A call against 'yellow journalism' in the Philippines

In light of the recent report brought to our attention by a member of the Defenders of the Philippinne Sabah and Spratly Claims community concerning a 'blatant example' of what can be qualified as media's jab or taunt against the Sultanate of Sulu, posted under a GMA Network banner, "A real sultan from Brunei in PHL for state visit" http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/photo/35952/a-real-sultan-from-brunei-in-phl-for-state-visit, we are reposting hereunder a reminder:

PLEASE SHARE -- THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT: ON SABAH PROPRIETARY RIGHTS (DIFFERENT FROM SOVEREIGNTY RIGHTS WHICH BELONG TO THE REPUBLIC): THE SULTANATE OF SULU HAS NINE LEGALLY RECOGNISED ROYAL HEIRS...  

Their intra-family bickering must not affect whatever the Republic's position is on its claim to Sabah which, by law -- by virtue of Republic Act 5446, is Philippine territory. 
The nine royal heirs must be allowed to decide among themselves who their sultan is... 

We, the non-sultanate member citizens of the Republic, must leave them alone to sort out their own family problem.

The judicious thing to do is for everyone, specially members of Government to abstain from putting more fat in the already confusing fire or from making a dismissive remark as, "We don't even know who the legitimate sultan is!"  

The judicious thing to do is for everyone, specially members of Government to abstain from putting more fat in the already confusing fire or from making a dismissive remark as, "We don't even know who the legitimate sultan is!"  

Government must step back and avoid such confusing remarks because the principle of Government support for their struggle must be for the Sultanate of Sulu as a body and for the people of Sulu and not for an individual. 

Unless government and the public accept the principle that there are nine legal heirs representing the Sultanate of Sulu, Government itself risks defeating the Republic's own legal cause in the future. 

Government must not confuse the people of this country and instead must use the Philippine law to Government's advantage in trying to resolve the Sabah crisis which has now claimed several dozens dead in the hands of a foreign government's maniacal troops. 

~~ Admins, Philippine Sabah Claim Forum08 March 2013 

IN PICTURE: Sultan of Sulu, Sultan Jamalul Kiram II (picture taken around 1936).

Kuala Lumpur to put Filipino Tausugs on trial in justice system meant to amuse Malaysian gallery

Anwar Ibrahim, high profile victim of the 
so-called Kuala Lumpur justice system 
after he dared challenge Mahathir who accused
him of sodomy in Kuala Lumpur's 
pathetic burlesque justice show

Court will try intrusion case fairly says Malaysia's Attorney General Gani from Kuala Lumpur.

Fair trial for Suluks in Kuala Lumpur? Pigs might fly! 

Kuala Lumpur officials have no business putting Suluks on trial under Kuala Lumpur justice system. 

Moreover, Kuala Lumpur has no business labelling them 'terrorists' because they are not. We must all remember that the Royal Sulu Army and their supporters went to Sabah which, by Philippine law, is Philippine territory. 

Under Republic Act 5446, the Philippines has title and dominion over Sabah. The Philippine Government and its leaders must not allow Kuala Lumpur to further inflict and heap abuse on Suluks and Filipino Tausugs.  

The Philippine Government and Filipinos worldwide must vigorously protest Kuala Lumpur's planned farce against Suluks in Sabah that they call justice system. Do not trust Malaysians! Their justice system is highly flawed and  is meant more to amuse the Malaysian gallery than to deliver justice.

A very good example: Just ask former Malaysia Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim (in picture) about how Kuala Lumpur's rocambolesque justice system dealt with his case when he dared opposed Mahathir! Human Rights Watch said Malaysia proceedings against Mahathir violated basic fair trial rights.

Our Suluks have absolutely no chance of getting a fair trial in the hands of the illegal occupants of Sabah as we shout loud and clear to the world that Kuala Lumpur has no business putting them on trial!

~~ By Defenders of the Philippine Sabah and Spratly Claims
27 March 2013

======================

REPORT: March, 26, 2013 - 9:09 pm
Court will try intrusion case fairly says Malaysia's Attorney General Gani from Kuala Lumpur  

KUALA LUMPUR: Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail is confident Malaysia’s courts will try the Sulu terrorists involved in the intrusion into Lahad Datu, Sabah in a fair and efficient manner. 

He said the case would not take too much time to complete. 

“Ever since Tun Zaki (former Chief Justice Tun Zaki Azmi) started the programme in court, I think they have been very efficient. 

“Mention date has been set on April 12, and then we will fix for trial, insya-Allah, I think within months we will have the trial. 

“But, we must also take into account the security circumstances, as the matter is not something straight-forward,” he told reporters after witnessing the signing of a renewal of agreement between the Malaysian Government and the Asian-African Legal Consultative Organisation (AALCO) here Tuesday. 

Abdul Gani said the case investigation officer would meet him Wednesday, to give a briefing on the terrorists who were still under detention. 

For more, read Borneo Insider report here.

In picture: Malaysia's opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim (R), his wife Wan Azizah Wan Ismail (C) and his daughter Nurul Nuha Anwar, leave the courtroom in Putrajaya on February 17, 2010. © 2010 Reuters

MALACANANG CIRCULAR No. 162 ON MATTERS PERTAINING TO NORTH BORNEO (SABAH)

HERE'S A 2008 MEMORANDUM NO. 162 EXECUTED BY MALACANANG ON GUIDELINES PERTAINING TO SABAH. UNLESS THIS MALACANANG DIRECTIVE HAS BEEN REVOKED BY THE CURRENT ADMINISTRATION, THIS DIRECTIVE REMAINS IN PLACE: THE REPUBLIC DOES NOT OFFICIALLY RECOGNISE SABAH AS BELONGING TO ANY OTHER FOREIGN ENTITY OR COUNTRY; ALL GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS, CIVIL SERVANTS, EMPLOYEES, ARE FORBIDDEN TO SAY THAT SABAH BELONGS TO MALAYSIA.

IF EVER THERE IS ANY DOUBT THAT SABAH IS NOT RECOGNISED BY THE REPUBLIC AS A PHILIPPINE TERRITORY, WE SUGGEST THEY CONSULT REPUBLIC ACT NO. 5446, AN ACT THAT AMMENDED THE PREVIOUS REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3046 APPROVED ON 18SEPTEMBER 1968 WHICH CLEARLY INDICATES THAT THERE IS NO PREJUDICE TO THE "ANNEXATION" OF SABAH TO PHILIPPINES.

THIS REPUBLIC ACT HAS NOT BEEN ABROGATED AND REMAINS IN FORCE.

REPUBLIC ACT 5446 STIPULATES THAT IT IS "without prejudice to the delineation of the baselines of the territorial sea around the territory of Sabah, situated in North Borneo, over which the Republic of the Philippines has acquired dominion and sovereignty."

CLEAR AND SIMPLE: THIS LAW DEFINES THE LEGAL "ANNEXATION OF SABAH" AND IS PART AND PARCEL OF OUR NATIONAL LAWS 

===============

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 3046REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9522Republic of the PhilippinesCongress of the PhilippinesMetro Manila 

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 5446September 18, 1968AN ACT TO AMEND SECTION ONE OF REPUBLIC ACT NUMBERED THIRTY HUNDRED AND FORTY-SIX, ENTITLED "AN ACT TO DEFINE THE BASELINES OF THE TERRITORIAL SEA OF THE PHILIPPINES" 

Section 1. To correct typographical errors, Sec. one of Republic Act numbered thirty hundred and forty-six is amended to read as follows: 

Section 1. The baselines for the territorial sea of the Philippines are hereby defined and described* specifically as follows:  

*NB: PLEASE SEE THE DIFFERENT LATITUDE, LONGTIDE AND AZIMUTH INDICATORS OF THE SCOPE OF TERRITORY OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES IN THE CHAN ROBLES LAW LIBRARY -- MUCH TOO LONG TO LIST THEM IN THIS POST. LINK:http://www.chanrobles.com/republicacts/republicactno5446.html#.USWXJh2-rMZ

 

Section 2. The definition of the baselines of the territorial sea of the Philippine Archipelago as provided in this Act is without prejudice to the delineation of the baselines of the territorial sea around the territory of Sabah, situated in North Borneo, over which the Republic of the Philippines has acquired dominion and sovereignty. 

Section 3. This Act shall take effect upon its approval. 

Approved: September 18, 1968

==================

NOTE: ANALOGY BY ADMIN APM, ONE OF THE ADMINS, WHO IS ALSO A LAW DEGREE HOLDER AND ACTS AS THE LEGAL ADVISER TO THE Defenders of the Philippine Sabah & Spratly Claims:

Section 1 defines and describes the baselines of the territorial sea of the Philippine Archipelago, which rightly did not include Sabah because it is not a part of the archipelago, but a separate territory over which the Philippines have a sovereign right to, as clearly stated in Section 2.  

In addition, Section 2 expressly reserves the rights of the Philippines to delineate the baseline of the territorial sea around Sabah.  

Analogy: It's like saying in Section 1 -- this Act delineates and defines the boundaries of mainland USA. And Section 2 would then say -- The definition of the baselines of the territorial sea of mainland USA as provided in this Act is without prejudice to the delineation of the baselines of the territorial sea around the territory of the states of Alaska and Hawaii over which the USA has acquired dominion and sovereignty.

~~ Admins, Defenders of Philippine Sabah and Spratly Claims