IF YOU are representing the terrorists, would it be instructive to let them include 'irrelevant and immaterial' counter claim arguments like Sabah is their grandfather's proverty, that the Sulu Sultanate has sovereignty over Sabah and that in any case No Referendum was held in Sabah on Malaysia.
So the question of waging war against Malaysia in Sabah does not arise. You need to get a Point of Law ruling on this.
Let's see how the Court addresses these irrelevant and immaterial arguments when the charges would probably be straightforward ones like causing public alarm, killing, possession of firearms, illegal entry, possession of fake documents, registering as voters with fake documents etc.
Sabah can charge these terrorists but can Malaysia charge these terrorists? How valid would be the charges as framed?
Taking these terrorists to Court does not seem to be a good idea. It would open up a Pandora's Box.
Please share this email with R. I heard that he's the only other lawyer in Sabah who's willing to represent the terrorists.