Do we still need a Huguan Siou?
SINDIN Ranggangon’s letter to the editor “We need a new Huguan Siou,” in this paper last Sunday made me think of another important question – do we still need a Huguan Siou today?
With no intention for irreverence, I pose this question for many reasons, the main one being that the times have changed a lot since the 1950s when Donald Stephens expressed his worry to K.G. Tregonning about the potential Muslim influence from Brunei.
The whole concept of Huguan Siouship stemmed out as part and parcel of the rise of Kadazan nasionalism. It led to the formation of the United National Kadazan Organization (UNKO) which sparked off a huge row between the pro-Kadazan segment of the Momoguns against the pro-Dusun and Murut group in the Interior led by the Gunsanad brothers. There was a series of events that ensued – the identity war which UNKO lost, which led to the merger of UNKO and Pasok Momogun into the old UPKO, UPKO’s ignominious dissolution under the political pressures of the politics of federalism, the rise of Berjaya, the sudden demise of the first Huguan Siou in the infamous Double (I would say Triple) Six Tragedy, the rise and fall of PBS. A;; these, and many others, strangely diminished the spirit of Kadazan nasionalism.
We thought that the euphoric rise of PBS was the culmination, and permanent instalment, of the KDM hegemony in Sabah and that the role and position of Huguan Siou had then been anointed into near-royalty legitimacy. But ironically, it was during the PBS rule that the meaning and essence of the Huguan Siouship began to wane because, inter alia, various questions were expressed by many parties as to the absolute validity of the position, with the title being bestowed by KDCA upon Tan Sri Joseph Pairin Kitingan, the president of KDCA, meaning he is strictly speaking a Huguan Siou only of the KDCA. At the same time Pairin was also the president of PBS, in political rivalry with other KDM-based political parties (PBRS, UPKO, AKAR). It was a clear conflict of interests.
The view that Pairin was the Huguan Siou of the Momoguns came only from the media at large and from those outsiders who had little cultural sense of the indigenous peoples.
And let us not forget that the glory of the PBS lasted only one short year before the flagrant invisible hands of federalism intervened with demonstrations and bomb explosions in downtown Kota Kinabalu.
With a flaccid will of the Huguan Siou so easily giving up the reign of power in 1994, the spiritual admiration for the title went south very fast.
Now, with the fall of Umno and Barisan Nasional, and the rise of Warisan hoisted by many Kadazandusun political hands – mostly in Penampang of all places – where has disappeared the Kadazan, Kadazandusun or Momogun nationalism of old?
Where was even the spirit of the Huguan Siou during the recent state-level Pesta Kaamatan when the occasion was conducted in confusion and in shameful protocol mess, with the Huguan Siou set aside as a muted guest and Datuk Peter Anthony officiating the event with a shirt in the yellow colour of the East Coast community?
Why couldn’t the Huguan Siou display dignity and self-respect by boycotting the event and making a courageous statement of displeasure for the sake of his people, in the same way he lambasted his brother-in-law, Justin Alip, as a “traitor” or the way he refused to have anything to do with the formation of the Momogun Nasional Congress (MNC)?
Clearly Pairin has forgotten his once highly aggrandised role as the defender of the dignity of his people. He has set a poor example by showing himself as the meek, docile and crushed leader while holding the exalted title of Huguan Siou. The title, known to most people to mean “Paramount Leader” actually literally means “The Core of Bravery”, i.e. the bravest of the brave! Nobody should be braver than him in the whole Momo gun community!
With all these having taken place, and are happening, before our very eyes, why shouldn’t we ask the question of whether we still need a Huguan Siou today? If we really think about it, why would we need a Huguan Siou? All the other racial groups in the world don’t need such a paramount leader! Well, maybe the Red Indians more than 200 years ago with their Sitting Bull, Geronimo, Crazy Horse and Red Cloud. But in those days leaders, like the old Huguan Siou of Penampang fighting against Brunei and pirate invaders, were warriors going into battles by wielding many types of combat weapons.
But if a majority of the Momo guns still believe we still need a Huguan Siou, then we need to posit that such a personality (to replace Pairin), must display a leadership role with the following characteristics and functions:
1. He must not be the leader of KDCA, nor any NGO that is limited to the interests of only one Sabah indigenous group. Ideally he should be not a leader of any Momo guns NGO, unless it’s the MNC;
2. He shouldn’t be a member of any political party but makes constant political statements when necessary to promote, defend and uphold the cultural dignity, as well as the indigenous rights and privileges of the natives of Sabah;
3. Has at least a small office with minimal staff to monitor socioeconomic, political, educational and cultural developments in the country as they affect the interests and future of the Indigenous peoples of Sabah and to make stern and loud statements pro-or-against any such developments; and
4. His office, ideally should be institutionalized, to be allocated a management fund by the state government with jurisdiction, even supreme executive power, over the Native Courts.
We as the Momogun community, cannot continue to be is a cultural limbo with the indefinite, loosely defined meaning, role and functions, status and NGO position of the Huguan Siou. As it is, the title has lost much of its meaning, dignity and purpose. The position cannot continue to belong exclusively to the KDCA alone while the KDCA also tries to make us think the Huguan Siou has jurisdiction over all the indigenous groups.
This position has given the KDCA the assumed veto power upon other native NGOs, such as the MNC, simply because it fears other NGOs would exceed the position of the KDCA as the supposed number one NGO in Sabah.
Such selfishness gives the understanding that KDCA wants to preserve its hallowed position even at the expense of uniting the wider members of the Momo gun community. If the problem persists – with KDCA being a hindrance to progress – what should stop the MNC from installing its own Huguan Siou or an overall Momogun Paramount Leader with a different appellation? And what harm would that do if the current or the next KDCA Huguan Siou continue to be docile and meek?
Let’s not forget too that we already have two Huguan Siou, the other being the Huguan Siou Lundu Mirongod (Brave Paramount Thinker) in the person of Datuk Dr Jeffrey G. Kitingan, Pairin’s younger brother, who is also a deputy president of KDCA.
And as we have seen Dr Jeffrey has been the one to have persistently and loudly been fighting for the rights of not just the indigenous peoples of Sabah, Sarawak and Kalimantan but also the rights of all the peoples of Sabah as well.
In reality, Dr Jeffrey has been a Huguan Siou many times more vocal, mobile and braver than his elder sibling! If we have no other option for a truly useful and bravest-of-the-brave Huguan Siou, it might as well be Dr Jeffrey himself!