DAILY EXPRESS SUNDAY FORUM LETTER: Reflects badly on our native courts

I read with interest in Daily Express the native court case (4th April, 2015) regarding a land case of 19 years in the matter of subdivision of land between two individuals. First, I must admire the appellant in this case for his persistance and patience in pursuing this case for those 19 years before reaching settlement.
  
In the first instance, I wonder how this simple case could drag on for such a long period as it was stated that all the documentation, land surveying for subdivision were valid and approved by the Land and Survey Department. The only argument being that the defendant refused to sign the land offer issued and approved by the Land and Survey Department.    It is quite awful and unacceptable to note that the decisions made by the native court with reasons on judgment given are totally out of context and should be very hard to swallow by the appellant as he seems fully understood that the case shall have settled in the native court via Land and Survey Department’s letter stated that the authority to hear the case is the native court in accordance with Section 40(c) of the Sabah Land Ordinance. To this, I have the same opinion and agree to the points and reasons raised by one writer published in your Sunday Forum not very long ago, most probably month of September 2014 or so, citing unfit native officers appointed due to politics.     To this peculiar land case, it is obvious that the native court officers do not probably possess the required qualification in terms of knowledge and schooling and presumably they have not seen or read the native court enactments and procedures. To this end, their decisions only caused dilemma and hardship to the native people seeking justice in the native courts.     It is quite fortunate to note that the appellant has appealed to district native court for another hearing but how many will follow this type of procedure. I only wish that the Pejabat Hal Ehwal Anak Negeri Sabah can hire more qualified native chiefs and do some recommendation on this issue. One land case can only be solved in 19 years what more if they have 3 or 4 cases? FO

My Comments:

I don't think this forum writer really read or understood the news as written.  Or he purposely exaggerated the problems faced by the appellant at the native court lasted only 2 years, not 19 years.

The 19 years started when he purchased the land and has to undergo subdivision.  The Native court was only referred when one of the three (not two) shareholders refused to sign the subdivision offer.

MR FO,  I bet the appellant asked you to write this letter but please get your facts correct.