Pertikaian semasa mengenai "pengiktirafan UEC" sering dipermudahkan menjadi isu teknikal: Adakah UEC setaraf dengan diploma negara? Adakah pelajar UEC perlu menduduki SPM bagi subjek Bahasa Melayu dan Sejarah? Namun, jika dipisahkan daripada konteks sejarah, persoalan ini sebenarnya salah. UEC bukanlah "pilihan melulu" masyarakat Cina, sebaliknya ia adalah mekanisme kelangsungan hidup yang terpaksa diwujudkan akibat keretakan sistemik.
Current debates over the recognition of the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) are often oversimplified into technicalities: Is the UEC equivalent to a national diploma? Should students take SPM Malay and History? However, detached from its historical context, the question itself is flawed. The UEC was not a "capricious choice" by the Chinese community; it was a self-preservation mechanism forced into existence by a systemic rupture.
一、不是“要不要统考”，而是“为什么会有统考”
当下有关“承认统考”的争论，往往被简化为一个技术问题：统考是否等同于国家文凭？统考生是否应考 SPM 国语与历史？
但若脱离历史语境，这个问题本身就被问错了。
统考不是华社的“任性选择”，而是在制度断裂下，被迫诞生的自救机制。
Sejak kebelakangan ini, persoalan sama ada Sijil Peperiksaan Bersepadu (UEC) sekolah menengah Cina merdeka adalah tidak berperlembagaan telah sekali lagi menjadi tumpuan perhatian tinggi di Semenanjung Malaysia, Sabah, dan Sarawak. Parti-parti politik dari kedua-dua belah pihak, kerajaan dan masyarakat sivil, masing-masing berpegang pada pandangan berbeza. Janji-janji lampau Parti Tindakan Demokratik (DAP) dan Pakatan Harapan telah diteliti semula, dengan tuduhan "khianat janji" yang sukar untuk dibantah. Namun, jika kita hanya terhenti pada tahap pertahanan parti politik atau sentimen etnik, masalah ini tidak akan pernah diselesaikan.
In recent days, the question of whether the Unified Examination Certificate (UEC) of independent Chinese secondary schools is unconstitutional has once again become a focal point of intense attention in Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah, and Sarawak. Political parties from both sides of the divide, government and civil society, hold differing views. The Democratic Action Party (DAP) and Pakatan Harapan's past promises have been re-examined, with accusations of "breach of faith" difficult to refute. However, if we remain confined to the level of political party maneuvering or ethnic sentiment, the problem will never be resolved.
近日，独中统考（UEC）是否违宪的问题，再度成为半岛与沙巴、砂拉越（沙砂）社会高度关注的焦点。朝野政党，朝廷与民间各执一词，行动党与希盟过往的承诺被重新翻出检视，“背信弃义”的质疑百口莫辩。然而，若仅停留在政党攻防或族群情绪层面，问题将永远无解。对沙砂人民而言，统考争议的真正症结，既不在教育技术层面，也不在宪法条文本身，而在于马来西亚建国理念的长期偏移，以及政治决心的持续缺席。
Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) urges the Sarawak Government to sponsor the airing of the Christmas Mass service over radio and television. Christmas has long been a major celebration in Sarawak—both before and after the formation of Malaysia. In earlier decades, the Sarawak government and broadcasting authorities were very supportive of using festive occasions to promote unity and harmony among all communities.
Parti Bumi Kenyalang expresses deep concern over recent developments under the GPS administration, particularly the substantial allocation in the State Budget to provide allowances to media personnel and journalists(Media Allocation)— while the poor, the homeless, farmers, and citizens forced to occupy vacant land continue to be neglected.
Today we applaud SUPP for once again delivering its signature political performance:
SUPP is a Government Party That Governs By Pretending It Isn’t in Government.
In a functioning democracy, the division of labour is simple:
Government governs. Opposition… opposes.
Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) expresses deep concern over the recent shooting incident in Melaka involving law-enforcement personnel. The loss of life under circumstances that remain unclear has shocked the public and further eroded confidence in agencies entrusted with safeguarding the people.
注： 本文基于《1963年马来西亚协定》（MA63）是一项有效国际条约的假设前提。本文承认，砂拉越肯雅兰全民党（PBK）的立场是MA63是一项**自始无效（null and void ab initio）**的条约，并辩称其为非法且违反国际法。
This paper is based on the hypothetical premise that the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) is a valid international treaty. It is acknowledged that Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK)'s stand is that MA63 is a null and void ab initio Treaty, arguing it is illegal and against international law.
Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) | Sabah Sarawak Rights – Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ): Kenyataan Zaid Ibrahim Menekankan Ketidaksahan Undang-Undang MA63 dan Mengukuhkan Hak Sabah dan Sarawak untuk Penentuan Nasib Sendiri.
Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) | Sabah Sarawak Rights – Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ)： 扎伊德·易卜拉欣（Zaid Ibrahim）的言论突显了《1963年马来西亚协议》（MA63）在法律上的无效性，并强化了沙巴和砂拉越的自决权。