Court of Appeal rules for the people in NCR land cases untangling murky transactions between companies and the government
Adenan
KUCHING: It may be the right time for Adenan Satem, who assumed the post of chief minister of Sarawak at the end of February, to take the necessary steps to accept the native customary rights (NCR) land concept as defined by the courts.
This follows the latest case in which the state government lost in court battles against the NCR landowners.
In the latest case today, the Court of Appeal rejected an appeal by the Sarawak government to reverse a High Court’s decision in Numpang Suntai and 13 other NCR landowners vs the
state government and five other defendants over a 1,500ha land in Ulu Sebangan, Simunjan.
In this case, the state government, through the director of Forests Sarawak, issued a timber licence to Quality Concrete Sdn Bhd on Nov 30, 2009 to extract timber from the lands claimed by the villagers as their “pulau galau” (communal reserve land) over which they have customary rights.
The landowners filed the suit on Nov 1, 2010, declaring ownership of the lands, besides seeking compensation for loss and damages as a result of alleged illegal logging activities and logging road construction.
The fourteen plaintiffs are bringing a representative action for themselves and all others in the sixteen villages situated at Sebangan, Simunjan, Sarawak.
In their statement of claims, the plaintiffs have claimed that the defendants have encroached into their lands located at Sungai Sebangan and Sungai Sebuyau, Simunjan.
They argued that they have Native Customary Right (NCR) over the lands.
They claimed that two private companies, Quality Concrete and Loyal Billion, had trespassed on their land and there was also illegal logging activities.
They claimed that the illegal activities had affected their farms and their old longhouse sites.
The plaintiff claimed they discovered their land had been trespassed for the construction of logging roads and extraction of timber from the lands which was not a licensed area.
They said Sungei Selabu, Sungai Ijuk and Sungai Sebangan, which are important for the daily needs to the villages, have been polluted by the logging activities.
They said the polluted and murky water had affected their farms, hunting ground and fishing grounds as well as destroyed their gardens.
The plaintiffs wanted the loss and damages suffered to be assessed.
Apart from the state government, the other defendants named in the civil suit were the timber concession holder, Quality Concrete Sdn Bhd, logging contractor Loyal Billion Sdn Bhd, two government-appointed community leaders Penghulu Merum Babu and Ketua Kampung Agu Kaleng and director of Forests Sarawak.
However, only the state government appealed against the High Court’s decision.
High Court judge Rhodzariah Bujang, had on May 21, 2012, ruled Numpang and the 13 other villagers have customary rights over the lands encroached by the defendants.
Speaking to reporters after the Court of Appeal dismissed the state government’s appeal, lawyer Baru Bian said: “We do hope that the new chief minister Adenan Satem takes steps to recognise the NCR land concept as defined by the court.
“The Federal Court, Court of Appeal and High Court have recognised that Pemakai Menoa (territorial domain) and Pulau Galau (communal reserve land) are NCR lands, but unfortunately, the state government has refused to accept the court’s definition of the NCR land.
“We are delighted that more and more NCR land cases have been decided by the Court of Appeal favouring the landowners, especially on the legal concept, which the court has made it very clear and concise.”
Baru, who is also State PKR chief and Ba’Kelalan State Assemblyman, said the Court of Appeal’s rejection of the state government’s appeal in the Numpang Suntai case is an assurance to the landowners.
“It should also be welcomed by the natives of Sarawak,” he said.
The appeal by the state government was heard by Appeal Court judges Mohamad Ariff Yusof, Rohana Yusuf and Hamid Sultan Abu Backer.
Baru represented the plaintiffs while the state government was represented by state legal council Joseph Chioh.