ANGER has erupted on social media following a “leaked” draft of the long-awaited bill to amend Sarawak’s Land Code.

The amendment, to allow the term “native territorial domain” to be recognised and given the force of law, is due to be tabled at next month’s state legislative assembly sitting.

The draft appears to show that the state’s indigenous Dayak are given only “usufructuary right” to their lost claims on their “pemakai menoa” (territorial domain) and “pulau galau” (communal forest reserve).

In law, “usufructuary right” means only the right to use something, without having legal ownership.

“Giving the territorial domain the status of ‘usufructuary right’ is akin to saying, ‘you can use the ‘pemakai menoa’ and ‘pulau galau’ land, but it does not belong to you’,” said state Pakatan Harapan information chief Vernon Kedit.

If the draft proves to be genuine, it could lead to further furore among the Dayak – much like what had happened in December 2016, when the Federal Court ruled that their native customary rights (NCR) to land applied only to a limited area of farmland, or “temuda”, and not “pemakai menoa” and “pulau galau” land, which is usually around their longhouses.

The apex court, in its ruling, had said there was no legislation in Sarawak that gave the force of law to the Dayak’s claims that they had NCR to virgin forests around their longhouses.

It had said the customs of “pemakai menoa” and “pulau galau” did not fall within the definition of law under Article 160(2) of the federal constitution.

The ruling saw the Dayak losing hundreds of thousands of hectares of land that they believe have been theirs for centuries, overnight. They were also angered that the court had failed to recognise their traditional rights and ownership of land.

Kedit said giving the Dayak “usufructuary right” would “erode the essence of ‘pemakai menoa’ and ‘pulau galau’, which was, is and always will be about recognising legal ownership of NCR land”.

He said such a right was not what the Dayak had wanted when they pushed for amendments to the Land Code.

“‘Pemakai menoa’ and ‘pulau galau’ is full, total and complete ownership and control of the land. Nothing less.”

The “leaked” draft also seems to suggest that there is a cap on the size of land that the Dayak can claim as “pemakai menoa” or “pulau galau”. However, the limitation is not stated.

A new section, namely Section 6A (2), to be inserted in the amended Land Code states: “Any claims under Sub-section (1) shall be made to the Superintendent (of Land and Survey), in such form as may be provided by the Director, with all evidence in support of such claims: provided always, the area claimed as territorial domain shall not exceed… hectares.”

How could the state government limit the size of “pemakai menoa” and “pulau galau”, questioned Kedit.

“Different rivers and different Dayak groups have different sizes.

“GPS (Gabungan Parti Sarawak) wants to put a cap, and limit the size. A standardised size for ‘pemakai menoa’ and ‘pulau galau’ throughout Sarawak goes against its very spirit.”

He said the state government is pulling a fast one with the amendment.

“Nothing has changed. The state still holds full ownership of ‘pemakai menoa’ and ‘pulau galau’. Does GPS still think it can continue to fool the Dayak with this legal spin?”

There are reportedly more than 300 pending NCR dispute cases before the high court and Court of Appeal statewide as of 2016. – June 25, 2018.