Manila's UN challenge vs China over disputed waters gathers pace behind 'formidable' legal team

Manila's UN challenge vs China over disputed waters gathers pace behind 'formidable' legal team

HONG KONG - The Philippines' legal challenge against China's claims in the South China Sea is gathering pace, emerging as a "proxy battle" over Beijing's territorial reach.

Manila has assembled a crack international legal team to fight its unprecedented arbitration case under the United Nations' Convention on the Law of the Sea - ignoring growing pressure from Beijing to scrap the action.

Any result will be unenforceable, legal experts say, but will carry considerable moral and political weight.

The Philippines has invested a "huge amount of political capital in this legal gambit and it wants to ensure success regardless of the cost," said security scholar Ian Storey of Singapore's Institute of South East Asian Studies.

"If the Philippine team submits a less than convincing case...this would be very embarrassing for Manila and put it right back to square one in its dispute with China.

"Beijing would also be emboldened to pursue its claims even more assertively than it has been doing over the past few years."

Beyond the legal questions, the case carries political and diplomatic risks and is being closely watched by Japan and Vietnam, locked in their own disputes with China over sea territory, officials from both countries say.

The United States, which is deepening military ties with the Philippines, a longstanding treaty ally, is also watching.

The legal battle mirrors tensions at sea, where China and the Philippines eye each other over rival occupations of the Scarborough and Second Thomas shoals.

Chinese vessels occupied Scarborough after a tense two-month standoff between rival vessels last year - a move some regional analysts have described as an effective annexation by Beijing.

The Philippines accused China of further encroachment when a naval frigate and two other ships steamed within five nautical miles of a dilapidated transport ship that Manila ran aground on Second Thomas Shoal in 1999 to mark its territory.

One Asian envoy from a non-claimant country said: "We are watching and worrying about an accident or miscalculation sparking an armed confrontation. So in some ways this growing legal fight looks like the proxy battle, you could say."

Overlapping claims in the South China Sea - traversed by half the world's shipping tonnage - are one of the region's biggest flashpoints amid China's military build-up and the U.S. strategic "pivot" back to Asia.

The claims of the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei are bisected by China's "nine-dash line" - the historic claim that reaches deep into the maritime heart of Southeast Asia.

European states, Russia, India and South Korea are also monitoring events, given the sea's shipping lanes and potential oil and gas resources, diplomats and military officials say.

http://www.interaksyon.com/article/71686/manilas-un-challenge-vs-china-over-disputed-waters-gathers-pace-behind-formidable-legal-team

'If we don't pursue our claim to Sabah, we may be doing violence to our Constitution' ~ Ambassador Lauro Baja

The article "Don't play into Malaysia's hands" was written at the height of the Sabah stand-off by former Permanent Representative to the UN Ambassador Lauro Baja. It is a brief analysis of the Tanduo siege which President Aquino termed a "hopeless cause."

Ambassador Baja warned,"If we do not pursue, we may do violence to our own Constitution, to House Resolution No. 321 adopted on April 24, 1962 and to the Supreme Court decision upholding the validity of RA 5522 and declaring that the PH has title and dominion over Sabah."

FULL ARTICLE: 

‘Don’t play into Malaysia’s hand’
February 27, 2013
By LAURO L. BAJA JR.

THE President has gone on TV appealing and at the same time chastising the Sultan of Sulu over the standoff in Lahad Datu in Sabah.

The next few days will tell the wisdom of doing it in public. His statements and actions give the unintended consequence of leaning on our own nationals over a foreign power. We may be playing into Malaysia’s hands who has been adopting a studied but cavalier attitude over the standoff. They are exercising acts of “effectivités” over Sabah during this standoff by their actions and even by their silence over our naive pronouncements.

“Effectivités” in a territorial dispute between countries gives weight to actual and continued exercise of authority over a territory. This is the basis of the International Court of Justice ’s 2002 decision on the Ligatan Sipadan case where the court awarded the area to Malaysia over Indonesia. Also the same principle in the case between Chile and Peru and between Nicaragua and Guatemala.

The Sabah standoff should rouse the Philippine Rip van Winkle attitude towards our claim to the area. It provides the country with a unique but sensitive opportunity to revisit our claim. If the Philippines can deal with the situation with some diplomatic imagination and finesse it can correct some missteps of the past which led to the current state of helplessness insofar as the issue is concerned.

Those missteps include the abortive “peopling” of Sabah by Filipinos under the Marcos administration which resulted in the Jabidah mnassacre. Also advocating and/or agreeing to a United Nations referendum in Sabah in 1963 without adequate strategic preparations which resulted in adverse outcome for the Philippines.

The solid legal foundation of our claim still exists.

In the transfer of sovereignty document which the Sultan of Sulu signed with the Philippine government, it was expressly provided that the transfer shall be deemed voided if the Philippines shall fail to pursue the claim. The sultan understandably feels he is now free to pursue the claim himself.

The President should find an opportunity to convene the National Security Council to consider the matter. The ramifications of the standoff have far reaching consequences and both the legislative and judicial branches of the government have pronounced themselves on the issue.

As days pass, the confluence of events makes it imperative that the Philippines now define its policy on Sabah. To continue putting the claim in the backburner is not a policy. This is an illusion, a mirage.

Will it be in the national interest to pursue the claim to Sabah? Strong legal grounds still exist although eroded by our statements and actions and inactions. If we do not pursue, then we lay to waste previous international efforts in the UN, in the London and Bangkok talks, in the ICJ, in the Manila Accord of 1963.

If we do not pursue, we may do violence to our own Constitution, to House Resolution No. 321 adopted on April 24, 1962 and to the Supreme Court decision upholding the validity of RA 5522 and declaring that the PH has title and dominion over Sabah.

To study (again!) the legal merits of the claim is to consign it to the backburner for the next fifty years.

It is a sad commnetary on the Philippines if our own nationals should run to the UN because their government cannot protect their rights. This is not the spectacle our country wants to portray to the international community.

It is now urgent to cease to be “confused” and move and act decisively. Time to end the Kabuki play on Sabah.

(The author is a veteran Philippine diplomat. He was the Philippine Permament Representative to the United Nations from May 2003 to  February 2007. Prior to that, he was Foreign Affairs Undersecretary for Policy.)

Link to original story here.

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

Is this really the Philippines' defence doctrine? "Protect Philippine territory if needed"

PH Ambassador Cusia during the send off of BRP Ramon Alcaraz (PF-16):

“As you know, there are some tensions in the West Philippine Sea and this may put you in harm’s way but there is no doubt that you will perform your duty of protecting Philippine territory if needed.” 

Our view: "IF NEEDED"? THERE IS NO "IF" BECAUSE PROTECTION IS NEEDED! Protection of territory does not mean going to war!!! Furthermore, "protection" of our territory is a duty, a physical and moral obligation, and cannot and must not fall under what seems to be this Administration's do-lally doctrine of "protecting Philippine territory IF NEEDED".

Ambassador Cusia himself said that "there are some tensions in West PH Sea" so he should not have used the conditional tense or inserted a caveat! No wonder our navy is confused - all these civilians in authority seem to be incapable of pinpointing with accuracy the difference between protecting our territory and going to war!

Protecting our territory is not going to war, it is that: TO PROTECT just like you protect your home!

~~ By AdB
For the Defenders of the Philippine Sabah & Spratly Claims
14 June 2013

Link: Ambassador Cusia story

*Posted on Philippine Sabah Claim Forum
*Posted on Defenders of Philippine Sabah & Spratly Claims

On the issue of national integrity and sovereignty, would you support President NoyNoy Aquino without reservation if....?

ON THE ISSUE OF NATIONAL INTEGRITY AND SOVEREIGNTY, a question to Philippine patriots and to the community of the Defenders of the Philippine Sabah & Spratly Claims: 

President NoyNoy Aquino will soon be delivering his State of the Nation Address... If President Noynoy Aquino decided to turn around from being a generally perceived weakling and moral coward in order to face the nation's foreign bullies, and as one member says, 'pounds his fist on the table', and announced that...

"NO nation will succeed in stealing Philippine territory! I am ordering the Philippine Navy and the Philippine Coast Guard to deploy all available ships to patrol our EEZ, guard our territories, protect and defend them against would-be foreign intruders at all cost... Furthermore, let this be known that I will not tolerate foreign state-sanctioned human rights violations on my people in Sabah..."

Would you let 'bygones be bygones' and give your ALL OUT support to NoyNoy Aquino, i.e., without reservation?

Please answer with either Yes or No... Thank you.

NB: If your answer is "NO" or "NOT SURE", please explain why not? Thank you very much.

NNB: Please feel free to share this post.

By Admins, Defenders of the Philippine Sabah & Spratly Claims: 

06 June 2013

PH Election 2013: Senatorial candidates endorsed by the Philippine Sabah Claim Forum

PHILIPPINE ELECTION 2013: These are the senatorial candidates who spoke - in varying degrees of eloquence - about the Philippine Sabah claim following the Sabah stand off in February. From what we understand, these candidates, if they win, will raise the country's claim so all may know that the Republic has not given up on its people's claim. 

We need as many voices as we can gather for the country's Sabah claim. The fight will be tough because the current dispensation is very much against Philppine sovereignty rights over Sabah and will do everything and anything to stifle the voices for Sabah.

On the strength of their courage to speak for the country's sovereignty rights claim to Sabah and for speaking out for the Filipinos who were massacred by Kuala Lumpur troops, the Philippine Sabah Claim Forum group is endorsing the following candidates as compiled by PSCF co-founder and Admin MGA.

~~ Administrators
Philippine Sabah Claim Forum (Group)
Philippine Sabah and Spratly Claims (Community) 
06 May 2013

NB: We promise to hold each and every single one of them to their Sabah claim promise when they are finally elected senators of the Republic.

LINKS TO CANDIDATES PROFILES:

# 28 - Koko Pimentel -  http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/aquilino-pimentel-iii-platforms-advocacy/

# 21 - Marwil Llasos -   http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/marwil-llasos-platforms-advocacy/

#27 - Ricardo Penson - http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/ricardo-penson-platforms-advocacy/

#31 - Eddie Villanueva -  http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/eddie-villanueva-platforms-advocacy/

#4 - Greco Belgica -  http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/greco-belgica-platforms-advocacy/

#16 - Edward Hagedorn -   http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/edward-hagedorn-platforms-advocacy/

#1 - Samson Alcantara -   http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/samson-alcantara-platforms-advocacy/

# 6 - Teddy Casino -  http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/teodoro-casino-platforms-advocacy/

#15 - Richard Gordon -  http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/dick-gordon-platforms-advocacy/

# 10 - Carlos de los Reyes -http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/john-carlos-de-los-reyes-platforms-advocacy/

#25 - Ramon Montano -  http://www.ivoteph.com/platforms/ramon-montano-and-his-platforms/

 #7 - Allan Cayetano - /www.ivoteph.com/platforms/alan-peter-cayetano-platforms-advocacy/

Sabah: Kuala Lumpur formulates Medieval Age tactics in the name of Sultan of Terangganu against Sulu Sultanate

The capture of Datu Amirbahar, a royal Kiram (in picture) and the spectre of death penalty against him is Malaysia king's -- and his Kuala Govt's, Medieval Ages  tactic meant as a message to the Sultanate of Sulu: "We will decimate you and we will have your land!"

Malaya Federation king, his Govt and troops waged war and terror on Sabah, not the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo
 
The Courts of Malaya Federation's Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin of the Sultanate of Terannganu, have no right to accuse, arrest, detain and tell a royal member of the Sultanate of Sulu, a Suluk (Tausug resident of Sabah) no less, that he is facing the death penalty allegedly "because he is the Sultanate of Sulu's defence minister, for being a member of a terrorist group, and for waging war against the king of Malaysia".

It is the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah) who should be pressing charges against the king of the Malaya Federation, his Kuala Lumpur Govt and their armies for bringing chaos, death and destruction to Sabah, to the Tausugs, to the Suluks, for waging terror and war against the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah) and absolutely not the other way around.

It was Malaysia's armies - in the name of the Terangganu Sultanate's Sultan Mizan Zainal Abidin who is currently the Malaya Federation's king, that launched an overkill against 230 men and women in Tanduo and not the other way around. It is Peninsular Malaysia that is illegally occupying Sabah and not the other way around.

A Medieval Age (from 5th to 15th centuries) method of obtaining land, of extending a domain and of exercising political vendetta against a rival monarch

This accusation and death penalty arrangement formulated in the name of a foreign sultanate against Datu Amir, son of Sultan Bentalin Esmail Kiram II and nephew of Sultan Jamalul Kiram III, is effectively a message from Kuala Lumpur to the Sultanate of Sulu: "We will decimate you and we will have your land."

With Datu Amir's arrest, detention of and death penalty being danggled against him,' Malaysia is attempting to hold the Sultanate hostage as they perpetuate the medieval form of political action to vanquish the enemy, obtain more land, in order to extend their political, military and economic power beyond their current realm.

And by threatening to kill no less than an immediate member of the current leaders of the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah), Kuala Lumpur wants the Sultanate of Sulu, its members, heirs and supporters to accept the most abject form of insult from an enemy, i.e., in order to reduce them to begging.
 
Objective: Sap the morale of the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah)
 
Understand that Kuala Lumpur, the Malaysa Federation and their so-called 'king of Malaysia' will do everything and anything to sap the morale of the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo. They are forcing them to surrender rich, very rich Sabah unconditionally and with that happening, they are hoping that the Sultanate of Sulu and its heirs will be gone forever. Truly, the exercise is strangely similar to those practised in the Medieval Ages!

People must hoist it in - must understand - that this latest action by Malaysia is actually a message to all and it is meant to inflict the most savage form of Medieval Age political power vendetta play against the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah), against the Tausug people, against the Suluks, and by extension, to show their contempt for the Filipino people.

Kuala Lumpur is already aware that the Filipinos of Luzon and Visayas and even some in Mindanao will not do anything because President Aquino has played his role to perfection; his fearmonger strategy has worked, i.e., the Filipinos have effectively 'capitulated.' But Kuala Lumpur wants the Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo, the Tausugs, the people of the Sulu archipelago, the Suluks and their supporters in Sabah to do the same: to surrender Sabah unconditionally!
  

Beware! Malaysia will corrupt Filipinos to capture an even bigger royal catch:  Rajah Muda/Crown Prince Agbimuddin Kiram (in picture) 

Malaysia will try to corrupt every known Filipino in the Philippines, might even bribe members of the MILF to help in the hunt, to lay their hands on an even bigger royal catch: Raja Muda/Crown Prince Datu Agbimuddin Kiram, younger brother of  Jamalul III and Esmail II.... also known as Datu Puing, commander of the Sultanate Army in Sabah.

There is no doubt that  Malaysia king, through his government in Kuala Lumpur, is hoping that the capture of a crown prince will finally legitinise Peninusular Malaysia's illegal 50-year war for the control of Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo (Sabah) lands.

NB: A Malaysian writer's implaccable logic about Sabah ownership:

In an article by Vidal Yudin Weil for the Free Malaysia Today dated March 9, 2013, the writer called Najib to task after Najib's pronouncement in Lahad Datu “The question of Sabah within Malaysia should not be disputed by anyone. Let not anyone underestimate Malaysia’s commitment to have Sabah within Malaysia forever. No one can dispute this, from within and outside the country. We will uphold the principle and fact of Sabah within Malaysia absolutely”.  

The Malaysian writer insisted that Najib was wrong: "Najib is wrong in making unilateral claims that Sabah belongs to Malaysia when historical legal documents and agreements may indicate otherwise."

The writer also enumerated the salient points in that Manila Accord:

•    the inclusion of Sabah into the formation of Malaysia is subject to the Philippines claim; and
•    the Philippines’ claim on Sabah must be settled in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) run by the United Nations.

With implaccable logic, he said: "Therefore, until such time when the ICJ has decided, Malaysia does not have absolute ownership of Sabah."

~ By AdB
For the Defenders of the Philippine Sabah and Spratly Claims
and for the Philippine Sabah Claim Forum
21 March 2013
 


RECOMMENDED POSTS:

• Kuala Lumpur's continuing annexation of Sabah is illegal even by Malaysia Federation standards
• Manila Accord of 1963 is United Nations Treaty 8029
• Beyond comprehension: President Aquino's 'un-involved observer stance' in the ongoing Sabah conflict
• Malaysia funded war and terror in Mindanao, US documents reveal
• Manila Govt has forsaken the Filipinos in Sabah
• Sabah sovereignty rights issue: Commentary by retired Ambassadors Baja and Lavinia
• Even Malaysia accepts that Sabah was leased land and not abandoned land
• Kuala Lumpur fields their Malaysia King in burlesque show

Mr. President, there is no shame in standing by the Sultanate, by the Tausugs, by the Filipinos in Sabah

President Aquino, what have you done to protect and defend your people in Sabah?

Mr President, these people who are being chased like animals out of Sabah, their homeland, by Malaysians are your people too. They are Filipinos and warrant the protection and defence of the Republic.

Grim news: Malaysia subjects the Tausugs to further indignities...has PH Government found out whose remains they are?

Sabah News
Police To Check For Terrorist Remains In Kampung Tanduo
 
LAHAD DATU, April 9 (Bernama) -- Periodic checks will be conducted in Kampung Tanduo for the remains of terrorists from the militant group which invaded the village on Feb 12, said Sabah Deputy Police Commissioner Datuk Tan Kok Lian.

He said K9 dog units would be used to detect graves which may contain such remains.

"We will check the area because there may still be some bodies buried in the village," he said after surveying several locations in Kampung Tanduo near here Tuesday.

Police discovered three graves containing 15 bodies, including that of a woman, and removed them from the village yesterday.

Mr. President, there is no shame in standing by the Sultanate, by the Tausugs, by the Filipinos in Sabah... there can only be pride because they are your people too. You can unite the country by standing by your people in time of crisis.

Mr President, every child left orphan because Malaysian troops killed his/her father or both will ask you why you did nothing while foreign toops killed a member/members of his/her family. Are you prepared to face that child to explain why you turned your back while Malaysian harmed his/her loved ones?

~~ Defenders of the Philippine Sabah and Spratly Claims
19 April 2013 

Malaysian writer calls Najib to task for not honouring 1963 Manila Accord

One of the provisions in the 1963 Manila Accord: to settle the Sabah case in the international court but Malaysia has now decided they did not want to honour the UN treaty. Without Malaysia's agreement, the Philippines cannot push the ICJ to arbitrate.

Paragraph 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 Declara tion."

Note this: "They agreed that the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia would not prejudice either the claim or any right thereunder."

But the recent pronouncements of Najib contradicted what Malaysia had agreed upon with PH in the Manila Accord; he said that Kuala Lumpur will never never let go of Sabah. It is contrary to and is a violation of that agreement which is a UN treaty.

In an article by Vidal Yudin Weil for the Free Malaysia Today on dated March 9, 2013, the writer called Najib to task after Najib's pronouncement:

Yesterday, Najib made the following statement at a press conference in Lahad Datu: “The question of Sabah within Malaysia should not be disputed by anyone. Let not anyone underestimate Malaysia’s commitment to have Sabah within Malaysia forever. No one can dispute this, from within and outside the country. We will uphold the principle and fact of Sabah within Malaysia absolutely”. 

And insisted that Najib was wrong:

Najib is wrong in making unilateral claims that Sabah belongs to Malaysia when historical legal documents and agreements may indicate otherwise.

The writer also continued to enumerate the salient points in that Manila Accord:

It was undoubtedly stated from the above provisions of the Manila Accord and joint statement that:

• the inclusion of Sabah into the formation of Malaysia is subject to the Philippines claim; and

• the Philippines’ claim on Sabah must be settled in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) run by the United Nations.

And with implaccable logic, stated:

Therefore, until such time when the ICJ has decided, Malaysia does not have absolute ownership of Sabah.

As Vidal called Najib to task, it became clear to me that there just might still be honourable people among the Malaysians:

By refusing to honour the Manila Accord and backtracking on the joint statement, has Najib not figuratively slapped the Philippines and Indonesia which were signatories to the historic documents? 

Internationally, is Najib not telling the whole world, especially foreign investors, that what Malaysia agrees and signs at any time may not be fulfilled or respected at Malaysia’s whims and fancies?

Obviously, Najib was emboldened to issue his offending pronouncements and to not honour the Manila Accord because our own president's inaction and playing spokesman to Najib served as signals to Malaysia that the Philippines wouldn't do anything about the claim. 

In that context, President Aquino is equally if not more guilty than Najib for waylaying the Manila Accord which is tantamount to his dismissing his Constitutional obligations. President Aquino's actions during the Sabah stand-off have clearly have emboldened Najib to overtly violate the Manila Accord which is a UN treaty. 

By choosing to side with Najib and Malaysia rather than with the Sultanate of Sulu, the president is also guilty of violating the Republic's contractual obligation vis-à-vis the Sultanate of Sulu which was to prosecute the Sabah claim. 

The President must realise that his refusal to push for the recognition of the 1963 Manila Accord during this critical period is tantamount to giving Najib and the Kuala Lumpur government the right to rape and plunder the Philippines. I really see no other way to put it.

By AdB for the Sabah Claim Society

15 April 2013

Related post: Signing of the 1963 Manila Accord

Article in Free Malaysia Today: Did Najib lie to the nation?Vidal Yudin Weil | March 9, 2013

Najib is wrong in making unilateral claims that Sabah belongs to Malaysia when historical legal documents and agreements may indicate otherwise. 

According to the Manila Accord signed on July 31, 1963 and registered in the United Nations as document No. 8029, then Malayan deputy prime minister Abdul Razak Hussein (late father of the present Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak) met up with foreign minister Dr Subandrio of Indonesia, and vice-president Emmanuel Pelaez of the Philippines in Manila for five days from June 7 to 11, 1963, to discuss about the status of Sabah. 

Consequently, it was agreed in writing by former Malayan prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman together with president Soekarno of Indonesia and president Diosdado Macapagal of the Philippines in paragraph 12 thereof: 

“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 Philippines’ claim to North Borneo. The ministers took note of the Philippines’ 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.” 

Subsequently on Aug 5, 1963 in a joint statement released to international media, the same also agreed in writing under paragraph 8 thereof: 

“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 Philippines 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 Philippines 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.” 

It was undoubtedly stated from the above provisions of the Manila Accord and joint statement that: 

• the inclusion of Sabah into the formation of Malaysia is subject to the Philippines claim; and

• the Philippines’ claim on Sabah must be settled in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) run by the United Nations. 

Therefore, until such time when the ICJ has decided, Malaysia does not have absolute ownership of Sabah. 

Yesterday, Najib made the following statement at a press conference in Lahad Datu: 

“The question of Sabah within Malaysia should not be disputed by anyone. Let not anyone underestimate Malaysia’s commitment to have Sabah within Malaysia forever. No one can dispute this, from within and outside the country. We will uphold the principle and fact of Sabah within Malaysia absolutely”. 

Now, with the involvement of the two late former prime ministers of Malaysia – Tunku Abdul Rahman and Abdul Razak Hussein – in the Manila Accord and joint statement which contained straightforward and unambiguous stipulations, the question that begged to be answered now is: why did Najib lie to the whole nation without even blinking his eyes? 

By refusing to honour the Manila Accord and backtracking on the joint statement, has Najib not figuratively slapped the Philippines and Indonesia which were signatories to the historic documents? 

Internationally, is Najib not telling the whole world, especially foreign investors, that what Malaysia agrees and signs at any time may not be fulfilled or respected at Malaysia’s whims and fancies? 

How are Malaysians going to face anyone overseas when our own prime minister has made us the butt of jokes and the laughing stock of the world? 

Effectively, he has also slapped each and every Malaysian who has an ounce of dignity. 

The writer is a former Sabah tour operator; loves food and speed; and blogs at http://legalandprudent.blogspot.com giving no quarters. The opinion and interpretation heretofore contained are exclusively his alone.