Philippine Claim to North Borneo (Sabah): Minutes of meeting 1963

By Yolanda Ortega Stern, Philippine Sabah Claim Forum:

The current GPH should please look at its archives and find Page 23 of their official handbook "The Facts about Sabah". 

Look at June 7-11, 1963. It's the official documentation of what transpired in that hearing. 

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."

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

OUR MUSLIM BROTHERS' STRUGGLE FOR TO SELF-DETERMINATION

I am neither a pro nor anti Marcos. I also used to be a supporter of President Aquino when he ran for presidency. But I do not give loyalty to any president if I believe that he/she is wrong. The president's stand on Sabah turned me off and I am no longer his supporter. Let me give you a little history of Mindanao from my understanding.

Mindanao has been fighting for their right to SELF-DETERMINATION ever since the Spanish came. They have been an independent state even before Magellan came to RE-discover the Philippines with the emphasis on RE-discover since trades and nation relationship was already established then before Magellan came. They have been sold or ceded by Spain (despite the fact that the Spanish had never colonized the Morolands) to the US and then ceded to the Philippines. They became part of the Philippines against their will but for so long our government has neglected their needs. Do we really blame them if they want to be independent? Our government has made them think that way. We see that now in the ongoing Sabah stand-off. Our own president talks as if they are not Filipinos worth fighting for and conveniently RENOUNCED them when they only want what belongs to them. Our government MUST decide sooner than later what it wants to do regarding Sabah. If it wants to exercise its sovereignty then take some action and do not dilly-dally any longer. If it wants to drop the claim then do so without wasting time so the Sultanate does not have to parry criticism and possible punishment from both governments. It's tragic that the Sultanate has to take matters into its own hands. I only blame our government for this. PNOY claimed IGNORANCE on the issue of Sabah when both his parents were involved in it. He also claimed to have not received the three letters from the Sultanate. They were conveniently lost in the bureaucratic maze but suddenly found it after the stand-off began. Had PNOY been proactive and show some leadership in this matter of Sabah, then this tragic event could have been avoided. Below are excerpts from different articles by different writers.

 

 

"There are about 12 million indigenous peoples in the Philippines - groups which have not been Christianized or Hispanicized - the Moros and the Igorots are the two most important because of their numerical size, demographic concentration, and political organization."

 

"There are twelve peoples whose shared religion, Islam, and shared historical experience, persecution by Spaniards and later Filipinos, have formed a distinct nation called the Bangsamoro.  They are located primarily in Basilan, Mindanao, Palawan, and the Sulu Archipelago. The Muslims were set up under a series of Sultanates, for example the Sultanate of Mindanao and the Sultanate of Sulu.  By the time the Spanish arrived in the 1500’s the Sultan of Sulu was the sixth sultan to rule." Sheila Musaji

 

"The struggle of the Moro people for freedom and self-determination is one of the longest, if not the longest, struggles in the history of mankind. Their struggle began with the “discovery” of the Philippines by Ferdinand Magellan in 1521, who claimed the island for Spain. The Moros rejected his claim, and Lapu Lapu subsequently killed him, a Moro Muslim leader. From then on, the Moros were in a fight for their independence and freedom." Amir Butler

 

"The Spanish differentiated the two natives of the archipelago into pagan Malays (Indios) and Muslim Malays (named Moros after the Spanish Moors). Their policy was simply to convert the Indios to Christianity and kill the Moros. The military resistance against the Spanish lasted over 350 years, until the Spanish were defeated by the Americans in the 1898 Spanish-American war. Despite the fact the Spanish had never colonized the Morolands, Spain included Mindanao in the Treaty of Paris, which transferred sovereignty to the United States." Amir Butler

 

"The US then attempted to subdue and disarm the Moros. Such was the resistance, that the US Army ordered the upgrade of the standard issue Colt .38-caliber pistol to the more powerful Colt .45-caliber, in order to stop the knife-wielding Moros. Their frenetic and oft suicidal style of fighting gave us the expression, “running amok”. The colonial administration then began passing laws that would quell Moro aspirations of independence by migrating large numbers of Christian Indios to the region." Amir Butler

 

"In 1903, all Moro land holdings were declared null and void and made open to land grabbing. In 1913, law was passed allowing Christians to own up to 16 hectares, whereas a Muslim could only own 8. In 1919, Christian land entitlement was generously extended to 24 hectares." An Enduring Freedom For the Moros, Amir Butler

 

"The Philippines were ceded to America by Spain at the end of the Spanish American War, although the Philippines had declared their Independence from Spain in 1896.  The U.S. fought the Philippine-American War between 1899 and 1913 in order to make the Philippines which had only recently declared its independence from Spain an American colony.  Like other wars we have fought there was never any formal declaration of war, although this didn't make the dead any less dead.  This undeclared war ended in 1902 in the North, although the Muslim Moros in the South refused to submit and continued fighting until 1916.  In America this was known as the Moro Rebellion." Sheila Musaji

 

ԔAlthough the final draft of the peace treaty which Madrid did sign provided for the sale of the Philippines, including Moroland, to the United States for 20 million Mexican dollars, President William McKinley had doubts as to Spain’s legal right to dispose of Moroland. He, therefore, instructed the Schurman Commission - the first U.S. government body to administer the Philippines - to investigate the legal status of the Moros. If it was determined that the Moros were independent of the Philippines, bilateral treaties were to be negotiated especially with the Sultanate of Sulu. A commercial treaty had already existed between the U.S. and Sulu since 1842.

 

The result was the Bates Treaty. Negotiated between two, equal, sovereign states - the United States and the Sultanate of Sulu - the treaty was signed on August 20, 1899. This was eight months after the Treaty of Paris had been signed ending the Spanish-American War. By this document - which officially states that any subsequent changes to the treaty could only occur by mutual consent - Washington officially acknowledged that the Moros were not part of the Philippines and specifically guaranteed to respect the identity and the integrity of the Sulu Sultanate. In return, the sultan recognized U.S. sovereignty.

 

"On March 21, 1904, the U.S. government unilaterally, and illegally, abrogated the Bates Treaty. The sultan responded by officially expressing his surprise and sadness by Washington’s action.  The abrogation of the Bates Treaty provoked a war with the Moros which lasted until 1913. The subsequent Carpenter Agreement of 1915 by which the Sultan of Sulu formally relinquished all political authority was illegal as it was signed under American military coercion. This document, however, relinquished political power only to the United States government not to the Philippines." Igorot and Moro National Re-emergence, Joseph E. Fallon

 

“On Dec. 8, 1941, the islands were invaded by Japanese troops. Following the fall of Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s forces at Bataan and Corregidor, Quezon established a government-in-exile that he headed until his death in 1944. He was succeeded by Vice President Sergio Osmea. U.S. forces under MacArthur reinvaded the Philippines in Oct. 1944 and, after the liberation of Manila in Feb. 1945, Osmena reestablished the government. The Philippines

 

“When independence from the US was imminent, the Moro leadership pled not to be included in the new “Independent Philippines”. Yet, on July 4, 1946, when independence was proclaimed, the Morolands were incorporated against their wishes, as they had been with the handover from Spain to the US." An Enduring Freedom For the Moros, Amir Butler

 

"But the region, and its six million Muslims, remain apart and distinct from the rest of the 71 million Christian Filipinos. During the 1960s and 1970s, Christian settlers, backed by the Manila government, began pushing into the economically backward, long-neglected south, in many cases stealing land and driving out its Muslim owners in a campaign of ethnic cleansing. Civil war erupted and the Muslim farmers fought back. During the regime of Ferdinand Marcos, the Philippine army and the gangs of paramilitary thugs killed an estimated 50,000 Muslims from 1969-1971 - without a peep of protest from Marcos’ American sponsors."

 

Two years later, the Moro National Liberation Front was formed in response to Marco’s imposition of martial law. The MNLF, which was financed by Libya, called for an independent Muslim state - Bangsomoro. Three years of heavy fighting between the MNLF and the US-armed Manila regime left over 100,000 Muslims dead; 250,000 were driven from their homes. The world again ignored this massacre.In the mid-1970s, Libya brokered a peace between Manila, the MNLF, and a breakaway group, the MILF. The MNLF leader, Nur Misuari, joined the government, and rebel forces were integrated into the national army. The Muslim regions of southern Philippines were granted autonomy. But tensions simmered on. Christian settlers continued to press the south; Moro factions battled with one another and failed to develop effective local government.”Philippines: Next Target of Bush’s War, Eric Margolis

 

The pattern of migrating Christians to Moro lands continued. In the 1950s, Northern peasants formed the New People’s Army and staged a Maoist rebellion. In order to defuse the situation, the government, under the auspices of the Economic Development Corp (EDCOR) began migrating these peasants to the Moro south and giving them seized parcels of Moro land.

 

"In 1968, anger at Manilla reached a new level, when the US-backed Ferdinand Marcos executed nearly 70 Muslim commando recruits to keep secret an aborted plan to invade Sabah, in Malaysia’s Borneo. When Marcos declared martial law on September 21, 1972, the Moros went to war after a quarter of a century of relative dormancy. Shortly afterwards, the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF) was formed, which called for an independent Moro state - Bangsamoro. They fought the US-armed Manilla regime for twenty-five years, leaving at least 100,000 Moros dead, and 250,000 driven from their homes. In 1996, the MNLF signed a peace deal with the Philippine government." An Enduring Freedom For the Moros, Amir Butler

 

 

 

Footnote:

 

But since the Sulu Sultanate transferred the full sovereignty of Sabah to the Republic in 1962 under the administration of then President Diosdado Macapagal, it is our DUTY to protect that sovereignty and not just ignore it. The Sultanate peoples became Filipinos and are holding Filipino passports. Do we just conveniently declare them Non-Filipinos and that this is their war and not ours? Remember that our Muslim brothers never wanted to be part of the Philippines but was forced to. So do we just claim them to be "our people" when they are of use to the country and renounce according to the president's wish? I said HIS because he does not listen to what most of the people are saying. The recent survey shows that 67 percent of responders DO NOT AGREE with the president's stand on Sabah.

While Malaysia kills Filipino Tausugs in Sabah, the audience cheers and harangues on the sidelines

By Yolanda Ortega Stern of the Philippine Sabah Claim Forum

Sabah Right Now

Najib on TV said outsiders cannot come into Sabah until all the followers of the Sultan are wiped out. No PH journalists, mercy missions, or rescue missions are allowed either.

Malaysia turned down a request for unilateral ceasefire, continuing the house to house searches and defying even the UN call for peaceful dialogue, saying his patience has rum out.

This mosquito infested territory, rich in timber, oil and gas, is a recurring page in a drama that pulls two countries apart each time the issue of sovereignty or proprietary rights are claimed by the heirs. The old War Refugee Camps set up by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees of War during the 1970s war between the MNLF and GPH, is now the scene of a showdown of wills between an impoverished Sultan and a Chief of State - one fighting for Honor, the other for s piece if real estate stolen from the landlord's honor.

The last time I saw a similar fight was 15 years ago during a re-run of High Noon.

Knowing only full well, the often reckless bravery of the Tausug, they prefer to fight to the death only worthy opponents, and Malaysia does not stand a long term victory against the ant colony. Genocide is the only way to go.

Is it worth it? For Petronas and the Palm Oil industry it is. The life of a Tausug is not worthy of any consideration, afterall, not only are they the poorest of the poor in their own country, they suffer the same fate in Sabah, where many of them have remained stateless for generations.

So bring the tanks and the bombs while the audience cheers and harangues on the sidelines

"But what do you want me to do?" asks President Aquino and we say, "Get bloody cracking, Mr Presideent!"

If the President continues to support - and by his inaction implicitly lauds - Prime Minister Najib's 'slaughter-the-Filipino-Tausugs-to-the-last-man-in-Sabah' doctrine, Najib will be emboldened to send Malaysia troops to seize every walking male Tausug within Sulu itself. Is this what this President want to happen?

The advisers of this not-so-bright president are equally to blame for the way this Sultanate Sabah business has been and is still being mishandled.

Don't the bright members of the President's entourage realise that Najib and his Kuala Lumpur cohorts will take President Aquino's wishy-washy stand, asking the Filipino nation - in time of national crisis - a most stupid question "But what do you want me to do?" as a license to go ahead and commit human rights abuses to every Filipino in Sabah?

Malaysia police and troops have begun rounding up Sabahan MyKad holders of Filipino Tausug extraction. And only God knows what abuses are being inflicted on them by the Malaysia Internal Security Act agents and on the displaced Filipinos who have no official identities in Sabah?

Don't the advisers to the President realise that this tetanised attitude of the President is a go signal for Malaysia to infiltrate Southern Philippines? That Najib, not a bright man himself, might take it in his head to attempt a much bolder step if he thinks Aquino has his back? Must the President wait until Malaysia military elements have crossed the Sea and landed on Sulu to snatch Tausugs before he realises that Najib's intentions are far from being honourable?

We need not remind the President and his brightest of the bright advisers that members of the Malaysian armed forces led by a senior star-ranking military officer are already in Mindanao for purposes of 'supervising' the Malaysia-engineered GPH-MILF framework agreement. It is easy to use that excuse to bring in Malaysian elements to do some serious dirty work.

Today, even Government doesn't know exactly how many Malaysian military people are already in Mindanao. But we have no doubt that immediately after the landing of the Sultanate Tausug fighters in Lahad Datu, Najib and Home Minister Hisham sent Malaysian military police intel and military elements  in disguise to Sulu and to the neighbouring provinces to "monitor" events in Southern Mindanao. They will not be dressed in military camouflage uniform but will be there.

The President has a duty to the country. He swore an oath to protect and defend the citizens of this country. There are no 'buts,' no 'becauses', no 'waits'... He can still stop the carnage and the abuses being inflicted on Filipinos, figthers and civilians, in Sabah by calling a Malaysia-PH summit to face the problem that has haunted the two countries for 51 years: the Philippine Sabah claim and the Republic's contractual obligation to represent the Sultanate of Sulu, the Tausugs and the Filipino nation in the International Court of Justice.

Mr President, we have just answered your "But what do you want me to do?" Now, get bloody cracking!

~~ Admins, Philippine Sabah Claim Forum 
07 March 2013

Poster by PSCF