship of the Ben Ali regime to quit power immediately.

    The demonstrations also spread to oil rich Algeria..

    The issues are very similar to what the Sarawak People are facing.

    The demonstrations broke out following Wiki Leaks disclosure of the Ben Ali’s corruption. A number of demonstrators have been shot dead by police- casualties of their struggle for democracy and human rights.


    Background on Tunisia- (Sounds familiar?)

    Aljazeera News-Youtube:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri3ugT84LAk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOtLPwj-Fzs http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ5wa61jhDY

    BBC News Report

    Press TV news:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VgCGCKXUaM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DB6F06_PMro

    BBC Report today:

    15 January 2011 Last updated at 07:08

    Tunisia: Ex-President Ben Ali flees to Saudi Arabia.

    Protesters walk through tear gas during clashes with riot police in downtown of the capital Tunis January 14, 2011. President Ben Ali resigned after weeks of unrest over corruption and unemployment

    Continue reading the main story

    Tunisia revolt

    Tunisian President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali has fled with his family to Saudi Arabia, after being forced from office after 23 years in power.

    The 74-year-old leader conceded power after protests over economic issues escalated into rallies against him.

    Prime Minister Mohammed Ghannouchi has taken over as interim president, and a state of emergency has been declared.

    Mr Ghannouchi has said he will meet political leaders on Saturday in an attempt to form a government.

    Dozens of people have died in recent weeks as unrest has swept the country and security forces have cracked down on demonstrations over unemployment, food price rises and corruption.

    ‘Regain trust’

    After abandoning power in Tunis, Mr Ben Ali boarded a plane with his family and left the country, amid widespread speculation about where he was travelling to.

    French media reported that President Nicolas Sarkozy had rejected a request for his plane to land in France.

    Continue reading the main story

    “Start Quote

    We are at the service of the Tunisian people. Our country does not deserve everything that is happening. We must regain the trust of citizens in the government”

    End Quote Mohammed Ghannouchi Interim leader

    A Saudi palace statement later said Mr Ben Ali had arrived in the country early on Saturday.

    “Out of concern for the exceptional circumstances facing the brotherly Tunisian people and in support of the security and stability of their country… the Saudi government has welcomed President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and his family to the kingdom,” the statement said.

    An overnight curfew was lifted on Saturday morning, but AFP news agency reported that central Tunis remained deserted after a night of looting in several suburbs.

    Earlier Mr Ghannouchi said his priority was to restore security, in the face of looting and robberies.

    “I salute the fact that groups of young people have got together to defend their neighbourhoods but we can assure them we will reinforce their security,” he said.

    “We are at the service of the Tunisian people. Our country does not deserve everything that is happening. We must regain the trust of citizens in the government,” he added.

    However, it is not yet clear whether protesters will accept Mr Ghannouchi’s interim leadership, or take to the streets for further demonstrations.

    Continue reading the main story

    Fall from power

    Tunisia’s President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali addresses the nation in this still image taken from video, January 13, 2011.

    * 17 Dec: A graduate sets himself on fire in Sidi Bouzid over lack of jobs, sparking protests

    * 24 Dec: Protester shot dead in central Tunisia

    * 28 Dec: Protests spread to Tunis

    * 8-10 Jan: Dozens of deaths reported in crackdown on protests

    * 12 Jan: Interior minister sacked

    * 13 Jan: President Ben Ali promises to step down in 2014

    * 14 Jan: Mr Ben Ali dissolves government and parliament, then steps down

    * Profile: Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali

    The BBC’s Wyre Davies in Tunis said many protesters had ignored the curfew to celebrate on the streets on Friday evening.

    Our correspondent says they will now want to see the fruits of their demonstrations, and will not settle for the elite remaining in power.

    ‘New government’

    Mr Ghannouchi, a 69-year-old former finance minister who has been prime minister since 1999, has said he will meet representatives of political parties on Saturday to form a government, calling it a “decisive day”.

    He said he hoped the new government would “meet expectations”.

    The wave of protests began in mid-December after an unemployed graduate set himself on fire when police tried to prevent him from selling vegetables without a permit. He died in early January.

    Demonstrations came to a head on Friday as thousands of people gathered outside the interior ministry, a symbol of the regime, and many climbed onto its roof. Police responded with volleys of tear-gas grenades.

    President Ben Ali, who had already promised to step down in 2014, dissolved his government and the country’s parliament, and declared a state of emergency.

    The state of emergency decree bans gatherings of more than three people and imposes a night-time curfew. Security forces have been authorised to open fire on people not obeying their orders.

    UK travel agents have scrambled to pull hundreds of tourists out of the country, and companies including Thomson, First Choice and Thomas Cook have cancelled flights scheduled to leave for Monastir on Sunday.

    The UK, the US and France are among the countries advising against non-essential travel to Tunisia.

    Mr Ben Ali, 74, was only Tunisia’s second president since independence from France in 1956. He was last re-elected in 2009 with 89.62% of the vote.

    BBC Report 14/01/11

    Thousands of people are staging an unprecedented protest in the Tunisian capital, calling on President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali (1987 to 2011, six years short of Taib’s record) to quit immediately.

    Police have fired tear gas at the crowds protesting outside the interior ministry in Tunis over corruption, unemployment and high food prices.

    Doctors say that 13 people were killed in overnight clashes in the capital.

    On Thursday night, Mr Ben Ali – who has governed Tunisia since 1987 – announced he would stand down in 2014.

    Human rights groups say more than 60 people have died in recent weeks as unrest has swept the country and security forces have cracked down on the protests.

    Tunisia’s President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali addresses the nation in this still image taken from video, January 13, 2011. Mr Ben Ali pledged to take action on food prices and end internet censorship

    The demonstrators have called on Mr Ben Ali to go straight away, saying Tunisia cannot have true democracy while he remains in charge. Trade unions have called a general strike.

    The BBC’s Adam Mynott in Tunis says there is now a public clamour for change that has become a tide which will be very difficult to hold back.

    A BBC Arabic reporter, Mohamed Ballut, says demonstrations are reportedly taking place in other cities, including Sidi Bouzid in the south, where the protests began four weeks ago.

    They started after an unemployed graduate set himself on fire when police tried to prevent him from selling vegetables without a permit. He died a few weeks later.

    Mr Ben Ali, 74, is only Tunisia’s second president since independence from France in 1956. He was last re-elected in 2009 with 89.62% of the vote.

    Tourists going home

    Meanwhile, UK tour operator Thomas Cook is pulling out all 1,800 of its customers currently on holiday in Tunisia.

    Thomas Cook and another holiday company, Thomson First Choice, are cancelling departures to Tunisia scheduled for Sunday 16 January. However, Thomson are not bringing home visitors already in Tunisia.

    Continue reading the main story


    * 17 Dec: Graduate Mohammed Bouazizi sets himself on fire in protest at lack of job opportunities

    * 24 Dec: Protester Mohamed Ammari shot dead in central Tunisia

    * 28 Dec: Protests spread to Tunis

    * 2 Jan: Hackers from Anonymous launch attack on Tunisian government websites

    * 5 Jan: Mohammed Bouazizi dies

    * 7 Jan: Bloggers and activists arrested

    * 8-10 Jan: Dozens of deaths reported in crackdown on protests

    * 11 Jan: Schools and universities closed

    * 12 Jan: Interior minister sacked

    * 13 Jan: President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali promises to step down in 2014

    Tourism is key to Tunisia’s economy and an important source of jobs.

    The UK, the US and France are among the countries advising against non-essential travel to Tunisia.

    “The situation is unpredictable and there is the potential for violence to flare up, raising the risk of getting caught up in demonstrations,” the UK Foreign Office said in its latest travel advisory.

    In his speech on Thursday night, Mr Ben Ali said there was “no presidency for life” in Tunisia. He said he did not intend to amend the constitution to remove the upper age limit for presidential candidates, which would have allowed him to stand for a further term in 2014.

    The president, who earlier this week had blamed the unrest on “terrorists”, also said he felt “very, very deep and massive regret” over the deaths of civilians in the protests.

    He said he had ordered troops to stop firing on protesters except in self-defence, and pledged to take action on food prices, which have gone up fourfold in recent weeks.

    Afterwards, Mr Ben Ali’s supporters took to the streets of Tunis, cheering and sounding car horns.

    In a further overture, Foreign Minister Kamel Mourjane said it would be possible to form a government of national unity involving the opposition. Speaking to France’s Europe 1 radio on Friday, he also held out the possibility of early parliamentary elections.

    But human rights activist Mohamed Abbou said he believed President Ben Ali was “fooling the Tunisians with promises that have no tomorrow”.

    On Thursday, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Arab leaders they would face growing unrest unless they enacted real economic and political reform.

    Mrs Clinton was speaking in Doha at the end of a four-nation visit to the Gulf.


    FSIS Comments: The news reports do not need explaining. Viewers can draw their own conclusions.

    Tunisia is a Muslim country and people have lived under a repressive regime since 1987. The tension broke over 4 weeks ago with food price increases and years of simmering people’s anger exploded.

    Demonstrations has also broken out on Algeria.

    This has the potential of spreading over to many Middle-eastern and Northern African countries where many western support regimes remain in power through repression of the people [as in “Malaysia”].

    Free Sarawak Information Service

  • http://none Watch Dog says…





  • Babeh

    Last year(2010) Taib cronies paid about RM200,000 to compensate peoples namely Kpg Baru, Kpg Bunga, Kpg Kuhas & Kpg Plaman Baki for the NCR land disputes at Engsengei areas. Baru Bian represent the peoples. Tqvm to Baru Bian.

  • Babeh

    – 1 – [S-22-220-2008-I]



    SUIT NO.: 22-220-2008-I















    20 (Representing themselves and other owners, occupiers

    and/or proprietors of Native Customary Rights (NCR)

    Land from Kampung Baru Mawang, Kampung Bunga,

    Kampung Menggu Lalang, Kampung Plaman

    Baki/Kuhas, Kampung Tarat Mawang, Kampung

    25 Tarat Melawi, Kampung Tarat Sibala

    94700 Serian … PLAINTIFFS


    30 1. USAHA JASAMAJU SDN BHD (CO. NO. 660630-K)


    96000 SIBU

    2. BESRICHAS SDN BHD (CO. NO. 625431-D)


    93100 KUCHING



    40 93450 KUCHING

    4. POLIGA SDN BHD (CO. NO. 586847-T)


    – 2 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    LRG ROCK 2

    93200 KUCHING

    5. SIBU SLIPWAY SDN BHD (CO. NO. 228470-H)


    93450 KUCHING

    6. SOUTHERN FORCE SDN BHD (CO. NO. 484050-K)

    LOTS 1181-1183 2ND FLOOR MCLD MIRI


    98000 MIRI










    25 R U L I N G

    The Plaintiffs commenced an action for various declaratory

    reliefs relating to their native customary rights over lands in respect

    of which timber licences were issued and alienation of land under

    30 Provisional Leases were granted by the authorities under the

    relevant legislations. The 4th Defendant, under enclosure 34 and

    the 7th to 9th Defendants under enclosure 51 filed almost identical

    applications to strike out the Plaintiffs’ action under Order 18 rule 19

    and Order 92 of the Rules of the High Court 1980 and were

    35 accordingly heard together.

    – 3 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    The respective applications are founded on the principle

    enunciated in O’REILLY v MACMAN [1983] 2 AC 237 where the

    House of Lords held that, as a general rule, it is contrary to public

    policy and as such an abuse of process for a person seeking to

    5 establish that a decision or action of a person or body infringes

    rights which are entitled to protection under public law, to proceed

    by way of an ordinary claim rather than the judicial review procedure

    under O 53, thereby evading the provision intended to protect public


    10 The principle laid down by Lord Diplock in O’REILLY has

    been applied with the rigidity and precision of an arithmetical

    equation in some of the authorities cited on behalf of the

    Defendants. For example in SHAHRUDDIN BIN ALI & ANOR v


    15 DIVISION & ANOR [2005] 2 MLJ 555 a case concerning the

    extinguishment of native customary rights over land the court in

    dismissing the Plaintiffs’ action stated:

    “ …. the plaintiffs’ remedy to enforce or protect rights created or

    acquired or recognised in accordance with the provisions of the

    20 Land Code must be sought under public law and not private law.

    That being the case, the plaintiffs here should have proceeded

    to seek judicial review of the Minister’s Direction and first

    defendant’s decision under O 53 RHC, unless of course they

    can bring themselves within the exceptions to the general rule

    25 stated in O’Reilly v Mackman (Supra) ….” .

    Similarly, in TR LAMPOH AK DANA & ORS v

    GOVERNMENT OF SARAWAK [2005] 6 MLJ 371 the Plaintiffs’

    action for declaratory reliefs concerning extinguishment of their

    native customary rights over communal native customary lands

    30 was dismissed and the court stated at pp 389-390 as follows:

    – 4 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    “In this particular case, the very fact that the defendant issued

    the Direction to extinguish the NCR over the said land is in itself

    a proof that the defendant recognizes that NCR could have

    existed on the said land. ……………………………………

    5 ……………………….. Since the issuing of the Direction is an

    act of a public body or authority in the form of the Minister for

    Planning and Resources Management the plaintiffs must

    proceed under O 53 of RHC 1980. In order to have the

    Direction quashed the plaintiffs must apply for an order of

    10 certiorari, the Direction being an administrative act of a public

    authority. To move the court for such an order the plaintiffs

    must proceed under O 53 of RHC 1980. In my view it is wrong

    for the plaintiffs to seek a relief in a declaratory order for their

    NCR and then pray for a consequential order that the Minister’s

    15 Direction be quashed. To allow that means to allow the

    plaintiffs to circumvent O 53 of RHC 1980 and all the protections

    afforded by it to the defendants. For that same reasons, I think

    the learned counsel for the plaintiffs’ argument on Chap VI of Pt

    2 of the Specific Relief Act 190 (Act 137), particularly on s 41 of

    20 the Act, is irrelevant and misconceived”.

    Hence, it is argued on behalf of the Defendants that the

    Plaintiffs in the present proceedings are in fact challenging the

    decision of the 7th and 8th Defendants and ought therefore to have

    resorted to Judicial Review to quash those decisions under Order

    25 53 of the RHC 1980. In not doing so, the Plaintiffs have attempted

    to circumvent the strict requirements of Order 53 which constitutes

    an abuse of the process of the court.

    A very similar objection was raised on behalf of the

    respondent in YAB DATO DR. ZAMBRY ABD KADIR & ORS v


    MALAYSIA (INTERVENER) [2009] 4 CLJ 253 where

    the applicants’ action was for declaratory reliefs challenging the

    respondent’s decision to suspend them from the Perak Legislative

    Assembly. The objection was dismissed and the reasons are

    35 stated in the judgment of Augustine Paul FCJ at pp 266-267:

    – 5 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    “The rule in O’Reilly v Mackman [1982] 3 All ER 1124 has been

    adopted by the Court of Appeal in cases such as Sivarasa

    Rasiah v Badan Peguam Malaysia & Anor [2002] 2 CLJ 697,

    Dato Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim v Perdana Menteri Malaysia &

    5 Anor [2007] 3 CLJ 377 and Ahmad Jefri Mohd Jahri v Pengarah

    Kebudayaan & Kesenian Johor & Ors [2008] 6 CLJ 473.

    However, due to the uncertainties in the rule in O’Reilly v

    Mackman [1982] 3 All ER 1124 in England itself the adoption of

    the rule in that case locally must be done so with care and

    10 caution as in Sivarasa Rasiah v Badan Peguam Malaysia &

    Anor [2002] 2 CLJ 697. The result is that the remedies of

    declaratory relief under O 15 r 16 and certiorari must still be

    regarded generally as being alternatives and mutually not


    15 However, whatever restriction there may be on the use of O 15 r

    16 it will not apply where a person seeks to assert, inter alia, his

    right to a legal status. This is statutorily recognised in the form

    of s 41 which reads as follows:

    Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as

    20 to any property, may institute a suit against any person

    denying, or interested to deny, his title to the character or

    right, and the court may in its discretion make therein a

    declaration that he is so entitled, and the plaintiff need not in

    that suit ask for any further relief:

    25 Provided that no court shall make any such declaration

    where the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a

    mere declaration or title, omits to do so”.

    and added at pp 290-291:

    “Clearly the challenge of the applicants to their suspension from

    30 the Legislative Assembly is a matter that affects their legal

    status within the meaning of s 41. They are therefore entitled to

    seek a declaration of their legal right pursuant to O 15 r 16. It

    cannot be argued that they ought to have proceeded under O

    53 itself for declaratory relief for two reasons. Firstly, O 53 does

    35 not say it is the exclusive provision for the grant of declaratory

    relief as stated by Lord Diplock in O’Reilly v Mackman [1982] 3

    All ER 1124 at p 1134 in the following words:

    My Lords, O 53 does not expressly provide that procedure

    by application for judicial review shall be the exclusive

    40 procedure available by which the remedy of a declaration or

    injunction may be obtained for infringement of rights that are

    entitled to protection under public law; nor does s 31 of the

    Supreme Court Act 1981. There is great variation between

    individual cases that fall within O 53 and the Rules of

    45 Committee and subsequently the legislature were, I think, for

    – 6 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    this reason content to rely on the express and the inherent

    power of the High Court, exercised on a case to case basis,

    to prevent abuse of its process whatever might be the form

    taken by that abuse. Accordingly do not think that your

    5 Lordships would be wise to use this as an occasion to lay

    down categories of cases in which it would necessarily

    always be an abuse to seek in an action begun by writ or

    originating summons a remedy against infringement of rights

    of the individual that are entitled to protection in public law.

    10 Secondly, when the Specific Relief act 1950 was enacted O 53

    was not in existence and, thus, adherence to it could not have

    been contemplated”.

    In the present proceedings, the Plaintiffs’ claim to native

    customary rights over lands alienated under the three Provisional

    15 Leases is unarguably ‘a right as to any property’ under the other

    limb of s 41 of the specific Relief Act 1950 and are, therefore,

    entitled to seek a declaration of their right to property under O 15 r

    16 which is consonant with what was laid down in THE


    20 CHIK & 3 ORS & ANOTHER APPEAL [1995] 3 CLJ 35 where

    Gopal Sri Ram JCA (as he then was) referring to the jurisdiction of

    the court to grant declaratory relief under s 41 had this to say at p

    49 which was reproduced with approval in ZAMBRY’s case.

    “Now, the jurisdiction of a Malaysian court to grant declaratory

    25 relief springs from two sources. First there is the statutory basis

    to be found in s 41 of the Specific Relief Act 1950 which reads

    as follows:

    Any person entitled to any legal character, or to any right as to

    any property, may institute a suit against any person denying, or

    30 interested to deny, his title to the character or right, and the

    court may in its discretion make therein a declaration that he is

    so entitled, and the plaintiff need not in that suit ask for any

    further relief:

    Provided that no court shall make any such a declaration where

    35 the plaintiff, being able to seek further relief than a mere

    declaration or title, omits to do so.

    – 7 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    Explanation – A trustee of property is a ‘person interested to

    deny’ a title adverse to the title of some one who is not in

    existence, and for whom, if in existence, he would be a trustee.

    The procedural adjunct to the statutory basis is to be found in O

    5 15 r 16 of the Rules of the High Court 1980, which provides as


    No action or other proceeding shall be open to objection on

    the ground that a merely declaratory judgment or order is

    sought thereby, and the Court may make binding

    10 declarations of right whether or not consequential relief is or

    could be claimed”.

    ZAMBRY’s case has now rendered it unnecessary to

    pretend that litigants in the jungles of Malaysian Borneo have the

    same sophistication as those in 1982 England when O’REILLY

    15 was first enunciated, to comply with the intricacies of Order 53 the

    relevant provisions of which are these:

    “2. (1) An application for any of the reliefs specified in

    paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the Courts of

    Judicature Act 1964 (other than an application for

    20 an order of habeas corpus) shall be in Form 111A.

    (2) An application for judicial review may seek any of

    the said reliefs, including a prayer for a

    declaration, either jointly or in the alternative in the

    same application if it relates to or is connected

    25 with the same subject matter.

    (3) Upon the hearing of an application for judicial

    review, the Court shall not be confined to the relief

    claimed by the applicant but may dismiss the

    application or may any orders, including an order

    30 of injunction or monetary compensation:

    Provided always that the power to grant an

    injunction shall be exercised in accordance with

    the provisions of section 29 of the Government

    Proceedings Act 1948 and section 54 of the

    35 Specific Relief Act 1950.

    – 8 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    (4) Any person who is adversely affected by the

    decision of any public authority shall be entitled to

    make the application.

    (3) (1) No application under this Order shall be made

    5 unless leave therefore has been granted in

    accordance with this rule.

    (2) An application for leave must be made ex parte to

    a Judge in Chambers and must be supported by a

    statement setting out the name and description of

    10 the applicant, the relief sought and the grounds on

    which it is sought, and by affidavits verifying the

    facts relied on.

    (3) The applicant must give notice of the application

    for leave not later than three days before the

    15 hearing date to the Attorney General’s Chambers

    and must at the same time lodge in those

    Chambers copies of the statement and affidavits.

    (4) The Judge may, in granting leave, impose such

    terms as to costs and as to the giving of security

    20 as he thinks fit.

    (5) The grant of leave under this rule shall not, unless

    the Judge so directs, operate as a stay of the

    proceedings in question.

    (6) An application for judicial review shall be made

    25 promptly and in any event within 40 days from the

    date when grounds for the application first arose

    or when the decision is first communicated to the

    applicant provided that the Court may, upon

    application and if it considers that there is a good

    30 reason for doing so, extend the period of 40 days”.

    It is hardly surprising that many a litigant has faced the

    ignominy of having his action dismissed and thereby denied the

    opportunity to present the merits of his claim simply because he is

    unable to meet the strict and mandatory requirements of O 53 but

    35 in the light of ZAMBRY’s case and for the reasons aforesaid the

    Plaintiffs in the present case may yet get that opportunity because

    – 9 – [S-22-220-2008-I]

    the Defendants’ objection to the effect that the Plaintiffs ought to

    have proceeded by way of Judicial Review under O 53 does not

    hold water. There is also no merit in any of the arguments

    advanced on behalf of the Defendants which are predicated on

    5 various provisions of the Land Code because the Plaintiffs’ claim

    to native customary right is not entirely dependent on them. In


    SDN BHD & ORS [2001] 2 CLJ 769 Ian Chin J said:

    “ …. there is no law in Sarawak to say that if you do not apply

    10 for a licence to occupy the land under s 30A of the Land

    Ordinance or s 29 of the Land Code you will lose your native

    customary rights which you have hitherto enjoyed now and

    which your ancestors have enjoyed since the days of the

    Rajahs. Support for the view that whatever native customary

    15 rights were acquired are not affected by the Land Code can be

    found in TR Bujang Ak Untor v TR Tanjong Ak Usat 4 MC 62

    which is a decision made in 1966 where Lee Hun Hoe J (as he

    then was) sitting in appeal with two assessors held that temuda

    acquired prior to 1958 co9ntinue to subsist”.

    20 Similarly, in KERAJAAN NEGERI SELANGOR & ORS v

    SAGONG BIN TASI & ORS [2005] 6 MLJ 289 the CA at pg 302

    stated –

    “So far as authority is concerned, there is Amodu Tijani to which

    the judge referred. There is also the decision of Adong bin

    25 Kuwau & Ors v Kerajaan Negeri Johor & Anor [1997] 1 MLJ 418

    when this upheld a finding by the High Court that aborigines had

    rights at common law over land vested in the State and that

    such rights existed despite the 1954 Act”.

    In the circumstances and for the reasons aforesaid the

    30 respective applications under enclosure 34 and 51 are dismissed

    with costs to be taxed unless agreed.

    – 10 – [S-22-220-2008-I]



    Date: 21st October, 2009


    For the Plaintiffs: Baru Bian

    M/S Baru Bian Advocates


    For the 4th 15 Defendant: Tan Kee Heng

    With Wong Siong Tung and Ling Pei


    M/S S.K. Ling & Co. Advocates



    For the 7th, 8th and Joseph Chioh with McWillyn Jiok

    9th Defendants: of State Attorney-General’s




  • oA


    poor native sarawakians.

    getting crumbs and getting bumped.

    left with nothing but grump.

    a few more elections and there will be nothing left but getting kicked in the bum.


  • native

    Resort to Gandhi's tactics – PEOPLE'S POWER, no aggression. It works during Gandhi's time, why not during our time?

    Our votes can be tampered with as the EC and MACC cannot be trusted! Remember why did it take SO long for Sibu's result to be announced? Why the delay? Who caused the delay? It wasn't mother nature. It wasn't the transport and communication, and what-nots. It was BN-made delay. See that? Now, shall we vote like Sibu voters? Yes. Let's vote like Sibu voters. They had totally ignored the BN's balance/scale logo. Go for any of PR's logos. Not BN's.

    Lawan tetap lawan!

  • mount merapi

    This is Mahatma Gandhi word of wisdom related to this family;

    1. wealth without work

    2 pleasure without conscience

    3.knowledge without character

    4.commerce without morality

    5.science without humanity

    6.worship without sacrifice

    7.politics without principle

  • Orang Kaya

    This is too much already, how can they sleep every nite?? with all the people's money and suffering.

  • anynomous

    they sleep soundly under fresh air con room.if they dont repent,Islam has this to say,they will sleep in bed brighten with fire of hell.

  • Bayi Sarawak

    There are several parcels of prime land in Kuching she should have grabbed them for development The two cemetery along Jalan Haji Openg are great for commercial development. For housing development, there are at least two cemetery in Jalan Batu Kitang which has good feng shui. If she managed to grab it from the people, I would be interested to buy from her at a much higher premium. I think she is my only hope to grab the land for development and benefit Kuchingnites.It is better to disturb the dead than the living, as the dead have no rights to vote, right?

    • http://none Watch Dog says…



  • karma believer


    • anynomous

      hope our feeling are right.

  • Jo Ann Edmund

    I use to love this country but lately I felt that if there is an opportunuty for me to migrate elsewhere, I probably will. What has become of our government? I'm sick of all these news reports and up until now you don't see any of the authorities taking action againts Taib. Infact he is still having his wedding bliss, which I think is trying to divert the attention of the people from all these land grabing, money swindling issues. Take my word for it, in the next few days or months there will be bound to be another sensational stories in the media which will again divert the attention of the people from the critical issues at hand. When we had the Mongolian lady case suddenly Teoh Beng Hock died in a mysterious manner and people will forget the mongolian case. And when Teoh Beng Hock case was hot suddenly there was a case of a little girl went missing and found dead inside a bag several months later. I can't remember which case comes first but it seems that Malaysian Government is good at making the people forget about the injustice done to them. We are a laughing stock to all the other countries. In other countries, the people will not wait 20 to 30 years of injustice to bring down a bad leader. And here we are in Sarawak/Malaysia still shaking hands with our leader everytime he comes for a visit. I am ashame to be a Malaysian or a Sarawakian.

  • Goku

    I'm Malay Sarawakian and working as consultant engineer in South Africa, Canada and Saudi Arabia. When I try to setup my business in Kuching I couldn’t do so due to a lot of corruption in the whole bullshit administration. I known this is because of BN politician practice and create in Kuching since long time ago. Until today I will not come back to Kuching to transfer my experience & knowledge as long as BN still there. I just come back for vacation to visit my family during election to contribute my effort to defeated BN in order to build the future Kuching better for us & our children’s. I am doing this just for getting better life for all the people who live in Kuching not because of I am interested to be politician.



    Dr. Goku

    • http://none Babeh Tebakang says.

      Don't come home,just do your business overseas. All consultants in Sarawak or Malaysia are called "KANTAUTON".Please take a look at Sarawak road,poorly done and yet passed by the kantauton,even a small stretch of road is unusable after only 8 months.All rubbish..just too corrupted Kantauton Enegineers..

      It is better that you practice what you have learned overseas.You cannot penetrate the Thief Minister's clan/cronyies and families.

      God bless you my fellow Sarawakian brother

  • http://none Watch Dog says…

    Quick Raziah,ask your brother to move the army army camp next to Kuching central and ask him to give the land so that you can sell to HSL,hurry up now and the graves too at 5th mile,take them

    the graves at jalan Batu Lintang,jalan Tun Abang openg,4th mile too as well as Jalan batu kitang..Land and Survey will help you with your brother's authority.QUICK!!

  • Meggie

    Greed has no limit. Ask Raziah and Taik, they knew it well.