Tuesday, April 22, 2008

No point "probing" Mahathir

Personally, Sarawak Headhunter thinks having a public enquiry on Mahathir would be a sheer waste of time and public funds, unless we have real solid evidence. If we did, then charge him in court.

Otherwise it would not be in the national interest. We would only be giving him yet another forum to propound his disgusting and self-serving views. Anwar should not make this mistake, no matter how much he would like to redeem himself.

If (or when) Anwar becomes Prime Minister and keeps to the straight path, he would already have redeemed himself. There is no need and indeed no better way to further humiliate Mahathir than to do better than him in all respects, and the latter is a not a difficult proposition, if one only has a conscience and the interests of the nation and its people at heart. The former will follow. Success is the best revenge.

While he was the mastermind, he certainly wasn’t alone. Many others were involved and you could blame practically every ruling party politician for complicity in the affairs of the 80’s and 90’s including Anwar.

Some of these characters are repentant and capable of reform, like Anwar – hopefully, and some not, like Mahathir.

Let history be the judge. And let history not repeat itself.

Mahathir (unlike Anwar, hopefully) is not a man who will regret anything he has done, even if found guilty. This is abundantly clear from his own public utterances. Even if he does regret, he will never admit it. His ego will not permit him to do so. Are we to believe anything he says then?

To paraphrase the Star report: “Asked whether he was ready to express regret over what he did to Anwar now that he has retired for several years, Dr Mahathir said: “Why should I regret? (I had my own survival to think about. Even if I did, why should I admit it?) He was arrested under the laws of the country. (Nobody would dare to arrest me! Not even Anwar. I made sure that there would be no evidence against me. All they have are all only opinions and conjectures, even if true.) He was tried in the courts of the country. (I made sure that I controlled most of the judges, especially the one who tried Anwar. Again, there is no evidence that I did so and I challenge anyone to produce such evidence.) Sentenced by court. (My court and my judge, but who can prove it?) If he was not wrong, no matter what you think about our judiciary, I don’t think he would have been sent to prison.” (Even if he was not wrong, I would have made sure that he would have been found guilty. I don’t see anything wrong with that. Of course I had to make sure that he was sent to prison. I was the nation and Anwar was a threat to the security of the nation. I decided that. How could I be wrong? All of you are wrong. So once again, why should I regret?)

Are we to believe that Mahathir was not an opportunist, a charge which he now levels at Anwar?
Are we to believe that Mahathir is not himself employing a political strategy to show that he has always been right, even if as he admitted himself, he was wrong in his choice of Abdullah (and even Najib, and all those before them, including Anwar).

“Nobody can say anything against him. (Of course nobody could say anything against me either when I was PM, but then I have always been right and he is wrong.) Newspapers report about how great he is. (They did the same about me but then I was really great and he is not.) His own supporters misled him into believing that if he holds elections before the end of his term, he would win a clean sweep. If you look at the record of his statements, he said he would win with zero opposition.” (I made sure I would win all the time, even when there was more than 50% opposition against me. Sure I cheated, but again prove it!)

On claims that his criticisms against Abdullah over the last few years had brought his successor down, he said: “I don’t see why I should not criticise wrongdoings by him.” (But don’t anyone dare say anything about my wrongdoings. I never did anything wrong.)

On why he picked Abdullah to replace him as Prime Minister, he said Abdullah was known as “Mr Clean”. (I thought he could keep me “clean” as well.)

How Abdullah deals with Mahathir now is up to him, but if he had any real backbone, he would expel Mahathir from UMNO. Mahathir would thus make history by having been expelled from both the Old UMNO as well as the New UMNO, as he rightfully deserves. What will he do, form a New New UMNO?

It is now time to cut out that gangrene known as Mahathir but also the gangrene that is affecting our whole nation called UMNO and its equally virulent offshoot BN. That will also take care of Abdullah and the rest of that poisonous gang.

No need to have a public enquiry after that.

Just get on with the task of rebuilding our nation.

Now THAT will make most Malaysians happy, even die-hard UMNO and BN supporters.

Al Tugauw
Sarawak Headhunter

Sunday, April 20, 2008

Five Ibans arrested over NCR dispute

Source: Malaysiakini
Tony Thien | Apr 19, 08 1:37pm

Five Ibans have been arrested by the Miri police on Thursday for what is believed to be the result of their persistent protest against the activities of an oil palm company working on their native customary rights (NCR) land without their consent.

Those arrested are all longhouse residents of Kampung Wawasan in Miri.

However, police appear to have given a different reason for their arrest, and Miri-based NGO Borneo Resources Institute of Malaysia (Brimas) has also failed to obtain the true account of why the five were arrested.

The five were asked by police to go to the Batu Niah police station two days ago to have their statements recorded. However, on arrival at the station, they were brought to the Miri police station and detained.

Brimas executive director Mark Bujang revealed to Malaysiakini today the identities of the five - they are Edi anak Ingah, Angkinsig anak Chundau, Awa, Awat and the village headman Rajang anak Sengalang.

Residents of Rumah Rajang, Kampung Wawasan filed a court suit at the end of last year against a plantation company Mega Jutamas Sdn Bhd alleging enroachment into their NCR land.

According resident Amy anak Alus, the five were requested by CID officers to go down to the Batu Niah police station to have their statements recorded concerning the arrest of another resident who was arrested earlier for allegedly carrying a home-made pistol without a licence. The man has been remanded in police custody since Monday.

Amy claimed police allegation that the man named Siew owned a homemade pistol was false as she believed that the police were trying "to maliciously persecute Siew and the other because of their action on the ground against Mega Jutamas Sdn Bhd."

Mark said Brimas found out that up to late yesterday afternoon the five detained persons have yet to have their statements recorded and not s single police officer has told them the reason for their arrest and detention.

"Brimas questions the police’s motive of the detention as it lacks transparency and does not follow proper procedures of arresting a person," he added.

Prevented from entering their farms

Residents of Kampung Wawasan have been protesting the encroachment of an oil palm plantation company into their land since last year, which they claimed to have native customary rights over.

Mega Jutamas was issued a Provisional Lease on Lot 95 Sawai Land District by the Land and Survey Department for the purpose of an oil palm plantation covering an area of approximately 2,145 hectares.

The residents are protesting because the plantation company workers came in and destroyed their padi fields and also their smallholders’ oil palm gardens. The residents were also stopped by the company's security guards from entering their own farms.

According to Mark, Brimas has found out that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) report done for the company stated in one of its mitigation measures that areas which are not conceded in the plantation for development should be left undisturbed and be clearly defined by proper ground surveys.

However, the company has not complied with the EIA report but proceeded to bulldoze their way through the villagers’ lands.

Last November, headman Rajang was also arrested and detained for 24 hours for allegedly attacking Indonesian workers working for the oil palm company. He denied ever attacking the workers and was later released on police bail pending further police investigations.

Brimas will continue to monitor the situation, Mark said.

Are Hong Kong bankers clearing a path for forest destruction?

Print E-mail
John Berthelsen
22 March 2007
Did major investment banks forget their own forest protection guidelines in the rush for IPO fees?

Image Environmental protesters are charging that HSBC and Credit Suisse have violated their own forest sector guidelines in cooperating in the public listing of a Malaysian logging giant with a record for environmental despoliation.

Samling Global Ltd has long been criticized for the destruction of tropical rainforest across the world and in fact early this year lost its only Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) certification less than a year after it was issued. It began trading on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange on March 7 at a 15 percent premium to its IPO price, giving it market capitalization of US$1.2 billion.

Credit Suisse managed the public listing as global coordinator and was joined by HSBC and Macquarie Securities as joint bookrunners, the institutions responsible for structuring and pricing public offerings and bringing in other underwriters. Both HSBC and Credit Suisse subscribe to forest sector guidelines that seemingly preclude assisting in an IPO for companies with records like Samling’s.

Credit Suisse said in a statement that the bank's business relationship with its client “was put through a comprehensive review process, during which compliance with local environmental regulations and international standards of sustainable management of natural tropical forests was a particularly important issue. We concluded, in line with the other banks involved, that the client's activities are in compliance with these standards. Controversial topics were raised with the client and discussed.”

Samling’s Guyana subsidiary lost its FSC certification two and a half months ago, on Jan. 7. It remains suspended although, according to its prospectus, “we continue to produce and sell logs from our forest concession, but such logs will not be sold as FSC-certified.”

Asked about Samling’s environmental record, a spokesman for HSBC in Hong Kong said any discussion would violate client confidentiality and referred to the bank’s website. In 2003, according to the website, “HSBC adopted the Equator Principles, a set of voluntary guidelines, which apply to project financing. In accordance with this, and our general approach to lending, HSBC will follow the International Finance Corporation Safeguard Policies in respect of forestry.”

In particular, the bank said, “We will not provide facilities and other forms of financial assistance, including any involvement in debt and equity capital markets activities and advisory roles, in respect of commercial logging operations in:
- Primary Tropical Moist Forest
- High Conservation Value Forest
- Logging operations that are in violation of local or national laws in respect of illegal logging
- Logging operations that include any species listed in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna.

In its prospectus for the IPO, Samling said that “we have achieved numerous internationally recognized certifications for different parts of our forestry management and production operations.” In particular, the company said, it was the first privately managed company in Malaysia and the only one in Sarawak to have obtained forest management certifications covering 56,000 hectares of Malaysian timber stands from the Malaysian Timber Certification Council.

On the ground, however, environmentalists say, the company’s operations make a mockery of the certification scheme, and the chapter on risk factors in Samling’s prospectus notes that “as of the latest practicable date, we had not obtained any forest management certifications for our tree plantations in Malaysia of a gross area of approximately 438,000 hectares, or for the gross area of approximately 445,000 hectares in Guyana over which we hold harvesting rights…”

If the company is unable to reinstate the existing certifications or successfully obtain additional ones, “we may not be able to compete effectively in the sale of certified wood products against competitors able to sell certified wood products in greater amounts in markets with demand for such products, thereby adversely affecting our business, revenues and results of operations.”

Samling in particular has carried on a three-year confrontation with the indigenous Penan tribe of Sarawak over the blocking of a timber access road into a logging area that has been called one of Malaysia’s last primary forests. The blockade was broken a few weeks ago when police accompanied by Samling’s logging tractors and bulldozers came in to knock down the barricade.

Ironically, the breaking of the blockade came just five days before representatives of the three governments with jurisdiction over the ecological jewel that is the island of Borneo signed what they called the “Heart of Borneo” declaration, promising to conserve one of the most important centers of biological diversity in the world. The pact was designed to conserve and provide sustainable management for almost a third of the island -- approximately 220,000 square kilometers of equatorial rainforest.

The Samling group is well connected, particularly in Sarawak. A whole panoply of friends, family members or political allies of Abdul Taib Mahmud, the long-serving chief minister of Sarawak, sit on the boards of Samling timber concessions. Yaw Tek Seng, the ethnic Chinese patriarch who heads Samling Global, is related by marriage to a Sarawak state minister. Yaw is close to James Wong, the now-retired Sarawak State Minister for Environment and Local Government, who for many years has been roundly criticized by environmental pressure groups for his closeness to the timber companies that have been accused of raping the North Borneo state.

As an indication of Samling subsidiaries’ closeness to Malaysian authorities, according to the Forests Monitor, a watchdog website dedicated to monitoring logging companies, when 70 Penan tribesmen went to Samling Plywood’s operations to petition them to cease operations on their ancestral land, “the Penan were met by a group of the (Sarawak) Field Police Force, armed with machine guns, tear gas and knives, who verbally abused the Penan and then assaulted and beat them with machine gun butts, boots and knives,” and arrested four of them for trespassing.

The Samling group of companies, headed by the family of timber tycoon Yaw controls an estimated 4 million hectares of tropical forest in Sarawak, Guyana, Cambodia, China and other areas. In the past the company was also active in logging in Papua New Guinea, where it was allegedly involved in illegal logging activities. According to the prospectus it issued at the time of the IPO, it has business operations in Malaysia, Guyana, New Zealand and China and sells its products in more than 30 countries and territories.

According to its website, the FSC was created in 1993 to establish standards for promoting global sustainable harvests in the world’s forests. Its standards have been applied in over 57 countries across the world – including Guyana, where a Samling subsidiary in January 2007 was proved to be noncompliant with the standards and its certification for its forest concession was suspended. Samling subsidiaries have also been blamed by environmentalists and non-government organizations for being involved in illegal logging in Cambodia and Papua New Guinea.

As long ago as 1996, the watchdog website, Forests Monitor, stated the company was involved in attempting to obtain signatures on so-called “goodwill agreements” from Sarawak communities that would allow it to operate with impunity. Logging operations have been described as having destroyed land, fruit trees and other forest products and polluted rivers, the publication charged.

In Cambodia, where the pressure group Global Witness cited Samling with buying illegal timber cut in the Snuol Wildlife Sanctuary, the Ministry of Agriculture charged Samling’s subsidiary SL International, with starting to cut without receiving a permit, cutting in areas not approved by Forestry Department officials, cutting undersized trees and continuing to exploit its concessions despite a 1996 ban on logging.

Although Samling hasn’t been implicated by name in reports of abuses in Papua New Guinea, it is one of the biggest logging companies in the jungled country, whose tropical rainforest encompasses land more than twice the size of the British Isles. According to a report funded by the British government in 2005, quoted by Greenpeace:

• People have been forced to sign (logging) agreements at gunpoint and threats of imprisonment and even death.
• Armed police officers have backed logging company employees
• Police ‘mobile squads’ quell any industrial unrest among logging company employees.
• Firearms-toting logging company managers threaten and intimidate local people.
• Local people face torture, physical abuse and unlawful detention by police officers ‘employed’ by the logging company.
• Female employees have allegedly been raped by logging company managers and police.

Malaysian Minister (from Sarawak) lies in BBC News interview

Malaysian Minister lies in BBC News interview PDF Print E-mail
Written by Noor Aza Othman
Wednesday, 13 June 2007

The Malaysian Minister of Plantation Industries and Commodities, Peter Chin Fah Kui was obviously lying through his teeth in one of the most disappointingly lame interviews I’ve seen on the BBC News on the 11 June.

The interview instead seemed as if intended to let the Minister to spread sheer propaganda in Europe, that the cultivation of palm oil by in Malaysia, especially in Borneo is supposed to be based on sustainable development.

Sustainable Development has been defined by the UN Commission on Sustainable Development as defined in the 1992 Rio Declaration to mean that it has to be holistic, and hence must also take into account the social, environmental and cultural impact on the people affected by such development, thus not just the economic factors. Further, the Minister went on to claim ridiculously that it is mostly the Indonesian state of Kalimantan Borneo which is unsustainably logged and cultivated for palm oil whereas, on the Malaysian states of Sabah and Sarawak of Borneo, things are done differently!

It is another shameless and deceitful whitewash, by this same Minister when he tried to convince Europe not so long ago that the logging industry that has destroyed 90% million of years old of Sarawak tropical rainforest, as has been found by the Swiss environmental group, Bruno Manser Foundation is also supposedly based on sustainable development. BMF was founded by the still-missing Swiss Environmentalist-Human Rights Activist Bruno Manser. And in the most recent report by Indonesian environmental group, Walhi, the ancient rainforest of Sumatera, Borneo, Sulawesi and Papua will have disappeared from mostly massive logging and palm oil plantations by 2022, hence contributing towards increasing global warming.

Moreover, the Indigenous Melanau Chief Minister of Sarawak Taib Mahmud, is currently being investigated (although a very slow process) in Malaysia for bribery involving RM32 million, paid by a cartel of nine Japanese shipping companies which in turn is being investigated for tax evasion in Japan (Japan is the second biggest importer of timber from Sarawak). This cartel buys timber through Dewaniaga Sarawak, a state-affliated organ in charge of timber export control headed by the Chief Minister’s younger brother, since 1981. (source: www.bmf.ch)

It has to be stated very clearly that corporate palm oil plantation industry is usually a continuation process from the logging industry within the same area, as of other large-scale monoagriculture plantations (hence destroying biodiversity of environment) such as Acasia (to provide new timber), rubber and coffee and in the near future, GM crops ( see [Sarawak] Eastern Times, GM crops possible answer to food woes, 19/04/07). This would infinitely generate maximum profit for the corporations as typical for Capitalist industries. And to achieve this kind of profit, such industries are based on massive and unjust exploitation of the labor of both Indigenous rural population and migrant workers as typical of the Capitalist system.

And in further tragic injustice, these industries usually involve the destruction of traditional and ancestral Indigenous communities landrights which include communal forests, mostly without their consent or if consented, such consent would have been manufactured within an environment of power-game of poverty, racism and discrimination.

This meant that most of these areas would have been neglected, sometimes intentionally, by both the federal and state government in being provided with the basic infrastructure such as roads, electricity, clean water, bridges, housing including longhouses, schools and clinics, hence leaving the logging and palm oil corporations to provide them. Hence, this would result in the corporations having absolute power to manufacture the consent of the communities (sometimes even through Indigenous politicians) to have to accept the encroachment of the logging and the plantation industries on their ancestral landrights under the guise of being provided ‘Development’.

For example, such as the Indigenous Iban communities that consented to leasing around 99,000 hectares of their ancestral land in Bintulu, Sarawak, to a palm oil corporation, Pusaka KTS, under the corporate language-game of “developing the area…in line with corporate social responsibility” (see The Borneo Post, Pusaka KTS signs MoU with ten longhouses, 18/04/07). Or in other example, Indigenous Penan and Indigenous Kenyah villagers in Ulu Baram, consented to the massive Tutoh-Apoh palm oil project because they needed a clinic and a primary school (see The Borneo Post, Penans to stop wandering ways, 12/04/07). Any community which oppose the encroachment would be falsely labeled in the deceitful language-game of being ‘anti-Development’, ‘Anti-Modernisation’, ‘Misfits’, 'Half-Baked Screwballs’ or even most absurdly, as ‘Satanist’ such as preached by a Sarawakian Indigenous politician, Frederick Bayoi Manggie:

"these people…made it their daily struggle to play the devil’s role of offering apples and promising paradise. I believe you are familiar with the book of Genesis. I can tell you, like Satan’s evil intention, opposition politics are all sugar-coated empty promises…..Be forewarned, the government’s priority will be to develop areas where it enjoys the undivided support of people" (Borneo Post, Village Misfits play the devil’s role, 20/04/07).

Furthermore, in Sarawak, the anti-logging /plantations communities would be notoriously punished and threatened (in previous years, murdered even) by the corporations, using gangsters or the police force. For example, an Acasia plantation corporation called Grand Perfect Sdn Bhd, was assisted by the Bintulu Land Department and a large team of police which descended with 17 four wheel drives to demolish 14 farm huts on the Indigenous Iban ancestral customary land (see Brimas press release, Enforcement Officers from the Land & Survey Department Bintulu Demolishing Houses again, 03/04/07). In another example, in Long Lellang in Upper Baram recently, it was pathetic to see how the agents (who were walking around like Mafias as if they owned the village, the government’s school, the air-strip and the whole surrounding area including training the People’s Voluntary Corp, Rela) of one of the biggest and most notorious Malaysian multinational logging-plantation corporation, Samling, are instigating irrational hatred and division between the anti-logging/plantation Indigenous Penan communities and the logging supporters from the Indigenous Kelabit community of Long Lellang.

Long Lellang, a village which is well-developed with all the basic infrastructure including an air-strip, is clearly being used strategically by the logging companies to prevent remote Penan communities from affectively resisting with their resistance and movement being monitored strictly which include restricting them from traveling by air to go out of the area. Such strategy is also used to prevent other activists from outside to travel easily by air into the surrounding remote Penan villages and Sela’an-Linau Forest Reserve which is currently being logged heavily by Samling, or when trying to fly out. Such strategy would involve ticketing agents based in the village, usually from the Kelabit community of Long Lellang, preventing both the Penan and outside activists from being able to get seats on the small flight (unless the flights are booked online earlier) by lying falsely that the flights are fully booked.

Moreover, the government’s primary school in Long Lellang which places mostly children from the surrounding anti-logging/plantation Penan villages, is left in disrepair with broken chairs and tables and a messy library. The school also charges various unnecessary fees, and absentee teachers are common, of which these factors have contributed (I suspected intentionally) towards some of the Penan children dropping out of schools and still being illiterate even after they finished the primary school at twelve years old. Meanwhile, of the boarding-house which places mostly the Penan children attending the school as conditioned by the government for remote communities, there were rusty nails jutting out of the walls, lack of mattresses (the children used to sleep on the floor until early this year and they have to share the mattresses), no furnitures, dirty toilets, and the children being fed non-nutritional food (mostly rice and vegetables most days) and having to bathe by the river without adult supervision (which can be dangerous during the rainy season) despite that pipe clean water is well-developed in the village.

Some of the anti-logging/plantations Indigenous communities have made some accusations towards European Union (EU) officals who were representing the European Commission (EC) delegation that visited Malaysia in January this year to investigate logging practices in Malaysia, as part of the requirement in the Voluntary Partnership Agreement (VPA) process being negotiated currently between the Malaysian Government and the EC. Some of these accusations included that the EC delegation have failed to meet with genuine representatives from the anti-logging/plantation communities despite this delegation have traveled all the way to remote Upper Baram, Sarawak.

In addition, the EC delegation had failed to observe properly the implication of the tragic oppression of the Indigenous communities impacted by the logging and plantation industries mostly by the Malaysian multinational corporations such as Samling, Interhill and WTK, when traveling through the logging dirt-roads through Lapok to Upper Baram. This area as demarcated within the Sela’an Linau Forest Reserve, used to be such beautiful and massive tropical highlands with so much glorious and diverse ancient wildlife including Orang Utan, Hornbills, Rhinoceros, Wild Elephants, Tigers*, ancient plants and trees, beautiful clean rivers and traditional Indigenous way of life.

Furthermore, the EC delegation was even staying for the night at the notorious corporation, Samling’s logging camp of Kelisa whilst there, instead of at the villages. Moreover, one of the company’s worker who is from the Indigenous Kenyah community, claimed that this camp has been notorious for false labeling of timber supposedly cut under the scheme of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) and for polluting the Sengayan and Selungor Rivers when using anti-pest chemicals on the logs which would eventually seep into the rivers after rainfall, and with waste from the camp toilets.

Other tragic implications include the continuous dust, the extremely dangerous conditions of the roads with huge holes and the logging /plantation activities especially endless monstrous lorries driving through with heavy logs and the heavy pollution of all the rivers along the road. Such failure of proper observation by the EC delegation was also due to the logging companies strategically stopping such activities and repairing the road during the delegation’s visit. However, the EC officials must also be made to bear responsibility or even to be indicted in the European Court of Human Rights by European NGOs towards such failure or probable complicity with the logging/plantation industry when failing to meet up with genuine anti-logging/plantation communities, where they would have been able to get genuine and correct information regarding such injustice and non-participation of such communities. In addition, if the EC delegation have taken the trouble to go trekking through the still unlogged part of this forest reserve to the remote Penan villages and staying for a few days there (instead of traveling comfortably in four wheel drives the whole time and staying in logging camps), they would have seen with their own eyes and understand deeply why the communities are resisting the logging and plantation industries.

And these officials would probably have come to appreciate the fact that it is not at all impossible and further, why it is so important to protect such ancient and diverse wonders of the natural world including the wildlife and clean rivers, and diverse traditional way of life of the Indigenous communities, in truly harmonious balance with genuine sustainable development as required by the UN and EU Conventions.

In addition, if these officials have also taken the extra effort to travel to Limbang also in Sarawak, where there are also massive logging and plantation industries going on from Mendamit towards the Kalimantan of Indonesia Borneo border, they would have also seen such unjust consequences of the industries that include the Limbang river being filled with chemical-laden logs despite that there are still many traditional Indigenous water villages existing by the river and villagers using the river still as their main transportation route, and for food and drinking water.

And lastly, these logging and plantation industries are also notorious for causing many fatal and tragic accidents. Such as when two Indigenous Malay youths died whilst fishing when their small boat was pulled under a tugboat laden with logs in Limbang (see The Borneo Post, Unfulfilled dream of seeing the birth of his first child, 10/04/07). Or in another extremely tragic example, three Filipino workers died with one of them, having his head blown apart, in an explosion in a Japanese papermill in Tawau of Sabah Borneo (see Harian Express, Kepala mangsa tercabut melambung ke udara, 21/04/07).

Furthermore, some villagers even claimed that many illegal foreign workers hired at low-pay by these industries are hastily buried in unmarked graves without being reported to authorities when accidents occurred. Clearly this further illustrated the reality of endless barbarity of such industries towards humanity and the natural world and all its wildlife!

In order to understand and promote socio-environmental justice in the EU regarding this critical issue, EU activists are welcomed to visit short-term or long-term, the traditional Indigenous communities of Borneo, especially in Sarawak. Accomodation is free with very low cost to cover transport through logging roads and rivers, and for forest guides and food, all paid directly to the communities.

(*The writer may not have realized that there are no tigers on the whole island of Borneo, leopards yes, but tigers no).

Friday, April 18, 2008

Malaysia - An Unholy Alliance of Politics and Logging

DEFENDING THE EARTH
Abuses of Human Rights and the Environment

June 1992
Human Rights Watch
Natural Resources Defense Council

The indigenous people who live in the Malaysian rainforest and are dependent on it for every aspect of their ancient culture are now pitted against state and federal authorities, who have a huge financial stake in the forests. Logging and politics are inextricably intertwined; new laws are created to override the old protections. Some, including the conservative International Timber Trade Organization, (ITTO), warn that the whole matter will soon be moot because logging will transform Malaysia’s rainforest into a veritable wasteland by the end of this decade.1 The voracious timber export industry has already caused land erosion, water contamination, the extinction of wildlife and plant species and the annihilation of indigenous cultures, not to mention the wider impact on global warming.

1 A 1990 ITTO report, cited in "Tropical Heat," The Economist, February 15, 1992, warns that Sarawak will have no virgin forest left by 2001.

Although most of the profit from logging goes to state officials, the federal government in Kuala Lumpur benefits both economically and, more importantly, politically from logging. By allowing the states to exploit their forests at their own discretion, Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad ensures their loyalty to Barisan Nasional, the ruling coalition party which he heads. Kuala Lumpur has never had comfortable relations with the two Borneo states (Sabah and Sarawak), so maintaining support from those governments is a political necessity, especially if it is to keep a tight grip on parliament.2 Mahathir wants Malaysia to be "completely industrialized" by the year 2020.3 There is little room in such a plan for indigenous lifestyles, which Mahathir characterizes as "eating monkeys and suffering from all kinds of diseases."4

For these reasons, Mahathir has declared an unofficial war against proponents of environmental and indigenous people’s protection, who call for a logging moratorium or at minimum a revamping of the existing timber infrastructure. The "war" is waged by repressive legislation prohibiting freedoms of association and assembly; censorship and harassment of domestic and international media; turning a blind eye to corruption and violations of official environmental policies; and the intimidation of environmentalists and indigenous people by means ranging from hired thugs to detention without charge under draconian emergency laws that supersede constitutionally-guaranteed rights.

Malaysian authorities espouse convincing conservationist sympathies but in actuality none of the protective measures is implemented. Asked if there is ever punishment or prosecution for logging practices that violate the ostensibly sound official logging code, such as cutting trees that are too small or cutting too many trees per hectare, one logger answered: "No, there’s no prosecution. There’s only corruption."5

2
In Sabah, leaders of the opposition party, Parti Bersatu Sabah, have been detained, and some remain in detention, under the Internal Security Act. For further discussion, see "Malaysia: Detainees in Sabah," News from Asia Watch, October 18, 1991.

3 "Malaysia: The race to 2020," The Economist, November 9, 1991.

4 "Tropical Heat," The Economist, 2/15/92.

5 "Penan’s last stand against timber industry pirates," by James Barclay, Guardian, January 10, 1992.

According to a recent article, the scene in the Borneo states of Malaysia is one of rampant waste and destruction.

It is like open-cast mining: huge bulldozers shift vast amounts of earth and topsoil, which is washed into the river system.

Thousands of trees are bulldozed into gullies to form temporary roads. Huge funeral pyres burn with trees deemed too small to send to the coast.

The riverbanks are lined with miles of rotting logs stacked 40-feet high because buyers have rejected them. They could have been left if the cutters were not inexperienced workers on piecerates.6

A shallow-growing creeper weed eventually greens the devastated land, but the rainforest is not revived.

Mahathir has waged an effective campaign against environmentalists in which their activities are synonymous with sedition and foreigners concerned about Malaysia’s rate of logging are discredited as motivated by a racist assumption that non-whites cannot make sound decisions. International environmental activists are condemned as racist "eco-imperialists" and domestic activists are Malaysia’s "Number 1 traitors."7

The prime minister claims that anti-logging protests are "being used to set up an international infrastructure that can attack and topple the sovereign governments of third-world nations, using the excuse of saving the environment."8

Malaysian authorities recently announced the formation of a special task force to be based in Europe, whose US$4 million budget will be financed by the Malaysian Timber Industry Development Council.9 Its mandate will be to "repel

6 Ibid.

7 "Eco-imperialists" attributed to Prime Minister Mahathir; "Number 1 traitor" attributed to Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud: "Act against ‘traitors’ call," Borneo Post, March 30, 1992.

8 "Tropical Heat," The Economist, February 15, 1992.

9 "Malaysia: Crisis deepens for Dayaks in Sarawak," Urgent Action Bulletin, Survival International, April 1992.

falsehood and lies spread by evil-intended environmentalists," who, officials say, have been "brainwashing the people of Europe" in order to "damage the country’s reputation and image in the western world."10

10 Prime Industries Minister Datuk Seri Dr. Lim Keng Yaik in "Special task force to counter western media propaganda," Borneo Post, January 4, 1992.

BACKGROUND

Eleven of Malaysia’s thirteen states are located on the Malaysian peninsula while Sabah and Sarawak are separated from Kuala Lumpur and the rest of Malaysia by some 200 miles of Borneo Sea. Sabah’s rainforest is expected to be "logged out" by 1995.11 So all eyes turn to Sarawak: its land area is 12.33 million hectares, 38 percent of Malaysia’s total land area; in 1990, its logging industry was estimated to generate about $2 billion in foreign exchange, (and logging has only increased since then) and the industry employs some 55,000 persons. But environmentalists and indigenous rights activists warn that the last remains of the ancient Borneo rainforest are being permanently extinguished at a rate three times faster than the Amazon rainforest.

Communal forests, to which indigenous persons have exclusive rights, have been reduced from 30,300 hectares in 1968 to just over 5,000 in 1990. The indigenous people have legal right to the land under the Native Customary Law, but they cannot claim native land rights without applying to the government. The procedure is often expensive, and indigenous people tend not to have currency. In addition, land rights can be overturned through "gazetting" in which state officials print an announcement in the government gazette, which the indigenous people do not receive. If no reply is received within a certain period of time, the land has changed hands.12 At present, 9.42 million hectares has been gazetted, most of which will be divided into logging concessions.

Indigenous people constitute nearly 50 percent of the state’s population. Most of them are entirely dependent on the rainforests for food, medicine and shelter, as well as to maintain their customs and ways of life generally.

Deforestation means the extinction of their ancient cultures. The fight in Sarawak to slow rainforest destruction and protect the indigenous cultures has been fought in two ways. First, there has been a publicity campaign to get domestic and international exposure of the problem, and to combat

11 According to an ITTO report quoted in "Empires of the chainsaws," The Economist, August 10, 1991.

12 "The Children in Empty Huts," by Jeni Kendell, Index on Censorship, June/July, 1989.

"misinformation" distributed by officials. Second, the indigenous people have engaged in non-violent protests, primarily in the form of human blockades that obstruct logging roads.

Most of the indigenous people do not read or speak either English or Malay, the main languages of power in Malaysia, and most cannot vote since they are do not hold identification cards.13 The blockades, therefore, provide just about their only means of empowerment. In the words of one indigenous person, they feel that "[without the blockades] we cannot do anything to stop the company...when we try to defend ourselves, we are condemned as troublemakers."14

Among the indigenous people, the Penan ethnic group, an ancient huntergatherer society, has been particularly active in blockading timber roads. Their name has become somewhat interchangeable with the movement as a whole. Many Malaysian authorities assert that they are better off changing their ‘primitive’

13 Many people in the interior do not hold identification cards. Sometimes this is the result of not being able to participate in the complicated registration process. In other instances, registration is kept on hold for years, without explanation.

14 Ulat Ayat, quoted in The Battle for Sarawak’s Forests by the World Rainforest Movement and Sahabat Alam Malaysia, p. 47.

lifestyles and becoming incorporated into the modern world. They say the Penan have been "over-romanticized and over-mythicized by liberal Westerners."15 Penan who have been removed from the rainforest (there are only a few hundred now out of some 9,000 Penan who still live in the traditional manner in the forest) reside in government-subsidized "longhouses."

There they experience malnutrition, various physical ailments and mental depression. They are not assimilating into modern society, and government efforts on their behalf are reportedly next to nil.16 Yet success stories appear in the domestic media, claiming that life in the longhouses is a radical improvement for the Penan.17

15
"Who are these Penans?" by Ken Yalang, Sarawak Tribune, February 29, 1992.

16 For example, the government sponsors a "flying doctor service," in which a physician is flown into the area (land travel is extremely difficult). There are reports, however, that the doctor comes sporadically and infrequently, and more often than not simply tosses packages of an aspirin-like medicine from his helicopter and spends the rest of his visit shooting at wild game from up in the air. Interviews with Sarawakian representatives, September 24, 1991.

17 See, for example, "Who are these Penans," by Ken Yalang, Sarawak Tribune, February 29, 1992.

LOGGING AND POLITICAL CORRUPTION

The state has absolute jurisdiction over land matters, a remnant of the enticement package with which the then-called "Malaya Federation" induced Sabah and Sarawak to join the union in 1963. The two states brought additional ethnic diversity to the union as well as a wealth in natural gas and the world’s oldest virgin rainforest. To this day, while 95 percent of gas profits go directly to the federal government, (the cause of great federal-state discord), timber concessions and jurisdiction over logging laws are still entirely controlled by the states. The state grants concessions to individuals who then contract out short-term rights to log the land in exchange for a percentage of the profits.

Logging continues seven days a week, twenty-four hours a day. At night the forest is lit by giant floodlights. As political offices change hands, so too do the logging contracts. Once a contract is secured, (usually only a one- or two-year arrangement) therefore, literally every minute of its term is utilized in order to make maximum use of the forest’s temporary availability. Yet only about 30 percent of the cut trees are used. The rest, often young trees that do not pass export regulations, are left to rot.18

Years of unaccountability have yielded a situation in which those who supposedly protect the environment are also the ones who profit most from its exploitation. The situation is epitomized by Sarawak Minister for the Environment and Tourism, Datuk James Wong, saying: "We get too much rain in Sarawak. It stops me from playing golf."19 Wong, an outspoken proponent of logging, owns 300,000 hectares of forest concessions, and the Limbang Trading Company, one of
the nation’s largest timber companies. In his own words, "logging is my bread and butter."20

18
"Penan’s last stand against timber industry pirates," by James Barclay, Guardian, January 1, 1992.

19 "International experts say Sarawak natives badly affected by logging," Utusan Konsumer, March 1988.

20 Star, September 5, 1988.

Sarawak Chief Minister Abdul Taib Mahmud, who calls anti-logging activists Malaysia’s "number one traitors," directly controls 10 percent of Sarawak’s logging concessions. He distributes logging licenses, like political favors, at his discretion. Taib’s relatives and political allies are said to hold around 1.6 million hectares, roughly one third of Sarawak’s timber concessions.21

In 1987, the Sarawak state elections were funded almost exclusively by money made from logging. Chief Minister Taib froze concessions owned by his opponents that covered 1.25 million hectares and which were worth between M$9billion and M$22.5 billion. Political campaigns are funded with money obtained through logging.22 Taib says granting concessions to politicians is a good thing because it frees them from their sponsors.23

Loggers allegedly falsify records of the species, sizes and origins of cut logs in order to avoid paying higher royalty rates on certain classes of wood. Analysts estimate that 30-40 percent of Sabah’s annual logging production is exported with improper documentation.

[A] shadowy network of businessmen is employing an elaborate system of bribes and kickbacks to document falsely both the species and the volume of the logs being loaded at East Malaysian ports.24

21
"In Sarawak, a Clash Over Land and Power," by Raphael Pura, The Asian Wall Street Journal, February 7, 1990.

22
"The Children of Empty Huts," Index on Censorship.

23 New Straits Times, October 4, 1987.

24
"Cutting down to size," by Doug Tsuruoka, Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER), July 4, 1991.

An estimated US$100 million in illegal timber is exported, undeclared, by just one of the several groups working illegally in Sabah.25 Enforcement officials make little impact because their powers are severely curtailed by timber companies’ protections and often they "prefer to remain silent in order to share in the secret profits."26

Kuala Lumpur espouses sound conservationist practices, while in fact, according to The Economist, [t]he federal government in Kuala Lumpur and the cliques that control Malaysia’s two states in Borneo have a tacit understanding. The states will help generate revenue for the federal government from Borneo’s natural resources so long as they are left free to run things their own way.27

REPRESSIVE LEGISLATION

The Emergency (Public Order and Prevention of Crimes) Ordinance 1969

The Emergency Ordinance grants authorities the ability to detain anyone they suspect of wrongdoing without charges or trial for up to 60 days. Used in the past against gangsters and Communist insurgents, it was most recently directed against Anderson Mutang Urud, from the Kelabit tribe. Mutang Urud is a leader in the blockades and an international spokesperson for the indigenous people. Fluent in Malay, English and Kelabit, he travelled internationally to increase awareness and heighten international concern for the situation in Sarawak. He was instrumental in founding the Sarawak Indigenous People’s Alliance (SIPA) in 1991 to disseminate information and campaign against unsustainable logging.

On January 11, 1992, Mutang Urud accompanied Svend Robinson, a member of the Canadian Parliament visiting Malaysia on a fact-finding mission, and Brendan McGivern, a Canadian diplomat, to an anti-logging blockade. Mutang Urud was then detained on February 5 under Section 3 of the Emergency

25 Ibid.

26 Ibid.

27 "The dwindling forest beyond Long San," The Economist, August 18, 1990.

Ordinance, and charged with running an unregistered society, SIPA. (All organizations must be registered with the Registrar of Societies under the Societies Act. Registration can take as little as a month for those that promote the official "party line" and more than three years for groups that go against it.)

Mutang Urud believes that the Svend Robinson affair and SIPA are not the real reasons for his arrest. He points out that the arrest occurred just before the blockade at Long Ajeng, one of the longest-running ever, was to be dismantled by authorities on February 12. As one of the blockade’s most prominent leaders, Mutang Urud’s arrest would help demoralize the more-than-500 participants and thus make taking it apart without complications or resistance that much easier.

During detention, Mutang Urud says he was interrogated about, among other things, how best to dismantle the blockade, and was asked to accompany the state and federal agents who did so. (He refused.)28 Mutang Urud was released on bail on March 3, after protests by Amnesty International and other groups. His trial is set for September, 1992.

Mutang Urud was kept in solitary confinement and interrogated for hours continuously, sometimes until 4 a.m., until he no longer knew whether it was morning or night. For ten days he was held in a cell without a window. He was forced to take cold showers in the middle of the night, to sleep without a shirt, sheets or blankets, and denied medical treatment. Furthermore, his interrogators constantly warned that he might be held under the Public Order provision of the Emergency Ordinance and therefore could be kept in detention indefinitely.29

Forests Ordinance

The blockades began over a decade ago but did not draw international media attention until 1987, a year in which 310,000 hectares was logged. In 1985, only 270,000 hectares had been logged. In contrast to the urgent recommendations of the ITTO and other groups, the logging rate has steadily increased. It is estimated

28 The blockade at Long Ajeng was clearly considered cause for concern, evidenced by the fact that it was ultimately dismantled by the Federal Reserve Unit (FRU), the toughest group of federal police. A sort of advanced riot police, with special uniforms, they carry tear gas and clubs and have a reputation of being vicious. Earlier blockades were dismantled only by local police and members of the federal Special Branch. Interview with Mutang Urud, April 26, 1992.

29 Interviews with Mutang Urud, April 10 and April 26, 1992.

that 1992 will see 400,000 hectares cleared -- more if illegal activity is factored into the total.

In immediate response to the international attention attracted by the blockades, the Sarawak Forests Ordinance was amended to make obstructing logging activities or resisting the dismantling of a blockade a criminal offense punishable by two years in prison or a fine of M$6,000. The amendment also granted forestry officials the power to enlist the assistance of agents of the logging concessions to dismantle blockades. Furthermore, the new law set out that expenses incurred in removing the blockade "must be paid by the so-called offenders to the
state government" with interest charged annually until the amount is paid.30

Indigenous people and their advocates have maintained that their customary rights to the land are protected by state law, so that any blockades set up on "their" land are therefore not illegal. In 1990, three men from the Kayan community filed an order to stop the felling of trees because it transgressed their native customary land rights as enshrined in the Constitution -- to no avail.31

Despite these claims, since the amendment was enacted, roughly 500 indigenous people have faced criminal charges under the ordinance. At varying times individuals were denied bail and experienced poor treatment while in detention. (See "Conditions in Detention.") In 1989, eighty Penan, swidden agriculturalists, were held in detention for three months, with the women and children who remained behind facing acute problems getting food. Sarawak Director of Forests Leo Chai explained that the "stubborn" indigenous people needed to be dealt with harshly in order to be "taught a lesson."32

Internal Security Act

30 Utusan Konsumer, May 1988.

31 SiMBA (Singapore and Malaysian British Association), Newsletter May 1990.

32 Emergency Committee for Human Rights in Malaysia, "Update No. 10: Malaysian ISA Detention and Human Rights Alert," February 16, 1989.

The Internal Security Act (ISA) allows for the arrest without warrant of anyone considered likely to pose a threat to the security of Malaysia. Those arrested can be detained for 60 days without charge or review, and the Minister of Home Affairs has the authority to extend the detention order for up to two years, renewable indefinitely. Prime Minister Mahathir holds the post of Minister of Home Affairs. Usually reserved for "religious extremists" and "Communists," the ISA has also been used against environmental activists.

Harrison Ngau, a Sarawak representative of Sahabat Alam Malaysia (SAM) and leader of the anti-logging blockades, was called a "communist stooge" by the government.33 He was arrested at his office in late 1987 and detained under the ISA for sixty days in the midst of a nationwide series of arrests. He was later released conditionally, prohibited from leaving his home after 10 p.m. and barred from leaving the city of Marudi without a police permit. In July 1987, he had led a group of 12 indigenous people to Kuala Lumpur where they communicated their grievances and remonstrated with the government. The mission yielded no results. Two other Sarawakians, farmers with the Sarawak Land Development Board, were also detained under the ISA at the same time, although the reasons for this are unclear. Among the hundreds of ISA arrests in 1987, at least 91 were known outspoken critics of the official land policy.34

CONDITIONS IN DETENTION

Since 1987, blockade participants who have spent time in jail have described various kinds of inhuman and degrading treatment. These include being kept in shackles and, consequently, being forced to defecate on themselves, and being ridiculed and humiliated for this; receiving inedible food or no food at all; being hit by police; being kept in extremely overcrowded cells without room even to sit or squat; unhygienic conditions (they were given one bucket instead of a toilet for 42 people, and forced to wear the same pair of underwear throughout detention); and being charged excessive bail. In several cases, the indigenous people were not brought directly to the town police station but to a timber company camp first, where they were slapped around and humiliated.35

33
"The dwindling forest beyond Long San," The Economist, August 18, 1990.

34 SOS Sarawak press release.

35 Oral reports and Utusan Konsumer, mid-August, 1991.

Those detained under the Emergency Ordinance and the ISA undergo additional forms of mistreatment. Detention is often incommunicado; charges are not clarified; legal counsel is not permitted until immediately before the trial.

INTIMIDATION

Timber companies hire toughs to drive their trucks and fill other low-level positions. The men who apply for these jobs tend to be in trouble with the law, and use the forest as a safe haven. They are often heavy drinkers with a history of time in jail. Their appearance is intimidating to the indigenous people, as they tend to be heavily tattooed musclemen who conspicuously carry huge knives known locally as "samurais." On three recent occasions, local Sarawakian rivalries turned into bloody fights when the gangsters got involved. One local man had four fingers sliced off when a petty argument escalated.36

These gangsters serve as off-the-record disciplinarians. One forestry official, investigating illegal logging areas, was persuaded to give up his inquiry after his wife received a visit at home by two thugs wielding machetes. The logging vigilantes have terrorized indigenous people with their menacing behavior and by implying that they would gladly engage in headhunting if logging is obstructed. While this may sound unlikely in the west, it has a very real ring to the indigenous people of Borneo, where headhunting among some groups continued until quite recently.

Another means of intimidation employed in Sarawak to silence protest against logging is the practice of unofficial "warnings." Indigenous persons in town for one reason or another run into local police officials, "by chance." They are "invited" to have a chat in police headquarters or to share a cool drink. They are then warned, "for their own good," to stay away from the blockades, from foreigners, or from environmental activists. These "invitations" are also used as a means of informal interrogation. Indigenous people, intimidated and not wishing to appear ungrateful (for the "invitation"), find it difficult to resist the barrage of questions.37

36 Interviews with Mutang Urud and others, September 24, 1991, April 10, 24 and 26, 1992.

37 Interviews with Mutang Urud and others, September 24, 1991 and April 26, 1992.

GENERAL HARASSMENT

The court hearings against the indigenous people for obstructing logging activities attracted international attention at the end of 1988. Observers representing different legal groups from various countries flocked to Malaysia and indigenous people traveled three days to attend the hearing. Thereupon, the trial dates were abruptly set back a year. Reasons cited included not being able to get an interpreter (despite having over a year to find one) and unavailability of prosecution witnesses.

Given that the prosecution have more than a year to prepare their cases and get its witnesses and interpreters, such tactics could only be interpreted as an attempt by the Sarawak authorities to diffuse international protests and avoid embarrassment.38

Indigenous people also describe being called to court over and over, only to have their hearings postponed. This is a significant form of harassment as the indigenous people often have to walk days to appear in court.39

Court proceedures take place in English, a language not spoken by most indigenous. Court-appointed interpreters translate the proceedings into a language that is similar but considerably more complicated than that spoken by the indigenous people. They therefore are unable to precisely follow the proceedings.

Bruno Manser, a Swiss citizen, lived with the Penan for years during the 1980s. He became heavily involved in the anti-logging campaign and for this reason became persona non grata in Malaysia. The government described him as a "subversive Zionist and communist." Logging companies placed a $30,000 reward on his head; Penan were beaten and one was killed in attempts to get information about Manser’s whereabouts. Manser was chased by commandos through the jungles. The government established checkpoints and soldiers conducted "sweeps.38

Indigenous people arrested in November 1987 and scheduled to be tried in October 1988 had their trials postponed until April 1989. Other trials set for December 1988 were changed to November 1989. Trials set for December 1988 were postponed until January 1990. Emergency Committee for Human Rights in Malaysia, "Update No. 10," February 16, 1989.

39 Ibid., and Survival International, Urgent Action Bulletin, April 1992.

in the areas where he had reportedly been spotted. His crime: remaining in Malaysia past the expiration of his visa.40

40
"The Apostle of Borneo," by Wade Davis, Outside, January 1991.

In addition to the aforementioned task force to be financed by the Malaysian Timber Industry Development Council in order to counter environmentalists’ publicity, Reuters reported on April 29, 1992, that Malaysia "may form a special police unit" which would "monitor Western and local
environmentalists" who seek to disrupt logging activities.41

PRESS CENSORSHIP

Censorship -- both official and unofficial -- is widespread in Malaysia. The British-based Economist was banned twice during 1991 for articles that looked critically at the Malaysian government, and its distribution was deliberately delayed there three times.42

A more common means of reining in the press is a phone call from the Ministry of Information to newspaper editors, warning them to "go easy" on a particular topic. The "advice" is generally heeded because maintaining rapport with government officials is a journalistic necessity.

Few negative reports appear about domestic issues, including logging, primarily because of the high degree of self-censorship. Members of the media are subject to having their works banned, censored or their institutions closed. For example, the political weekly Mingguan Waktu was banned in December 1991 on

41 "Malaysian Police May Check on Environmentalists," Reuters, April 29, 1992.

42 Delaying distribution serves almost the same function as banning issues yet proves more difficult to censure. The issue is delayed until it is no longer even remotely up-to-date. Readership is therefore substantially reduced, and whatever impact the issue might have had is effectively nullified, while the government avoids the political embarrassment of engaging in outright censorship.

the grounds that it had reported "irresponsibly." Only five months old, it had published criticisms of Mahathir’s administration.43

43 Attacks on the Press: 1991, Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ), March 1992, p. 79.

Mahathir told members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), that Western-style freedom of the press could be a hindrance to developing nations. He said that foreign journalists "fabricate stories to entertain and to make money out of it, without caring about the results of their lying."44

He also warned the ASEAN representatives that it is not easy to ban a newspaper or expel a foreign reporter: "You don’t do such things without getting a bashing from the Fourth Estate and those who consider themselves holier than us."45

The Far Eastern Economic Review (FEER), which just completed an out-of-court settlement in a lawsuit filed against it by Mahathir, had its July 4, 1991 issue banned by the Malaysian government. FEER, with a Malaysian circulation of 10,000, was not distributed there because, according to Deputy Home Minister Megat Junid Megat Ayob, the issue contained material which "threatened the security of the nation."46 The issue in question contained three articles on Malaysia.

One described Islamic fundamentalism; another discussed challenges faced by a corporation’s new director. The third and by far the most detailed article reports that "illegal logging in both states [Sabah and Sarawak] is rampant and may have foreign connections."47

44 "Malaysia makes its feelings clear," IPI Report, October 1991.

45 Ibid.

46 Attacks on the Press: 1991, CPJ, p. 78.

47 Cutting down to "size," FEER, July 4, 1991.

On July 5, 1991, eight foreign environmental activists staged a demonstration in Kuala Baram, a dockyard at the mouth of the Baram River, important for timber export, where logs are floated down from the interior before being loaded into barges and finally onto ships for overseas markets. The next day, two freelance journalists, Frank Momberg of Germany and Anna Leonard of the United States, who were covering the protest from across the river, were detained, interrogated and ultimately deported from Malaysia. According to Momberg, authorities "said I was involved in an action against the security of Sarawak." Leonard confirmed, Malaysian authorities "said we have to leave because ‘we have threatened the security of the state.’ That’s ridiculous."48

Neither had participated in the demonstration. They had dispatched stories via fax to international news agencies, including the Associated Press and Reuters, and Momberg was writing for Robin Wood, a German magazine. Other foreign journalists who had been with them were not detained, presumably because the others were based in Kuala Lumpur, and so were not held under Sarawak state laws.

Today, foreign journalists are prohibited from visiting the indigenous people’s "longhouses" and the sites of anti-logging activities. Tourist agencies are required to submit names of all foreigners, tourists and journalists, to the Special Branch for review.

Mahathir explained: They [foreign journalists] would be most happy if the country was poor and begged for assistance. But they look for something bad to report if the country is not begging for help...It has become part of their culture to look down upon the coloured.49

On February 16, 1992, Rolf Bokemier, editor of the German-based GEO magazine and Charles Lindsay, a Canadian photographer, arrived in Sarawak but were not permitted to stay. The two had applied through the Malaysian Tourist Development Corporation in Germany to do a story on tourism in Sarawak but state

48 Telephone interviews with CPJ.

49 Mahathir quoted in "Some Foreign Journalists are Jealous of M’sia: Dr. M," Sabah Times, September 17, 1991.

authorities suspected they were planning an article on the anti-logging campaign.50 (Bokemier had been one of the first to interview Bruno Manser in the mid-1980s.)

British writer James Barclay was deported from Sarawak and became a "prohibited visitor" in August 1991, after he allegedly filmed a Penan blockade for a Canadian production company. Barclay, author of A Stroll Through Borneo, re-entered Sarawak after officially changing his name and obtaining a new passport.

50 New Straits Times, March 12, 1992.

British writer James Barclay was deported from Sarawak and became a "prohibited visitor" in August 1991, after he allegedly filmed a Penan blockade for a Canadian production company. Barclay, author of A Stroll Through Borneo, reentered Sarawak after officially changing his name and obtaining a new passport.

He was detained from February 15 through March 17, 1992, under Section 33 of the Immigration Act because of his status as a prohibited immigrant. He was told, however, that he would be charged with drug trafficking (which carries a mandatory death penalty). He was reportedly kept in poor conditions, denied food and water for two days, and physically abused. During interrogation, his recent Guardian article, "Penan’s last stand against timber industry pirates," was frequently mentioned.51

CONCLUSION

The logging industry is virtually exempt from adhering to the environmentally-sound guidelines set forth by the federal government, because it generates wealth for potential dissident voices in the state governments and thus keeps them loyal to the Malaysian federation. Political bullying and scare techniques enable both the legal and the black market timber companies to engage in logging without restraint.

On paper and in words, Malaysia implements reasonable conservationist practices but in actuality environmental activists and critics of logging are detained, censored and harassed. Through it all, the planet’s oldest rainforest, as well as the myriad plant and animal species unique to it are being annihilated, and the fragile human cultures that depend on it are on the brink of extinction.

51 January 10, 1992.

The Continuing Saga of Taib Mahmud's Greed

How Sarawak's Timber Wealth Benefits a Few at the Expense of the Many

Extracts from David Brown's doctoral dissertation "Why Governments Fail to Capture Economic Rent: The Unofficial Appropriation of Rain Forest Rent by Rulers in Insular Southeast Asia Between 1970 and 1999" (374 pages) will be posted in Sarawak Headhunter from time to time, but those who want to download, read, keep and distribute the whole dissertation will find it here.

For how long more do Sarawakians want to put up with Taib, his family and cronies' blatant abuse?

Even Taib's bomoh earned much more than many normal businessmen or professionals, or was this passed back to Taib?

"What we learn is that the family of Indonesia's former President Suharto earned $5 million from a single timber concession in a single year. It also tells us that the bomoh for Sarawak's Chief Minister Taib, who may be thought of as a proxy, earned $4.8 million from a single concession in a single year. As to Sabah, Kitingan's lawyer appropriated $275,000 a year from his shareholding in a timber concession".

"Finally, and by far the most important, the story I uncovered is an important one: heads of state had appropriated money crucial to the economic development of the states they governed while destroying an irreplaceable biological treasure. The next three chapters tell this tragic story".

Table 4.4 Samling timber concessions in which family members, friends, proxies or political allies of Taib Mahmud are board members or shareholders.

Name of Samling-linked timber concession

Name of board member or shareholder

Position in or percentage of shares held in company

Relationship to current chief minister, source of information.

Adong; Baram Sawmill, 46,134 hectares; Dayalaba, 16,469 hectares; Kelapang; KTM Timor 71,657 hectares;

Majau Timber;

Pelutan, 55,912 hectares; Ravenscourt 136,659 hectares; Samling Plywood Miri, 160,954 hectares; Sertama; Syarikat Reloh;

Tinjar Logging

Yong Nyan Siong

Holder of a single share; Director;

Director and 40 percent shareholder; Director; Director; Director; Director; 30 percent shareholder; Director; Director; Director and 3 percent shareholder;

Director

Nominee on behalf of Sarawak’s current Minister of Finance, George Chan (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Paong Timber,

61,892 hectares

Edmund Ang @ Edmund Lea Ang, Bertram Raymond Regie Adai, Narulhuda Binte Mohd Mortadza, and Mustapha Bin Ismail, Sriemar Sdn Bhd.

1 percent shareholder, 1 percent shareholder, 3 percent shareholder, 1 percent shareholder, 5 percent shareholder.

Bertram Raymond Regie Adai is the former Editor in Chief of the Sarawak Tribune (11 June 1997 interview with former Sarawak Assistant Minister of Finance Patau Ubis). He and three other shareholders, as well as the company Sriemar Sdn Bhd, all give the Chief Ministers palace guest house, Istana Tetemu, as their address (18 August 1997 interview with Raphael Pura).

Pelutan, 55,912 hectares; Sertama, size unknown

Ahmad bin Suut

20 percent shareholder; Director

Chief Minister Taib Mahmud's bomoh (traditional healer and spiritual medium) who owns between 15 and 17 luxury automobiles (4 June 1997 interview with a Sarawak state assemblyman).

Ravenscourt, 36,659 hectares

Abdul Hamid

bin Sepawi

Director and 24 percent shareholder

First cousin to the chief minister, and an important business figure in the chief minister's family (6 June 1997 interview with State Assemblyman Aidan Wing). Abdul Hamid is “holding part of the money” for the chief minister (11 June 1997 interview with former Sarawak Assistant Minister of Finance Patau Ubis).




Table 4.4 (continued) Samling timber concessions in which family members, friends, proxies or political allies of Chief Minister Taib Mahmud are board members or shareholders.

Name of Samling-linked timber concession

Name of board member or shareholder

Position in or % of shares held in company

Relationship to current Chief Minister, source of information.

Ravenscourt, 136,659 hectares

Wahab Dollah, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure Development (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist).

Director

Known as "Giant Killer" because he defeated former Chief Minister Tun Rahman in the elections in the aftermath of the 1987 Ming Court affair. Dollah acted on the chief minister's behalf in an attempt to obtain editorial control in the Borneo Post, where he is now a shareholder. Together with the chief minister's first cousin, Hamid Sepawi, Dollah owns 25 percent of the parent company of the Utusan Sarawak newspaper. Dollah serves as political lieutenant of Taib by controlling political activities and seeing to material needs of eight PBB state assemblymen. He is a strong public proponent of continued Melanau leadership in Sarawak. Dollah is said to have been awarded eight timber concessions by Taib (Sayottaib 2001: sulit 6, dokumen 1-4), although my study identified only five. He makes profits from his timber concessions available to the PBB during election time (10 June 1997 interview with Kueh Yong Ann).

Seriku, 85,559 hectares; Sertama

Abang Abdul Karim Tun Abg. Hj. Openg

Director and 0.5 percent shareholder; Director

Older brother of one of the chief minister’s most important ministers, Abang Johari, Minister of Industry (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist).

Seriku, 85,559 hectares

Abang Hj. Mohamed Bin Abang Sharkawi

Director, 0.5 percent shareholder

Former associate of Wahab Dollah. Former official of Sarawak Economic Development Corporation (7 June 1997 interview with State Assemblyman Aidan Wing). A “Taib nominee” (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Wan Abdul Rahman Timber, 28,407 hectares.

Thomas Kana

Director, 3 percent shareholder

Former senior official with the SNAP party (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin). In the Sarawak state cabinet as a minister from about 1967-1969 (26 May 1997 interview with a reliable and informed academic). Former state assemblyman (4 June 1994 interview with state assemblyman Aidan Wing). Still active with the PBB (11 June 1997 interview with former Sarawak Assistant Minister of Finance Patau Ubis).



Besides using its privately held timber concessions to make the Taib family wealthy and keep it powerful, the Samling group also owns two publicly listed companies
[1] whose earnings are used to satisfy similar objectives. Lingui, the larger of the two, is highly penetrated by political elites. One of its subsidiaries, Tamex Timber, is directed by Mirzan Mahathir, a son of Malaysia’s current Prime Minister. According to documents on file with the Malaysia Registry of Companies, Mirzan owns 15 percent of Tamex Timber through his company Falmouth. Also on the board of directors of Tamex Timber is Yong Nyan Siong, a nominee of Sarawak’s current Minister of Finance, George Chan (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Samling has become the timber group most favored by Chief Minister Taib. He has reportedly promised the group that their concessions will be renewed in exchange for their undertaking certain steps to help develop Miri, Sarawak’s second largest city after Kuching. Samling has begun this process by building Miri’s (comparatively) luxurious Holiday Inn. More importantly, Samling has agreed to invest between RM1-2 billion ($400-800 million) and RM6-7 billion ($2.4-2.8 billion) in the Miri Township urban renewal project. Once the Miri project is complete, Samling is committed to undertaking a similar urban renewal project in Bintulu (4 November 1996 interview with James Ritchie; 5 and 7 November 1996 interview with a well-placed and knowledgeable source in Sarawak). One may speculate that the Samling group's rise to the top timber concession holder in Malaysia is due in part to their agreement to absorb a substantial portion of the expenses associated with these two urban renewal projects in Sarawak.


Rimbunan Hijau

Sarawak's second largest timber conglomerate is the Rimbunan Hijau group. The group's relationship with Sarawak's heads of state highlights the extent to which most timber concessionaires in insular Southeast Asia are completely at the mercy of rulers. Rimbunan Hijau's head, Tiong Hiew King, understands the political economic balance of power in Sarawak. In the early 1970s he was jailed by then Chief Minister Tun Rahman on charges of being a communist (Lau 1995: chapter 20, page 2). After being released, Tiong went to great lengths to curry favor with Rahman, even making a special trip to Taiwan to serve as his golf umbrella-holder. In an awkwardly translated but amusing passage,[2] S.K. Lau recounts that:

Tiong King went to Taiwan to hold umbrella for [Chief Minister Tun Rahman] Yakub while the latter played golf. This did not matter. [Tiong] even asked Yet Ming Ek, the Bintulu richest man to be the caddie of Yakub. Perhaps Tiong felt so lonely if only he was alone with Yakub. So he had to bring Yet along. Later, it became a laughing stock for the local timber sector and golf players (Lau 1995: chapter 4, page 2).


Rahman continued to abuse his relationship with Tiong. The head of the Sarawak Alliance's largest and most powerful Chinese party, the SUPP, promised Tiong a federal senatorship in exchange for a substantial bribe. After the SUPP took the bribe, Rahman refused to deliver on the deal:

SUPP Secretary General Wong Soon Kai promised Tiong King appointed as Senator on the condition that he should donate RM1,200,000 [$480,000] to the party. He could pay a deposit of RM700,000 [$280,000] and pay the balance after he was appointed as Senator. However, the then State Governor, Rahman Yakub disliked him and withheld the Senator post for the time being. Tiong was very angry and he asked for a refund of the money paid. Soon, Rahman Yakub stepped down and Tiong King was successfully appointed Senator (Lau 1995: chapter 2, page 3).


Once Taib assumed power, Tiong moved to curry favor with the new chief minister, appointing Taib's brother, Dato Haji Mohamad Arip bin Mahmud, to the board of Tiong’s publicly listed company Jaya Tiasa. Tiong's Rimbunan Hijau conglomerate has also awarded over a dozen timber concession directorships and shareholdings to the families, proxies, friends, and political supporters of Chief Minister Taib, according to company records on file with the registry of companies. These are listed in Table 4.5.

Table 4.5 Rimbunan Hijau timber concessions in which family members, friends, proxies or political allies of Chief Minister Taib are board members or shareholders.

Name of Rimbunan Hijau-linked concession

Name and position of board member/ shareholder

Position in or percentage of shares held in company

Relationship to Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, source(s) of information

Bornion Timber, 79,898 hectares

Bok Kok Pheng, Wee Ai Choo

Directors

Nominees for SUPP, one of four parties that makes up the state’s ruling coalition (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Cahaya Upaya, contracting subsidiary;

Mantan, 75,538 hectares

Abdul Hamid Haji Sepawi

Director and 50 percent shareholder ; Director

First cousin to the chief minister, and important business figure in the chief minister’s family (6 June 1997 interview with State Assemblyman Aidan Wing). Abdul Hamid is “holding part of the money” for the chief minister (11 June 1997 interview with former Sarawak Assistant Minister of Finance Patau Ubis).

Cahaya Upaya, contracting subsidiary

Mohamad Asfia Awang Nasar, from the lower Rejang River

Director and 50 percent shareholder

Deputy speaker of state assembly (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist). Instrumental during Ming Court affair in eroding support of Tun Rahman faction. Informer to CM Taib on activities of Sarawak Alliance's PBDS and SNAP parties. Executive editor of Borneo Post, People's Mirror, Sarawak Tribune, and Utusan Sarawak. Enforcer of news blackouts on activities of Malay (Abang Johari) and Iban (Alfred Jabu) leaders (Sayottaib 2001: sulit 6, dokumen 5). “Taib nominee” (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Curiah, 65,487 hectares

Sim Kui Hock, son of Sim Kheng Hong, former Deputy Chief Minister

Initial Director

Sim’s position on the board of this concession is a political payback on behalf of his now deceased father (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist). At a pivotal moment in the Ming Court affair, Taib’s press conference of 10 March 1987, when he announced the plot against him, Sim’s father was one of two men who stood shoulder-to-shoulder with the embattled chief minister (Ritchie 1987: 22).

Dahasil, 9,314 hectares

Abang Carrol Bin Abg. Dris

Director and 24.5 percent shareholder

Relative of Aloysius Dris, a senior civil servant in Ministry of Tourism, and a figure close to the PBB (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Fonlin, size unknown

Abang Haji Ali Bin Abang Sepawi

Director

Probably the brother (*Not correct) of Abdul Hamid bin Sepawi, a first cousin to the Chief Minister, and an important business figure in the chief minister’s family (6 June 1997 interview with State Assemblyman Aidan Wing). Abdul Hamid is “holding part of the money” for the chief minister (11 June 1997 interview with former Sarawak Assistant Minister of Finance Patau Ubis).





Table 4.5 (continued) Rimbunan Hijau timber concessions in which family members, friends, proxies or political allies of Chief Minister Taib are board members or shareholders.


Name of Rimbunan Hijau-linked concession

Name and position of board member or shareholder

Position in or percentage of shares held in company

Relationship to Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, source(s) of information

Mantan, 75,538 hectares; Maxiwealth,

96,685 hectares

Wahab bin Haji Dollah, Assistant Minister for Infrastructure Development (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist).

Director; Board member

Known as "Giant Killer" because he defeated former Chief Minister Tun Rahman in the state assembly elections in the aftermath of the 1987 Ming Court affair. Dollah acted on the CM's behalf in an attempt to obtain editorial control of the Borneo Post, where he is now a shareholder. Together with the chief minister's first cousin, Hamid Sepawi, Dollah owns 25 percent of parent company of the Utusan Sarawak newspaper. He serves as political lieutenant of Taib, controlling the political activities of, and seeing to the material needs of, eight PBB state assemblymen. Dollah is a strong public proponent of continued Melanau leadership in Sarawak. He is said to have been awarded eight timber concessions by Taib (Sayottaib 2001: sulit 6, dokumen 1-4), although my study identifies only five. Dollah makes profits from timber concessions available to PBB during election time (10 June 1997 interview with Kueh Yong Ann).

Maxiwealth,

96,685 hectares

Sharkawi Haji Bohari

Board member

A former associate of Wahab Dollah. A former official of Sarawak Economic Development Corporation (7 June 1997 interview with State Assemblyman Aidan Wing). A “Taib nominee” (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Sarawak Plywood, 105,000 hectares

Datuk Haji Bujang Mohd. Nor

Director, holder of five shares.

Former state secretary under Chief Minister Taib, from the early-to-middle 1980s (26 May 1997 interview with a reliable and informed academic). Former state financial secretary. Regarded as a potential candidate for the post of Governor. He is the former chair of Bakun Hydroelectric Electric Corporation (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist). Current executive chairman of Harwood. His position on the board of Sarawak Plywood may be a golden handshake reward for having held one or more of the posts discussed above (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).


Table 4.5 (continued) Rimbunan Hijau timber concessions in which family members, friends, proxies or political allies of Chief Minister Taib are board members or shareholders.

Name of Rimbunan Hijau-linked concession

Name and position of board member or shareholder

Position in or percentage of shares held in company

Relationship to Chief Minister Taib Mahmud, source(s) of information

Sarawak Plywood, 105,000 hectares

Mohd Amin bin Hj. Satem

Director

Formerly with Sarawak Economic Development Corporation (26 May 1997 interview with a reliable and informed academic). Older brother of Sarawak's current Minister for Social Development. Chairman of BIG, a company specializing in the manufacturing of industrial cases, redi-mix concrete, and quarrying. Chairman of the Sarawak Chamber of Commerce (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist). An original director of CMS corporation, the single largest and most important financial entity in the state, and widely regarded as the personal financial vehicle chief minister of Sarawak (29 May 1997 interview with Dominique Ng). A "former PBB nominee" (12 August 1997 interview with James Chin).

Tijok-Nakan,

14,699 hectares

Abang Sulaiman bin Datuk Hakim Abang Hj Mohidin

Director

Brother of the chief minister (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist).

*Actually brother of former Senate President, Tan Sri Abang Ahmad Urai


Tijok-Nakan,

14,699 hectares

Taibi bin Ali

Director

Relative of the chief minister (7 June 1997 interview with State Assemblyman Aidan Wing).

Tijok-Nakan,

14,699 hectares

Dayang Mastura Bte Datuk Hakim Abang Hj Mohidin

Director

Sister of the chief minister (28 May 1997 interview with a Sarawak journalist).

*Actually Sister of former Senate President, Tan Sri Abang Ahmad Urai


In addition to cultivating relationships with Sarawak’s past and present chief ministers, Tiong attempted to do the same with Malaysia’s Prime Minister Mahathir by going into business with two of his sons. In 1991, Tiong activated a dormant shell company, Opcom, in order to go into optical fiber and optical cable manufacturing. In March, 1992, the same month that Mukhriz Mahathir, one of the prime minister's sons, joined the board, the company was given "pioneer status" by Malaysia's Industrial Development Authority, entitling it to a five-year corporate tax holiday.


In October, 1992, Tiong split off 15 percent of his company Opcom to Creative Synergy, a company in which Mukhriz and a second Mahathir son, Mukhzani, were sole shareholders and directors. Other share allocations in Opcom went to several politicians in Mahathir's United Malays National Organization.

Problems emerged, however, when an effort to produce optic fiber using original technology did not succeed. Strains in the shareholder partnership developed over purchases of more than RM40 million ($12 million) in equipment. In December, 1994, Tiong and his brothers resigned from Opcom's board, ending the family's representation there (AWSJ 1994b).

After Tiong and his brothers withdrew from the partnership, Mukhriz Mahathir brought a lawsuit against Tiong. In order to try to smooth things over, Tiong asked the head of the Sarawak’s SUPP party, the same man who had bought Tiong his senatorship and an old medical school classmate of Dr. Mahathir’s, to intercede on Tiong’s behalf and to try to arrange a meeting for Tiong with Dr. Mahathir. However, Mahathir refused to meet with Tiong and instead, S.K. Lau alleges, sent federal Inland Revenue Service agents to raid Tiong’s corporate headquarters.


In 1990, in order to curry favor with Dr. Mahathir, Tiong King invited [Mahathir's] son to set up a factory by joint venture. One and a half years later, he withdrew from the partnership. He said that the PM's son was in [a] power struggle in the firm and he withdrew [from] the partnership for the sake of not offending Dr. Mahathir. However, Tiong King was defeated in the battle this time as he underestimated Dr. Mahathir's son. [Tiong] thought he could use the same tactic previously applied to other Malay partners. In fact, Dr. Mahathir's son is a smart businessman and he decided to give up the firm too. He wanted to take legal action against Tiong . . .Tiong was frightened and he immediately asked Wong Soon Kai to discuss [the matter] with Dr. Mahathir to settle the case amicably. . . . Wong Soon Kai had to ask his wife to telephone [the] PM's wife for
discussion. [The] PM's wife said that since [her] son had grown up, he knew how to look after his own business and that they as his parents did not want to interfere.

A few days before writing this book, a group of Business Criminal Investigation Team accompanied with thirty plus police came to [the] Rimbunan Hijau Building for searching and investigating of accounts in the office. They surrounded the whole building and nobody was allowed to enter the office premises. As learnt . . . Tiong King . . . had removed all the important documents from the office. Thus, there was not many relevant important accounts kept in the office. . . (Lau 1995: chapter 2, pages 3-4).


S.K. Lau goes on to explain that there "were not many relevant important accounts kept in the office" because these important documents had been removed by Tiong's personal secretary, Margaret Wong. Lau explains, in a humorous passage, how Wong removed Rimbunan Hijau's books from the company's headquarters beneath her skirt.
[3]

To sum up, the family members and political associates of Chief Minister Taib Mahmud continue unofficially to appropriate timber rent through managerial and equity representation in timber concessions licensed to the Rimbunan Hijau group. The family of Malaysia's Prime Minister was also for a time engaged in a similar relationship with Rimbunan Hijau.


[1] Both of these companies, Lingui and Glenealy Plantations, were at one time financially distressed and acquired through reverse takeovers. That is to say, the companies agreed to surrender control to Samling, in exchange for receiving a small portion of Samling's assets. By using the method of the reverse takeover, Samling was able to obtain two publicly listed platforms from which it could then raise shareholder equity, without having to undergo the process of discovery concerning its broader holdings.


[2] The material is quoted directly from an unpublished manuscript written by S.K. Lau, a former Sibu-based journalist. The manuscript reportedly first saw the light of day when Lau sent his computer to a repair shop, and the shop took the liberty of printing it off without Lau's permission. From there, the manuscript was informally xeroxed, and distributed widely throughout Sarawak. As a result of its explosive content, Lau was forced to flee to Australia where he is now said to reside, though others speculate he is dead. Although the manuscript’s title, Immortal - Tiger – Dog, is borrowed from a Chinese comedy of the same name, the title is also believed to carry a double meaning, reflecting the author's own view of himself as having gone from an 'immortal' associating freely with Sarawak's political and timber elite, to a 'tiger' penning uncomplimentary details about them in his secret manuscript, to a 'dog' when he was financially marginalized by the (unwitting) subjects of his manuscript (19 July 1997 interview with Chiew Chin Sing).

[3] "One year, one day, a batch of personnel from the Inland Revenue Department suddenly stormed into the Rimbunan Hijau office for investigation on taxation. That day, Tiong was away in a foreign country. Tiong’s most helpful assistant Margaret Wong who played an important role in Rimbunan Hijau office would stay calm and took away the computer diskettes to hide inside her skirt before going past those Inland Revenue personnel guarding at the entrance gate . . . [L]ike the other large [timber] enterprises, Rimbunan Hijau group of companies kept two copies of account book. One was a false one which was meant for the declaration of tax. Another one was the actual account of the company for self keeping. Margaret Wong is a spinster with slim build and ugly appearance. People would mistake her as a cleaning maid in Rimbunan Hijau office. This time she could manage to walk past the entrance gate guarded by the Inland Revenue Department personnel. It was because of her ugly appearance that no one would suspect there would be computer diskettes stored with the company’s account hiding in her skirt. After all, none would believe such a ugly woman was an important figure in the Rimbunan Hijau group. [I]f those computer diskettes were discovered, perhaps Rimbunan Hijau Group would face serious trouble. All evidence in connection with the evasion of tax would be exposed. The personnel concerned would then be charged in court. After this incident, this spinster [was even] more highly regarded by her boss. . . . Don’t belittle this spinster Wong. Apart from holding other posts, she is now a member of the board of directors of the Rimbunan Hijau group" (Lau 1995: chapter 3, pages 2-3).