Showing posts with label Sabah lease. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sabah lease. Show all posts

Friday, January 1, 2016

"PAJAK" IN 1878 SABAH LEASE IS REALLY THE BONE OF CONTENTION; DOCUMENT FROM THE BRITISH COLONIAL OFFICE IN LONDON DATED 1ST NOV 1962 PROVES IT






"PAJAK" HAS BEEN THE BONE OF CONTENTION; ANOTHER DOCUMENT WHICH IS A LETTER FROM THE BRITISH COLONIAL OFFICE IN LONDON DATED 1ST NOV 1962

NOTE: This document is about the thorny word "Pajak" that was used in the translation of the Sabah lease agreement between the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo and the private foreign businessmen; note that even Tunku Abdul Rahman himself, "father of the Malaysia Federation," referred to "pajak" in the Sabah lease agreement of 1878 as "rent" but the officials of Kuala Lumpur tried to turn around the damage created by Tunku Abdul Rahman's announcement by insisting that the lease was a definitive cession. We are re-posting it to accompany the document unearthed (shown alongside pink-coloured document) in the British Foreign Office that we posted earlier on.

NB: Transcription of letter (for easier reading) is mine hence any and all errors of transcription are mine. ~~ Blog Administrator


 ~~~~~O~~~~~


CONFIDENTIAL

COLONIAL OFFICE
GREAT SMITH STREET, LONDON S.W.1
Telephone: [...] 1266 Ext.
1st November 1962



Dear [......]

                        In connection with the alleged Philippine "claim" to North Borneo there is one point on which we should be grateful for Kuala Lumpur's confidential advice.

                        In paragraph 1, of Kuala Lumpur telegram to Commonwealth Relations Office No. 625 of the 3rd September in connections with conversations with Ghangli and Ngah about the Tunku's unfortunate reference to a "lease" Ghangli is reported as saying that the Malay word used by the Tunku was "srwa" i.e. "lease" or "rent" and Ngah is reported as saying that he thought "pajak" and "pajakan" nowadays meant the same thing though originally they meant more as the Tunku with his knowledge of Kedah and Penang would realise ..........

                       As pajak" is the word in the Deed of Cession of 1878 from which all our present troubles appear to stem because of its alternative translations as "grant and cede" and "lease" we were most interested in Ngeh's remark and we should be grateful if Kuala Lumpur's advice could be sought on the original meaning of the malay words "pajak" and pajakan". This original meaning may perhaps be very helpful to us.

                      I am sending a copy of this letter to Cable.

Yours,

(signed) 

W.S. Carter


[Letter addressed to] D.C.R. RODCLIFF [???], ESQ.,
             Commonwealth Relations Office
                          Downing Street,
                               London, S.W.1.




  ~~~~~O~~~~~

 
NOTA BENE: The Philippine Sabah Claim Forum is grateful to HM Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram for allowing us to avail of documents in his possession pertaining to PH Sabah claim.


 ~~~~~O~~~~~

Related post:


Sunday, March 10, 2013

Article 12 of the Manila Accord 1963 and the Sabah stand-off

March, 7, 2013 - 9:52 am

Lahad Datu: Is there a solution?

By Vidal Yudin Weil
KOTA KINABALU: This is a requested sequel to my previous article titled “To whom does Sabah belong?” which attracted a high number of responses and shares in cyber space and triggering a unique volume of debate among netizens.
In the current piece, I will unmask the mindset of most Malaysian commentators before imparting more of my findings about the Lahad Datu debacle.
Firstly: To the families of policemen who died in the line of duty, my condolences here are as heartfelt and deep as those of mine for the families of innocent citizens who died in police custody including those inside motor vehicles as a result of police shootings.
Secondly: To the families of deceased Tausug warriors who had to assert their right to sovereignty with their lives, my profoundest sympathy that it has to come to such a stage as a result of the failings of my government and possibly that of yours as well. I condemn my government for our casualties and I leave it to you to rebuke yours if yours so deserve it.
By and large, not all homo sapiens are born intelligent, and the high tendency of them ending up as nincompoops rests on how he or she is brought up at home and of course that also includes the way they are educated.
Many countries in the world control the thinking of their citizens; for example, I was reliably told only a few weeks ago that the National University of Singapore does not have the subject called “Jurisprudence” for their law students; if this is true, my personal opinion is that it must have been deliberately done to prevent them from becoming lawyers who can think better.
On the other hand, Malaysians are indoctrinated from a young age with politically convenient half-truths which are spiced up with fabricated history about events that are authored by so-called historians who were never there in the first place; such brainwashing was authorised by an irresponsible government with a vicious tenacity to keep the citizens daft and executed right from primary schools up to tertiary levels.
For instance, all Malaysians read from government authorised history books believing that Sabah and Sarawak are of the same status with the remaining 11 states in West Malaysia – they are wrong!
Tunku Abdul Rahman uttered the following historical statements:
“The granting of self-government too would enable Sabah to stand on its own feet as equal with Malaya, Sarawak and Singapore.” (Sabah Times, Jesselton, Aug 30, 1963.)
Serial racists
As a result of the miserable education system, many Malaysians grew up to become full-blown serial racists and religious bigots who not only think that they are superior to other people, but also are unable to respond out of the box because they were only taught “what to think” instead of “how to think” for themselves; and worst, many Malaysians are not even aware of their own pathetic predicament much like when a shrink asks a mental patient “are you mad?” and the lunatic will always answer in the negative.
Like an orphaned lamb which grew up with a pack of wolf pups, the former mistakenly thought that it is strong and formidable like the latter when it was actually physically and psychologically compromised; such is my description of the general Malaysian public today.
It is not entirely the fault of Malaysians when many of them cannot understand basic, decent, and logical elucidation because the education system that churned them out is wanting; but if they continue to elect a bunch of clowns that is corrupted to the core to run the government which only knows how to fiddle with propaganda and figures to look good, the worst will get even worse.
While Malaysians per se are somewhat reasonable, many could not accept fact and truth particularly when they think their interests are in jeopardy; in short, they are unable to behave impartial.
For introducing the naked truth about the sovereignty of the Philippines over Sabah, a layman wrote that there is a difference between stealing something movable and stealing land – how much more preposterous can Malaysians be?
Netizens can find all the ridiculous arguments by Malaysians in the comments section of my immediate previous article in FMT; while not all Malaysians are warped in their thinking, I am sad to say more than 90% of the Malaysian comments therein are such.
Now back to the Lahad Datu skirmishes.
I still maintain that the whole episode is a sandiwara with pre-planned collateral damages thrown in. Is Najib Tun Razak planning to declare emergency, suspend the Federal Constitution, and impose martial law to delay elections which the Barisan Nasional will lose? Will this incident make the BN look more like a hero when our troops finally sweep in?
With the large number of soldiers from Peninsular Malaysia being deployed to Sabah at this time, how many tens of thousands more additional postal votes are we talking about now to bolster the chances of the BN in Sabah? What about the feelings of the 900,000 Tausug people in Sabah, how will it affect their votes?
Alternatively, has the parade now got out of control with the Sulu warriors no longer following the script?
Ridiculous suggestion
It was recorded that the Tausug people of Sulu were never colonised by any foreign powers; their warriors are war-hardened and fear nothing. A few decades ago, they were funded by Libya to fight the government of the Philippines. Was our government the one that trained, armed, and gave them safe haven? Was the same also true of the Acheh rebels in Indonesia and the Pattani separatists in Thailand?
I am unable to gauge the capabilities of our present troops to dislodge the so-called intruders, but I do worry for them and the civilians; the Tausug people never surrender and they never forgive. If their warriors are here to die fighting, they will be dead sure that many of our soldiers and civilians will follow them.
Let me now assume for a moment that the whole thing is not a conspiracy and the Malaysian government does not know how to solve it peacefully and diplomatically; should it not resign en bloc and let the people choose a new government to deal with it? The BN government does not have the authority from the rakyat to risk the lives of our troops, innocent civilians, and foreigners included.
There is another ridiculous suggestion a few days ago: when the nation was peaceful, non-Malays were side-lined or capped with a glass ceiling for promotion and rank in the police and armed forces; all of a sudden in war, Kadir Jasin said that non-Malays should now die for the country…! What kind of logic is that…?
If the Lahad Datu fiasco is real by any imagination, the federation has failed us disastrously; our comfort was all along artificial and looking back, the discredited formation of Malaysia in 1963 is now ludicrously confirmed as not only hugely insignificant but a complete flop and fatally flawed.
Malaya is enslaving Sabah and its politicians, who are not troubled by conscience, are subjugating us with foreign nationals by issuing citizenships to them and plundering our rich natural resources.
Our presence as the poorest of the poor in Malaysia is a clear indication that Sabah’s economy is not only on the retreat, but heading for world-record collapse at a speed few of us can comprehend. Malaya’s ambition is boundless; it seizes every opportunity meant for Sabah and what did our impoverished people get – terror in the end.
Just look at our infrastructure: a few new roads, a few magnificent government buildings, expensive homes for the elite; but our people are still as poor as ever on a colossal scale working day and night for a pittance. Compared with colonialism, this is much more oppressive and widespread than anything our former British colonial government was ever accused of.
Why must our government run on bribery and by notoriously corrupt pariah politicians while the police force on brutality? There is a real sense of anxiety among a lot of Sabah people that citizens do not have any real protection that we should have; fundamentally, we are now under siege, not only from Sulu gunmen but from Malaya. Why can we not have our own final say on our rights? Why must the people of Malaya insist on how we should live our lives? We are not a colony of anyone!
The people of Sabah are astonishing human beings with a limitless capacity for self-sacrifice; but today, I say: enough is enough. All Malaya politicians are hypocritical and disgraceful – well below the standards expected of decent leaders; the greatest justice for Sabah will triumph on the historic day all the Malaya-based political parties and their local running dogs are humiliatingly voted out by bold Sabahans in the 13th general election, effectively ending their dangerous and hate-driven abusive meddling in the affairs of Sabah, making us physically and financially ill.
Is there a solution?
A senior lawyer from Sandakan asked me about the Malaysia versus Indonesia case of Sipadan and Ligitan islands in which the International Court of Justice ruled that Sabah has sovereignty over the contested islands by virtue of an old legislation regulating the collection of turtle eggs ordained by the former British colonial government.
The Philippines applied to intervene as a third party in the proceedings but was disallowed because both Malaysia and Indonesia objected to it; now why? I believe both Malaysia and Indonesia will go home empty-handed because the Philippines can and will be able to establish sovereignty claims on Sabah thereby making ownership of the two islands theirs as well.
I asked him back: if in a court case, both sides of the legal team deliberately conceal evidence with the intention of misleading the judges, how legitimate is a judgment which was rendered in ignorance? His answer was “the judgment does not hold water”.
I was also asked about the Madrid Protocol signed by Germany, Britain, and Spain which contained provisions greatly distorted by lay Malaysian commentators.
If a bandit attempted to rob your house and then entered into an agreement with a second bandit in relation to the loots which may not have been taken from your house, is the agreement legal? The answer is NO because such agreement is void ab initio (from the beginning).
Readers who still think that just because certain people in Sabah of the past had chosen to form Malaysia on Sept 16, 1963, such action supersedes the sovereignty of the Philippines have complete absurd mentality. They should read what Tunku Abdul Rahman signed on July 31,1963 – Article 12 of the Manila Accord:
“The Philippines made it clear that its position on the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia is subject to the final outcome of the Philippine claim to North Borneo. The Ministers took note of the Philippine claim and the right of the Philippines to continue to pursue it in accordance with international law and the principle of the pacific settlement of disputes. They agreed that the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia would not prejudice either the claim or any right thereunder. Moreover, in the context of their close association, the three countries agreed to exert their best endeavours to bring the claim to a just and expeditious solution by peaceful means, such as negotiation, conciliation, arbitration, or judicial settlement as well as other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and the Bandung Declaration.”
He also signed on Aug 5, 1963 – Article 8 of the Joint Statement by the Philippines, the Federation of Malaya, and Indonesia:
“In accordance with paragraph 12 of the Manila Accord, the three Heads of Government decided to request the British Government to agree to seek a just and expeditious solution to the dispute between the British Government and the Philippine Government concerning Sabah (North Borneo) by means of negotiation, conciliation and arbitration, judicial settlement, or other peaceful means of the parties’ own choice in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations. The three Heads of Government take cognizance of the position regarding the Philippine claim to Sabah (North Borneo) after the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia as provided under paragraph 12 of the Manila Accord, that is, that the inclusion of Sabah (North Borneo) in the Federation of Malaysia does not prejudice either the claim or any right thereunder.”
Ball in our court
From the above two provisions, any lawyer worth his seasoning will tell you that the inclusion of Sabah into the formation of Malaysia is subject to the claims of the Philippines. It is therefore also crystal clear as the morning sun that the British government screwed us up blue and purple with Malaya as the accomplice.
Before I forget, former president Ferdinand Marcos did not have the authority to renounce the Philippines’ claim over Sabah as issues concerning sovereignty must be approved by both houses of their Congress.
My previous article actually spelt out in clear and unambiguous terms what to expect in the whole scenario; but how many people really understood the implications and in between the lines, the remedy?
A chief editor of a popular online news portal asked me whether there is any immediate solution to end the impasse without incurring any further casualty on both sides. My answer was a definite YES and the ball is in our court.
Before I conclude this piece, my personal view about the Sulu warriors: if this incursion is not sandiwara, how come they did not take out the communication towers and lay siege on the airport and town?
If this invasion is real, our troops and civilians are going to suffer; everything the Tausug warriors did had the hallmarks of the strategies mapped out in Sun Tzu’s “Art of War” and I suspect they also have the standard operating procedure manual of Osama Laden’s Al-Qaeda.
By bringing the battles right to the heart of our towns (Lahad Datu, Semporna, and God knows how many more), they have nothing to lose; but not us, our terrified civilians will become refugees and our developments devastated. Try finding out how many percent of our troops including the top brass actually have war experience and you will know what I mean. The Tausug warriors have declared that they are not going back and will die here; if this does not send shivers down your spine, you really need to see a neurosurgeon…
For every casualty on either side, the BN government is to be blamed and held responsible; one word best describes the whole affair: “Kiaguk”…!
(“Kiaguk” is the Suluk word for stupid used by the Tausug people.)
·         The writer is a retired Sabah tour operator; loves food and speed, and blogs at http://legalandprudent.blogspot.com giving no quarters. The opinions and views contained hereinabove are entirely his alone.
Published in The Borneo Insider 07 March 2013
NB: Shown is set of documents featuring the transcription in English of the 1878 Sabah lease to the British North Borneo Company and the copy of the original contract in Arabic.

Philippine Sabah Claim: Sovereignty rights and ownership not the same


SUBJECT: An important factor in the Sabah question is THE NINE SULTANATE HEIRS and not whoever the sultan is. The Philippine Government must not use the Kirams' intra-family bickering as an excuse NOT to perform the Republic's contractual obligation.

OPINION OF ADMIN APM, LEGAL EXPERT, PHILIPPINE SABAH CLAIM FORUM: "Who owns the land, or who among the heirs is the manager or trust holder of a property has no bearing on a country's sovereignty rights. 

"In fact, it is not even important who owns the title at this point for as long as a government have acquired dominion over it at one time based on an internationally-acceptable mode of acquisition of a territory.

"It is about what lands and waters are included in a country's territory and jurisdiction as outlined in its Constitution and other special laws. Proprietary rights over a real property are transferred every day, in many different ways, but the country still retains sovereignty rights over the same.

"Even selling it to a a citizen of another country, or an intra-state corporation (which is not legal in the Philippines) does not transfer the sovereign right of one country to the buyer's country of origin.

"Who the right sultan of the Sultanate of Sulu is tantamount to meddling in who is the administrator of the properties left by an intestate deceased parent. It's not an issue that needs to be addressed in a question of sovereignty rights."

Saturday, March 9, 2013

1946: The year the British Crown colonised North Borneo (Sabah)


UNDERSTANDING THE SABAH PROBLEM 

One factor that is essential in the comprehension of the Sabah problem is to understand that Sabah was only officially colonised by the British Crown only in 1946 which means that UNTIL THEN, North Borneo (Sabah) WAS PART of the Sultanate of Sulu although leased. 


Note that before that year, North Borneo (Sabah) was managed by the British North Borneo Company under a lease signed between the representatives of the company, Messrs Overbeck and Dent in 1878. The British Crown had not during that time officially colonised North Borneo (Sabah.)


Despite British Crown's colonisation of Sabah from 1946 until 1963, it is my opinion that Sabah's sovereignty, although compromised by the British colonisation, still legally belonged to the Sultanate of Sulu. However, we all know that the Sultanate of Sulu ceded full sovereignty of Sabah to the Philippine Republic on 12 Septemeber 1962 while it was still a colony of Britain.


On 31st August 1963, Britain granted Sabah (whose sovereignty rights had been ceded the year before to the Republic of the Phlippines) its independence.


Sixteen days after Britain granted Sabah its independence in 1963, and despite PH protests, it was annexed to a new federation in the making called MALAYSIA instead of returning it either to the Sultanate of Sulu or to the Republic of the Philippines which had already inherited sovereignty rights over Sabah from the Sultanate by virtue of the transfer on 12 September 1962.


In 1968, while Malaysia had taken de facto control of Sabah, the Republic of the Philippines enacted a series of laws related to our baselines and one of these laws is the Republic Act 5446 which acknowledges title and dominion over Sabah, thus by PH law, Sabah is Philippine territory. RA 5446 is still in vigour. 


As Law Professor Isagani Cruz says:

"President Noynoy faces an insoluble dilemma. If he believes that Sabah is part of the Philippines, he has to defend Sabah because Malaysia is attacking it. If he does not believe that Sabah is part of the Philippines, he opens himself up to impeachment, because Philippine law says that Sabah is part of the Philippines and he is sworn to uphold Philippine law. Talking of a conspiracy does not solve the problem; in fact, it is irrelevant if there is or there is no conspiracy. The dilemma has to do simply with his stand on Sabah itself."

To my mind, the Sultanate of Sulu, and by extension the royal heirs, is irrelevant in the PH claim because Sabah is already PH territory by PH law. The Philippine Republic, however, has contractual obligations which it signed when it accepted from the Sultanate of Sulu the full transfer of sovereignty rights in 1962 and one of these contractual obligations is to prosecute the claim and in so doing, help the Sultante of Sulu's proprietary rights to be recognised. So we cannot actually take it against the Sultanate for feeling doubly rebuffed. It is the Philippine Republic's contractual obligation to do it and the Government has been remiss in its obligations.


NB: The relevant point in the Sabah question is THE NINE SULTANATE HEIRS and not whoever the sultan is. The Philippine Government must not use the Kirams' intra-family bickering as an excuse NOT to perform the Republic's contractual obligation.


Nota Bene: OTHER VERY IMPORTANT NOTE THAT EVERYONE MUST KNOW: When the Sabah lease was signed 134 years ago -- on the 22nd of January 1878, between the Sultanate of Sulu & Sabah and two foreign businessmen, the Sultanate ensured that their rights to Sabah ownership were protected with this all encompassing moral and legal clause clearly spelled out in the lease contract, to wit (Restrictive clause):

"...but the rights and powers hereby leased shall not be transferred to any nation, or a company of other nationality, without the consent of Their Majesties Government." 
Related post: Moral and legal clause spelled out in the Sabah lease of 1878 

~~ By Anne de Bretagne
For the Defenders of the Philippine Sabah & Spratly Claims 
05 March 2013

When did the British Crown colonise North Borneo (Sabah)?

UNDERSTANDING THE SABAH PROBLEM: One factor that is essential in the comprehension of the Sabah problem is to understand that Sabah was only officially colonised by the British Crown in 1946 which means that UNTIL THEN, North Borneo (Sabah) WAS PART of the Sultanate of Sulu although leased. 


Picture on the left is the court of directors of BNBCC.
Seated from left to right :

1) Mr Harrington G. Forbes, Secretary
2) Sir Charles J. Jessel, Bart., Vice Chairman
3) Mr Richard B. Martin, M.P., Chairman
4) Mr William C. Cowie, Managing Director
5) Mr Edward Dent
Note that before that year, North Borneo (Sabah) was managed by the British North Borneo Company under a lease signed between the representatives of the company, Messrs Overbeck and Dent in 1878. The British Crown had not during that time officially colonised North Borneo (Sabah.)

Despite British Crown's colonisation of Sabah from 1946 until 1963, it is my opinion that Sabah's sovereignty, although compromised by the British colonisation, still legally belonged to the Sultanate of Sulu. However, we all know that the Sultanate of Sulu ceded full sovereignty of Sabah to the Philippine Republic on 12 Septemeber 1962 while it was still a colony of Britain.

On 31st August 1963, Britain granted Sabah (whose sovereignty rights had been ceded the year before to the Republic of the Phlippines) its independence

Sixteen days after Britain granted Sabah its independence in 1963, and despite PH protests, it was annexed to a new federation in the making called MALAYSIA instead of returning it either to the Sultanate of Sulu or to the Republic of the Philippines which had already inherited sovereignty rights over Sabah from the Sultanate by virtue of the transfer on 12 September 1962.

In 1968, while Malaysia had taken de facto control of Sabah, the Republic of the Philippines enacted a series of laws related to our baselines and one of these laws is the Republic Act 5446 which acknowledges title and dominion over Sabah, thus by PH law, Sabah is Philippine territory. RA 5446 is still in vigour.

As Law Professor Isagani Cruz says:

"President Noynoy faces an insoluble dilemma. If he believes that Sabah is part of the Philippines, he has to defend Sabah because Malaysia is attacking it. If he does not believe that Sabah is part of the Philippines, he opens himself up to impeachment, because Philippine law says that Sabah is part of the Philippines and he is sworn to uphold Philippine law. Talking of a conspiracy does not solve the problem; in fact, it is irrelevant if there is or there is no conspiracy. The dilemma has to do simply with his stand on Sabah itself."
To my mind, the Sultanate of Sulu, and by extension the royal heirs, is irrelevant in the PH claim because Sabah is already PH territory by PH law. The Philippine Republic, however, has contractual obligations which it signed when it accepted from the Sultanate of Sulu the full transfer of sovereignty rights in 1962 and one of these contractual obligations is to prosecute the claim and in so doing, help the Sultante of Sulu's proprietary rights to be recognised. So we cannot actually take it against the Sultanate for feeling doubly rebuffed. It is the Philippine Republic's contractual obligation to do it and the Government has been remiss in its obligations.

NB: The relevant point in the Sabah question is THE NINE SULTANATE HEIRS and not whoever the sultan is. The Philippine Government must not use the Kirams' intra-family bickering as an excuse NOT to perform the Republic's contractual obligation.

Nota Bene: OTHER VERY IMPORTANT NOTE THAT EVERYONE MUST KNOW: When the Sabah lease was signed 134 years ago -- on the 22nd of January 1878, between the Sultanate of Sulu & Sabah and two foreign businessmen, the Sultanate ensured that their rights to Sabah ownership were protected with this all encompassing moral and legal clause clearly spelled out in the lease contract, to wit (Restrictive clause): 

"...but the rights and powers hereby leased shall not be transferred to any nation, or a company of other nationality, without the consent of Their Majesties Government." 
Related post: Moral and legal clause spelled out in the Sabah lease of 1878 

~~ By Anne de Bretagne
For the Defenders of the Philippine Sabah Claim 
05 March 2013

Saturday, February 9, 2013

Cory Aquino and the Republic's sovereignty rights over Sabah


PLEASE BE WARNED: THE POSTER SAYING "SHE GAVE SABAH AWAY" IS WRONG! 

IT IS NOT TRUE THAT MRS AQUINO GAVE SABAH AWAY... WE NEED NOT LIKE A PARTICULAR PRESIDENT BUT WE MUST STICK TO FACTS! 

WE ARE RATHER SURPRISED TO READ AN ASSERTION IN SOME POSTS IN OTHER PAGES ON FACEBOOK THAT PRESIDENT CORY AQUINO GAVE SABAH AWAY.... To assert such notion is to play right into Malaysia's thieving hands!

BEFORE ANYTHING, we would like to assure everybody that we do not profess to be a pro-Aquino or pro-Marcos community nor anti any one of them. We are Patriots and as such defenders of Philippine sovereignty above all else.

We believe that those who insist that Pres Cory Aquino gave away Sabah are playing right into Malaysia's hands. They don't have to be pro-Aquino or pro-Marcos or even anti any one of them but FACTS ARE FACTS. 

First of all, what is the basis of those accusing Mrs Aquino of "giving Sabah away?"

Mrs Aquino could not have given away Sabah -- she might not have been interested in getting it back or did not do what was needed to be done, eg.,taken Malaysia to the ICJ, but neither did she relinquish sovereignty rights over Sabah which as everyone knows the Philippine government obtained under President Diosdado Macapagal when the Sultanate of Sulu, Sultan Esmail Kiram I officially transferred Sabah's sovereignty rights to the Republic on 12 Septe 1962 or a year before then Malaya Federation physically annexed Sabah. 

Moreover, the 1987 Constitution makes absolutely no mention of giving away sovereignty rights over Sabah which, again, the Philippines at the time possessed.

Here is Article 1 of the 1987 Constitution (promulgated under President Cory Aquino): 

ARTICLE I- NATIONAL TERRITORY•The national territory comprises the Philippine archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction, consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other submarine areas. 

Allow us to be emphatic: "...all other territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty" = MEANS THAT SABAH IS PART OF THE PHILIPPINES BECAUSE SOVEREIGNTY RIGHTS OVER SABAH WERE OFFICIALLY TRANSFERRED (signed and sealed) TO THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES BY THE SULTANATE OF SULU ON 12 SEPT 1962 DURING THE TERM OF PRESIDENT DIOSDADO MACAPAGAL LONG BEFORE THE 1987 CONSTITUTION WAS PROMULGATED. HENCE, SABAH HAS NOT BEEN EXCLUDED AT ALL FROM THE SCOPE OF PHIL NATIONAL TERRITORY UNDER THE 1987 CONSTIUTION CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME BELIEVE. Link: 1987 Philippine Constitution or view post here.

We must be absolutely careful not to play into the hands of Malaysians by saying that Mrs Aquino gave Sabah away. There is no proof, tangible or not tangible that she gave Sabah away. The act also will not be doing the Tausugs, the Sultanate of Sulu and the people of Mindanao a favour at all because to "renounce" sovereignty rights over Sabah (especially on the basis of a dislike for a president living or dead) is what Malaysia seeks.

Furthermore, on 20th August 2008, Malacanang Memorandum Circular No. 162 (shown) was issued by then Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita on behalf of the Gloria Macapagal Arroyo government concerning North Borneo (Sabah) which, unless revoked by the current dispensation (Government under President Benigno Aquino III), remains in place -- IT EXPLICITLY PROHIBITS any department, agency, and by extension all govt officials, civil servants, employees, etc from saying or printing or acknowledging or recognising that Sabah is part of Malaysia. Link: Malacanang Memorandum Circular No. 162 - Guidelines on Matters Pertaining to North Borneo (Sabah)

Until there is tangible proof that the Republic's sovereignty rights over Sabah have been formally, legally and officially given away by the Republic, we must be careful to play into Malaysia's hands.

We cannot, on the excuse that we do not like such and such president or such and such administration, "cut off our noses to spite our faces."


NB: For those who are interested in the Sabah lease, link here: MORAL AND LEGAL CLAUSE - PROVISION SPELLED OUT IN ORIGINAL LEASE CONTRACT

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Beware of sultan of Sulu impostors! Sultan Muedzul has the moral and legal ascendancy to champion the claim to Sabah cause


Sultan Muedzul-Lail T Kiram, current reigning sultan of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah) shown in better times with his  uncle, Datu Fuad Kiram (right) who has decided to usurp the Sulu throne aided by a fake 'prince marshal'.

Please be informed that the websites you see on Facebook, and on the net in general, promoting the impostorship of Datu Fuad Kiram (the uncle of Sultan Muedzul Kiram) and rallying support for Fuad Kiram to be recognised as sultan of Sulu are part of a massive sting operation. The said websites were created by someone who is not even a Tausug but decided to appropriate for himself the title of prince marshal - he is the handler of Datu Fuad whom he convinced to try to usurp the sultanate throne. His websites are a mixture of facts, fiction and fairy tale. In other words, they can only be the creations of the leader of a con gang whose main pre-occupation today is to try to get rich quick.

Datu Fuad, who is telling everyone on Facebook that he is the sultan of Sulu (which, if you examine closely is based on pure 'backside wind') and his handler, someone who is undoubtedly excellent at story telling, met for the first time in 2004 and hatched a plan. For your infomation, it was Sultan Muedzul, who was then Rajahmuda (Crowned Prince) who appointed his uncle, Datu Fuad, as sultan regent of Sabah. But the poor, feeble-minded and unemployed Datu Fuad was convinced by the handler to proclaim himself sultan in place of his nephew who has the most legitimate claim to the title. So, the problem began. 

Sultan Muedzul stripped his uncle Fuad of the regent sultan of Sabah title while the Rumah Bechara of Sulu excommunicated Fuad. Fuad's handler then took things a step forward by organising a crowning ceremony for Fuad in a basketball court in Angono, Rizal. The said handler also convinced Datu Fuad to forge some kind of accusation against Sultan Muedzul Kiram for some 'haram' act which Ayatollah Matt Salleh, one of the illustrious members of the Forum who has worked and knows the Tausug culture more than many will ever do, qualifies as fake charges.
Ayatollah Matt Salleh, one of the unsung heroes of Operation Merdeka, the first physical attempt of the Republic to claim Sabah (in the 60s and 70s) said, "There is no proof of any competent authority declaring him haram. Only the Ruma Bechara can do so. Neither is there any police record or court conviction of such thing."

Furthermore, the said Datu Fuad handler organised a group on Facebook to rally support for the impostorship of Fuad. The same handler who, by the way, goes under the name of Omar Kiram (although not a Kiram nor a Tausug, and is completely unknown to legendary Tausug warrior Nur Misuari) is someone who is also very good at creating internet sites, as one of our illustrious members here once remarked to us. 

The handler, who goes by the name of Omar Kiram and who also named his mistress a 'duchess of the Tausugs' (something absolutely ridiculous since such English nobility sounding titles DO NOT EXIST IN THE TAUSUG CULTURE), has decided to "award" English nobility sounding titles to just about any person who would chant the name of Fuad on Facebook. And sadly, he has has tricked many unsuspecting people to accept and join his absolutely abominable Facebook campaign. In other words, the whole thing, as we have said, is a mixture of facts, fiction and fairy tale with the end purpose of organising a massive con job - sting operation on Facebook. We hope that you are not one of those that he has conned. 

One of our Admins here has actually discovered that the said Omar Kiram and his principal, Datu Fuad are running a sting operation with the help of the Indonesians. The Indonesians are running an Islamic fundamentalist school somewhere in Java. The 'partnership's' primary aim, we dedeuced, is to get Malaysia to pay them blackmail money to shut up. We hope we have helped you even in a little way, understand the whole situation today. 

But rest assured that as far as we are concerned, Sultan Muedzul Kiram has the legitimate credentials: LINEAGE, RESIDENCE, ROYAL COUNCIL OF ELDERS PROCLAMATION, AND THE DETERMINATION TO DO GOOD BY HIS PEOPLE AND BY THE NATION's SABAH CLAIM, to take over the mantle of leadership of the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah) that his grandfather and father left him.

In the photo above taken when Datu Fuad (right) had not yet taken it in his head to follow the con job operations hatched by Fuad's handler, you will find Sultan Muedzul (left) still in good terms with his uncle. Datu Fuad in fact signed a letter vowing support for his nephew when the latter appointed him (Fuad) as regent sultan of Sabah in 2004 or 2005 but which has since been revoked by Sultan Muedzul for his (Fuad's) most atrocious crime of lèse majesté.

For your information, Farida Kiram, the wife of Datu Fuad who happens to be the mother of his child Habiba Kiram, has brought accusations against Datu Fuad for gross negligence and child abandon. Farida Kiram knows all about the abominable plans that Fuad Kiram and his handler, the fellow calling himself Omar Kiram, have hatched from Day 1 of their first meeting in 2004.

Nota Bene: We did not reach this stage of certainty out of nowhere... All of the Admins of the Philippine Sabah Claim Forum, patriots found all over the world, went minitiously to work, spent their own personal funds, time, efforts to unearth the truth. The Admins HAVE NOTHING TO GAIN AND ARE NOT AFTER THE ACCOLADE OF ANYBODY NOR FOR THE GLORY AND CERTAINLY NOT FOR MONEY... The only thing the Admins have always wanted is to help right a wrong all for INANG BAYAN.

FOR REMINDER: What Senator Salonga said 50 years ago when he replied point by point to Senator Sumulong's traitorous insinuations really still is applicable today:
"But I believe that on such a fundamental question as this, it may be well for us to remember that political considerations, bitterness and endless quibbling should stop at the water's edge and that the claim to North Borneo is not the claim of the President, nor of the Liberal Party, nor of his Administration, but a claim of the entire Republic, based on respect for the rule of law, the sanctity of contractual obligations, the sacredness of facts and the relentless logic of our situation in this ..."

Thursday, June 21, 2012

22 June 1962 Philippines officially files claim to Sabah in the United Nations.

Today is the 50th anniversary of the official filing of Philippines' claim to Sabah.

On 22 June 1962 or fifty years ago today, the Philippines, under President Diosdado Macapagal officially filed the Republic's claim to Sabah in the United Nations based on historical and legal sultanate of Sulu ownership right.

Fifty years hence, nothing concrete has been done to raise the issue with Malaysia. Instead, in 2003, the daughter of President Diosdado Macapagal who became 'president' extra-constitutionally opened the gates of Mindanao to the Malaysians by allowing the Malaysians to control the so-called peace talks with the MILF and almost gave a huge chunk of Mindanao. 

Today, the son of the senator who denounced President Marcos plans to invade Sabah in the late 60s and who has become president himself has continued the process -- in Kuala Lumpur to boot leading to a signed agreement under the diktat of Malaysia for the creation of a "new political entity."

Where has national self-respect gone???

Lease documents shown below. You may also click on this link here.

Recommended reading: A briefer on the North Borneo (Sabah) ownership from the Pimentel Institute.


Wednesday, June 20, 2012

Moral and legal clause spelled out in 1878 Sabah lease contract


By Anne de Bretagne

When the Sabah lease was signed 134 years ago -- on the 22nd of January 1878, between the Sultanate of Sulu & Sabah and two foreign businessmen, the Sultanate ensured that their rights to Sabah ownership were protected with this all encompassing moral and legal clause clearly spelled out in the lease contract, to wit (lease shown, 2nd photo): 


"...but the rights and powers hereby leased shall not be transferred to any nation, or a company of other nationality, without the consent of Their Majesties Government." 
The whole Mindanao-Moro problem compounded by Malaysia's continuing support for the MILF right in the heart of Philippine Moro 'homeland' is without a shadow of doubt tied to the Philippine Sabah claim.


The Malaysians know it and the Filipinos know it but Kuala Lumpur will do everything in their power to make sure that the Philippines will not have a moment's respite to turn around and raise the Sabah claim. And the problem is being compounded by the fact that successive Chinese communities in Sabah have staged their own claim over Sabah and over the last couple of decades, they have been at it, trying to muster political support from the population of Sabah to claim "independence" from Malaysia.


As years go and while this problem is unsettled, there will be more problems -- political and military, that are bound to arise and could very well bring the Sabah question to the inevitable: armed conflict which it almost did back in the 60s when the Philippines attempted to take physical control of Sabah in a covert operation code-named "Operation Merdeka."


After 134 years, it is time to examine the contents of the lease and to bring them out in the open. The Republic of the Philippines -- and Malaysia, cannot continue to be blind. Sabah is either the Philippines' or it is not -- only a minitious examination of facts done in absolute good faith can determine final legal and moral ownership.


If the parties to the claim or to the counter claim refuse -- and that includes major counter claimant Malaysia, to adhere to the principle of good faith, I'm afraid, the peace and order problem in Mindano will continue as the rebel forces in Mindanao are encouraged, maintained and funded by the the current occupiers of Sabah. And unless we face this extremely sensitive Sabah question head on, there is every chance that we will be encouraging Malaysia to invade Mindanao by proxy.




Shown left is the document containing the transcribed lease from Arabic to English.