Why the anti-Huguan Siou movement?
ONE surprising development we have had in the Momogun community of late is the rise of an anti-Huguan Siou “movement” as seems to be indicated by an opinion piece in a local paper last Sunday which forthrightly asked “No more Huguan Siou, please!”
Why such a call? Is such a sentiment by someone who called himself “Anti-Huguan Siou movement”¨ (AHSM) justified? Identifying himself as a Kadazan, he wrote that “I know I'm not alone in wanting the post scrapped as it only brought misfortune to the community based on the track record of both holders, late Tun Fuad Stephens and Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan”.
He supported this strong statement by “Stephens' traitorous act of forcing the closure of Upko in 1967 despite heated protests” and that he “cunningly waited until Deputy CM Datuk GS Sundang was on medical leave in UK to strike, instead of waiting for his return on a matter of utmost importance.”
He cited the “political naivety” of the current Huguan Siou in leaving the BN in 1990 which led to the flooding of Sabah with foreigners that had instant national ICs. “Hence, both the Huguan Siou put the community in a worse situation.”
The writer was making his response to a previous proposal that the next Huguan Siou should be chosen through an election.
At the other extreme end, those who revere the Huguan Siou want the title to be institutionalized because of its great importance as a pinnacle of the Kadazandusun culture, a symbol of the people proud heritage from the days of the Brunei rule during which the then Huguan Siou of the Tangara (Tangaah) tribe fought the Bruneian soldiers over excessive “buis” (tax).
Today the title is a flag carrier of the Kadazandusun identity, a cultural pride, a communal insignia which has been entrenched as an apparently indispensable part of the community's cultural and historical motif.
The significance of the title has evolved by leaps and bounds from the mere tag as a communal warrior in battles in the Penampang district a century of two ago.
It is now a title which represents bravery in the fight for the Kadzandusun socio-economic and political causes, a cultural head who has been shored up to a semi-royal status -- the closest the Kadazandusun community's reach to a kingship. As such, to many in the community, doing away with the position of the Huguan Siou is simply unthinkable!
But this high reverence for the Huguan Siou by a segment of the Momogun people doesn't insulate the two holders of the position from criticism and they opened themselves to attacks by being politicians.
It's also well known that that a middle-of-the-road position on the matter states that the Huguan Siou should be apolitical, and that by leading a political party, he puts himself in a serious conflict of interests.
This is because members of the Kadazandusun Cultural Association (KDCA) don't necessarily support him in politics, being in the opposition against the Parti Bersatu Sabah (PBS) for which the current Huguan Siou was or is president. And how can those opposing him politically be also revering him as Huguan Siou?
Other than this, the Huguan Siou, strictly speaking, is the Huguan Siou of the members of the KDCA. His cultural leadership and representation of the members of the other Momogun cultural associations and the Kadazandusun people in general is only implied or alluded to as a matter occasional convenience.
The Bisayas, a clearly Kadazandusun tribe, has its own version of Huguan Siou, called Janang Gayuh. And (absurdly) the Paginatan (and other Sabah members of) Parti Keadilan Rakyat (which include a large number of Kadazandusuns) have declared Anwar Ibrahim as their Huguan Siou!
And when I was still the Secretary General of the United Sabah Dusun Association (USDA), I had said to the then KDCA Secretary General that, “There is nothing wrong with USDA having its own Huguan Siou.”
And for all his repeated appeals for unity of the Momoguns and Sabahans, the current Huguan Siou failed historically by flatly rejecting the late Datuk Mark Koding's appeal to him in 1985 to be the Huguan Siou of both the Kadazans (of the then Kadazan Cultural Association or KCA) and the Dusuns (in USDA).
Thus, the real status quo of the Huguan Siou position is that he is the cultural leaders of the Kadazandusuns (sometimes assumed to include the Muruts) while within the Kadazandusun community he is regarded with reverence as well as with contention.
The rise of the communal sentiment expressed by AHSM is clearly symptomatic of the community's ills, disappointments and regret, as well as our fear of what's to become of the Momogun people.
The sad realities that have befallen us are the malignant factors that now fuel our struggles for Momogun Nationalism. We had dreamed of having that great leader, the mythical superhero that will deliver us from our defeats and domination, and at one time so very long ago, we thought it was the Huguan Siou.
Now that many want the position to be contested for, while others want it to be scrapped or done away with, we should all be provoked into asking: What should we do now? Can we perform better without a Huguan Siou? What's the Huguan Siou for other than being a cultural icon? Whither the Momoguns? Are we at the last crossroads?
Perhaps we need to discuss: Will a Huguan Siou fit in an ultramodern scenario of Sabah in which a conglomeration of diverse peoples, living bobohizan-free in near-utopian communities with flying cars and industrial automation powered by nanotechs?
In such a world where open IT and independent transportation facilities have broken down national borders, and in which the government has very little power over the conduct of people's lives, the figure of the Huguan Siou and his bobohizans will most probably be found only at the museums.