By : JOE FERNANDEZ
IF THE Government in
Putrajaya is truly honest with itself, it will confront the fact that there’s
very little sympathy in Sabah and Sarawak on the ground for the security forces
apparently battling it out in Lahad Datu. It’s 50 years too late. They might as
well pack up and go home and instead recall the Sabah Border Scouts and Sarawak
Rangers.
At the same time, the
continuing statements from one Jamalul Kiram III, the Manila press, the
Philippines Government and Nur Misuari of the Moro National Liberation Front
(MNLF) on Sabah and Sarawak are being viewed in the right perspective.
Local political parties in
Sabah and Sarawak are convinced, like the descendants of the heirs of the
defunct Sulu Sultanate and Nur Misuari that the International Court of Justice
(ICJ) in The Hague is the best venue to settle rival claims to the two Borneo
nations.
Already, the State Reform
Party (Star) led by Jeffrey Kitingan, has reportedly included the ICJ option in
their draft Manifesto for the forthcoming 13th General Election.
The ICJ is also the best
venue to address the fact that Singapore was expelled in 1965 from the
Federation of Malaysia by unconstitutional, unlawful and illegal means. It’s an
open secret that then Malaysian Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman had the doors
of Parliament locked until the MPs agreed to the expulsion of the city state
from the Federation.
The general consensus across
both sides of the Sulu Sea is that the Sabah/Sarawak issue will not go away
unless there’s a final resolution one way or another. In the absence of a final
resolution, the security of both Sabah and Sarawak will continue to be
compromised and thereby affect investor and consumer confidence.
Singapore Application would
be a continuation of Pulau Batu Putih case
If Singapore is featured as
well at the same time that the cases of Sabah and Sarawak are considered, it
would amount to a revisitation of the Pulau Batu Putih hearings which saw the
island of a few rocks being awarded to the city state.
The Singapore Application
could be made by the Government of that island or vide a Class Action Suit
commenced by concerned citizens seeking closure on an issue which has
bedevilled relations on both sides of the causeway since 1965.
The descendants of the nine
heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate claim that they have private property
rights to Sabah or parts of it. They further claim and/or used to claim that
sovereignty over Sabah rests with the Philippines Government.
This is a grey area since
one Sulu Sultan apparently “transferred” his sultanate’s sovereignty over Sabah
to the Manila Government by way of a Power of Attorney which has reportedly
since expired.
Jamalul Kiram III claims to
be Sultan of Sulu.
Sulu claimants, Nur Misuari
don’t have a leg to stand on in Sabah, Sarawak
At last count there were
some 60 claimants to the Sulu Sultanship, not all being descendants of the nine
heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate.
The nine Plaintiffs viz.
Dayang Dayang Piandao Kiram, Princess Tarhata Kiram, Princess Sakinur Kiram,
Sultan Ismael Kiram, Sultan Punjungan Kiram, Sitti Rada Kiram, Sitti Jahara
Kiram, Sitti Mariam Kiram and Mora Napsa were recognised by C. F. Mackasie,
Chief Judge of Borneo, on 13 Dec, 1939 in response to Civil Suit No. 169/39.
The Judge ruled that the
nine heirs, as the beneficiaries under the will of the late Sultan Jamalul
Kiram, who died at Jolo on 7 June 1935, are entitled to collect a total of RM
5,300 per annum from Sabah in perpetuity for having foregone in perpetuity the
right to collect tolls along the waterways in eastern Sabah.
The reference point was the
deed of cession made between the Sultan of Sulu and the predecessors of the
British North Borneo Chartered Company on Jan 22, 1878, and under a
confirmatory deed dated April 22, 1903.
If the descendants of the
nine heirs end up at the ICJ in The Hague, there are no prizes for guessing
which way the case will go. The Sulu claimants don’t have a leg to stand on in
Sabah.
Nur Misuari ready to do
battle with a battery of lawyers
The Sulu Sultans of old were
extorting tolls, virtually a criminal activity, from the terrified traffic
along the eastern seaboard of Sabah. The Brunei Sultanate meanwhile denies ever
handing any part of Sabah, or the right to collect tolls along the waterways,
to Sulu.
The British North Borneo
Chartered Company had no right whatsoever to enter into negotiations on behalf
of the people of Sabah with anyone.
The entire land area of
Sabah, by history, Adat and under Native Customary Rights (NCR), belonged to
the Orang Asal (Original People) of the Territory.
The sovereignty of Sabah
rests with the people of Sabah. This sovereignty was re-affirmed on 31 Aug,
1963 when the state won independence from Britain which had occupied the state
after World War II. Therein the matter lies. The sovereignty of Sabah had never
been transferred to Brunei, Sulu, the Philippines, Britain or Malaya,
masquerading as Malaysia since 16 Sept, 1963.
Likewise, Sarawak’s
independence was re-affirmed on 22 July, 1963 when the British left. Sarawak
had been an independent country for over 150 years under its own Rajah until
World War II intervened and the Japanese occupied the country.
The war over, the British
coerced the Rajah to hand over his country to the Colonial Office in London
because they had plans to form the Federation of Malaysia with Sarawak as one
of the constituent elements. British occupation of Sarawak was illegal and an
act of piracy.
Nur Misuari claims that
Sarawak had belonged to his family, from the time of his great great
grandfather. He claims that he has the services of the best lawyers at his
disposal to make his case at The Hague.
Cobbold Commission a scam by
British and Malayan Governments
The outcome of any hearing
at The Hague will be a forgone conclusion: the Sulu and Nur Misuari petitions
will be struck out without even a hearing; the Court will rule that the people
of Sabah and Sarawak never agreed to be in Malaysia; and Singapore will hear
that its expulsion from Malaysia in 1965 was unconstitutional, unlawful and
illegal.
The people of Sabah and
Sarawak must be given the right to intervene in the Applications at the ICJ
which will determine their fate. There’s nothing to prevent the people of Sulu
and the southern Philippines from throwing in an Application that the
Philippines Government has no business to occupy their traditional Muslim
homeland.
The people of Singapore
decided in a Yes or Note Vote in 1962 to the idea of independence through
merger with Malaya via the Federation of Malaysia. The inclusion of Orang
Asal-majority Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei was to facilitate the merger between
Chinese-majority Singapore and non-Malay majority Malaya.
Brunei stayed out of
Malaysia at the 11th hour after an armed rebellion in the Sultanate against the
idea of Sabah, Sarawak and Brunei being in Malaysia.
No Referendum was held in
Sabah, Sarawak, Brunei and Malaya on Malaysia. The Kelantan Government even
took the matter to Court.
A sampling of community
leaders conducted by the Cobbold Commission found that only the Suluk and Bajau
community leaders, perhaps sensing some personal benefits for themselves as
proxies of Muslim-controlled Kuala Lumpur, agreed with the idea of Malaysia.
Revolution another
possibility to finish off Sulu, Nur Misuari, Manila
Orang Asal community leaders
wanted a period of independence before looking at the idea of Malaysia again.
They asked for further and better particulars on Malaysia to be used as the
reference point for a future re-visitation of the Malaysia Concept. They were
not provided these further and better particulars.
The Chinese community
leaders, keeping the eventual fate of the resources and revenues of the country
uppermost in mind, totally rejected the idea of Malaysia. They were not wrong.
Putrajaya today carts away all the resources and revenues of Sabah and Sarawak
to Malaya and very little of it comes back to the two Borneo.
The Cobbold Commission
disingenuously declared that two third of the people in Sabah i.e. Suluk/Bajau
+ Orang Asal supported Malaysia. The Commission made the same declaration in
Sarawak where only the Sarawak Malay community leaders supported the idea of
Malaysia for self-serving reasons.
When Singapore was expelled
from Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak – the facilitators of the merger between
Singapore and Malaya – were not allowed to exit the Federation. This is a
crucial point which will feature at the ICJ.
Security became an
afterthought. But as the continuing influx of illegal immigrants into Sabah and
Sarawak, and the Lahad Datu intrusion, has proven, there has been no security
for both Borneo nations in Malaysia. ESSCOM (Eastern Sabah Security Command)
and ESSZONE (Eastern Sabah Safety Zone) comes too little too late, after 50
years.
In the unlikely event that
the ICJ rules in favour of the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate and Nur
Misuari, it would be the sacred duty of Sabahans and Sarawakians to launch a
Revolution and decapitate all the claimants to their countries from the
Philippines.
This would bury the issue
once and for all and shut up the Manila press and the Philippines Government.
Singapore’s re-admission to
Malaysia, if it materialises, would not persuade Sabah and Sarawak to join the
Federation as well. The people would want Malaya even quicker out Sabah and
Sarawak. It would be the end of a long drawn out nightmare.
Joe Fernandez is a graduate
mature student of law and an educationist, among others, who loves to write
especially Submissions for Clients wishing to Act in Person.
He feels compelled, as a
semi-retired journalist, to put pen to paper -- or rather the fingers to the
computer keyboard -- whenever something doesn't quite jell with his
weltanschauung (worldview). He shuttles between points in the Golden Heart of
Borneo formed by the Sabah west coast, Labuan, Brunei, northern Sarawak and the
watershed region in Borneo where three nations meet.
No comments:
Post a Comment