TODAY, 12 September 2013 is the 51st anniversary of Sabah's formation as Philippine sovereign territory

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Sabah's sovereignty 1946 - 1963: Compromised by the British colonisation but belonged legally to Sultanate of Sulu

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. 

Despite Britain's official 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 31 July 1963, prior to the creation of the Malaysia Federation, the Manila Accord was signed by three heads of state namely, Macapagal of the Ph ilippines, Soekarno of Indonesia and Rahman of the Malaya Federation (which was not yet Malaysia Federation). Registered as United Nations Treaty 8029, Section 12 of the Manila Accord stipulated that Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman, on behalf of the Malaya Federation, agreed that the Philippine Sabah claim would not be extinguished by the then to-be-created Malaysia Federation (which was to be created later on 16th September 1963.)
 
On 31 August 1963, Britain granted Sabah, which had been under British Crown control since 1946 (and whose sovereignty rights had been ceded the year before to the Republic of the Phlippines), its independence.

On 16 September 1963 or sixteen days after Britain granted Sabah its independence, 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.
 
On 18 September 1968, while Malaysia had taken de facto control of Sabah, the Republic of the Philippines enacted an act - AN 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” - to ammend our baselines and known today as 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 story in this blog link: Nemo nos impune lacessit (No one hits us with impunity)
Link to Republic Act 5446 /

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

Mainstream media and Government must exercise professionalism with regard to Sultanate of Sulu

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 for Sabah 'incursion'

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

THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION, A REPUBLIC ACT AND A PRESIDENTIAL DIRECTIVE ON 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. 3046 

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9522 

Republic of the Philippines 

Congress of the Philippines 

Metro Manila 

REPUBLIC ACT NO. 5446 

September 18, 1968 

AN 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.

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


FURTHERMORE, PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION, 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.

NOTE: "and 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 CONSTITUTION CONTRARY TO WHAT SOME BELIEVE. 


~~ Admins, Defenders of Philippine Sabah and Spratly Claims