Judges refuse to rule on consitutionality of land grab

The Federal Court today refused to answer a question on whether the seizure of land by the Sarawak government for the Bakun dam was unconstitutional or not.

The decision by Chief Justice Zaki Azmi (left) and the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Richard Malanjum, both of whom refused to answer the question, was to let other pending cases deal with the issue.

The other Federal Court judge, Justice Md Raus Sharif, answered the question in the negative, and said the seizure was not unconstitutional.

However, all three judges unanimously decided to dispose of lawyer Baru Bian's appeal following the land seizure in Bakun by the state government 14 years ago to build the multi-billion ringgit dam and a wood pulp mill.

Led by native Bato Bagi, five longhouse residents of Uma Balui Ukap at Batu Kalo, Uma Lesong at Batu Keling, Uma Bakah at Long Bulan, Rumah Kulit at Long Jawe and Rumah Ukit at Long Ayak on June 23, 1997, claimed native customary rights over lands along Batang Balui and its tributaries in the Belaga District of Kapit division.

They were ordered to vacate the land and surrender their native customary rights for the construction of the dam.

The indigenous people wanted the order to be declared void on the grounds that:

• The directive violated the plaintiffs' fundamental rights under Articles 5(1) of the Federal Constitution, and/or Article 8 of the Federal Constitution and/or Art. 13(2) of the Federal Constitution;

• The directive was in violation of Article 39(1) and (2) of the constitution of the state of Sarawak and/or Article 153 of the Federal Constitution; and

• The directive was made pursuant to sections 5(3) and (4) of the Sarawak Land Code, which are void and unconstitutional as being in violation of Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution and/or Article 8 of the Federal Constitution and/or Article 39(1) and (2) of the constitution of the state of Sarawak and/or Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.

Bato has since passed away.

Zaki said this was the most difficult judgment he had to deal with during his three-year tenure as chief justice.

[More to follow]