LABUAN WAS A COLLECTIVE DECISION, HARRIS CONTENDS

Labuan was a collective decision, Harris contends

Kota Kinabalu June 12, 2012: The decision to make Labuan a Federal Territory on April 16, 1984, was resolved or decided collectively by the State Cabinet and sanctioned by majority members of the Sabah State Legislative Assembly, including the Labuan Assemblyman.

Former Chief Minister Tan Sri Harris Mohd Salleh in his Statement of Defence in the suit filed against him by local businessman James Albanus @ Richard, Harris said it was because the purpose of creating Labuan Federal Territory was explained by him during a sitting of the State Legislative Assembly on March 8, 1984 and was not made in an extremely haste and hurried manner.

Harris denied Albanus' statement of claim that in 1984, as a result of action taken by him, Labuan became a Federal Territory on April 16, 1984, the second Federal Territory after Kuala Lumpur and denied that the creation of the Labuan Federal Territory was undertaken by him in an extremely hasty and hurried manner without seeking any public opinion or consultation especially of the citizenry of the State of Sabah and/or the citizenry of the Labuan island.

Harris further claimed that the statements are mischievous.

Albanus, 59, had named Harris in the legal suit filed here on March 7, this year and seeking for a declaration that Harris, who was the sixth Chief Minister from 1976 and 1985, on his part had acted unlawfully in the surrender of Labuan in 1984, damages, injunctive relief, cost and interest.

Harris also claimed that Albanus' further statements that he had discovered from one Tan Sri Simon Sipaun (then acting State Secretary), in researching the creation of Labuan as a Federal Territory that he (Harris), among others, had not sought the opinions, feeling and concerns of Sabah citizens, including Albanus, are misconceived.

Harris said it was because Labuan Federal Territory was created after the relevant provisions under the Sabah Constitution and Federal Constitution were complied with and that there is no such provision therein or in any law which requires for direct or indirect public opinion or consultation in respect thereof.

He further averred that the said paragraphs 10 and 11 of the plaintiff's Statement of Claim pleaded evidence thus bad pleading and/or otherwise the plaintiff suit is political in nature and devoid of any cause of action and thus an abuse of the court process and ought to be struck out.

The defendant denies each and every allegation or claim in the Statement of Claim, said Harris.

At the same time, Harris also filed a counterclaim against Albanus for libel contained in a statement he maliciously published and/or caused to be printed or published in the Daily Express on March 8, which "had defamatory context concerning or referring to him".

Harris claimed that the said statement as a whole and/or in particular the phrases "Sabah is not financially well off as a State was because of the surrender of Labuan, which was undertaken by the Defendant" and "the transfer was done rashly and there are many unanswered questions" in the context it was published or in their ordinary and natural meaning an/or by false innuendo bore the meanings and was understood to mean that the defendant:

- Had surreptitiously surrendered or transferred Labuan island to the Federal Government in unconstitutional manner for his own personal benefit or financial gains;

- Had completely disregarded the economic well-being of Sabah or its people or Labuan people in transferring the administration of Labuan to the Federal Government;

@ Had personally caused Sabah to suffer financial loss and/or not financially well of today by making Labuan a Federal Territory; had broken or ignored the State Constitution or Federal law when allowing Labuan to become a Federal Territory; and is an untrustworthy political leader of Sabah who had undertaken unlawfully the creation of the Federal Territory of Labuan without approval by the State Cabinet and/or the Legislative Assembly or its members.

@ By reason of the said statement, the defendant was put into embarrassment, exposed to public hatred, ridicule and gravely injured in his feelings and reputation and suffered distress and loss and damage, claimed Harris.

Harris also claimed aggravated and exemplary damages against the plaintiff and that in support he will rely on the facts that the plaintiff unnecessarily published, the said statement, in order to gain prematurely publicity of his purported suit against him;

@ The plaintiff deliberately omitted to mention the reasons or explanations given by the defendant during sitting of the Sabah Legislative Assembly on March 8, 1984 for making Labuan a Federal Territory; the plaintiff deliberately ignored the tremendous economic and infrastructure developments, specially educational and international financial institutions which took place in Labuan after it was made a Federal Territory which not only the people in Labuan but Sabah had benefited;

The plaintiff or any political party in Sabah could call for a referendum to determine whether the people in Labuan want the island to remain as Federal Territory or not; the plaintiff did not mention any state assemblyman or the State Authority could move a resolution in the State Assembly to take back the Labuan Administration from the Federal Government if the original intention to make Labuan a Federal Territory for the development of Labuan and Sabah was not fullfilled;

The plaintiff portrayed that the creation of the Federal Territory of Labuan was undertaken unlawfully by the defendant without the resolution of the State Cabinet and/or the Legislative Assembly; and the plaintiff made it appears that the defendant personally responsible for making or causing Sabah not financially well off now.