Daily Express Subscriber
Sign in to your account.

SABAH welcomed the Kaamatan celebration for 2026 under the theme “Kaamatan: Harvesting Unity, Celebrating Harmony”.

This is also an appropriate moment to reflect on unity, identity and the shared future of Sabah’s native communities.

Kaamatan has always been more than a festival. It is the living heritage of the agricultural civilisation of the Anak Negeri — celebrating harvest, resilience, community and continuity. 

The cultural performances, traditional music, embroidery, native costumes and the Unduk Ngadau pageant are all important expressions of identity and heritage that deserve recognition and preservation.

The history of Unduk Ngadau itself reminds us that Kaamatan was never merely about entertainment. 

It emerged from the Huminodun narrative and symbolises sacrifice, dignity, spirituality and cultural continuity. 

Behind every dance, costume and ritual lies a deeper civilisation shaped by adat, collective memory, language, land and community institutions.

This reflection also connects naturally to the ongoing discussions concerning identity among Sabah’s native communities.

Recently, discussions have arisen regarding the addition of the letter “S” into “KDMR” to form “KDMRS”, in recognition of the Sungai community. 

This follows continuing discourse surrounding “Momogun”, “KadazanDusun”, “Kadazan”, “Dusun” and other proposed umbrella identities.

The debate today is no longer merely about terminology. It increasingly touches on identity, constitutional recognition, historical memory and political unity among Sabah’s indigenous communities.

At the outset, it is important to state that all these views and sensitivities deserve appreciation and respect. 

Whether one identifies more closely with “Momogun”, “KDMR”, “KDMRS”, “KadazanDusun”, “Kadazan”, “Dusun” or otherwise, these positions are deeply connected to history, heritage, language and collective memory.

The ongoing discussions themselves have enriched public discourse on native identity in Sabah. 

They have encouraged deeper reflection on inclusivity, representation and the future direction of Sabah’s indigenous communities.

For the purposes of this reflection alone, one can immediately appreciate the diversity of Sabah natives through the many communities such as Dusun, Kadazan, Murut, Rungus, Lotud, Tatana, Sungai, Bajau, Iranun, Brunei, Kedayan, Bisaya and many others throughout Sabah.

The criticism against endlessly expanding acronyms is therefore understandable. Once letters are continually added to accommodate every community, the process may never truly end. 

Today it may be Sungai, tomorrow perhaps other communities may also seek inclusion.

Eventually, an acronym may become administratively cumbersome and politically divisive rather than genuinely unifying.

In that context, the proposal by the Momogun National Congress to adopt “Momogun” instead of continually expanding acronyms raises a serious and legitimate point. 

The argument being advanced is that a people should possess not merely an abbreviation, but a broader civilisational identity with historical and cultural roots capable of embracing diverse indigenous communities without erasing their own ethnic identities.

Intellectually and politically, that argument has merit. Comparable umbrella identities exist elsewhere — such as “Dayak” in Sarawak, “Maori” in New Zealand and “First Nations” in Canada.

At the same time, Sabah’s historical and constitutional development is unique. For many communities, names such as Kadazan, Dusun, Murut, Rungus, Sungai and others are not merely labels. 

They are deeply tied to ancestry, language, customary systems and historical experience.

That is why some communities remain more comfortable with identities such as KadazanDusun, while others support Momogun, KDMR or KDMRS.

From my respectful perspective, the more sustainable approach may not be to force one ethnic identity over another, but to distinguish between specific ethnic identity and a broader constitutional or administrative umbrella identity. 

In other words, a person can remain Kadazan, Dusun, Murut, Rungus, Sungai, Lotud, Tatana or otherwise — while collectively sharing a broader constitutional identity as Anak Negeri Sabah. This is because legally and constitutionally, that umbrella already exists.

The concept of “native” or Anak Negeri Sabah is already recognised and defined under the Interpretation (Definition of Natives) Ordinance, as well as within the State Constitution of Sabah, the Federal Constitution and various Sabah laws dealing with native affairs, native lands and Native Courts.

From the standpoint of law and governance, Anak Negeri Sabah remains the broadest and most inclusive umbrella. 

It carries legal grounding, avoids concerns of ethnic supremacy and aligns closely with native customary law, Native Courts and broader indigenous institutional development.

Recent views expressed by Dr Jeffrey Kitingan and Dr Maximus Ongkili also demonstrate that the idea of Anak Negeri Sabah as a broader collective identity is neither foreign nor unreasonable. 

Dr Jeffrey has openly proposed replacing the category “lain-lain” in official forms with “Anak Negeri Sabah”, grounding the suggestion upon the legal framework of Sabah itself, while Dr Maximus has similarly observed that there is nothing inappropriate in referring collectively to Sabah natives as Anak Negeri Sabah.

This also explains why many natives feel uncomfortable with the continued use of the category “lain-lain” in official forms and documents. 

Communities lawfully recognised as natives of Sabah should not be administratively reduced to being merely “others” within their own negeri.

If the legal and constitutional framework of Sabah already recognises the collective identity of Anak Negeri Sabah, then public documents and official forms should reflect that reality appropriately. In place of “lain-lain”, there should be a proper category recognising Anak Negeri Sabah.

One important point often overlooked is that this issue is not merely semantic. 

Once an umbrella identity enters official forms, policies or constitutional discourse, it may eventually influence representation, interpretation of native status and institutional recognition. 

That is why emotions remain strong on all sides.

The real danger in this debate is if it degenerates into a competition of ethnic legitimacy or an attempt to erase existing identities. That would divide rather than unite.

The wiser path is likely this: preserve every ethnic identity, strengthen Anak Negeri constitutional recognition, remove degrading classifications such as “lain-lain”, and build unity through institutions, law and shared belonging rather than labels alone.

That may also be the deeper meaning behind this year’s Kaamatan theme.

“Harvesting Unity” should not mean forcing every community into one singular identity.

And “Celebrating Harmony” should mean recognising that despite our many languages, customs and histories, we continue to share one larger constitutional and historical belonging as Anak Negeri Sabah.

Sua Sponte

The views expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of the Daily Express. If you have something to share, write to us at: Forum@dailyexpress.com.my