By Faber Concepcion
What is the legal basis of Sabah claim by the Sultanate of Sulu?
Answer:
”The legal position of Malaysia, is not clear being not a party to the original Lease of Sabah. The suspected manipulations and the misinterpretations from the word 'Padjak" as cession or sale is not also clear , because the signatory to the Contract is only one person but Sultan Jamallul Ahlam. If it is a sale two party must be involved as signatory. The analysis of most expert of the Agreement is more of a 'Franchise " rather than lease or sale because only the owner has signed the contract permitting the two merchant to act as a holder of the area perpetually to the life of the company or any of it's heir represented by Dent and Overbeck.
”The transfer by the private company or non government entity to British Government is strongly questionable, because the Sultanate has 'Friendship Treaty to the Sultanate of Sulu kingdom that was violated. Much more that the transfer to the Malaysian Federal is questionable, being not a partner to the 1878 Franchise Agreement.”
We must remember ownership to Sabah by the Sultanate is enshrine in the Philippine Constitution and the Philippine government has every right to press the Sultanate of Sulu's proprietary claims to Sabah Island which in the past several administrations have ignored or failed to do so, “mainly because Malaysia has been brokering talks with the Moro insurgents in the South,” according to a legal expert Professor Harry Roque said.
"Under international law, the Sultanate of Sulu should not have been the party pressing this claim, but the Philippine State. This is something that the government seems to have forgotten. They have a right and they're enforceable under international law,'' he said.
There is therefore, valid and legal reason why the Sultan Kiram of Sulu finally decided to set off “homecoming to occupy and live for good in peace in Malaysia’s Sabah territory. Whether they leave Sabah or not clear and simple Sabah was and is still owned by the Sultanate of Sulu.
Filipinos, Our Move.
Things are getting tighter than better
after the 3-weeks of stand-off in Sabah. For no less the President of the
Republic of the Philippines, who apparently wanted a quick resolution of the
issue, while still trying to “salvage” the situation through diplomatic means
as well as legal actions, boldly took the firm stand of “no compromise” towing
the line of Malaysia’s wishes’ the wish, that is to bodily extricate the
followers of the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu from their occupied territory
if they refuse to leave up to the 11th hour. Although earlier,
the appeal was for them to leave peacefuly and return to their origin.. Still
in control of a small Village, the Sultan Kiram’s Royal army and loyalists led
by its Prince (Datu Muda) Agbimuddin Kiram, on the other hand, while contained
in one spot amid food sanction and isolation, remained steadfast and defiant
only obeying a Royal Decree issued by Sultan Jamalul Kiram, III’s, the supposed
true representative of the heir of the entire Sulu Sultanate insistence to stay
put, would be the stumbling block in effort to ending the debacle. This is the
strongest of statements coming from a government head whose government has the
sovereign authority over the group, being Filipinos (if indeed they were) and
not Malaysians, Their defiance and Pnoy's warning could sealed their
death sentence.
However, such official pronouncement and warning from President Noynoy Aquino is expected and understandable which is what the Philippines, normally as a country must do at this very moment in dealing with the fiasco given under the present situation. Meantime, the whole world is watching! Unfortunately, as events unveiling historical truths, Small Bites believed nothing has been achieved to normalized the situation that stirred a lot of reactions or results to repercussions that instead of easing the tension would further add up to more trouble and chaos signaling a pro-longed tug of war with Malaysia. PH making the balancing at this instance, as a party involved not only as broker or a go-between in the whole scenario. Malaysia, obviously pushing it's way to the limit for the Philippines to take the cudgel for her interest tied up under "the friendly ties," of both countries while the "Kiram’s small armed group" just waiting to be attacked when time lapses. Time is in the essence for the government, but for the Kiram followers’ time had stood still and they can stay and wait forever while Malaysia definitely couldn't or wouldn't.
Small Bites would like to share two perspectives as answers to the controversy of the historic territorial claim on Sabah Island, legal or otherwise; According to “www.wiki.answers.com” on both the Sultanate and Malaysia claim, but whose side is valid? Hoping this will clear the issue as who has the valid and right claim over Sabah of North Borneo; The question and answer now can better give deeper understanding on the issue at bar. As Small Bites believed many of us do not exactly know or bother to know the historical truths.
However, such official pronouncement and warning from President Noynoy Aquino is expected and understandable which is what the Philippines, normally as a country must do at this very moment in dealing with the fiasco given under the present situation. Meantime, the whole world is watching! Unfortunately, as events unveiling historical truths, Small Bites believed nothing has been achieved to normalized the situation that stirred a lot of reactions or results to repercussions that instead of easing the tension would further add up to more trouble and chaos signaling a pro-longed tug of war with Malaysia. PH making the balancing at this instance, as a party involved not only as broker or a go-between in the whole scenario. Malaysia, obviously pushing it's way to the limit for the Philippines to take the cudgel for her interest tied up under "the friendly ties," of both countries while the "Kiram’s small armed group" just waiting to be attacked when time lapses. Time is in the essence for the government, but for the Kiram followers’ time had stood still and they can stay and wait forever while Malaysia definitely couldn't or wouldn't.
Small Bites would like to share two perspectives as answers to the controversy of the historic territorial claim on Sabah Island, legal or otherwise; According to “www.wiki.answers.com” on both the Sultanate and Malaysia claim, but whose side is valid? Hoping this will clear the issue as who has the valid and right claim over Sabah of North Borneo; The question and answer now can better give deeper understanding on the issue at bar. As Small Bites believed many of us do not exactly know or bother to know the historical truths.
What is the legal basis of Sabah claim by the Sultanate of Sulu?
Answer:
Malaysia was formed
and given independence by the British Government in 1963. The Sultanate of Sulu
and North Borneo was also given by the British Government the 'Letter of
Administration to Sabah,
acknowledging all the property of the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah in 1939. To the effect that 1939 is earlier than 1963 explicitly is telling us which one is genuine and legal.
Another striking solid and legal evidence of the Sabah ownership is the case filed by Indonesia to the United Nations to claim part of Sipadan, Sabah against Malaysia . The UN ruling under ICJ explicitly stated that Indonesia has no sovereign rights over Sipadan, Sabah because it is owned by the Sultanate of Sulu under administration of Malaysia.
Therefore, if Malaysia will not acknowledge the ownership by the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah, Malaysia is directly violating ( for in fact being violated for 47 years) the UN sanctions over Sipadan, Sabah stating that the Sultanate of Sulu is the legitimate owner of Sabah.
Moreover, if Malaysia will not acknowledge the 1939 High Court decision and the implementation of the 'Letter of Administration over Sabah that the Sultanate of Sulu is the owner of Sabah , Malaysia has to nullify their Independence given by the British Government in 1963 ,simply because it is the same government , the British Government who gave authority over the ownership of Sabah which is far earlier than their independence in 1963.
The continued ignoring of Malaysia to this day of the rights to possess the ownership, over Sabah by the Sultanate of Sulu Kingdom, creates a continuous anger on the part of the Sultanate people for prohibiting them to live in their own land and even expulsing the people of the Sultanate living in Sabah today.
What is the legal Basis of Malaysia in absorbing Sabah from the British government?
Answer:
“Sabah has been Leased in 1878 by two merchants Overbeck and Dent under their private company. When this company was dissolved, the leased was absorbed by the British government, when Malaysia got their independence in 1963, Sabah was again absorbed by Malaysia. This series of transfer built a suspicious thinking that from the beginning, the idea is to diminished it's owner , the Sultanate of Sulu of the sovereign rights over Sabah.”
acknowledging all the property of the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah in 1939. To the effect that 1939 is earlier than 1963 explicitly is telling us which one is genuine and legal.
Another striking solid and legal evidence of the Sabah ownership is the case filed by Indonesia to the United Nations to claim part of Sipadan, Sabah against Malaysia . The UN ruling under ICJ explicitly stated that Indonesia has no sovereign rights over Sipadan, Sabah because it is owned by the Sultanate of Sulu under administration of Malaysia.
Therefore, if Malaysia will not acknowledge the ownership by the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah, Malaysia is directly violating ( for in fact being violated for 47 years) the UN sanctions over Sipadan, Sabah stating that the Sultanate of Sulu is the legitimate owner of Sabah.
Moreover, if Malaysia will not acknowledge the 1939 High Court decision and the implementation of the 'Letter of Administration over Sabah that the Sultanate of Sulu is the owner of Sabah , Malaysia has to nullify their Independence given by the British Government in 1963 ,simply because it is the same government , the British Government who gave authority over the ownership of Sabah which is far earlier than their independence in 1963.
The continued ignoring of Malaysia to this day of the rights to possess the ownership, over Sabah by the Sultanate of Sulu Kingdom, creates a continuous anger on the part of the Sultanate people for prohibiting them to live in their own land and even expulsing the people of the Sultanate living in Sabah today.
What is the legal Basis of Malaysia in absorbing Sabah from the British government?
Answer:
“Sabah has been Leased in 1878 by two merchants Overbeck and Dent under their private company. When this company was dissolved, the leased was absorbed by the British government, when Malaysia got their independence in 1963, Sabah was again absorbed by Malaysia. This series of transfer built a suspicious thinking that from the beginning, the idea is to diminished it's owner , the Sultanate of Sulu of the sovereign rights over Sabah.”
”The legal position of Malaysia, is not clear being not a party to the original Lease of Sabah. The suspected manipulations and the misinterpretations from the word 'Padjak" as cession or sale is not also clear , because the signatory to the Contract is only one person but Sultan Jamallul Ahlam. If it is a sale two party must be involved as signatory. The analysis of most expert of the Agreement is more of a 'Franchise " rather than lease or sale because only the owner has signed the contract permitting the two merchant to act as a holder of the area perpetually to the life of the company or any of it's heir represented by Dent and Overbeck.
”The transfer by the private company or non government entity to British Government is strongly questionable, because the Sultanate has 'Friendship Treaty to the Sultanate of Sulu kingdom that was violated. Much more that the transfer to the Malaysian Federal is questionable, being not a partner to the 1878 Franchise Agreement.”
We must remember ownership to Sabah by the Sultanate is enshrine in the Philippine Constitution and the Philippine government has every right to press the Sultanate of Sulu's proprietary claims to Sabah Island which in the past several administrations have ignored or failed to do so, “mainly because Malaysia has been brokering talks with the Moro insurgents in the South,” according to a legal expert Professor Harry Roque said.
"Under international law, the Sultanate of Sulu should not have been the party pressing this claim, but the Philippine State. This is something that the government seems to have forgotten. They have a right and they're enforceable under international law,'' he said.
There is therefore, valid and legal reason why the Sultan Kiram of Sulu finally decided to set off “homecoming to occupy and live for good in peace in Malaysia’s Sabah territory. Whether they leave Sabah or not clear and simple Sabah was and is still owned by the Sultanate of Sulu.
Filipinos, Our Move.
No comments:
Post a Comment