A report on the situation of the forest peoples of Sarawak/Malaysia

Introduction

After this meeting a letter was sent to the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs in which the Indigenous issue was asked to be put on the agenda of the negotiations between Malaysia and the Netherlands on sustainable forest management. In 1993 the same request was made.

In 1991, the Dutch governement accepted a policy on tropical forests. Once accepted, the Dutch government was asked to start a dialogue with the main countries from which the Netherlands imported tropical timber. In Octobre 1992 the Joint Working Group Malaysia - the Netherlands started with the aim to have a dialogue on the subject of tropical forest management. Since then three meetings of the Joint Working Group have taken place.

During the second meeting of the Joint Working Group (JWG) it was decided to form an Ad-hoc Expert Group. In December 1994 this expert group made recommendations to the Joint Working Group. Some of the recommendations were: - ITTO (International Tropical Timber Organisation) criteria and indicators for sustainable tropical forest management provide a useful framework for the Malaysian forests; - It is necessary that a Forest Management Unit is setup; - The relation between people living in and around the forest and the sustainable mana gement of these forests might for the JWG be a subject of elaboration;

In January 1996 the second meeting took place of the Ad-hoc Expert Group. They discussed implementation of the criteria, indicators and activities for sustainable forest management at the operational level in Malaysia. Among other things during this mee ting they also made a field visit to the Ministry of Forestry in Sarawak. Statements of the Department of Forestry of Sarawak were included in the report of the Expert Group. The third meeting of JWG in April 1996 decided that the proposed elabolation on the relationship between people living in and around the forest and sustainable forest mana gement will be based on the statements made by the Deparment of Forestry of Sarawak to the Expert Group. The Netherlands will consult with relevant parties on the basis of this information. And the outcome of these deliberations will be reported by the Nether lands in the next JWG meeting. The present report was made for this consultation.

After the meeting in April 1996 of the JWG the Malaysian Timber Council instructed SGS-Malaysia to execute an independent test study on forest management of PFE's (Permanent Forest Estates) in three states of West-Malaysia (Selangor,Teranganu and Pahang). Also the Chain of Custody of forest products was tested and controled of 4 enterprises in these states (CHG Industries Berhad, Berjaya Finewood (Malaysia)Sn Bhd, Asrama Raya Sdn Bhd and Pesama Timber Corporation Sdn Bhd). This test was done on basis of the Malaysian Criteria and Indicators and Activities (MCIA), which are based on ITTO guidelines for sustainable forest management. In 1997 a test load of forest products (with a declaration of SGS Malaysia) from these States (600 cubic metres) has been sent to the Netherlands. The Heart for the rainforest groups welcomed this step, but were critical when was tried to sell the testload as "certified timber".

A correspondence with the Dutch government (Economic Affairs) on Sarawak started in 1990, when the ITTO sent a mission to Sarawak to investigate the logging situation. Before the report of this mission was discussed, the Dutch government was asked to act on behalf of the urgent situation of the forests and the indigenous peoples of Sarawak. In a correspondence between 1990 and 1996 about the situation in Sarawak with the Ministry of Economic Affairs, the Ministry could not answer questions why the recommendations of the ITTO report were not implemented.

Since 1987, protests against large-scale logging and implementation of oilpalm planta tions has been widespread in Sarawak. The reason of the protest is, that large scale logging and oilpalm plantations threaten the very base of existence of forest peoples. This report shows that Native Customary Rights of forest peoples in Sarawak continue to be ignored. It is important to stress that unless the rights of the people in and around the forests are respected, sustainable forest management can not be reached.

Eddie Roos
Amsterdam, December 1997

I EXPERT GROUP ON SARAWAK AND INDIGENOUS RESPONSE

STATE OF SARAWAK

3.1.1 The Director of Forestry, Sarawak, explained that the implementation of ITTO's criteria and indicators at the field level is hindered by the lack of manpower. In this regard, Sarawak plans to train forest workers in the private and public sectors through a certificate course on issues related to sustainalble forest management, for instance, to reduce logging damage and environmental impact of logging. It is expected that the understaffing of the Forestry Department will be resolved through the forthcoming corporatization. In this respect, the Sarawak Forestry Corporation Bill was passed in November, 1995 by the Sarawak State Legislative Assembly to corporatize the State Forestry Department. This would enable the Sarawak Forestry Department to have more flexibility in staff recruitment and thus overcoming the shortaqe of manpower at the operational level.

3.1.2 The Director also emphasized the urgent need for rehabilitation and reforestation of logged-over areas and areas that are affected by shifting cultivation. This is an area where technical assistance from the Netherlands was solicited. This technical assistance could be in the form of practical research in developing a model for rehabilitation and reforestation.

3.1.3 The Netherlands complimented the Sarawak Government for setting aside approximately 200.000 ha of mixed dipterocarp forest to form a Transboundary Biodiversity Conservation Area together with approximately 800.000 ha of the same forest type on the Indonesian side. This protected area was set-up and will be managed with assistance from ITTO. The Expert Group discussed in general terms the possibility of the Netherlands providing financial support through ITTO towards the management of this unique 1.000.000 ha of the Transboundary Biodiversity Conservation Area.

3.1.4 The total percentage of mixed dipterocarp forest that has been logged for the first time was estimatied to be 45%, while for the peat swamp forest was estimated to be almost 100%. The harvesting cycles adopted for the mixed dipterocarp and peat swamp forest are 25 years and 45 years respectively.

3.1.5 The need to set aside a complete and intact peat swamp forest ecossystem should encompass all the phasic communities of the peat swamp forest.

3.1.6 A large amount of data has been collected by the Forestry Department of Sarawak. The data include details on distribution and relative abundance of peat swamp species. The data need to be analysed to further enhance the susrtainable management of the peat swamp forests.

3.1.7 It is proposed that a collaborative research project involving the Forestry Department of Sarawak and Netherlands scientists be initiatied to identify and delineate an area of virgin peat swamp forest for the purpose of conservation and long-term ecological observation. In the selection of partners on the Netherlands side, attention should be given to the use of high technology for ecosystem and species identification, including remote sensing and satelite imagery.

3.1.8 It is observed that there is still a significant percentage of ramin trees in the logged-over stand of the peat swamp forest. Nevertheless, there are variations in the occurrence of ramin in different localities in the State of Sarawak. A preliminary observation of the data available in the Silviculture Research Office of the Forestry Department of Sarawak indicates that there is a greater percentage of ramin trees in the upper diameter classes than in the lower classes. Generally, ramin seedlings are also observed to be present in substantial quality in the logged-over stands. However, they do not appear to be able to compete with other faster growing species in the residual stand. The reason for this is not fully understood.

3.1.9 Therefore, there is a need to reactivate studies to investigate the ecology and physiology of ramin, to understand why ramin seedlings could not maintain dominance in the logged-over forest stand and to determine how the forest stand can be silviculturally manipulated to induce greater ramin dominance. Technical assistance would be sought from the Netherlands for such an ecological research project.

3.1.10 Insight was given into the system of land classification and division as provided for in the Land Code of Sarawak (Cap.81). More specifically, Native Customary Rights (NCR) and Native Communal Reserves were discussed in general with the Court cases as published by the Lands and Survey Department of Sarawak. No new NCR were recognised after 1958 under the provisions of the Land Code. All NCR would have been extinguished prior to the legal constitution of the PFE (Permanent Forest Estates). In this context, the issue of NCR on the PFE should not arise as this issue would have been resolved prior to its gazettment. However, occasionally the issue of NCR is still being disputed on land that had been previously cultivated by the indigenous people.

3.1.11 Under the provision of Section 65 of the Forests Ordinance of Sarawak (Cap. 126), any inhabitant in the State of Sarawak may, without licence or permit, cut and remove from Stateland forest which is not a forest reserve any timber or other forest produce required by him exclusively for his own domestic use and not for sale, barter or profit.

3.1.12 Furthermore, if the indigenous people already possess the rights to enter a forest reserve, a protected forest, national park or wildlife sanctuary, and cut and remove timber and other forest produce or for other purposes prior to its legal constitution, such rights would still be recognised and specifically stated in the gazette notification for the forest reserve, protected forest, national park or wildlife sanctuary.

3.1.13 In addition, Stateland forest areas are frequently constituted as communal forest for the sole use of the community. Any member of the community may, after the constitution of the communal forest, remove free or royalty or fee, any forest produce for his own use and not for sale, exchange or direct profit.

INDIGENOUS RESPONSE FROM SARAWAK

The following comment was made on the statements by the Malaysia-The Netherlands ad-hoc expert group on sustainable forest management regarding Sarawak (3.1.1. - 3.1.13)

1. Lack of Manpower for implementation of ITTO's Criteria and Indicators

These comments made by the Director of Forestry, Sarawak are true. But it also shows the continual lack of political will and serious committment of the government of Sarawak to achieve such an important and urgent need. This problem had been highlighted by them for so many years already and therefore there is no excuse for them not to have resolved it by now.

The Sarawak Forestry Corporation Bill had been passed and corporatisation of the Forestry Department had been undertaken. This alone will not solve the problem unless there is a serious political will and commitment on the part of the government both at policy making and departmental levels to ensure that policies made and the rules and regulations on sustainable forest management are really implemented on the ground.

All this while, the Sarawak government assumed that its policies and the rules and regulations on forestry and loggings in the State have been enforced by the Forest Department and/or complied with by the logging companies. But this is not true when one really goes down to the actual logging sites where the situation is such that the companies are just left to do anything they like. As the areas being logged is very extensive i.e. practically overall the remaining forest areas throughout Sarawak, the lack of manpower as acknowledged by the Director of Forestry himself had resulted in the lack of supervision of the logging activities and /or the effective enforcement of the forestry rules and regulations on the ground.
The question is : Why should the Sarawak government issue and continue to issue licences for logging throughout the State when all along they know themselves they lacked the necessary manpower to supervise and enforce the rules and regulations on logging activities? This is also the question SAM (Sahabat Alam Malaysia) had been asking the Sarawak government since ten years. We have also proposed to them to slow down or reduce loggings to an extent where the government can provide the necessary manpower to supervise and control loggings and enforce the laws effectively. But they refused to do so. Now they admitted the problem and yet are still not taking serious steps to overcome it.

2. Urgent need for rehabilitation and reforestation of logged-over areas and areas affected by shifting cultivation.

The Director is right. There is an urgent need for this. But again, although they are fully aware about this need there is no serious efforts being done on the ground. And while Sarawak is already having problems to rehabilitate and reforest its logged over forests, it still continues to issue logging licences for more loggings in new areas and it still allows logging to be continued in already logged areas when these areas should be urgently rehabilitated or reforested. This is the reason why SAM says Sarawak logging policies and practices do not allow the forest any opportunity to regenerate at all.

On the areas affected by shifting cultivation, this is only very minimal compared to areas affected by loggings. There are also many scientific studies that already proved shifting cultivation as practised by the Sarawak natives is in fact a model for sustainable forest management practices. And also, the Sarawak natives have been practising their system for generations but Sarawak never had any problem with its forest and environment until there was logging all over the State.

The Director's proposal for technical assistance from the Netherlands in the form of practical research to develop a model for rehabilitation and reforestation is therefore not realistic and unnecesssary. The Sarawak government should seriously stop issuing new logging licences over new areas and also stop renewing existing licences over presently logged areas as well as reduce drastically the areas allowed for logging immediately.

3. Logging within peat swamp forests

Logging within these forests should be immediately stopped otherwise these forests will never recover. At present, although these forests have been 100% logged as admitted by the Sarawak government, they are still being logged. It therefore does not make any sense for the government to recognise and stress on its importance but at the same time allow it to be logged over and over again. The Forest Department, Sarawak itself also admitted there is still lack of sufficient research and knowledge of peat swamp forests and its ramin timbers. This clearly justifies the proposal by SAM to immediately stop logging within these areas which will destroy these forests before we even have sufficient knowledge or understanding about them.

For any research programmes on these forests to be meaningful they should not be logged pending the completion of the research since there will be no need for such research when these forests are destroyed.

4. Native Customary Land and Native Customary Rights

Native Customary Rights (NCR) of the natives of Sarawak over their native customary land (NCL) are recognised and protected by the Sarawak Land Code cap.81 and also the land laws enacted before it i.e. all the land laws existing during the time of the Brooke's and British Administrations in Sarawak.

The extent of the NCL of each longhouse community is defined by boundaries mutually agreed between that particular longhouse community and all the other longhouse communities surrounding it. These land boundaries are also recognised by the law and they are officially recorded in the government Land Boundary Register kept at the District Offices following a legislative decision through the Secretariat Circular No. 12 of 1939 which requires all landboundaries to be recorded.

But although NCR to land and the land boundaries defining the extent of NCL are recognised and protected by the law, the Sarawak government had issued licences for logging over NCL on which the natives have acquired NCR i.e. these logging licences also covered or included land within the land boundaries of the longhouse communities.

To the logging companies, their licences allows them to log within the licenced areas. So when they start to log, the natives protest against them. But when both complain to the government, the government sides with the companies. And the companies will proceed to log, the natives will suffer damages to their land, crops, burial grounds, destruction of their forests and its resources as well as pollution or their rivers and water supplies. When the natives protest, they are arrested by the Forest Department and the Police. But when the case goes to the Court the natives were acquitted or the Forest Department and the Police withdraw the charge against them.

In one case, the natives sued the Police for wrongful arrest and false imprisonment (Wan Jok & others V Malaysian Government) and the Court had ruled the natives were right to put up a blockade on the logging road of a company that goes over their NCL and it was wrong for the police to arrest and detain them. The Court also ordered the police to pay compensation to the natives. There are also cases whereby the logging companies have applied to the Court to stop the natives from blockading their logging roads. But in all these cases they have simply withdrawn them apparently after they realised the natives have very strong claims of NCR over their NCL. e.g. Limbang Trading Limbang Sdn. Bhd. which sued the Penans and Kelabiths of Ulu Limbang in 1987 for putting blockades on its logging road. And also the case of Samling Timber Sdn.Bhd. who sued the Kenyah of Long Geng, Belaga in 1991.

These scenarios and cases clearly proved the natives have NCR over their NCL and it was illegal for the government to issue logging licenses over their said land and therefore it was also illegal for the companies to log thereon.

As a compromise, SAM had proposed to the government to suspend logging within the disputed areas pending investigation to be carried out and completed on the claims of the natives. But this was ignored by the Sarawak government and so the disputes and protests had continued unresolved.

Rather than seriously taking steps to investigate and resolve these problems, the Sarawak government chose to arrest the natives for protesting against the logging within their NCL. It also alleged that the natives are simply being instignated by outsiders or that they are anti-government or anti-development.

5. Constitution of Permanent Forest Estates (PFE) and Extinguishment of Native Customary Rights

The Sarawak Forest Ordinance cap.126 requires that before any PFE is established, notice must be given to the local communities in or around the area to be constituted as PFE. This is to enable them to submit their claims of NCR over the area concerned which will then be investigated by the authorities after which their NCR are to be extinguished and compensation paid to them for loss of their NCR.

In most cases where these PFE were already constituted particularly during the period of the Brookes' and British Administrations, we have found that these were constituted without compliance with the prescribed procedures. In all cases we have investigated, the PFE were established over the NCL of the natives. The constitution of these PFE are therefore illegal for breaching the procedures required by the law.

It is therefore also illegal and wrong for the present Sarawak government to assume that all NCR of the natives over their NCL on which these PFE were established are deemed to have been extinguished in the process. The onus is on the government to prove that the mandatory procedures as prescribed by the law have been complied with when these PFE were established over NCL on which the natives have prior and existing NCR. These are serious legal issues concerning rights of the natives to land/property and it is morally and legally improper for the government to simply dismiss these issues outright and just presume they have been resolved prior to the gazetting of the PFE. That is totally irresponsible!

6. Rights to take forest produce within PFE

The rights under section 65 of the Forests Ordinance cap.126 are only very restricted rights subjected to the absolute discretion of the Direcor of Forests. They are therefore not rights of exclusive ownership over the land as previously enjoyed by the natives. No property/land owner would ever accept such a lesser right over his property/land in exchange for a real and exclusive right thereon!

This claim by the Sarawak government is therefore only an insult to the natives who are deprived of their NCL as a result of establishment of the PFE over their said land.

If the Sarawak government is a responsible, accountable and transparent government, it should immediately take serious steps to investigate the complaints of the natives who alleged that they have been illegally deprived of their NCL as a result of the establishment of the PFE over their said land. If the claims of the natives are found true then it should revoke the PFE and restore the land back to the natives instead of taking advantage of the situation/confusion by giving out licenses to log such areas.

7. Communal Forests Reserves

Sections 40 to 48 of the Sarawak Forest Ordinance cap.126 do provide a procedure for a native community to apply for a communal forest reserve for the use of their community. But in the last fifteen years, no applications for such a reserve has been approved by the government of Sarawak. Instead, existing areas of such reserves have been revoked and reduced drastically by the government.

For example, in 1968, there were 303 sq. KM of communal forest reserves areas in the State. But through degazettement or excision/revocation by the government, these had been reduced to only 56 sq. KM in 1984 The Sarawak government is therefore misrepresenting the truth because it is not true at all that stateland forests are frequently constituted as communal forest reserves for the use of the natives.

8. Additional questions that the Malaysian/Sarawak governments should reply to:

a) Forfeiture of passports of Sarawak natives If the Malaysian/Sarawak governments are democratic, liberal, accountable or transparent as they claim concerning the management of the Sarawak forests and in their treatment of the Sarawak natives concerning the problems related to logging in the State, why is the government even resorting to confiscating the passports of the natives who come out of Malaysia merely to give their views on loggings and forest management issues in Sarawak? E.g. cases of Thomas Jalong and Jok Jau Evong of SAM whose passports were forfeited when they wanted to attend the meeting of the International Alliance of the Indigenous Peoples of the Tropical Rainforests in Japan and Peru in 1992 and 1993. Recently (March 1997) Raymond Abin was stopped for going to a meeting of the International Alliance in Nagpur (India).

b) Use of the Internal Security Act and Emergengy and Public Order Ordinance against natives Why did the government arrest and detain Sarawak natives under such laws when they only tried to assist their own people to protect their rights to their NCL against illegal loggings thereon. There is no Court Order which said the companies can log over the NCL of the natives and if the natives are indeed guilty of any offences why are they not charged in Court but instead detained without trial? E.g. of cases: Harrison Ngau detained under the ISA in 1987 and Anderson Mutang detained under the Emergency and Public Order Ordinance.

c) Deportation from/Ban from entry into Sarawak Why is the Sarawak government refusing entry and deporting persons from Peninsula Malaysia who work with legitimate organisations wanting to find out more about the actual situation on loggings and forest management issues in the State? On the other hand the Sarawak government said people from outside who criticised Sarawak for its forest management policies and practices are ignorant of the truth. How are the people from outside able to know the truth when the Sarawak government tried its best to stop people from knowing the truth by deporting and banning their legitimate entry into the State? E.g. of cases: Thayalan Muniandy, Secretary general and Legal Advisor of SAM whose wife is from Sarawak itself, Chee Yoke Ling former Sercretary General of SAM, Meena Rahman who is Legal Advisor of Consumers Association of Penang, Aster Soong SAM staff from Sabah.

d) Police raids on SAM office Why did the police raid SAM office in Marudi three times and the SAM Penang office once ?

e) No transparency in the issue of timber licences in Sarawak Why is the issue of timber licences not made by tender or made by a collective cabinet decision in Sarawak just like other States in Malaysia so as to make it transparent?

f) Penan Biosphere Reserves Why are these reserves not gazetted until today and instead are being logged despite the government announcement to the world at large since 1987?

g) Conversion of forest land into oil plantations Why are forest land including the Permanent Forest Estates being clearcut and converted into oil palm plantations resulting in the irreparabled loss of forests and its entire biodiversity?

h) Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Study on logging Why are EIA Reports on logging not done in Sarawak as required by the Environmental Quality Act 1974 and the Sarawak Natural Resources and Environment Ordinance 1994 (SNREO)? Why does the Sarawak law i.e. SNREO requires EIA to be done on logging activities over already logged areas only and not in respect of logging activities in virgin/primary forest areas?

a) Helicopter Loggings
The Sarawak government claimed these logging methods are now used in the State and this had resulted in very significant reduction of adverse environmental impacts from loggings. This method is used only in very limited areas and is also mainly resorted to by the loggers to extract timbers in areas which otherwise would be impossible to extract the timbers by the conventional method. It is therefore not of that much improvement to the problems caused by loggings in the State as claimed or exagerated by the government. In most areas where they have started, they have stopped this logging method because it was found too costly to operate and maintain.

b) Field visits conducted by the participants of the Meeting to Sarawak. The field visits were entirely a government arranged one which only gives the government and logging companies side of the story and was also conducted to selected sites only. For a balanced and an objective judgement to be made, participants should also visit other areas and meet the natives in their longhouses or the Penan at their settlements. Meeting the various NGOs would also provide a broader and balanced perspective on the whole situation.

c) Recent events: Issue of logging licences over NCL by Forest Department Recently, the Forest Department, Miri, on the instructions of the Director of Forests, Sarawak issued two logging licences over NCL of seven longhouses in Sungai Bong, Teru/Tinjar, Baram. The conditions of the licences stated that they would be immediately suspended if the owners of the NCL covered by the licences object to the said licences and/or logging over their said land.
The Miri High Court granted an injunction stopping logging from being carried out within the NCL of the residents of the seven longhouses. The Order of the Court was also sent to the Forest Department. Letters were also sent by the residents to the Department appealing for the revocation of the licences immediately. But until today, inspite of the Court Order and letters sent by the residents to the Forest Department, the Department had failed to revoke the said logging licenses.
This is very clearly another excemple of how the Forest Department in Sarawak acted without regard to the law and the rights of the Sarawak natives.

Harrison Ngau
Sarawak, December 1996

Recently, the State Legislative Assembly has amended the law to give the Chief Minister powers to extinguish native customary rights not only in the national interest but also in favour of private enterprises. The constitutionality and legality of this amendment has been disputed and it appears to be a clear example of racial discrimination, whereby the property rights of natives are treated as inferior to the property rights of other citizens. Plans exists to develop in Sarawak 1 million hectares of land into oil palm plantation by 2010, from which 400.000 hectares is Native Customary Land. It means that 30.000 hectares of Native Customary Land would be used for this annually the next 13 years. (Sarawak Tribune 4 September '97). The recent shooting on unarmded indigenous people who were in protest against implemenation of oilpalm plantation and whereby 1 Iban died, gives fears for intensifying of conflicts about Native Customary Rights.

II PROTESTS AND ARRESTS IN SARAWAK

From October 1996 till the end of December 1997 indigenous peoples were arrested on different locations in Sarawak. In December 1997 1 Iban was killed and 2 wounded as police opened fire on unarmed indigenous people protesting the take over of their lands by oil palm plantations. In the following pages I give an overview of the cases. As far as possible I give also the background situation of the communities and their history.

1. Logging blockade in Limbang.
   Iban longhouse residents blockade logging road; 7 arrests in October 1996; no charges at the Court case.

2. Encroachment of NCR land at Niah Suai, S.G. Sebatu.
   Iban longhouses oppose implementation of oilpalm plantation; 5 arrests in January 1997, released on self bail.

3. Brutal treatment op Penan. (13 March-29 March 1997)
   In March 1997 a group of 75 Penan went to a logging camp near Long Kerong, Ulu Baram to deliver a letter to the head of the logging company with the intention to negotiate peacefully. Having arrived at the logging site, they met a group of Police Field Force who started to arrest and to hit the Penan. Many Penan were injured and 4 Penan arrested and severely wounded during the arrest.They were charged on illegal assembly and rearrested on a charge of stealing. The arrested Penan have complained about their treatment in prison.

4. Iban longhouse Rumah Riggie, Tinjar in Baram, April 1997,
   The Iban longhouse Rumah Riggie filed a lawsuit to stop the activities of the oil palm plantation and successfully obtained an Interlocutory Injunction against LCDA and Nation Mark. Several months later Nation Mark started again and 9 Ibans were arrested for obstructing the workers. The Iban were ordered to execute a bond of peace for six months. Three Iban refused and made an apeal at the Miri High Court. On August 5 the Miri High Court squashed the lower Court decision and ruled that the police had arrested the Iban without just cause and that the bond to keep the peace had been ordered withour proper inquiry.

5. Ensika. Twenty five Iban have been arrested in May 1997 for their efforts to negotiate with a timber company.

6. Iban from Sungai Bong, Teru Tinjar in Baram, June 1997.
   Three hundred natives from Sungai Bong stopped the logging activity of Ogawa Sdn Bhd. In July 1996 the natives obtained an Interlocutory Injunction restraining the logging company to encroach their NCR land.In May 1997 they were heard before the Court in Miri. In June surveyers from the Sarwak Land and Survey Department came to Sungai Bong to survey the implementation of an oil palm plantation scheme. They were told to stop their survey work by the longhouseresidents. The next day 42 Iban were arrested, during the arrest several Iban were severely injured. The Magi state ordered them to sign a bond to keep the peace. Most Iban were bailed out but while in prison they made an appeal against the order to keep the peace at Miri High Court. On August 6 the Miri High Court squashed the order to keep the peace.
   
   back to top

7. Arrest of Jaili bin Sulaiman November 1997
   Bintulu - The chairman of a native committee struggling for fair compensation for land to be used for a paper producing plant had been arrested for menacing behaviour. Jaili bin Sulaiman was arrested after a police report was lodged at the Tatau Police Station. Jaili, who is Rumah Munggun in Ulu Tatau was escorted from Tatau to Bintulu Central Police Station for questioning.
   On October 10, Jaili in a press conference in Bintulu declared that disgruntled natives were mulling over blockading the implementation of the RM 3 billion proposed Borneo Pulp and Papers (BPP) project. (Borneo Post 5/11/97)

8. Rumah Bangga longhouse, Sungai Sebukut, Lutong, Bakong, Baram, December 1997
   Ibans from Bakong, Baram, Sarawak try to protect their Native Customary Land from the encroachment of an oilpalm plantation company. Although they wrote several appeal letters and lodged a report with a police station no action was taken by the authorities. As a last resort, they confiscated three bulldozers. On the 19 th December 1997, 3 Ibans were shot by the Police Field Force. One was shot at the head, he died the 24th December. In total 28 Iban were arrested.

Cases 1,3 and 5 have to do with logging on Native Customary Land. Cases 2,4 and 8 have to do with oil palm plantations on Native Customary Land. Case 6 has to do with logging as well as oil palm plantation.
Case 6 shows that a court decision was not respected by the Forest Department and police.
Case 4 shows that a court decision was not respected by LCDA and police. Cases 3,4,6 and 8 deal with severe physical violence against indigenous people. It is very worrying that police opened fire on Iban people in December, when Enyang Ak Gendang was killed. All cases where physical violence was used originate from Miri Police Station.

On several other places protests against extinguishing of Native Customary Lands has been recorded: 10 longhouses in Sibu Sg Durin Road (Nov. 1997), residents from Rumah Jau and Rumah Nuga in Tubau (Nov. 1997)
Not mentioned in this list is the Bakun area, where a serious threat exist that indigenous people will be forcefully relocated, however the dam itself has beeen deferred.Protests of indigenous peoples against the implementation of the Bakun dam has been going on since the project was announced.

1. Logging blockade in Limbang/ 7 arrests in Octobre 1996

The longhouse residents of Rumah Bugah are continuously mounting road blockades in their efforts to stop logging operation within their native customary land boundary. The Rumah Bugah longhouse is an Iban native community situated in Tubai, Ukong river in Limbang division, the northern region of Sarawak. They are farmers, hunters and gatherers. The Ibans are putting up the blockade against the timber company known as Syarikat Gunung Utama Sdn. Bhd, a contractor company to Limbang Trading Limbang Ltd owned by Datuk Amar James Wong, who is the Sarawak Minister for Environment.

Syarikat Gunung Utama Sdn Bhd purportedly encroached and trespassed onto their native customay land (NCL) area in June '96 and started to carry out logging activities illegally within the area without their consent and permission. This is a serious violation of the Iban adat or custom. The timber company had built a logging camp for its operation in the area. Logging bridges and roads were constructed which caused massive destruction to their land and forest and severe soil erosion.

According their longhouse Headman TR Siran, the timber company has encroached into their communal forest area which their people have preserved and managed since the time of their ancestors. It is the only remaining intact jungle in the area from which they collect products for handicraft, herbals, resin, palm shoots for food and building materials for houses and boats. This is also where they carried out hunting activities.

They have taken several means to solve their problems amicably by writing appeal letters to authorities concerned and had met many times with government officers regarding their situation and their need to safeguard, preserve and protect their communal forest from being logged. However, their complaints fell to the deaf ears of the government officers.

On October 17, 1996 a group of men and women started to put up a blockade on the logging road of Syarikat Gunung Utama. On October 19, 1996 Linus Urud and 6 others were arrested by a team of policeman from Limbang Police station and were detained in the police custody for 36 hours. They were alleged of committing an offence under Section 341 of the Criminal Procedure Code. On Noverber 20, 1996 the criminal case against them was heard at Limbang Magistrate Court. They were not charged and released unconditionally.

Since the beginning of 1997 the blockade started again. The people staged the blockade at Ulu Sungai Tubah Eka which is about eight hours walking distance from their longhouse. Day and night, men women, young and old kept vigil across the logging road. Through out the blockade period, the Ibans have encountered several incidents and confrontations with the Police personel and the officers of the timber company.

2. Encroachment of NCR Land at Niah-suai, SG.Sebatu

Four Iban longhouses of Niah-suai strongly oppose the encroachment of Johnson Enterprise setting up an oil palm plantation on their NCL. The encroachment started in September 1996: the longhouse residents requested the District.Officer. to write a letter to the company asking them to respect N.C.R. land. The company ignored the protest and the letter. In December 1996 the longhouse residents lodged a report about the destruction of their NCR land. This report was refused by the Batu Niah Police and only accepted after it was offered to the Bintulu Police. On 16 january 1997 60 persdons from 4 longhouses gathered at their temuda to stop the company workers; 5 Iban were arrested and accused of stealing a bulldozer. On 27 January they were released on self bail.

Chronology of events.
In July 1996, Tradewinds Plantation Services SDn Bhd from West Malaysia announced its joint-venture with Sarawak State government in setting up oil palm plantations in Sarawak. One of it is at Niah-Suai, affecting about 20 longhouses in the area covering 10,000 hectares. In July 1996 its contractor company, Johnson Enterprise, sent an undated letter to the affected longhouse people offering RM 100/-per acre for the purchase of their NCR lands (temuda) and stated the date it took over ground operation. Out of the 20 longhouses, residents of 4 longhouses have strongly rejected such an arrangement: Rh Junit, Rh Kimen, Rh Ulut and Rh Tukok.

On 17 Sept. 1996 Tuai Rumah (Headman) Junit and his people met with the District Officer (D.O.) of Miri, Mr William Nyuallau. They requested the D.O. to write a letter to Johnson Enterprise informing the company to respect the Native Customary Rights (NCR) of the longhouse people and stop encroaching into these temuda. The company was advised to seek the understanding of the lonhghouse people before any work commence. The people have stayed there since 1954 and hold document proof over their NCR lands. However, Johnson Enterprise continued to bulldoze these temuda and ignored the people's protest, as well as the letter from Miri District Officer (DO).

On 3 Dec. 1996, longhouse folks held a "Miring Bebuling Menoa" ceremony on the bulldozed land according to their Customary Laws (Adat Asal). This ceremony was to clean and bless their temuda from bad fortune and harms as the lands have been intruded by offender of the Adat. The offender has to pay all things used and spent for this ceremony and after that the offender is to discontinue actions of encroachment. At the same time with this miring ceremony, following the "Adat Batu Pegai" the longhouse folks also withheld the company's bulldozer key and sent it to the Batu Niah Police station in the hope their land would not be disturbed further.

On 4 Dec 1996 at 8.30am, policemen from Batu Niah together with manager of Johnson Enterprise, Mr Kuang, came to the longhouse in two landcruisers. Mr Kuang then asked one of the policemen named Luhat Wan: "Besok boleh kerja kah?" (Can we start working tomorrow?) "Boleh, besok boleh kerja" said Luhat Wan, the policeman. Since then Johnson Enterprise went into full swing bulldozing the temuda and all things planted by the longhouse people.

On 7 Dec. 1996, 5 persons from Rh Junit and Rh Kimen came to Batu Niah Police Station to lodge a report on the destruction of their NCR land and their properties such as rubber trees, cocoa plants and fruit trees by Johson Enterprise, but the police there refused to take their report. Not giving up easily, they went all the way to Bintulu Police Station to do that. They were then asked by the Bintulu policeman to hand their report back to Batu Niah police station. The Batu Niah police on duty promised to give the people a copy of their repport on 13 Dec. and informed them to be prepared to pay RM 2.00 for it. The next day, the longhouse folks then stopped the company worker from bulldozing their land by withholding the bulldozer key and sent it to the policestation.

On 13 Dec. the longhouse folks came to Batu Niah Police Station to collect the photocopy of the report but it was refused by the police on duty. Meanwhile Johnson Enterprise continued to bulldoze the longhouses' temuda lands.

On 16 January 1997, about 60 persons from these 4 longhouses gathered at their temuda to stop the company workers from carrying on their work at the same time withheld the bulldozer key and later submitted it to the Batu Niah Police Station again. On the next day at 2.30 pm, about 15 policemen from Batu Niah, some in uniform and some without, arrived at Rumah Junit longhouse. They were headed by a Mr. Paul, together with the Manager of Johnson Enterprise. The police then took five persons from the longhouse to Batu Niah for investigation and told the longhouse folks that they would not take long to come home. However, after arriving at Batu Niah the five were brought straight to Miri. Many of the longhouse folks that went down to Niah by their own transport also wanted to go to Miri but were rejected by the police.

Johnson Enterprise had accused the five of stealing its bulldozer and therefore the police remanded them for investigation. The five denied stealing of the bulldozer, the bulldozer was withheld to prevent further destruction of their temuda and properties. The five were being remanded for 10 nights in Miri Police cell and being interrogated. On 27 Jan. 1997, they were released on self bail of RM 1000/- each. Presently they are engaging a lawyer from Bintulu to represent them in this case. All the longhouse folks continue to worry about their land and fruit trees being bulldozed by the company for oil palm plantation. Up to March 1997, most of their temuda lands are already bulldozed except a small portion close to the longhouse (about 500 meters) remain undisturbed.

Note: Main portion of this record was narrated by abang ak Rasmba and Sating ak Abang on 1 Feb. 1997 and recorded by David Kimay in Iban language.

3. Report on the brutal treatment of Penan

On 13 March 1997 a group of 75 Penan went to a logging camp near Long Kerong, Ulu Baram area. They wanted to deliver a letter to the head of the logging company with the intention to negotiate peacefully. Having arrived at the logging site, they met a group of Police Field Force (PPF), who started without reason to arrest and to hit the Penan. Thirty Penan were injured. Four Penan were arrested and severely wounded during the arrest.
The four Penan who were arrested on 13 March were charged on illegal assembly on 21 March at Marudi Magistrate Court. They were rearrested for a second charge on stealing soon after they were bailed out. The Penan have strongly denied all allegations by the police regarding theft and attempts to attack the police. On 29 March they were released without charge on stealing.
This report is based on interviews with Penan made on video about the Penan encoun tering the Police Field Force on 13 March 1997 and on interviews with relatives and friends of the arrested Penan.

Ijack Lagoi (Long Pigen), 20 March 1997:

"Our problems are getting worse now. I myself was almost caught by PPH (Police Field Force) on 13 March, 1997. On that day, I went to a logging camp near Sungai Seketa, about 75 of us from various villages were following. When we arrived, several company workers were working, we called them and delivered this letter (he showed the letter) to them.
We asked them to deliver the letter to their boss. But we encountered PPH nearby. They did not respect us at all, they fired at the sky with their M16 (He showed the cartridges/bullets) to warn us. Actually we were there to have a peaceful negotiation with the company (Samling). Our group were led by several chieftains (Tai Kampung) and followed by some interpreters (including me) and other villages. But PPH did not give us any chance to speak nor did they allow us to negotiate.
This person (he shows his picture), he is a PPH chief, he said during the incident on 13 March:" This is a big problem, we can not solve it here, by right now one of you should follow me to Miri". As soon as he spoke, he jumped towards me and grabbed my hand, my left hand was grabbed and injured, but I managed to get rid of his catch. Another PPH tried to catch my right arm, but with no success. Another PPH, I don't know which one, sliced me with a parang (knife). Earlier on I 've seen the PPH chief with his parang on his waist.
Above 30 of us were injured, some of us were fallen on the ground, the PPH personnel were trying to grab whoever they could grab. Several of our people suffered serious injury. Rostina John and Mina Perawi (both are women), got swollen in their feet and the pain last for several days. We tried to send them for treatment at a clinic in Lio Matu but we couldn't. Because the PPH were blocking all the roads, they intended to arrest those who are trying to seek medical treatment.
This guy (he showed the photo of the chief of PPH) please look at this carefully to recognise him. He is the one who led the operation on 13 March, he treated us Penan so badly. I asked him to arrange a negotiation between the company and us on that day (13 March), but he said he couldn't and detained and beat us without further saying any words.

Jau Lirong (Long Kerong), 20 March 1997

"On 13 March, I went to the logging road at Sg Seketa for negotiations with the company. When we arrived, PPH wanted to catch my friend Ijack, but they failed. After that, several PPH tried to catch me. They caught us without explaining us the reason. When I fled, I was hit at the back by the M16 gun. It's still painful. When I was running, the PPh were chasing me and shouting:"we"ll shoot you because you came here!"
I ran away from them, when I was looking at my back, I saw Wan Musong was caught. A PPH stepped on his chest with his jungle-boot. Company workers called "jangut" and broke Wan's blowpipe. Wan was hurt on his chest."
Actually the purpose of our gathering on 13/3/97 was to negotiate with the company. We never meant to create any trouble. We used to put our hope on the government to solve our problems, but now we realise that the government is always siding the company, they just ignore us, the Penans. We have even produced maps to demarcate our territority and our land, to show the company which part of the forest is not allowed to be entered. However, they just ignore what we have said."

P.S. Maps have been surveyed and produced by Penans in several areas to demarcate their boundaries and customary land.

ARRESTS

Four Penan were arrrested on 13 March and were charged on illegal assembly on 21 March. They were rearrested for a second charge soon after they were bailed out. On 29 March they were released without charge.
The four Penans are Pusu Bujang (Long Benali), Jangin Jalong (Long Benali), Wan Musong (Long Sait), Beripin Wan (Long Sait)

Relatives and friends of the four Penan made the following statement:
"We are also sad and worried about the conduct of the Police in Miri who took brutal action. They tortured our four friends while under remand at Miri Police Station. When we met our friends in court, they told us about the bad treatment they had undergone at Miri Police station on 13/3 and 14/3. After 14/3 they were brought to Marudi Police Station without knowledge of their lawyer, relatives and friends. At Miri Police Station about midnight of 13/3/97 the shoulder of Pusu Bujang was hit 3 times by the police. His watch was robbed and thrown away. Wan Musong was punched 3 times on his chest until he fainted. Police had kicked the body of Wan. After that he was lifted and pushed.
When they were at the Police Station in Miri and Marudi, they were given a half Packet of noodle, shared by four persons once a day for a period of 7 days."

4. Rumah Riggie Longhouse, Iban, Tinjar, Baram

A provisional lease of State land was granted to LCDA which covers part of the NCL of the Rumah Riggie longhouse. The plantation company Nation Mark tried several times to start the implementation of the oil palm plantation, but was stopped by the longhouse residents. Police Field Force was stationed in the area. Longhouse residents were harrassed by the police. The Rumah Riggie longhouse filed a lawsuit to stop the activities of the oil palm plantation and they successfully obtained an Interlocutory Injunction against LCDA and Nation Mark. Several months later Nation Mark started again and 9 Ibans were arrested for obstructing the workers. The Iban were ordered to execute a bond of peace for six months. Three Iban refused and made an appeal at the Miri High Court. On August 5 the Miri High Court squashed the lower Court decision and ruled that the police had arrested the Iban without just cause and that the bond to keep the peace had been ordered without proper inquiry.

On 1 April 1996, Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA) was granted and issued a provisional lease of State land known as Lot 15 (leased land) containing approximately 4827 hectares without the consent of the Rumah Riggie longhouse residents. The said leased land covers part of the NCL owned by Rumah Riggie longhouse residents. According to the terms and conditions of the provisional lease, a proper lease shall be given to LCDA upon the completion of a proper survey of the said leased land, after which such lease shall be granted a 99 years term from the date of the provisional lease.

The longhouse residents were shocked to discover that an oil palm plantation company known as Nation Mark Sdn Bhd encroached onto the boundary of their NCL with bulldozers, trucks, lorries, landcruisers and felled and removed trees/timbers from their land. They immediately protested and stopped the company from continuing their activities within the boundaries of their NCL. The company ceased temporarily.

Around the end of September 1996, the company came again and tresspassed on their land. The natives stood strong and maintained firm protest and objection against the company activity. The situation caused tension between the company workers and the natives. In retaliation, the company called a group of seven (7) Police Field Force (PFF) personel to ensure peace and order. A few of the longhouse residents were brutally harassed by the PFF personel. On the 14 th October 1996, TR Riggie lodged a police report at Marudi Police Station on this harassment.

On 26th September 1996, a PFF Unit led by Chief Inspector Chan Kuang Yu appeared at the longhouse of Mr Insom. They first went to the room of the Chief but as the Chief was not in, they went to meet Mr Insom and demanded his Identity Card. However, when Mr Insom was about to get his Identity Card he was suddenly assaulted by the Chief Inspector and then handcuffed with his hands folded to his back. He was then repeatedely punched and kicked on his head, face, chest, head and fingers. As a result he suffered several cuts and bruises. The PFF did not explain their purpose of raiding the longhouse. However, their motive was clear, that is to intimidate and stop the natives from stopping the establishment of the oil palm plantation of LCDA on their land. Mr Insom filed a suit against Chief Inspector Chan Kuang Yu for damages.

October 19, 1996 Nation Mark Sdn Bhd again encroached illegally and caused destruction to their lands and about 20 acres of rice fields were bulldozed. On the 24 th October 1996, TR Riggie travelled down to Marudi town to lodge a police report on the illegal encroachment and damages done by the company to the land and the rice fields.

TR Riggie and the members of his longhouse committee have met and reported these trespasses to the other relevant authorities such as the District Office Marudi and the Divisional Resident Office, Lands and Surveys Department and the Forest Department in Miri, however there is no action taken to stop or discourage the company from encroaching and further damaging their land, gardens and forest.

On 2 December 1996, TR Riggie Ak Belulok, who is the Headman of his community together with Insom Ak Uban and Ungkok Ak Atau representing themselves and sixty other families who are all natives Iban of Rumah Riggie, Sungai Nat, Teru, Tinjar in Baram filed lawsuit to stop the activity of oil palm plantation within their native customary land (NCL). In the suit they name LCDA (provisional lease holder), Nation Mark Sdn Bhd (Developer of the oil palm plantation) and Superintendent of Lands and Surveys (Authority granting the provisional lease)

In their writ, the natives sincerely affirmed that their community through their forepa rents initially moved to and settled at their present longhouse in 1920s and have had acquired Native Customary Rights in the area:
1. By cultivation and planting on the said land with rubber trees, fruit trees, rice, pepper and vegetables;
2. By rearing of livestocks and/or poultry/s;
3. By clearing and/or felling virgin jungle and the occupation of the same;
4. By using the said land as burial grounds;
5. By traditionally gathering jungle products like rattan, wood, herds, shoots, mushrooms and other edible and medical plants;
6. The boundary of our NCL was confirmed and recorded by the Government pursuant to the Government Secretariat Circular No. 12 0f 1939 and accordingly kept and recorded in the Land Boundary Register Book at the District Office, Marudi,Baram.

On 6 January 1997 TR Riggie Anak Belulok and 2 others successfully obtained a court declaration after the High Court in Miri granted an Interlocutory Injunction against Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA), Nation Mark Sdn Bhd and Superintendent of Lands and Surveys Miri by restraining their agents or servants or subcontractor/s and assignee/s from further tresspassing on and commencing their oil palm plantation scheme within the communal native customary rights lands of the Rumah Riggie community.

On 10 April the work of Nation Mark started again and on 17 April 9 Ibans (including Riggie Anak Belulok) were arrested for obstructing the workers of Nation Mark to carry out their work. What had happened? From a letter from Miri prison by Riggie Anak Belulok and 2 others dated 26 April:

"But on the 10th April 1997, we were shocked to discover that the workers of the company were bulldozing our garden and cultivated land resulting in extensive damages to our land and crops such as fruit trees and vegetables. The last portion of our forest was also being cleared. As we feared that the company would continue to damage our land, crops, properties and forest we stopped the workers working on our land. We told the manager of the company to stop work and explained to him that our case against them in the High Court in Miri is yet to be determined.
However, on the morning of the 17th April 1997, we were again shocked to find out that our farm huts on our land in which we store padi (rice) seeds and agriculture tools for our farm had been blazed or burned down. We strongly suspected it was the work of the company workers because the workers were bulldozing the sites of these farm huts on the morning of the 17 th April, 1997. We reported all this to the Police Field Force who were stationed there at the site with the workers of the company as well as the Police in Marudi and Beluru without any success.
With all these acts of the company that caused extensive and continued damages to our land, forest destruction, losses of crops and properties and with the indifference of the authorities towards our repeated complaints, we beleive we are lawfully justified in exercising our right of private defence against the company by using reasonable force to stop their activities on our land."

As said 9 Ibans from 3 longhouses from Tinjar, Baram were arrested on 17 April 1997. On 19 April 1997 they were brought to the Magistrate Court in Miri whereby the police requested that they would be further remanded for investigation in connection with a report lodged by the oil palm plantation, Nation Mark that they intimidated and threated their workers. The Court ordered that they would be remanded for eight days.

On 23 April the 9 Ibans were ordered by the Magistrate's Court Miri to execute a bond of peace for six months and to be released on RM 3000 bail in two sureties each. Six of them were released. However, another three (Headman Riggie Anak Belukok, Ungkok Ak Ata and Genga Ak Timbang) were dissatisfied and disagreed with the order made by the magistrate. The three were sent to Miri Central Prison on the 24th April.

The three were released on May 3 1997, but only after they had made an appeal against the said order at the Miri High Court. Also they declared with the application that the land belongs to them.

On August 5 the Miri High Court squashed the lower Court decision. The High Court ruled that the police had arrested the Ibans without just cause, and that the bond to keep the peace had been ordered without a proper inquiry by the Magistrate. Apperently the interlocutory injunction was still valid in April, when the Iban were arrested.

5. Ensika / 25 arrests in May '97

Twenty-five Iban natives have been arrested on 10 May, 1997 for their efforts to negotiate with a timber company. The Iban natives from Ensika village were verbally invited by one police officer, Assistant Superintendent of Police (ASP) Mohd Faizal to negotiate the villagers' demand to temporarily stop logging on their NCR land. Upon reaching the logging camp, ASP Mohd Faizal changed his mind and refused to accept a letter from the villagers seeking negotiation with the company officials. Instead he ordered the Police Field Force (PFF) to arrest the 25 villagers.

Chronology of events
January 1997 - Ensika villagers were shocked when their NCL (Native Customary Land) was encroached by a logging company without any prior notice. The logging company, Hua Seng Sawmill Sdn Bhd, started logging activities on NCL of Kampung Ensika, Ulu Sebangan, Simunjan District, Samarahan Division.
Heavy machines used to drag logs from forest to riverside, caused problems (soil erosion and diesel waste) to Ensika villagers and some other downstream villages, e.g. Kampung Meranti, Kampung Tungkah Melayu, Kampung Tungkah Iban, Sebangan and a few more.

February 18 - The villagers sent a letter to the camp manager, Kamal b. Budol, who is the representative of Hua Seng Sawmill Sdn Bhd, calling on the company to respect their NCR (Native Customary Rights) on their land. The company did not respond and thus no agreement was reached.
February 25 - Again the representatives of Ensika villagers sent another letter of appeal to the camp manager, Kamal b. Budol, to request the company to stop logging activities before the involved parties reach any solution. Copies of the letter were also sent to: Director of Forest Department, Sarawak; Residen of Samarahan Division; District Officer of Sadong Jaya; Penghulu Sebangan; YB Julauhi b. Waram, State Assemblyman of Sebuyau.
February 28 - Fed up with the inaction of the authorities, Ensika villagers decided to launch peaceful protest on the railway track to prevent the logging activities before any agreement or solution is reached.

April 7 - Mr Lau Phang Ting and Mr Tiong, the representatives of the company, invited representatives of Ensika villagers to a meeting in Simunjan District Office. The meeting was attended by: Simunjan District Officer;1 Forest officer; Pemanca; 2 representatives of Hua Seng Sawmill Sdn Bhd; 6 representatives of Ensika villagers.
The meeting could not achieve any agreement because the representatives of hua Seng could not promise anything to resolve the matter. The demands of the representatives of Ensika villagers are:
1. Compensation of RM2.000 for each door (household), or
2. Build a bund road connecting the longhouse to the estuary of Sungai Ensika (about 12 km) and compaensation RM1.000 for each household, or
3. Compensation 5 tonnes of Meranti plank to each door (household) In April another three meetings were held (April 11, April 17 and April 21) between Ensika representatives and Hua Seng; these meetings were also attended by forest officers from Kuching and policemen. No agreement was reached.

May 2 - One inspector ASP Mohd Faizal and another 6 policemen and policewomen arrived at Ensika Longhouse at 12.00p.m. He offered a helping hand by asking longhouse villagers to write a letter to him (ASP Faizal) to arrange a final dialogue with the company. The villagers agreed.
May 5 - A letter of request to arrange the dialogue had been faxed to Simunjan Police Station for SSP Faizal, according to the policeman who received the fax, ASP Faizal was having a meeting in Kuching at that time.
May 6 - Police Field Force (PFF - paramilitary) personnel from Batu Kawa (KUching District) were sent to Sungai Meranti Logging Camp. Ensika villagers were so shocked to see so many (around 20 persons) PFF uniformed personnel armed with automatic firearms. One of the villagers approached them and asked: What is your purpose of coming here? They said: We are taking instruction from the authorities on security purposes.
May 8 - Four representatives of Ensika villagers were verbally invited to the logging camp to deliver a letter to ASP Faizal about the arrangement of the dialogue between villagers and timber company, but one of the PPF told them that ASP Faizal returned to Simunjan. He them asked them to turn up on the following day.
May 9 - 26 villagers went to the logging camp to meet ASP Faizal about the same matter but he was not there. Meanwhile, the villagers discovered that the camp workers were building the railway track into NCL of Ensika village. The PFF personnel were guarding them. When the villagers approached PFF personnel and asked them about ASP Faizal, they told Ensika villagers to come on May 10.
May 10 - Saturday. Again the Ensika villagers went to the logging camp to send their letter to ASP Faizal. They still remember his promise and put their hope on him. This time ASP Faizal was there, but he refused to accept the letter. He said that he has no power to arrange any discussion or dialogue for them. Instead he ordered the villagers to line up at the camp site, and announced that the villagers were arrested under Section 506 of the Penal Code and Section 27 (5) of Police Act 1967. Then the PPF personnel brought the villagers to Simunjan Police Station for remand. All the villagers were shocked of his unexpected treatment.

May 11 - Sunday. The condition in Simunjan lockup was poor. No blankets, no pillows and insufficient food was offered. There was also a lot of mosquitoes. They complained to ASP Mohd Faizal. The police promised them to provide blankets, pillows, enough food, and mosquito coils. ASP Faizal also promised their family members who came from Ensika and their friends (who have to travel for 180 km to Simujan) from Kuching to fulfil the required of the 25 Ensika villagers. At the end the police only provided mosquito coil for the second night. Since the police never keep to their promises, the poor condition caused some of the villagers, including the eldest villager, Bohoi ak Meling, 74 year-old, who already had health problem, fall sick. The police refused to provide any medical attention.
May 12 - Monday. Some of the villagers of Ensika obtained permission from the policer to send Bohoi ak Meling to a clinic in the afternoon. Unfortunately the clinic was closed. They had been brought before the Magistrate of Simunjan Court, Mr Tom Hem, and after that they were released at 4.00 p.m.

6. Sungai Bong, Teru, Tinjar in Baram/ 45 arrests in June '97

Three hundred natives from Sungai Bong stopped the logging activity of Ogawa Sdn Bhd. In July 1996 the natives obtained an Interlocutory Injunction restraining the logging company to encroach their NCR land. The longhouse residents were heard in this case before the Court in Miri in May 1997. They argued that one of the special conditions in the 2 licences to the company stated that if there is any dispute with the landowners whose land is affected or included, the licences shall be revoked immediately.And that since the time they first discovered the first licence over their land, they have made repeated representations to the Forest Department to withdraw the licence. On 24 th June 1997 surveyers from the Sarawak Land and Survey Department came to Sungai Bong to survey for the implementation of an oil palm plantation scheme. They were told to stop their survey work by the longhouse residents. The next day 42 Iban from Sungai Bong were arrested.
During the arrest several Iban were severely injured. The Magistrate ordered them to sign a bond to keep the peace, which was refused by the Iban. Most Iban were bailed out on 12 July, but while in prison they made an appeal against the order to keep the peace at Miri High Court. On August 6 the Miri High Court squashed the order to keep the peace. Longhouse Chief Tr Rayong Ak Lapik was arrested seperately on 28 June and accused of stealing a bulldozer and obstructing a public servent. This had to do with the prevention of the illegal cut of illeput trees by the longhouse residents.

Longhouse Chief TR Rayong Ak. Lapik led about 300 natives of his longhouse to stop logging activity of the timber company Ogawas Sdn Bhd., which illegally encroached and commenced its logging operations within the native customary land boundary that stretches from Tanjung Kibal to the confluence of Sg Litot and Bukit Merambun in Teru, Tinjar. The said timber company was granted a logging license to operate in the area by the Forest Department without the consent of the natives of Rumah Rayong.

In June 1996, TR Rayong filed an ex-parte injunction against Ogawa Sdn Bhd. On July 20 last year the natives succesfully obtained an Interlocutory Injunction order to restrain the said company from encroaching and commencing logging operations on their communal land. Since then the court mention for hearing of the case have been postponed for a number of times until it was decided to hear the natives on this case on 7 May 1997.

May 1997
From a report of 7 May: Longhouse Chief TR. Rayong Ak Lapik suit against timber company, Ogawa Sdn Bhd recieved the full support of Dayak communities from different parts of Sarawak when more than 100 Dayak representatives, men and women turn up to show their solidarity support in front of the building of Miri High Court here this morning. TR Rayong together with a group of elders from his community were dressed with their traditional gears with the women featuring their native customes marched along the corridor of the court building. They performed a short symbolical ceremony with an elder enchanted a tribal spirit and invoked the spirits of their ancestors to inspire them in their struggle and guide their counsel in pursuing the case. He whispered a message into the air by saying:
"Our ancestors, we are here today confronting a human written law which is not in favour of us as it is not in accordance with our system of customs and laws. Help, inspire and guide us in our struggle against the plunderers of our land and forest which you had passed onto us and on which we continue to occupy and use for our survival; it contend the burials of our dead relatives and friends which we care for, from generation zo generation."

From a press release by the Iban on 7 May 1997:
"We came down from our respective longhouses in Ulu Sg. Teru, Tinjar, Baram, Sarawak two days ago. We are here at the Miri High Court today to seek vindication of our rights over our native customary land. Sometime last year (1996), without our knowledge or consent, the Director of Forests wrongfully issued occupation Ticket licenses for the extraction of rubber woods and other timbers on our land to a body called Ahli Jawatankuasa Kemajuan Kawasan (Area Devvelopment Committee) Ulu Teru. The said body is neither registered as a company or society and therefore does not has a legal personality in law. Indeed, we are very surprised that the Director of Forests can issue such a license which carries it rights and obligations to such an unregistered body. One of the special conditions in the two licenses clearly stated that if there is any dispute with the land owners whose land are effected or included in the licesed areas, the licenses shall be revoked immediately.
Since the time we first discovered the first license was issued over our customary land, we have made repeated representations to the Forest Department to withdraw or revoke the said license. We have also filed a case in the Miri High Court against the contractor of the said licensee Ogawa Sdn Bhd for trespassing and obtained an ex-parte injunction. But despite our said appeals to the Forest Department which was also notified about our said case in the Miri High Court, the Director of Forest had issued a second Occupation Ticket License over the same area of our said land. We had also lodged reports with the Police over the destruction of our customary land, crops and forest by the logging contractor but the police had simply advised that this is not a criminal matter which warrants their action. Left to ourselves, we had appealed to the company to stop their activities on our land but we were ignored. This is the reason why we now come before the court. Later today, we will bring a report to the Anti-Corruption Agency on this matter."

June 1997
On 25 June 1997 forty two Ibans were arrested by platoons of Malaysian Police and Police Field Force within their native customary land area in Sungai Bong, Teru, Tinjar in Baram District of Miri Division, Sarawak. The 42 Ibans were from five longhouse communities namely: Rumah Rayong, Rumah Jawing, Rumah Pong, Rumah Janda and Rumah jambo.

From a letter from Miri Central Prison (30 June '97):
"On 24th June 1997 we met with surveyers from the Sarawak land and Survey Department who came to survey our Native Customary Land in Upper Teru River, Baram for an oil palm plantation company to implement an oil palm plantation scheme which is against our consent. We told them to stop their survey work so they told us to wait for their boss to come the next day. At about 3.30 pm on 25th June 1997, it was not their boss who came but about not less than forty Para-Military Police and Police Field Force. As soon as they arrived they immediately proceeded to arrest us without telling us our crime. We refused to be arrested. But they resorted to assaulting and beating us by kicking, punching us and butting us with their M16 rifles. As a result many of us were bruised and suffered cuts and pains all over our body." As stated by a letter of 39 prisoners in Miri prison.

On 26 June, the arrested Ibans were produced by the police before the Miri Magistrate Court. Upon hearing the application made by the police, the Magistrate ordered them to sign a bond to keep the peace for six months and to be released on RM3000 in two sureties each pursuant to Section 67 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The Ibans disagreed with the order and refused to sign the bond to keep the peace because the land on which the oil palm plantation is to be established is their native customary land. On 27 June they were send to Miri Central Prison in lambir. Meanwhile two more Iban from Sungai Bong area were arrested.

On 28th June three Iban were bailed by their family members to enable them to seek medical treatment as their health detoriated. The three are: Tait Ak Barau, Alau Ak Ngira, Bugul Ak Ugap. They made numerous requests to the police to obtain medical treatment during the entire period of their detention but their requests were rejected by the police. As their health condition was getting worse, their relatives were forced to arrange their immediate release to seek medical attention. Soon after they were released, they lodged a police report at Miri Police station regarding the assault, and violent and brutal treatment of the police on many of the Iban during the arrest.

On July 12 most of the Iban were bailed out by their relatives. While they were in prison, an appeal against the order to keep the peace was filed in the High Court.
On August 6 the High Court squashed the order made by the Magistrates Court to execute a bond to keep the peace for six months.

Arrest of Tr Rayong Ak Lapik
Longhouse Chief Tr Rayong Ak Lapik from Sungai Bong was arrested by a group of policeman on 28 June in Miri town. Chief Tr Rayong came down to Miri town upon receiving news that Ibans of Sungai Bong were arrested by the police. The week before the arrest Tr. Rayong and his longhouse residents had stopped the workers of a logging company, Ogawa Sdn Bhd from felling and extracting various species of illeput trees which the Iban call "Engkabang" near his longhouse in Sungai Bong. This tree specie is protected under the Sarawak Wildlife Ordinance 1990.
Last year longhouse Chiefs in Baram District were formally appointed by the Sarawak Minister of Environment and Housing, Datuk Amar James Wong to be Honorary Wildlife Rangers to help the Sarawak Forest Department to enforce the said Ordinance in their respective areas. Tr Rayong was one of those appointed.
Before stopping the company from felling and extracting these "Engkabang" trees, TR. Rayong had reported the matter to the Sarawak Forest Department several times without success. According to the police, Tr. Rayong was arrested because a report had been lodged in Marudi last week alleging that he stole a bulldozer of the company, which was used for extracting the Engkabang trees.

On July 10 he was bailed out, but immediately re-arrested and charged for obstructing a public servant in discharge of his public functions. After that he was again bailed out.

7. No further details

8. Rumah Banga longhouse, Sungai Subukut, Bakong, Sarawak

Iban from Rumah Bang, Bakong try to protect their Native Customary Land from the encrouchment of an oilpalmplantation company. Although they wrote several appeal letters and lodged a report with a police station no actions were taken by the authorities. As a last resort they confiscated three bulldozers. On the 19 th December 1997 three Iban were shot by the Police Field Force. One was shot at the head, he died the 24th December. In total 28 Iban were arrested.

Without notice or consultation with the Iban of Rumah Banga, the Land and Survey Department issued a provisional lease to Empresa (M) Sdn Bhd, an oil palm plantation company. The land area covered with the lease includes the Native Customary Land of the Iban. The conditions stated in the lease were, inter alia, that "the holder of this provisional lease shall not be entitled to a lease of an area equal to the area (of the provisional lease) but only to such an area as the Survey shows to be available" i.e. a survey must be done first by the lessee over the leased area to determine whether other people have rights over the same area of land, if so, such an area will be excluded from the lease.

The Iban first and only came to know of the issue of the provisional lease to Empresa when Segarakam Sd Bhd and Prana Sdn Bhd (contractors to Empresa) tresspassed and started clearing their customary land on November 16 1997. The companys started to cut down rubber and fruit trees of the longhouse residents.
Longhouse chief Banggau anak Andop lodged a report against the company on December 1 at the Beluru police station stating what damage had been done and requesting them to stop Empresa and their contractors from operating. In Beluru as well as Marudi Police station the report detailing the peoples objections to what was happening to their land was not accepted. Banggau anak Andop wrote also letters to the Land and Survey Department and other Departments requesting that the lease be withdrawn or revoked or that a survey be done so that there land could be excluded therefrom. No action was taken by government authorities and the companies continued to trespass and clear their land and more of their crop were destroyed.

As a result of this inaction by the police and the continued destruction of their lands the villagers took control of three of the companies bulldozers and removed them to the longhousse. The action of the people were designed firstly, to stop Empressa from operating and secondly, to initiate a dialogue with the company. The company's response was to call in the police to help them get their machinery back. After a visit from one truckload of police on the 18 th of December the people refused to return the bulldozers as the company still had made no promise to stop working on the Native Customary Rights land.

The following day the Police Field Force returned in greater force, in plain cloths and in uniform but without identification and armed with side arms, M16 rifles and batons.

The people of the village made a peaceful gathering outside of their longhouse when the police arrived, holding a banner tied between two poles bearing the statement, 'Land is our life'. Photographs from the site site show the people smiling and joking with each other. Offerings were also being made to the ancestors, called a 'Miring', using rice, eggs and other food. The banner was to act as a line over which negotiations with the company and the police officers could take place.

After the exchange of a few words however one of the leading Police Field Force officers rushed forward and tried to arrest some Iban. The Iban tried to prevent the arrests. At the same time the Police Field Force officer gave the orders to the other PFF officers to charge and to open fire on the unarmed villagers.
Without any warning or warning shots, three of the Ibans were shot, one in the head. Also several of the Iban were beaten up with batons or punched and kicked. Several Ibans were arrested.

Five days later, on December 24 th Enyang Ak Gendang died in hospital where a postmortem revealed a bullet lodged inside his head.
Indit ak Uma, who was shot in the stomach, chest and wrist, and Siba ak Sentu, who was shot in the abdomen, were detained by the police until their release on 29 December. Indit is reported to have returned to the hospital for treatment to his stomach wound which became infected while he was in detention. Six people of Rumah Banga were detained. The Iban were released from police custody on 23 December. The remaining detainees were released on 29 December with no charges having been laid against them, but they all are due to appear at Marudi police station and Magistrate's Court on 22 January 1998.
It was reported that up to 22 other Iban from neighbouring communities have been detained briefly before 23 December 1997. They are also released wihtout charge but ordered to appear at the Magistrate's Court in Marudi on 22 January 1998.

On 22 January 1998, all the Ibans who were arrested were present at Marudi Police station. They were asked to hold a flat bearing their name written on it as the police took their photo one by one inside a room in the police station. The police have not charged them yet. However, they are ordered to appear again at the Marudi Police Station on March 9, 1998.

On 29 December 1997, Iban Headman Banggau and 2 others on behalf on themselves and all the members of their longhouses filed a suit to stop the activities of the oil palm plantations within their Native Customary Land. They also name Land Custody and Development Authority (LCDA) and the Sarawak State Government as defendent in the case. They are challenging the issue and declare as illegal, null and void the provisional lease by the LCDA.
23 January 1998, the Miri High Court adjourned the injunction application filed by Iban Headman Banggau and 2 others to February 11, 1998. More than 100 menbers of the Iban longhouses from Bakong gathered outside the court building to show their moral support.

Immediately after the courtcase of 23 January, Iban Headman Banggau was arrested by the police. There was no explanation given to him on his arrest. The period of his detention is not known yet. He is detained at Miri Central Police Station.