Analisis: Pencerobohan Lahad Datu Oleh ‘Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu’

gempur

1. Siapakah Yang Menceroboh?

Kumpulan penceroboh yang dikenali sebagai ‘Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu’ (The Royal Sulu Sultanate Army)1 datang dari Selatan Filipina dan dianggarkan terdiri daripada kira-kira 200-400 orang, dengan 20-100 orang daripada mereka bersenjata2. Kumpulan ini diketuai oleh ‘Raja Muda’ Agbimuddin Kiram, adik kepada ‘mantan sultan’ Jamalul Kiram III dan ‘sultan’ Ismael Kiram II.3 4 Jamalul Kiram III pernah bertanding untuk jawatan senator dalam pilihanraya Filipina.

tenterasultan


2. Adakah Kumpulan Penceroboh Ini Mewakili Kesultanan Sulu?

Tidak.

Ini kerana kerajaan Filipina telah berhenti mengiktiraf Sultan Sulu sejak kemangkatan Sultan Mohd. Mahakuttah A. Kiram pada tahun 1986. Kini terdapat dua pihak utama yang mengaku sebagai Sultan Sulu:

Pertama, Muedzul Lail Tan Kiram, anak kepada Sultan Sulu terakhir yang diiktiraf kerajaan Filipina, Sultan Mohd. Mahakuttah A. Kiram. Beliau dilantik sebagai Raja Muda pada hari penabalan bapa beliau sebagai sultan.

Kedua, Ismael Kiram II, abang kepada ketua penceroboh, ‘Raja Muda’ Agbimuddin Kiram.

mahakuttah

Majlis penabalan Sultan Mohd. Mahakuttah A. Kiram sebagai Sultan Sulu pada 1974. Kelihatan sedang berjalan ialah anak beliau, Muedzul Lail Tan Kiram, yang ditabalkan sebagai Raja Muda. Kumpulan penceroboh ialah pengikut Ismael Kiram II, yang tidak pernah ditabalkan sebagai Sultan Sulu yang diiktiraf oleh kerajaan Filipina.


3. Apakah Tujuan Kumpulan Penceroboh?

‘Mantan sultan’ Jamalul Kiram III menyatakan bahawa kumpulan ini ingin menjadikan Sabah sebagai ‘rumah’ mereka:

“Mengapa kami harus meninggalkan rumah kami sendiri? Hakikatnya mereka (rakyat Malaysia) membayar sewa (kepada kami). Pengikut kami akan tinggal di Lahad Datu, Sabah. Tiada siapa akan dihantar pulang ke Filipina. Sabah ialah rumah kami”.2


4. Adakah Filipina Pernah Membuat Tuntutan Terhadap Sabah?

Ya.

Filipina membuat tuntutan terhadap Sabah kerana menganggap Kesultanan Sulu, yang pernah berpusat di Filipina, memiliki hak ke atas Sabah.

Setiausaha Kehakiman, Kementerian Luar dan Pejabat Presiden Filipina kini telah diarahkan untuk melakukan kajian mengenai tuntutan Kesultanan Sulu terhadap Sabah.5


5. Adakah Malaysia Boleh Membuat Tuntutan Terhadap Wilayah Milik Filipina Sekiranya Kesultanan Sulu Menjadikan Sabah Sebagai Pusat Pentadbiran?

Sabah tidak pernah menjadi pusat Kesultanan Sulu.

Malah, Sabah dianggap kurang penting oleh Kesultanan Sulu sehinggakan ia diserah kepada British North Borneo Company pada 22 Januari 1878.

Pusat Kesultanan Sulu terletak di Maimbung, Jolo.

maimbung

Istana Sultan di pusat pentadbirannya di Maimbung, Jolo. ‘Kesultanan Sulu’ tidak memiliki apa-apa kuasa politik di Jolo tetapi mahu menuntut kuasa politik di Sabah.


6. Adakah Pihak Di Malaysia Yang Menyokong Tuntutan Kesultanan Sulu Ke Atas Sabah?

Wakil The Manila Times di Mindanao, Al Jacinto, melaporkan bahawa pencerobohan ‘Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu’ berlaku ketika Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, ketua Pakatan Rakyat, mencadangkan agar Sabah diberikan kuasa autonomi.6

manila

The Manila Times melaporkan bahawa pencerobohan ‘Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu’ berlaku ketika Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim mencadangkan agar Sabah diberikan kuasa autonomi.

ABS-CBN News melaporkan bahawa kumpulan penceroboh tersebut telah dijemput oleh seorang ahli politik pembangkang:

A Philippine military officer interviewed by Reuters also said the men were followers of the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu – an island group off the southern Philippines – who had been invited to Sabah by a Malaysian opposition politician to discuss land issues.7

(Seorang pegawai tentera Filipina yang ditemuramah Reuters juga berkata bahawa kumpulan tersebut merupakan pengikut kepada waris Sultan Sulu – sebuah kepulauan di selatan Filipina – yang diundang ke Sabah oleh seorang ahli politik pembangkang Malaysia untuk membincangkan isu tanah.)

abs

ABS-CBN News melaporkan seorang pegawai tentera Filipina memberitahu Reuters bahawa kumpulan penceroboh telah diundang seorang ahli politik pembangkang.

The Star melaporkan bahawa Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, ketika ditanya samada laporan yang mengatakan bahawa pihak pembangkang menjemput kumpulan penceroboh tersebut ke Sabah adalah benar, menjawab:

Who is the one who gave it?8

(Siapa yang beri?)


7. Benarkah Malaysia Membayar Sewa Kepada Filipina Untuk Sabah?

Tidak.

Malaysia membayar ‘cession money‘ sebanyak RM5,300 setiap tahun9 kepada waris Sultan Sulu.

Cession money‘ ialah bayaran penyerahan, dan bukan bayaran sewa. Selain Sabah, terdapat wilayah-wilayah lain di dunia yang diserahkan (ceded) dengan bayaran, contohnya:

1. Louisiana, diserah oleh Perancis kepada Amerika Syarikat dengan bayaran berjumlah USD15 juta, atau kurang USD0.03 seekar.
2. Alaska, diserah oleh Russia kepada Amerika Syarikat dengan bayaran USD7.2 juta, atau USD0.02 seekar.

cession


8. Apakah Wilayah Yang Menjadi Hak Kesultanan Sulu?

Royal House of Sulu10, laman web rasmi Muedzul Lail Tan Kiram, mendakwa bahawa wilayah-wilayah yang menjadi hak Kesultanan Sulu termasuklah Jolo, Palawan, Semenanjung Zamboanga, Basilan dan Tawi-Tawi di Filipina, selain Sabah dan Pulau Balambangan di Malaysia. Kepulauan Spratly juga didakwa di bawah hak Kesultanan Sulu.

Jolo, Basilan dan Tawi-Tawi sekarang berada di dalam wilayah pentadbiran Filipina yang dinamakan ARMM (Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao – Wilayah Autonomi Muslim Mindanao). ARMM dicadang untuk digantikan dengan wilayah autonomi baru yang dikenali sebagai Bangsamoro.


9. Adakah Filipina Mengiktiraf Kesultanan Sulu?

Tidak.

Kali terakhir kerajaan Filipina mengiktiraf Sultan Sulu ialah pada 24 Mei 1974 apabila Presiden Filipina ketika itu, Ferdinand Marcos, mengeluarkan Memorandum Order No. 427 yang menabalkan Mohd. Mahakuttah A. Kiram sebagai sultan.

Sejak kemangkatan Sultan Mohd. Mahakuttah A. Kiram, kerajaan Filipina tidak pernah lagi mengiktiraf mana-mana individu sebagai Sultan Sulu.

427

Memorandum Order No. 427 ialah bukti terakhir kerajaan Filipina mengiktiraf Kesultanan Sulu. Tiada sebarang memorandum dikeluarkan untuk mana-mana individu yang mengaku ‘sultan’ selepas itu. Filipina tidak mengiktiraf Kesultanan Sulu tetapi pernah menuntut wilayah yang kononnya masih menjadi hak Kesultanan Sulu.


10. Adakah Ini Bermakna Filipina Memanipulasi Kesultanan Sulu Untuk Menuntut Sabah?

Filipina dilaporkan pernah memulakan ‘Operation Merdeka‘ pada 1967, satu operasi ketenteraan untuk melatih pasukan komando daripada etnik Tausug dan Sama yang beragama Islam bagi menimbulkan ketidakstabilan dan kacau-bilau di Sabah.

Namun, sebaik sahaja mengetahui matlamat sebenar operasi ini ialah untuk memerangi kerajaan yang dipimpin oleh orang Islam, pelatih-pelatih etnik Tausug dan Sama ini telah menuntut agar dihantar pulang. Walau bagaimanapun, Pasukan Bersenjata Filipina (AFP – Armed Forces of the Philippines) dikatakan telah menembak mati para pelatih ini. Dilaporkan seramai 11-64 orang telah mati ditembak. Kejadian ini dikenali sebagai Jabidah Massacre (Pembunuhan Jabidah) atau Corregidor Massacre (Pembunuhan Corregidor).

William Larousse11, Michael Leifer12, Andrew T. H. Tan13 dan Alfred W. McCoy14 adalah antara para penulis yang telah melaporkan kejadian ini.


11. Apakah Peluang Filipina Untuk Menuntut Sabah Sekiranya Kes Ini Dibawa Ke Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa (ICJ)?

Tipis.

Pertama, undang-undang antarabangsa yang ditadbir oleh ICJ menolak tuntutan kedaulatan berdasarkan semata-mata kepada hak milik bersejarah (historic title), selepas referendum atau pungutan suara dilakukan:

Modern international law does not recognize the survival of a right of sovereignty based solely on historic title; not, in any event, after an exercise of self-determination conducted in accordance with the requisites of international law, the bona fides of which has received international recognition by the political organs of the United Nations.15

[Undang-undang antarabangsa moden tidak mengiktiraf kemandirian hak kedaulatan yang berdasarkan semata-mata kepada hak milik bersejarah; tidak, dalam apa juga peristiwa, selepas penggunaan hak penentuan diri (self-determination) dilakukan mengikut keperluan undang-undang antarabangsa, bona fide yang mendapat pengiktirafan antarabangsa oleh badan-badan politik Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu.]

Kedua, kerana waris Sultan Sulu telah menerima ‘cession money‘ sehingga ke hari ini. Ini bermakna waris Sultan Sulu mengakui bahawa Sabah telah diserah (ceded), dan bukannya dipajak (leased), kepada British North Borneo Company.

Ketiga, kerana Kerajaan Filipina telah berhenti mengiktiraf Sultan Sulu sejak kemangkatan Sultan Mohd. Mahakuttah A. Kiram pada tahun 1986.

Geran yang dijadikan sumber konflik telah ditandatangani oleh Sultan Sulu, Sultan Jamalul A’lam dengan Gustavus Baron de Overbeck serta Alfred Dent, yang mewakili British North Borneo Company, pada 22 Januari 1878.

Keempat, geran yang ditandatangani antara British North Borneo Company dan Kesultanan Sulu itu telah diatasi oleh Protokol Madrid 1885.

Sepanyol, yang menguasai wilayah-wilayah Kesultanan Sulu ketika itu, telah menandatangani perjanjian dengan Jerman dan Great Britain pada 7 Mac 1885 untuk melepaskan segala tuntutan terhadap kedaulatan Sabah:

Article 3

The Spanish Government relinquishes as far as regards the British Government, all claim of sovereignty over the territories of the continent of Borneo which belong, or which have belonged in the past, to the Sultan of Sulu (Jolo), including therein the neighboring islands of Balambangan, Banguey and Malawali, as well as all those islands lying within a zone of three marine leagues along the coasts and which form part of the territories administered by the Company styled the ‘British North Borneo Company’.

(Kerajaan Sepanyol melepaskan kepada Kerajaan British, semua tuntutan kedaulatan ke atas wilayah-wilayah benua Borneo yang dimiliki, atau yang telah dimiliki pada masa lampau, oleh Sultan Sulu (Jolo), termasuk pulau-pulau Balambangan, Banguey dan Malawali yang berhampiran, dan semua pulau-pulau yang berada di dalam zon tiga liga marin di sepanjang pesisir pantai dan membentuk sebahagian wilayah yang ditadbir oleh Syarikat yang digelar ‘British North Borneo Company‘.)16

Kelima, Kesultanan Sulu dianggap telah tamat sebaik sahaja Sultan Jamalul Kiram II menandatangani Perjanjian Carpenter pada 22 Mac 1915, yang menyerahkan segala kuasa politik beliau kepada Amerika Syarikat.

Keenam, kerajaan Malaysia telah mengambil tanggungjawab untuk membangunkan prasarana bagi kemudahan para penduduk Sabah sejak 1963 tanpa bantahan Kesultanan Sulu mahupun kerajaan Filipina. Ini membuktikan pemilikan dan pentadbiran yang aman secara berterusan oleh kerajaan Malaysia ke atas Sabah. Mengikut dasar effectivites yang diambil kira oleh Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa (ICJ – International Court of Justice), Malaysia boleh dianugerahkan hak ke atas Sabah, sepertimana yang pernah diberikan kepada kerajaan Malaysia dalam kes Ligitan-Sipadan.

Ketujuh, laporan Suruhanjaya Cobbold yang dikeluarkan pada 1 Ogos 1962 mendapati bahawa 1/3 penduduk Sabah dan Sarawak menyokong kuat pembentukan Malaysia, 1/3 lagi menyokong projek Malaysia dengan syarat hak mereka dilindungi, manakala kumpulan 1/3 yang terakhir terbahagi antara mereka yang mahukan kemerdekaan dan mereka yang mahukan pentadbiran British diteruskan.

Kelapan, Setiausaha Agung PBB, U Thant, telah melaporkan pada 1963 bahawa penduduk Sabah “ingin menamatkan status kebergantungan mereka dan merealisasikan kemerdekaan mereka melalui penyekutuan yang dipilih secara bebas dengan bangsa lain dalam rantau mereka” (“wish to bring their dependent status to an end and to realize their independence through freely chosen association with other peoples in their region”).15

Kesembilan, jika Kesultanan Sulu mendakwa bahawa Sabah adalah milik mereka, maka adalah konsisten bagi Kesultanan Sulu untuk tidak sahaja membuat tuntutan terhadap Sabah semata-mata, malah juga menuntut dan menguasai pusat pentadbiran mereka sendiri di Jolo, selain wilayah Palawan, Semenanjung Zamboanga, Basilan dan Tawi-Tawi di Filipina yang juga mereka dakwa merupakan milik mereka.

Walau bagaimanapun, Kesultanan Sulu tidak memiliki apa-apa kuasa politik terhadap wilayah-wilayah yang terletak di Filipina ini.



1. “Sulu sultan’s army stakes Sabah claim,” philstar.com, 16 Februari, 2013, http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2013/02/16/909400/sulu-sultans-army-stakes-sabah-claim

2. “Pengikut Sultan Sulu Tidak Akan Tinggalkan Lahad Datu,” mStar Online, 18 Februari, 2013, http://mstar.com.my/berita/cerita.asp?file=/2013/2/18/mstar_berita/20130218160807&sec=mstar_berita

3. “Salasilah Hubungan Kesultanan Brunei-Suluk,” SMJ-Site, http://www.freewebs.com/julabbi_cairo12/familytree.htm

4. “The true Sultan of Sulu,” http://www.fakesulusultans.com/

5. “Gov’t to assess Sabah claim,” BusinessWorld Online, 21 Februari, 2013, http://www.bworldonline.com/content.php?section=Nation&title=Gov%E2%80%99t-to-assess-Sabah-claim&id=66237

6. “Our Sultan of Sulu and Sabah,” The Manila Times Online, 16 Februari, 2013, http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/opinion/editorials/41591-our-sultan-of-sulu-and-sabah

7. “‘Royal Sulu Army’ in Malaysia stand-off,” ABS-CBNnews.com, 15 Februari, 2013, http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/02/14/13/royal-sulu-army-malaysia-stand

8. “We did not invite Sulu gunmen, says Anwar,” The Star Online, 22 Februari, 2013, http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2013/2/22/nation/12745258&sec=nation

9. “Sulu ‘royal’ family drops claim,” The Star Online, 17 Julai, 2008, http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/7/17/courts/21841951&sec=courts

10. “Sultan of Sulu,” Sultaniyyah Sin Lupah Sughttp://www.royalsultanateofsulu.org/#!sultan-of-sulu

11. William Larousse, A Local Church Living For Dialogue: Muslim-Christian Relations in Mindanao-Sulu (Philippines), Editrice Pontificia Universita Gregoriana, 2001.

12. Michael Leifer, Michael Leifer: selected works on Southeast Asia, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, 2005.

13. Andrew T. H. Tan, A Handbook of Terrorism and Insurgency in Southeast Asia, Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2007.

14. Alfred W. McCoy, Policing America’s Empire: The United States, The Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State, The University of Wisconsin Press, 2009.

15. “Case Concerning Sovereignty Over Pulau Ligitan And Pulau Sipadan,” World Court Digest, 23 Oktober, 2001, http://www.mpil.de/ww/en/pub/research/details/publications/institute/wcd.cfm?fuseaction_wcd=aktdat&aktdat=201010200400.cfm

16. “Case Concerning Sovereignty Over Pulau Ligitan And Pulau Sipadan,” International Court of Justice, 17 Disember, 2002, http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/102/7714.pdf

76 thoughts on “Analisis: Pencerobohan Lahad Datu Oleh ‘Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu’

  1. terima kasih atas info..mmg fakta2 tu adalah sahih dlm menyatakan isu tuntutan tu dah tak sah…

    TAPI ada fakta yg kita tak brapa tahu..Fakta yg plg menarik adalah…sabah yg dikatakan ‘milik’ sulu tu..adalah drp sultan brunei…tapi sultan brunei bg hanya ‘TIMUR’ Sabah. jadi persoalannya macammana mangkuk2 ni nak mintak seluruh sabah?????

    • Salam tuan,

      Terima kasih atas soalan yang diberikan.

      Kawasan yang dinyatakan di dalam geran meliputi Sg. Pandasan (dekat Kota Belud) dan seluruh pantai timur sehingga Sg. Sibuku (dekat Tawau).

      Namun, walau apapun pertikaian mengenai ‘historic title‘, kita perlu diperingat bahawa undang-undang antarabangsa yang ditadbir oleh ICJ, meletakkan hujah berdasarkan ‘historic title‘ di satu tahap yang sangat rendah.

      Ini boleh dilihat ketika Malaysia menewaskan bukan sahaja Indonesia, malah Filipina di ICJ, dalam kes Ligitan-Sipadan.

      Fakta telah membuktikan bahawa Filipina pernah mengemukakan permohonan untuk mencelah (intervene) ketika ICJ sedang membicarakan kes tuntutan pulau Ligitan-Sipadan antara Indonesia dan Malaysia. Dalam kenyataan penghakiman pada 23 Oktober 2001, ICJ, sambil merujuk kepada kes Namibia (1971), Western Sahara (1975) dan Timor Timur (1995), telah menyatakan secara jelas bahawa:
      Undang-undang antarabangsa moden tidak mengiktiraf kemandirian hak kedaulatan yang berdasarkan semata-mata kepada hak milik bersejarah (historic title); tidak, dalam apa juga peristiwa, selepas penggunaan hak penentuan diri (self-determination) dilakukan mengikut keperluan undang-undang antarabangsa, bona fide yang mendapat pengiktirafan antarabangsa oleh badan-badan politik Pertubuhan Bangsa-bangsa Bersatu.”

      Menurut ICJ, Setiausaha Agung PBB “telah diberikan kepercayaan di bawah Perjanjian Manila (Manila Accord) pada 31 Julai 1963 untuk menentukan hasrat rakyat Borneo Utara”, dan melaporkan bahawa majoriti rakyat Borneo Utara telah “memutuskan bahawa mereka ingin menamatkan status kebergantungan mereka dan merealisasikan kemerdekaan mereka melalui penyekutuan yang dipilih secara bebas dengan bangsa lain dalam rantau mereka.”

      ICJ membuat kesimpulan bahawa permohonan mencelah Filipina merupakan “satu percubaan untuk menghidupkan kembali hak bagi menterbalikkan keputusan yang bebas dan adil yang telah dibuat hampir 40 tahun lalu oleh rakyat Borneo Utara dalam perlaksanaan hak undang-undang mereka untuk penentuan diri (self-determination).”

      Saya tidak fikir ICJ akan membelakangkan perakuan Setiausaha Agung PBB dan penghakiman kes terdahulu.

      Itulah undang-undang antarabangsa.

      • Memeng tidak boleh dinafihkan Blog ini munafik..Hak sesama islam pun jadi halal. Rujuk surat pajakan itu dgn teliti sebelum memberi komen yg tak berdasarkan apa apa. Itu pun Sabah dipajak atas pihak BNBC membekalkan senjata api utk mempertahan Agama islam di kepulauan sulu.

    • komen ‘hak sulu’ diatas melambangkan ilmunya dangkal, cetek dan kurang pengetahuan antarabangsa , dia bercakap hanya berdasarkan hear say , hanya dengar cerita orang-orang dan bukan mengkaji atau belajar secara ilmiah ,

      sulu tidak punya apa-apa hak lagi keatas sabah selepas termeterainya perjanjian , selagi ada bulan dan bintang maka perjanjian itu tetap terpakai,
      kalau sulu benar-benar mahu, bawa kes ini ke ICJ dan kita lihat siapa yang tewas ..

    • Setakat ini seperti yang kita semua maklum sebarang laporan umum (available for public) mengenai pembabitan mana-mana pihak hanya diperolehi daripada media Filipina yang tidak dikawal sepertimana media Malaysia.

      Sama ada media Filipina mempunyai niat politik di sebalik laporan-laporan tersebut adalah tidak dapat dipastikan.

  2. saya telah cuba mengikuti perkembangan pencorobohan kumpulan yang menggelarkan diri mereka sebagai tentera sultan sulu, bermacam info dan input telah saya baca dan cuba rungkaikan kerana saya adalah warga sabah yang mahukan kebenaran dan tidak terpengaruh dengan andaian2 songsang, di sini ada beberapa perkara yang saya rasa harus kita tahu, jangan sebar sesuatu yang belumdi ketahui kebenaran baca semua tetapi untuk pengetahuan sendiri kalau ada maklumat jangan terlalu ambil keputusan untuk publish, di sini ada beberapa blog yang bernas saya baca mungkin mereka ini di kalangan rakyat sabah juga tahniah kerena idea yang bernas i solute kamurang antarnya tausugglobalblogspot.com and afterdarkblogsport.com kalau taak silap saya, sama2 kita jaga and doakan keamanan negara kita khasnya untuk orang sabah aminnnn.

    • Tiada laporan yang mengatakan Jamalul Kiram III atau pengikutnya Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu menuntut ‘pantai timur’ Sabah sahaja.

      Malah frasa ‘pantai timur’ tidak disebut, begitu juga frasa ‘pantai timur Borneo Utara’.

      Nama yang disebut hanyalah ‘Sabah’:

      “Why should we leave our own home? In fact they are paying rent. Our followers will stay in Lahad Datu. Nobody will be sent to the Philippines. SABAH is our home.

  3. Pingback: Analisis: Pencerobohan Lahad Datu Oleh ‘Tentera DiRaja Kesultanan Sulu’ – By Andak Jauhar | 2000 Nations

  4. Terima kasih atas artikel yg amat menarik. Pada pendapat saya hak Sultan Sulu lupus bila rakyat Sabah melaksanakan hak mereka menerusi prinsip ‘right of self determination’ semasa mereka bersetuju memasuki Malaysia. Ada referendom di buat utk ini. Utk Perjanjian 1878 itu pula, saya tak pasti ianya pembayaran hak pelupusan ‘ceded’ sebagaimana yg dinyatakan diatas. Ini kerana terdapat interpretasi berbeza pada perjanjian yg ditandatangani itu samada leased atau ceded. Berdasarkan apa yg saya google, maksudnya mungkin juga leased kerana perkataan asal yg digunakan dikatakan sebagai ‘padjak’ yg difahami oleh Orang Sulu sebagai sewa.
    Then again, ini persoalan sejarah yg agak terlalu lama utk dikenalpasti. Dari segi common sense, selepas bertahun-tahun Sabah di bawah pentadbiran dan dibangunkan oleh Malaysia, maka ia sepatutnya menjadi hak Malaysia.

  5. Alhamdulillah.. A well researched and well written from a sincere citizen of Malaysia.. Definitely a MUST-READ article for all Malaysian citizens yang cintakan Agama, Bangsa & Negara.. InsyaAllah..

  6. Pingback: Analisis Pencerobohan Lahad Datu | MYKMU.NET: DEMI SEBUAH PERJUANGAN

  7. Salam Andak.. May I have your permission to “Share” this useful Article with as many Malaysians as possible.. If yes, how do I do it as there is no “Share” button to click..

    • Salam tuan,

      Terima kasih atas bantuan tuan untuk share artikel yg tidak seberapa ini.

      Utk share artikel ini, saya tiada apa2 masalah & keuntungan drpd suatu benda yg ditulis dgn nama pena. Cukuplah sekadar hati saya tenang mengingatkan yg satu hari nanti, anak2 arwah Insp. Zulkifli, Koperal Sabarudin & anggota2 pasukan keselamatan lain tahu bahawa bapa mereka telah mati sebagai pejuang di pihak yg benar. InsyaAllah.

  8. Britis.jepang,siam,belanda,,indon dll..pernah merosakan dan merampas harta tanah air ku……..kami tak mahu ungkit perkara lama……yg berlalu biarlah berlalu……demi keamanan sejagat…

  9. Terima kasih dengan maklumat yang dinyatakan. Sekurang-kurangnya boleh memberikan pemahaman kepada masyarakat umum di Malaysia. Dengan adanya situasi seperti ini dapat memberikan gambaran kepada kita sendiri bahawa isu seperti ini (atau boleh kita kan sebagai isu perebutan wilayah) dapat membuka mata rakyat Malaysia sendiri. Mohon juga kepada pihak-pihak yang tidak bertanggungjawab tidak menjadikan isu lahad datu ini sebagai satu cara untuk memutarbelitkan dan memberi fahaman yang songsang. Berkenaan dengan penghakiman di ICJ, Malaysia berkemungkinan mempunyai peluang untuk menang (sekiranya dapat menyediakan dokumen serta bahan bukti yang sah). Tambahan, kerajaan Malaysia telah pun memberi prasarana yang sepatutnya kepada penduduk di Lahad Datu sendiri.
    Isu ini juga boleh kita “highlight” kan mengenai keselamatan negara kita. Di sini, ingin saya tegaskan bahawa saya bukan mempersoalkan kekurangberkesanan pasukan keselamatan negara. Tetapi, saya ingin menegaskan bahawa dengan adanya isu seperti ini, kemungkinan pihak Kementerian Dalam Negeri serta Pertahanan negara dapat mengukuhkan dengan menambahkan bilangan barisan pertahanan negara kita daripada yang sedia ada sekarang. Dengan adanya bilangan barisan pertahanan yang ramai, ini mungkin dapat menjadikan sistem keselamatan kita lebih efektif.
    Sekian kalinya, segala yang saya nyatakan di atas adalah merupakan pendapat saya sendiri. Mohon maaf jika ada yang salah dan sila dibetulkan. Ia cumalah pendapat semata-mata daripada saya sebagai generasi muda.
    Terima kasih.

    • Terima kasih tuan.

      Mengenai kemungkinan Malaysia akan menang di ICJ, sebenarnya Malaysia sudahpun menang di ICJ pada 23 Oktober 2001, apabila application Filipina utk intervene telah ditolak.

      Saya tak faham dgn pendapat ramai pihak terutama di pihak Filipina yang nak bawa benda ni ke ICJ. Benda ini telahpun dibawa ke ICJ dan decision ICJ adalah jelas: Malaysia memiliki kedaulatan ke atas Sabah.

      Kalau Filipina nak bawak lagi boleh, tapi pada pendapat saya, buang duit, buang masa saja – melainkan ada pihak di sana mahu meraih political mileage dilihat sbg pejuang.

      Saya setuju dgn pendapat tuan bahawa pertahanan negara perlu diperkukuh.

      Satu yg saya kurang setuju dgn cara isu ini dihandle ialah begitu lemahnya maklumat disebarkan kpd umum. Saya tidak minta pemerintah pasukan keselamatan dedah rahsia taktikal, saya cuma ingin melihat pemerintah pasukan keselamatan berani menafikan khabar-khabar angin dgn fakta di press conference yg tetap, bukan ketika ditemuramah di tepi-tepi khemah ketika waktu rehat.

      Kita lihat bagaimana tanpa sebaran maklumat rasmi yg berkesan, telah membuka ruang kpd khabar-khabar angin berleluasa.

      • Alhamdulillah dan syukran jazilan sdr di atas penulisan yang mencerahkan. Selain dari keturunan Kiram ini terdapat beberapa kumpulan lain yang melantik Sultan Sulu mereka sendiri. Saya harap masalah mereka ini diselesaikan dengan baik tanpa mengugat keamanan di negara lain.P

        Perjuangan pihak polis mempertahankan kedaulatan dan keamanan negara adalah sesuatu yang mulia. Doa saya ialah mereka diberikan ganjaran syahid di sisi Allah swt.

        Saya setuju dengan sdr tentang keperluan meningkatkan penyampaian maklumat kepada pihak awam. Dalam masa yang sama perlu diimbangi juga dengan keperluan menyampaikan maklumat yang sesuai dan tepat supaya tidak menimbulkan kekeliruan dan rasa cemas di pihak awam..

        Jika kita lihat di Sabah, tiada bezanya peluang yang diberi untuk sesiapa mencari rezeki. Kehidupan pun aman dan terima menerima saja. Kesian Malaysia. Kehidupan tenang dicemburui ramai. Usaha baik dianggap tidak memadai. Semoga Allah swt memelihara keamanan di tanah air tercinta ini dan memudahkan kita untuk terus membantu mereka yang teraniaya.

      • Ya, memang betul maklumat perlu sesuai dan tepat supaya tidak menimbulkan kekeliruan dan rasa cemas di pihak awam.

        Tapi apa yg saya tgk semalam – keadaan sebaliknya berlaku.

        Rakan-rakan saya bertubi-tubi menerima maklumat Kunak diserang. Polis cedera ditembak di Semporna. Adakah khabar-khabar angin ini benar? Tidak, malangnya lagi buruk. PDRM mengesahkan 5 org anggotanya bukan sahaja cedera, malah terkorban!

        Dalam era moden kini, tidak perlulah kita terikat dgn kaedah tradisional press conference di hadapan kamera. Sediakan portal rasmi yang hanya mengeluarkan kenyataan sahih tanpa dihiasi laporan yg tidak penting. Public boleh memeriksa sendiri kenyataan rasmi terkini tanpa tertanya-tanya.

        Jika kenyataan rasmi 5 anggota terkorban dikeluarkan lebih awal, bukankah ia boleh mematikan sama sekali khabar2 angin diserang dan sebagainya? Mengapa khabar2 angin ini patut diberi ruang?

      • Salah satu lagi berita palsu yg tersebar begitu lama sblm dinafikan – berita kematian Koperal Azman Ampong.

  10. Orang Sabah adalah rakyat Malaysia sama seperti rakyat di Semenanjung dan Sarawak … derita Sabah adalah derita rakyat Malaysia.

  11. Assalamualaikum.
    Terima kasih Andak,
    1. Sekadar berkongsi kerisauan,bilakah tentera boleh berkerjasama dgn lebih optimum memandangkan angka korban dah 7 orang di pihak Malaysia?
    2. Perkara 6 kaitan isu dengan DS Anuar, propaganda atau fakta berserta bukti sahih. dan jika tidak benar, adakah ia dikira fitnah yang boleh di saman lagi (kita sedia maklum, banyak kes-kes saman pembangkang menang).
    3. Saya amat bersetuju tentang penyebaran maklumat hendaklah bertapis dan terkawal.

    • Waalaikumussalam warahmatullahi wabarakatuh waridhwanuh,

      1. Pada pandangan saya, situasi adalah terkawal di bawah PDRM. Selagi darurat tidak diisytiharkan, maka PDRM menjadi peneraju dalam kawalan keselamatan. ATM membantu. Darurat bukanlah sesuatu yg senang-senang diisytihar, dan darurat bukanlah perkara yg enak-enak. Seperti yg kita tahu sejak merdeka, hanya 4 kali sahaja darurat diisytihar: 1964 – Konfrontasi dengan Indonesia, 1966 – di Sarawak, deadlock antara Ningkan-Abang Hj Openg, 1969 – 13 Mei, 1977 – di Kelantan, kejatuhan kerajaan Dato’ Mohamed Haji Nasir. Bila darurat, Parlimen boleh buat undang-undang tanpa proses gubalan biasa. Kuasa Parlimen berlipat ganda. Saya yakin Parlimen skrg tidak mahukan kuasa sebegitu.

      Bagi saya, selagi keadaan ini tidak berlaku, maka ATM hanya dapat membantu apabila diminta, tidak meneraju. Sama seperti di Sauk. Pandangan saya ini terbuka kepada perbincangan.

      2. Kita lihat media di Filipina, sgt bebas. Ada yg memetik Reuters juga. Keadaan ini sama sekali berbeza dgn kebebasan media di negara kita. Namun begitu saya percaya The Manila Times dan ABS-CBN News, walau betapa bebas, patut tertakluk kepada undang-undang Filipina, dan Anwar Ibrahim bebas untuk mempertikai kesahihan berita ini di Filipina.

  12. Pingback: Fakta : Menjawab Semua Persoalan Pembangkang-Analisis Pencerobohan Lahad Datu | http://rmf7.wordpress.com

  13. kalau kita boleh beri kerakyatan kepada bangsa India , Cina, pakistan dll mengapa tak boleh beri kepada orang2 sulu yang sememangnya dulu adalah penduduk sabah ?

    • Kerakyatan bukan satu benda mustahil.

      Ia boleh dimohon melalui Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara.

      Mohon dgn cara baik. Bukan dgn bawa grenade launcher, pergi tembak polis.

      • Saya terpanggil untuk memberikan penjelasan terhadap kenyataan saudara.

        Pada masyarakat sulu (khususnya masyarakat laut atau nomad lautan), kewarganegaraan itu bukanlah suatu yang penting untuk mereka pohon kerana pada mereka, mencari kelangsungan kehidupan di pesisiran pantai dan lautan adalah lebih utama. Kehidupan mereka seringkali berhijrah dari satu persisiran pantai ke satu pesisiran pantai yang lain. Itulah cara hidup mereka. Tetapi atas nama pembangunan, mereka sering kali mengalah dan berpindah serta menerokai persisiran pantai yang lain pula.

        Pengetahuan terhadap keperluan kad pengenalan atau kewarganegaraan pada mereka bukanlah suatu yang wajib diperolehi.

        Tetapi kenapa harus dinafikan kehidupan dan kehadiran mereka di tanah tumpah darah mereka sendiri?

        Seandainya saudara meninjau persisiran pantai timur sabah khususnya, pasti saudara akan bertemu dengan mereka-mereka yang masih tidak mempunyai kad pengenalan dokumen diri.

        Kenapa? dek pengetahuan dan kemiskinan.

        Saudara tahu berapa perbelanjaan yang terpaksa mereka keluarkan untuk membuat permohonan kewarganegaraan itu? Pada mereka, lebih baik menyuapkan sahaja wang perbelanjaan itu ke mulut-mulut anak dan isteri mereka agar memperolehi kelangsungan hidup di bumi ciptaan tuhan ini.

        Saudara tidak mengalaminya kerana saudara tidak sebangsa dengan mereka. Tetapi ketahuilah bahawa, mereka adalah saudara seagama…

      • Jika ada pendatang yang menganggap keperluan kad pengenalan dan kewarganegaraan bukan wajib, maka tiada sebab mengapa kaum India, Cina dan Pakistan pula dipersalahkan.

        Kaum Cina, India, Pakistan yg tinggal 10 tahun sanggup merebut peluang pergi ke JPN, bawa dokumen, bawa salinan fotostat, isi borang, bayar bayaran permohonan RM10. Tempoh 10 tahun bukan terlalu lama, 10 tahun yg lepas ialah tahun 2003.

        Ini undang-undang Malaysia yg perlu dihormati.

      • Undang-undang Malaysia sekiranya mereka memang orang Malaysia. tetapi mereka menganggap diri mereka bebas drp undang2 itu kerana mereka ada pertalian dgn keturunan sultan sulu. Mengapa mereka perlu mendapatkannya?

        Berlainan drp keturunan sptmana yg saudara nyatakan. Mereka mmg berhasrat utk menjadi warganegara Malaysia. Sebab itu mereka berlumba-lumba memohon walaupun sampai merangkak!

      • Jika mereka anggap diri mereka bebas drpd undang-undang,

        maka mereka boleh tinggal di negara yg tiada undang-undang.

        Bila dah bertembak-tembak, berbunuh-bunuh, kerja tak ada, hidup merempat, tak payah nak lari ke negara lain. Duduk sahaja tempat yg BEBAS undang-undang.

        Nak duduk Malaysia, buat cara Malaysia.

      • Masalahnya, siapa yg mulakan dahulu?

        Bukankah bumi ini Tuhan berikan utk dinikmati bersama-sama?

        Siapalah saudara yang menghalang umat lain menduduki halaman umat manusia ini?

        Undang-undang haruslah berpaksikan Keadilan dan bukannya Penyelewengan atau penindasan oleh pihak-pihak yg kurang bertanggungjawab.

      • Jika undang-undang di Filipina lebih adil,

        mengapa tidak tinggal sahaja di Filipina?

      • Isunya bukan undang-undang Filipina yg adil atau Malaysia, tetapi kebolehupayaan sesetengah umat manusia menguruskan dokumen diri/kad pengenalan, lalu membolehkannya diiktiraf atau dimasyurkan sebagai Warganegara.

        Saudara barangkali kurang memahami sentimen ini kerana bukan berada daripada kelompok bangsa “Nomad Lautan” ini.

        Seperti yang saya katakan tadi, ramai dikalangan mereka masih kurang arif mengenai urusan Kad Pengenalan diri (akibat taraf pendidikan) selain dihimpit kemiskinan dek menghuni pesisiran pantai yg cukup sekadar utk melangsungkan kehidupan harian mereka.

        Sebagai penutup perbincangan saya dengan saudara, dan saya mendoakan wira-wira yg berkorban yg berjuang utk penerusan generasi masa hadapan mereka akan mendapat lindungan drp Allah SWT.;

        “Wahai umat manusia! Sesungguhnya Kami telah menciptakan kamu dari lelaki dan perempuan dan Kami telah menjadikan kamu berbagai bangsa dan bersuku puak, supaya kamu berkenal-kenalan (dan beramah mesra antara satu dengan yang lain). Sesungguhnya semulia-mulia kamu di sisi Allah ialah orang yang lebih takwanya di antara kamu, (bukan yang lebih keturunan atau bangsanya). Sesungguhnya Allah Maha Mengetahui, lagi Maha Mendalam PengetahuanNya (akan keadaan dan amalan kamu)”.
        (Al-Hujraat, 49: 13)

      • SadaqAllahulazim.

        Jika mereka dihimpit kemiskinan, cukup sekadar melangsungkan kehidupan seharian,

        maka adalah lebih baik mereka tidak membeli rifle dan peluru yang mahal-mahal.

  14. Info yg sgt baik dan jelas. Sy yg duduk disemenanjung kurang mendapat maklumat tepat mengenai konflik di Lahad Datu kerana ketiadaan keterbukaan maklumat seperti yg tuan utarakan.

    Salut kepada petugas tanah air kita yg berjuang sehingga ke titisan darah yg terakhir. Cumanya kalau ada sikit pencerahan ttg beberapa perkara yg sy sbg seorang rakyat Malaysia inginkan kepastian.

    1) isu pencerobohan ini adakah isu baru atau mmg telah berlaku sejak sekian lama?
    2) sekiranya benar dakwaan mereka datang utk berbincang pasal tanah atas jemputan DSAI, sy agak musykil bagaimana dengan satu jemputan terbuka mereka boleh terus lolos masuk siap dgn kumpulan bersenjata. Bagaimanakah tahap keselamatan disana sebenarnya?
    3) seandainya rundingan utk tanah jajahan sulu pastinya Sultan Sulu akan berunding dan menjalin dgn pemerintah kerajaan semasa daripada pembangkang yg tak punya kuasa. Tak hairan kalau melihat ada konco2 sultan sulu didalam UMNO.
    4) sbg rakyat sy kira kita patut menuntut jawapan dr kerajaan sekarang kerana isu pencerobohan dan keselamatan di Sabah bukan isu baru dan dibiarkan tanpa tindakan sewajarnya sejak sekian lama. Komen tuan?

    • Terima kasih tuan/puan.

      1. Isu pencerobohan sudah wujud sejak pembentukan Malaysia pada 1963 lagi, dan tidak hanya berlaku di sempadan Sabah sahaja.
      2. Kerajaan Filipina memang menghadapi masalah untuk disarm bangsa Moro, walaupun sejak perjanjian damai ditandatangani. Memiliki senjata secara bebas umpama satu budaya di sana. Boleh baca:

      http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/287798/philippine-muslim-rebels-want-to-keep-guns

      3. Siapa Sultan Sulu? Kerajaan Filipina telah berhenti mengiktiraf mana-mana individu sebagai Sultan Sulu. Waris Kesultanan Sulu tidak memiliki apa-apa authority walaupun di wilayah Filipina – jadi mengapa pula mahu tuntut authority di wilayah milik negara lain? Jamalul Kiram III hanya mengaku sebagai sultan, tetapi beliau bukan sultan.

      Sebarang rundingan yg dibuat oleh kerajaan saya lihat hanyalah atas dasar perikemanusiaan, bukan antara kerajaan dgn kerajaan.
      4. Isu pencerobohan sempadan maritim berlaku di mana-mana di dunia. Bagi saya, ia satu perkara yang hampir-hampir mustahil utk dihalang 100%. Amerika Syarikat tidak mampu menghalang beratus ribu orang Cuba menceroboh Miami, walaupun memiliki kelengkapan paling canggih dalam dunia. Filipina pun tidak mampu menghalang militan bersenjata merentas sempadannya.

      Utk menghalang 100%, perlu kerjasama rakyat dan kerajaan.

    • Terima kasih tuan.

      Saya ada membaca laporan ini, tetapi saya sangsi untuk menggunakannya kerana Nur Misuari ada menyebut ayat yang menimbulkan tanda tanya “apa yang dia dengar ialah” (“what he heard was“).

      Beliau tidak menyebut beliau “dengar” daripada siapa.

      Tiada sumber dari organisasi rasmi seperti tentera dan sebagainya dipetik seperti laporan Reuters.

      Namun begitu, saya tetap akan update di page.

  15. Alhamdullilah ada info yang amat jelas yang dapat diyakini kesahihannya berikutan ianya disokong dengan beberapa bukti-bukti melalui dokumen-dokumen serta fakta-fakta logikal yang Tuan paparkan. Sekurang-kurangnya dapat membuka minda rakyat seperti saya dalam mempertimbangkan yang mana yang benar dan yang mana khilaf dalam memahami apa yang sebenar-benarnya sedang berlaku. Terima kasih Tuan di atas info yang saya yakini amat berguna pada seluruh rakyat Malaysia. Moga ianya dapat memberi pemahaman yang lebih jelas kepada semua khasnya kepada rakyat Malaysia yang cinta tanahair tercinta ini. Kepada yang terkorban dalam memperjuangkan tanahair ini saya doakan agar mereka diletakkan di dalam golongan para syuhadah serta syahid, Al-Fatihah, AMIN! Wassalam.

    • ICJ tidak mengiktiraf East Jerusalem sebagai Israel, walaupun Israel mengaku itu ialah wilayahnya.

      ICJ melabel wilayah itu sebagai “Occupied Palestinian Territory” (“Wilayah Palestin yang Diduduki”).

      Kita semua maklum bahawa selepas penguasaan British, PBB telah mengeluarkan pelan “partition” untuk Palestin. Pelan ini boleh dibandingkan dengan pelan “partition” India-Pakistan.

      Partition” ini, ialah perkara utama.

      Berbanding India-Pakistan, pelan “partition” Palestin ditolak oleh orang Arab. Pengerusi Palestine National Authority (badan yg diiktiraf antarabangsa sebagai pentadbir Palestin), Mahmoud Abbas, menyatakan bahawa penolakan ini ialah satu kesilapan. Kita semua tahu bahawa akibat daripada penolakan ini ialah perang.

      Bila perang, orang Arab dah nak menang. Tapi akhirnya kalah juga. Boleh rujuk buku sejarah. Dulu kalah dengan British. Sekarang kalah lagi – kepada Yahudi pula.

      Sekarang bila PBB bagi pelan, orang Arab tolak. Bila perang, orang Arab kalah, macamana? Apa hak yang dimiliki oleh satu pihak – yang telah kalah perang? Yang dikendong tak dapat, yang dikejar berciciran orang kita kata. Kesultanan Sulu juga kalah perang dengan Sepanyol.

      Saya melihat kalau pelan ini diterima dahulu, sekarang ini akan ada 2 negara: Israel dan Palestin, sepertimana India dan Pakistan.

      Namun, sekarang ini ada Israel, ada “Occupied Palestinian Territory“. “Occupied Palestinian Territory” ini pun terbahagi dua – Tebing Barat (Fatah) dan Gaza (Hamas).

      Berbanding Malaysia – Malaysia pun bekas jajahan British seperti India, Pakistan dan Palestin juga. Malaysia pun ada populasi pendatang yang ramai juga. Tapi Malaysia tak pula perlukan apa-apa pelan “partition“. Malaysia tak pula berperang. Walhal Malaysia pun majoriti Islam juga.

      Bezanya – di Malaysia yg Islam bukan Arab.

      Saya berpendapat benda ini sudah lama selesai kalau tidak sebab sifat org Arab suka bergaduh antara satu sama lain. Tidak bersatu. Oleh sebab itulah kedatangan nabi terakhir itu satu mukjizat – kerana Baginda SAW dpt menyatukan satu bangsa yang begitu degil, kasar dan suka bergaduh – iaitu Arab.

  16. Tahniah, nasehat saya tentang tulisan saudara berkaitan dengan ketua pembangkang eloklah di delete jika tiada bukti kukuh, jika tidak saudara ada ‘share’ dalam fitnah yang akan dengan senyum digunakan oleh pihak yang tak bertanggungjawab.

    • Terima kasih tuan.

      Saya tiada menulis apa-apa dakwaan terhadap ketua pembangkang. Tuan boleh rujuk artikel di atas dgn lebih teliti.

      Semua pihak, sama ada pembangkang mahupun kerajaan, tiada sebab untuk risau jika tidak melakukan apa-apa kesalahan.

  17. Adakah “pencerobohan” oleh Tentera Diraja Kesultanan Sulu” mempunyai perkaitan dengan penubuhan RCI – Pendatang Asing Tanpa Izin oleh Kerajaan Malaysia?

    Saya melihat keceluparan pihak tertentu yang sering melabelkan bahawa merekalah penduduk asal Sabah, seterusnya banyak menuduh saudara-saudara seagama saya sebagai PATI, walhal kalau disingkap dari segi sejarah Sabah, Pantai Timur dan Pantai Barat Sabah sememangnya berada di bawah naungan dua sultan yang utama iaitu kesultanan Brunei dan Kesultanan Sulu, dan ada juga disebutkan Kesultanan Bolongan berhampiran kalimantan. Bukankah masyarakatnya di bawah naungan Sultan-Sultan tersebut beragama Islam?

    Saya terpanggil untuk bertanya soalan ini kerana pihak yang seirngkali menuduh itu adalah bukan seagama dengan saya. Sememangnya saya khuatir mereka ada agenda yang lebih besar daripada apa yang terjadi sekarang ini.

    Lebih-lebih lagi pertelangahan yang sedang berlaku ketika ini adalah melibatkan saudara seagama saya.!

    PATI yang dituduh itu memanglah lebih menjurus kepada saudara seagama saya. Apakah motif disebalik label yang diberikan itu?

    Adakah yang berlaku sekarang ini agenda sesuatu puak untuk melemahkan daulah Islamiyah kerajaan Malaysia?

  18. sekadar pendapat sahaja..

    Walaupun kebarangkalian untuk Filipina menang keatas tuntutanya keatas Sabah adalah tipis. Namun harus ingat disebalik Filipina adalah US. Satu kuasa besar yang sememangnya diikuti oleh dunia. Sebelum ini pun Filipina pernah membuat tuntutan keatas Sabah. Tidak mustahil dikatakan jika kes di Lahad Datu ini adalah penyebab untuk mereka campur tangan.

    Sangat berharap kita lebih bersatu padu dalam menangani hal ini dan bukannya menuduh atau mencari bukti untuk dikaitkan dengan mana-mana parti politik.

    Perlu diingatkan kerajaan melayu nusantara dahulu dijatuhkan oleh Portugis disebabkan perpecahan yang berlaku dikalangan melayu sendiri.

    Jadi kita harus berhati-hati dalam kes Lahad Datu sekarang ini. Perlu lebih sepakat. Mereka menggunakan orang seagama Islam. Semoga umat Islam dilindungi.aminn

  19. Tuan,

    “Malaysia membayar ‘cession money‘ sebanyak RM5,300 setiap tahun kepada waris Sultan Sulu”.

    Soalanya,
    (1) Adakah pembayaran “cession money’ ini mempunyai tempoh tamat perjanjian?

    (2) Apa kemungkinan implikasi yg berlaku terhadap tuntutan Filipina jika waris Sultan Sulu tidak berkehendak untuk menerima lagi bayaran penyerahan ini?

    (3) Apa kemungkinan implikasi yg berlaku terhadap tuntutan Filipina jika terdapat tempoh tamat perjanjian?

  20. Di petik dari Inquirer Philipines: baik baca dan sampaikan. kalau malas skalipun, baca concclusion je… what ever malaysia is ours

    On March 25, 1963, Senator Lorenzo Sumulong delivered a privileged speech berating the Philippines claim to North Borneo (Sabah), which had been filed by President Diosdado Macapagal on June 22, 1962. Five days later, Senator Jovito R. Salonga delivered a point-by-point rebuttal to Sumulong’s speech.
    Below are the full text of Sumulong’s speech and Salonga’s reply. We leave it to our readers to judge the merits of the case as presented by the senators 50 years ago.
    Excerpts from the speech of Salonga are also reprinted in the Philippine Daily Inquirer in its March 5, 2013 issue in a bid to shed light on the Sabah conflict.
    Here is the full text of Senator Salonga’s rebuttal speech delivered on March 30, 1963, which was broadcast over radio and television and published in The Manila Times on March 31, April 1-2, 1963.
    A few days ago, Senator Lorenzo Sumulong spoke on the floor of the Senate to air his views on the Philippines claim to North Borneo. My first reaction was to keep my peace and observe this shocking spectacle in silence, particularly in the light of the request of the British panel during the London Conference that the documents and the records of the proceedings be considered confidential, until they could be declassified in the normal course of diplomatic procedure. In part, my reaction was dictated by the belief, so aptly expressed elsewhere, that the best way to answer a bad argument is to let it go on and that silence is the “unbearable repartee.”
    But silence could be tortured out of context and construed by others, not familiar with the facts, as an implied admission of the weakness of the Philippine stand. And so, I decided to make this reply, fully aware that in an exchange such as this, considering that our claim is still pending and each side is feeling out the other’s legal position, none but our British friends and their successors may well profit.
    The good Senator, whose patriotism I do not propose to impugn, has had access to the confidential records and documents of the Department of Foreign Affairs. By his own admission, he attended closed-door hearings of the Senate Committees on Foreign Relations and National Defense, where crucial matters of national survival and security were taken up. He knows the classified, confidential nature of the records and documents bearing on the Philippine claim.
    Senator Sumulong has now found it proper and imperative, if we take him literally, to ventilate his views berating the merit and validity of the Republic’s claim, accusing his own Government of gross ignorance and holding in unbelievable disdain the Philippine position on the British-sponsored Malaysia plan. He has chosen to assault the Philippine position at a time when his own Government, by virtue of the British request, may be said to be somewhat helpless in making, right in our own country, an adequate, fully-documented defense of the Philippine stand. I trust our British friends, here and across the seas, will understand if, in defense of our position, we come pretty close to the area of danger.
    The good Senator tells us that in view of the “importance and magnitude” of the subject, he decided to wait “until all the relevant facts and information” were in, that he had made his own “studies and researches,” which on the basis of the press releases issued by his office, must have been quite massive. The morning papers last Monday (March 25) quoted the Senator as having bewailed, in advance of his privilege speech, that “only one side of the problem has been presented so far,” (meaning the Philippine side) seemingly unaware, despite the depth and range of his studies, that in the world press, only the British side has been given the benefit of full and favorable publicity and that the Philippine side has been summarily dismissed, just as the Senator dismisses it now with apparent contempt, as “shadowy”, “dubious” and “flimsy.” It may interest the good Senator to know that his statements, particularly on the eve of the talks in London, consistently derogatory of the Philippine claim, were seized upon by the English press with great delight, as if to show to the Philippine panel how well-informed the Senator was. It is, of course, not the fault of the Senator that the British, in an admirable show of unity, enjoyed and were immensely fascinated by his press releases and statements.
    But before I take up the Senator’s arguments in detail, it may be well to set our frame of reference by restating the position of the Philippine Government on the North Borneo claim.
    Thousands of years ago, what is now known as the Philippines and what is known today as Borneo used to constitute a single historical, cultural, economic unit. Authoritative Western scientists have traced the land bridges that connected these two places. The inhabitants of the Philippines and Borneo come from the same racial stock, they have the same color, they have or used to have similar customs and traditions. Borneo is only 18 miles away from us today.
    North Borneo, formerly known as Sabah, was originally ruled by the Sultan of Brunei. In 1704, in gratitude for help extended to him by the Sultan of Sulu in suppressing a revolt, the Sultan of Brunei ceded North Borneo to the Sulu Sultan.
    Here, our claim really begins. Over the years, the various European countries, including Britain, Spain and the Netherlands acknowledged the Sultan of Sulu as the sovereign ruler of North Borneo. They entered into various treaty arrangements with him.
    In 1878, a keen Austrian adventurer, by the name of Baron de Overbeck, having known that the Sultan of Sulu was facing a life-and-death struggle with the Spanish forces in the Sulu Archipelago, went to Sulu, took advantage of the situation and persuaded the Sultan of Sulu to lease to him, in consideration of a yearly rental of Malayan $ 5,000 (roughly equivalent to a meager US $ 1,600), the territory now in question. The contract of lease — and I call it so on the basis of British documents and records that cannot be disputed here or abroad — contains a technical description of the territory in terms of natural boundaries, thus:
    “…all the territories and lands being tributary to us on the mainland of the island of Borneo commencing from the Pandassan River on the NW coast and extending along the whole east coast as far as the Sibuco River in the South and comprising among others the States of Peitan, Sugut, Bangaya, Labuk, Sandakan, Kinabatangan, Muniang and all the other territories and states to the southward thereof bordering on Darvel Bay and as far as the Sibuco River with all the islands within 3 marine leagues of the coast.”
    Overbeck later sold out all his rights under the contract to Alfred Dent, an English merchant, who established a provisional association and later a Company, known as the British North Borneo Company, which assumed all the rights and obligations under the 1878 contract. This Company was awarded a Royal Charter in 1881. A protest against the grant of the charter was lodged by the Spanish and the Dutch Governments and in reply, the British Government clarified its position and stated in unmistakable language that “sovereignty remains with the Sultan of Sulu” and that the Company was merely an administering authority.
    In 1946, the British North Borneo Company transferred all its rights and obligations to the British Crown. The Crown, on July 10, 1946 — just six days after Philippine independence — asserted full sovereign rights over North Borneo, as of that date. Shortly thereafter former American Governor General Harrison, then Special Adviser to the Philippine Government on Foreign Affairs, denounced the Cession Order as a unilateral act in violation of legal rights. In 1950, Congressman Macapagal — along with Congressmen Arsenio Lacson and Arturo Tolentino — sponsored a resolution urging the formal institution of the claim to North Borneo. Prolonged studies were in the meanwhile undertaken and in 1962 the House of Representatives, in rare unanimity, passed a resolution urging the President of the Philippines to recover North Borneo consistent with international law and procedure. Acting on this unanimous resolution and having acquired all the rights and interests of the Sultanate of Sulu, the Republic of the Philippines, through the President, filed the claim to North Borneo.
    Our claim is mainly based on the following propositions: that Overbeck and Dent, not being sovereign entities nor representing sovereign entities, could not and did not acquire dominion and sovereignty over North Borneo; that on the basis of authoritative British and Spanish documents, the British North Borneo Company, a private trading concern to whom Dent transferred his rights, did not and could not acquire dominion and sovereignty over North Borneo; that their rights were as those indicated in the basic contract, namely, that of a lessee and a mere delegate; that in accordance with established precedents in International Law, the assertion of sovereign rights by the British Crown in 1946, in complete disregard of the contract of 1878 and their solemn commitments, did not and cannot produce legal results in the form of a new tide.
    I shall not, for the moment, take issue with the Senator as to his statement of the problem sought to be solved either through the Malaysia plan or the Greater Malayan Confederation. Our commitments under the United Nations Charter, the Bandung Conference Declaration and the 1960 decolonization resolution of the General Assembly are matters of record and there is no quarrel about them.
    Let us deal now with Senator Sumulong’s analysis of the “relevant facts”. He begins by saying that “since the organization of the United Nations in 1945, Britain in accordance with the obligations imposed by the Charter has declared herself to be the colonial power administering North Borneo as a British colony”. There is something misleading in this naked assertion. The good Senator could have informed the people, having proclaimed knowledge of all the relevant facts, that the British Crown never considered North Borneo as British territory, nor the North Borneans as British subjects, until July 10, 1946 — six days after the Philippines became independent. He may well have asked himself, “Why July 10, 1946?” and thereafter report to the Senate and to the people he loves so well the results of his new inquiry.
    Then, with the air of a magistrate delivering a stinging rebuke, he asks: “Why was the Philippine claim of sovereignty to North Borneo so tardily presented in the United Nations?” Yet, in the next breath, the good Senator reassures everyone that “I am and have been in favor of our government giving every possible support to the proprietary claims of the heirs of the late Sultan Jamalul Kiram.” Now, let us examine these interesting assertions a little more closely.
    (1) If the Senator believes that the claim of sovereignty was so “tardily presented”, how could the proprietary claim of dominion or ownership — which is the main element of sovereignty — regardless of whether it is the Philippine Government or not that institutes the claim — be considered still seasonable and appropriate?
    (2) If the Senator suggests now that the proprietary claim is not yet tardy and that the Government should merely support, “the heirs of the Sultan” in this aspect of the claim, how can he turn around and say that it is late if it is the Government that is instituting the claim? Be it noted that the Philippine claim includes sovereignty and dominion over North Borneo.
    (3) But what arouses my curiosity is the bald statement of the Senator that he is and has always been in favor of supporting the proprietary claims of the “heirs of the Sultan of Sulu.” Well, that must have been quite a long time! The Senator cannot therefore blame us, since he has invited and provoked the inquiry, if we now file a bill of particulars. Did he really support the proprietary aspect of the claim since he first became a member of the House of Representatives and assumed the Chairmanship of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs? Probably he did not give much thought to it then. But certainly he must have heard of the Macapagal-Lacson-Tolentino resolution of 1950. Did he give it in the Senate active and real support, even in its proprietary aspects? He has been a member of that distinguished body for more than 12 years — when, how and in what form, (even through a proposed amendment so as to fit his thinking) did he give that support? The cold, lifeless records of Congress yield no evidence of what he now eloquently professes.
    The distinguished Senator makes a most interesting suggestion. He tells his colleagues in the Senate and the Filipino people that “the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu” should have gone to the United Nations, presumably to the International Court of Justice, so that if the said heirs lose their case, “there would be no loss of honor or prestige for the Republic of the Philippines.” I would commend to the good Senator a closer reading of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, in relation to Chapter 14 of the United Nations Charter. Undoubtedly, he must have known that “the heirs of the Sultan” could not possibly litigate before the International Court of Justice for the simple reason that they have no international legal personality. They do not constitute a State, as that term is understood in law. Chapter 2, Article 34, paragraph 1 of the Statute clearly provides: “Only States may be parties in cases before the Court.”
    The same thing may well be said of his suggestion that the heirs file a reservation or a petition before the United Nations. And were we to follow the logic of the good Senator, we might conclude that America, Britain, France, the Netherlands and other countries have no more prestige and honor to keep since they have, as a matter of cold fact, lost quite a number of cases before international bodies and tribunals. But, of course, the conclusion is wrong. For respect for the rule of law has never meant and should never mean loss of honor and prestige.
    Then, the good Senator tells us that “contrary to the impression created in the minds of our people, the claim of sovereignty put forward by our Government as transferee of the Sultan of Sulu does not cover the entire area of North Borneo but only a portion thereof.” I do not know who created this impression, or whether the Senator has had a hand in it, through his own statements. However, the scope of our claim is clear: we are claiming these portions of North Borneo which were leased, as clearly defined and described in the contract of 1878 and which are still under the de facto control and administration of the British Crown. But the good Senator would like to know what are the “exact metes and bounds” and gloats over the seeming inability of the people in the Foreign Affairs Department to tell him what are the exact boundaries. International law, it may be well to remind our good Senator, does not require exact, rigid definition of a territory by metes and bounds. In the language of international law authorities of the highest repute, “rigidly fixed boundaries are not indispensable and boundaries of a territory may be indicated by natural signs, such as rivers, mountains, deserts, forests and the like.” (See, for example the decision of the German-Polish Mixed Arbitral Tribunal, August 1,1929). Up to now, ancient nations, such as India and China, are still quarreling about their boundaries. In other words, Senator Sumulong is exacting of his own government more than what International Law requires of us. But no matter. The lease contract of 1878 tells us in specific terms the natural boundaries and I do not think Senator Sumulong can improve on it. Nor can the British, if we consider as correct the conclusions of reputable writers abroad that the dividing boundary lines between the Borneo territories are neither fully-surveyed nor well-defined (See, for example, North Borneo, Brunei and Sarawak, Country Survey Series, New Haven, 1956).
    It may be well for us, on such a delicate matter as this, to refrain from accusing our own Government of ignorance, partly out of simple discretion and partly because the real difference between most of us is that we are ignorant on different subjects — it may be the best thing indeed not to talk about each other’s ignorance.
    Incidentally, the good Senator cites Professor Tregonning of the University of Singapore, who wrote a book on the subject, “Under Chartered Company Rule” to support his own — not Tregonning’s — conclusion that Overbeck and Dent — the two adventurers whose exploits the good Senator carefully avoided mentioning — “evaluated the rights acquired from the Sultan of Brunei to be 3 times greater than the rights acquired from the Sultan of Sulu, the yearly payment to the former being Malayan $ 15,000 and to the latter Malayan $ 5,000.” His conclusion is not supported by the authority he cites. Let me quote from Tregonning himself:
    “This meager rental (of Malayan $ 15,000 paid to the Sultan of Brunei) reflects the state of affairs. The territory had long ceased to be under Brunei control and failed to bring in any revenue. The Sultan received Malayan $ 15,000 for nothing and he was well pleased.” (p. 14).
    Likewise, in reading Tregonning, the good Senator avoided telling the people that the history professor he cited characterized the yearly payment of Malayan $ 5,000 to the Sultan of Sulu as “annual rental” (p. 14), that the British Colonial Office objected strenuously to the grant of the Royal Charter to the British North Borneo Company, “considering that no private company should exercise sovereign rights” (p. 20) and that the highest British officials were reassuring one another that the Royal Charter awarded to the British North Borneo Company did not vest the sovereignty of the territory in the British Government (at pp. 27-29).
    Assuming that we fail to recover North Borneo, the good Senator insists that “we would appear as attempting to colonize North Borneo without any lawful or just cause.” How can Senator Sumulong damn his own country as a colonizer when it is precisely submitting its claim, based on historic and legal considerations, in accordance with the peaceful procedures indicated in the United Nations Charter? How can he, on the other hand, have nothing but praise for Malaya which, without any claim at all and virtually a stranger in the region, desires to take over — thanks to British support — the Bornean territories?
    Like the isolationists of old, Senator Sumulong asks us: What is the gain of involving ourselves in North Borneo, if after all, even if we recover it, we are committed to the idea of letting the North Borneans determine what their eventual fate would be? It is like asking a man what is the use of working if after all he would eventually fade away — and leave his properties to his kin. One of the rosiest chapters in our entire history as a people was written when we dispatched our young men to Korea to fight for the cause of freedom in that part of the world. I don’t remember Senator Sumulong having raised the question, “What’s the use of it all?” The good Senator seems to forget that what happens in North Borneo affects us with greater immediacy and impact because of its proximity to us, that the North Borneans come from the same racial stock, that years of political isolation and hostile propaganda have created a gap between our two peoples, that despite the proud assertion that British interests have administered North Borneo for many years, the British, by their own admission, have not prepared the Borneans for self-government, that the natives are backward, that they are under the economic, cultural and political domination of the Chinese and that according to the British-prepared Report (Cobbold) there exists in North Borneo “fertile material on which Communist infiltration could work in the same way as it is already working in Sarawak.” The Communist danger, the Cobbold Report states, “cannot be excluded for the future.” (p. 36).
    Senator Sumulong is all praise for the success and the leadership of the Tungku of Malaya and from these coupled with “British military and economic aid”, he jumps to the conclusion that “the enlarged Federation of Malaysia under the same leadership and with continued British military and economic aid will be able to meet and overcome any communist attempt to capture Singapore, Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo.” But anyone who has studied logic must surely see that that is a mighty, big jump. Since the Tungku succeeded in fighting Communism in his home base, the Senator is certain he will also succeed elsewhere even if the conditions are quite different. This must be a new brand of logic! For one thing, there is the simple matter of geography. The Tungku Government is a thousand miles away from the jungles of Borneo. For another, the Borneo peoples, particularly in North Borneo, are not quite prepared for self-government. And how can the distinguished Senator be so sure about “continued British military and economic aid”, when Britain no longer requires a military outpost in this area as an essential link in her claim of defense, when the usefulness of fixed bases — such as Singapore — has been rendered obsolete by new developments in nuclear warfare and when England, beset by economic problems and stymied by many commitments, must of necessity launch a program of progressive withdrawal from Southeast Asia? The good Senator did not care to tell our people that the whole concept of Malaysia was designed to sterilize Singapore, that the whole plan was intended to redress Chinese dominance in Singapore and Malaya and that the Federation was not conceived out of a sense of oneness, or of racial or ethnic unity, or of a common heritage, but out of mutual fear and distrust. How can a Federation — so conceived and designed — endure, much less bring stability to a region where the countries immediately involved — the Philippines and Indonesia — have not even been consulted? The British may well be wrong here, just as they were proved wrong in their evaluation of Singapore on the eve of the Second World War (remember how the British thought it could “stand a long siege” and yet this “key base” fell in less than a week’s time?) and just as they are now being proved wrong in Africa where the British-inspired Central African Federation is about ready to collapse. And if the Malaysia Federation should fail and become instead the focal center of Communist infection, what does the good Senator intend to do? Isn’t it rather ironic that whereas in some responsible British quarters, including a sector of the British press, there has arisen a lurking doubt as to the feasibility of the Malaysia plan, the good Senator should be so certain about its success?
    The respected Senator tells us that he cannot say whether the Greater Confederation plan is a better substitute. I thought he had all the relevant facts. And if he did not have all the relevant facts, may it not have been the better part of prudence to give the higher officials of the Department of Foreign Affairs all the chance to explain the outlines of the plan? But as I said earlier, the good Senator had access to the Government’s Confidential Report. He knows or should know that incisive studies have been made and completed since last year on the Greater Confederation Plan by an Ad Hoc Committee, composed of professors and scholars in the University of the Philippines. Surely, he does not expect his Government to spell out the Confederation Plan to the last detail at this time, before an agreement in principle is reached among the proposed members. Assuming that the Greater Confederation Plan does not convince the good Senator, after a careful reading of the studies that have been completed, can he not possibly render service to the Republic by suggesting positive, meaningful alternatives, having in mind his massive research and studies on the subject?
    Our distinguished Senator has but one suggestion. I quote him:
    “…the better course to follow is for our government to inform the United Nations in due time, i.e., when the Federation of Malaysia Plan is submitted for consideration in the United Nations, that we are voluntarily relinquishing whatever claims of sovereignty we may have to any portion of North Borneo in order to accelerate the changing of its status from a non-self-governing territory to that of a self-governing or independent State and that we favor holding a plebiscite under UN auspices to give the people of North Borneo the opportunity to freely express their will and wishes…”
    In short, the good Senator would have us tell the world we are abandoning our claim, let Malaya take over North Borneo under the so-called Malaysia Federation, then ask for a referendum in North Borneo to ascertain what the North Borneans want. This, to my mind, is a proposal so naive it does not do justice to the reputation of the distinguished Senator or to the depth and range of his studies. In the first place, a Federation plan need not be approved by the United Nations. In the second place, a sophisticated study of the results of a plebiscite under the circumstances set forth by the distinguished Senator (and having in mind the plebiscites that have already been held, where there was indeed no choice but to say “yes” to what the British and Malayans wanted) forecloses the kind of result that will be achieved. For so long the North Borneans have been under British tutelage; the Malaysia plan is British-conceived, British-inspired and British-sponsored; Malaya is raring to take over a territory whose native inhabitants, according to the Cobbold Report, have a low level of education and political consciousness and who were ready to agree to the Malaysia proposals “although they were not fully understood.” Now, what kind of free elections does the Senator expect to witness in North Borneo?
    In fine, the Senator would have the Republic launch a program of defeat — born of fear and doubt and timidity. I cannot agree to such a plan of action.
    We have told the British that we agree that their interests in the region should be respected and that we welcome any practical arrangements to this end. But this should not take the form of colonialism in a different guise which, instead of being a factor of stability becomes the source of endless provocation. The Philippines is here in Southeast Asia to stay; Britain, saddled with various commitments, probably desires to play a lesser role in Southeast Asia and make a graceful exit; Malaya, a distant stranger to the region, desires a virtual annexation of the Bornean territories to sterilize and quarantine Singapore, the “key base”, which is predominantly Chinese and, whose loyalties are not beneath suspicion. A professor in an Australian University, writing in the India Quarterly, makes a thorough analysis of the Malaysia Plan and sees great difficulties ahead.
    “Even in North Borneo and Sarawak the indigenous peoples are not happy about a federation. Their own racial problems are much simpler and their economic prosperity does not require any political integration with Malaya. In any case, Borneo territories are extremely jealous of their imminent independence which they are reluctant to submerge in a federation.
    “It is also unclear how the central (Tungku) government located in Kuala Lumpur would be able to exercise effective control over those territories, which are separated by South China sea from Malaya by varying distances, from about 500 miles to well over a thousand. Jesselton is nearer to Saigon or to Manila than to Kuala Lumpur. In area British Borneo is about the same as Malaya, but its 1400 mile long coast line is longer than the Federation’s. Defense, in the event of a crisis, from Malaya would be difficult…” (Singhal, D.P., Imperial Defence, Communist Challenge and the Great Design).
    The good Senator realizes, of course, that if North Borneo should fall into hostile hands, it is the Philippines that will be immediately affected. And yet until we filed our claim to North Borneo and talks were conducted thereafter in London culminating in an official cognizance of our claim, there was no attempt at all to consult with us on matters that affect the very survival and security of this country. It is only now that Britain and Malaya have become increasingly appreciative of our stand and their willingness not to prejudice our claim despite Malaysia is certainly a great credit to the Administration. If between now and August 31,1963, the scheduled date of birth of the Malaysia Federation, these countries should stiffen in their attitude towards our claim, I must state in all candor that for all my respect for him and even assuming the nobility of his motives, the good Senator cannot fully escape the burden of responsibility,
    I am no apologist for the President of the Philippines, not even on the North Borneo question and will disagree with him whenever I think that his action is not well-advised. But I believe that on such a fundamental question as this, it may be well for us to remember that political considerations, bitterness and endless quibbling should stop at the water’s edge and that the claim to North Borneo is not the claim of the President, nor of the Liberal Party, nor of his Administration, but a claim of the entire Republic, based on respect for the rule of law, the sanctity of contractual obligations, the sacredness of facts and the relentless logic of our situation in this part of the world.
    Privilege Speech of Senator Lorenzo Sumulong on the Sabah Claim
    Philippine Senate, March 25, 1963
    I have refrained from discussing on the floor of the Senate the Malaysia plan or the alternative plan of a Greater Malayan Confederation proposed by President Macapagal in connection with the Philippine claim of sovereignty to a portion of North Borneo, while the Senate Committees on Foreign Relations and National Defense and Security were holding joint closed-door hearings in Camp Murphy.
    As your Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations, I had made my own studies and researches, but I thought that there might be new facts and considerations which our defense and foreign affairs officials might bring to our attention during the briefing.
    Now that the briefing is over and the administration experts have submitted to the two Committees all the facts within their knowledge and possession, I believe it is already proper, nay, I believe it is my duty to submit for the consideration of the entire Senate and of our people the facts and considerations which I believe are material and necessary to the formation and crystallization of an intelligent opinion about the two plans. In so doing, I want to make clear the responsibility for the facts and considerations I am about to present is my own.
    I want to make clear that I am always subject to correction. If my facts and considerations are wrong, I would be ready to admit and correct my mistakes. And I do hope that others will do likewise.
    Our commitments
    Under the United Nations Charter, it is the duty of every colonial power administering non-self-government or independence and until that people has been made self-governing or independent, it is the duty of the colonial power to submit to the United Nations every year a report of its administration of the territory.
    The duty of the administering power to prepare the non-self-governing territory for self-government or independence is provided for in Chapter XI, Article 73 b of the United Nations Charter which makes it the duty of the administering power “to develop self-government, to take due account of the political aspirations of the (non-self-governing) peoples and to assist them in the progressive development of their free political institutions.”
    No RP Protest
    Since the organization of the United Nations in 1945, Britain in accordance with the obligations imposed by the Charter has declared herself to be the colonial power administering Sarawak as British colony and has been submitting to the United Nations every year a report of her administration of these three non-self-governing territories. During all that time, the Philippines as a member of the United Nations has not put forward any claim of sovereignty over North Borneo, nor has the Philippines registered any reservation or protest to the report submitted by Britain to the United Nations every year as the administering power over North Borneo. It was only in December of last year (1962) that the Philippine delegation, during the consideration of the yearly report of the British administration over North Borneo in the Trusteeship Committee, made a reservation contesting for the first time the right of the British to rule and administer North Borneo.
    Belated claim
    Why was the Philippine claim of sovereignty to North Borneo so tardily presented in the United Nations? The answer is that North Borneo is not a part of the national territory of the Philippines as defined and delimited in our Constitution. When the United Nations was organized in 1945, the claimants to North Borneo was not the Philippines but the heirs of the late Sultan Jamalul Kiram who died in 1936. If the said heirs had any claims to sovereignty over North Borneo — as distinguished from their proprietary claims — they could have filed a petition or a reservation to the United Nations protesting against British rule and administration over North Borneo, but they did not file any such petition or reservation. It was only in February of last year (1962) that the said heirs informed our Department of Foreign Affairs that they were claiming sovereignty to North Borneo and they offered to turn over such claim of sovereignty to the Republic of the Philippines, reserving however to themselves their proprietary claims.
    This offer was accepted by President Macapagal and to give semblance of legality to the transfer of sovereignty from the said heirs to the Republic of the Philippines, in September of last year (1962) out of the several surviving heirs of Sultan Jamalul Kiram who died in 1936, Esmail Kiram was proclaimed the new Sultan of Sulu claiming to possess all the attributes and prerogatives of a sovereign ruler and as such he executed a deed of cession of his alleged claim of sovereignty to North Borneo in favor of the Republic of the Philippines.
    A mistake
    I am and have always been in favor of our government giving every possible support to the proprietary claims of the heirs of the late Sultan Jamalul Kiram. But I have always believed as I still believe that it was a mistake for President Macapagal to have agreed to such transfer of the claim of sovereignty from the said heirs to the Republic of the Philippines for the following reasons:
    (1) The said heirs had never filed a petition or reservation before the United Nations claiming sovereignty to North Borneo and protesting British rule and administration thereof. Since the transferee acquires no better rights than the transferor, this weakens the present claim of the Republic of the Philippines.
    (2) Even if the said heirs had a strong claim of sovereignty to North Borneo, our government should have advised them to file a petition or reservation to that effect before the United Nations, instead of agreeing to a transfer of such claim of sovereignty to the Republic of the Philippines. If the said heirs lose their case before the United Nations, there would be no loss of honor of prestige for the Republic of the Philippines. As it is now, if the belated claim of sovereignty of the Republic of the Philippines to a portion of North Borneo does not prosper in the United Nations, the damage to our national honor and prestige would be incalculable. We would appear as attempting to colonize North Borneo without any lawful or just cause, contrary to our vehement denunciations of colonialism and our loud demands that the grant of self-government or independence to subject peoples be accelerated. Even if the United Nations should sustain the belated
    Philippine claim of sovereignty to North Borneo, we stand to gain nothing because we are committed to speedily end our rule and administration there, grant its people self-government or independence and respect their will and wishes as to whether they will join the Federation of Malaysia or the Greater Malayan Confederation proposed by President Macapagal.
    (3) Contrary to the impression created in the minds of our people, the claim of sovereignty put forward by our government as transferee of the Sultan of Sulu does not cover the entire area of North Borneo, but only a portion thereof. This was admitted by the Philippine panel during the London talks, but the administration of President Macapagal has kept mum and has not brought this important fact to the attention of our people. During our joint committee meetings in Camp Murphy, I asked the members of the Philippine panel present if they could tell us the exact metes and bounds and the exact area of this portion of North Borneo claimed by our government but none could give us a positive answer. This was amazing in the extreme. When a man sues in court to recover title and possession to a piece of land, the first thing he has to prove in court is the identity of the land. But here is the administration of President Macapagal involving the honor and prestige of our government in a claim of sovereignty to a portion of North Borneo, without being able to tell us the identity of that portion. And yet, administration stalwarts have been daring the British to have the case tried and decided by the International Court of Justice.
    From the compilation of documents submitted to us by Minister Benito Bautista of the Department of Foreign Affairs, I found that before Overbeck and Dent entered into the contract of January 12,1878 with the Sultan of Sulu, they had previously obtained from the Sultan of Brunei four other similar contracts on December 29,1877. As narrated by K. G. Tregonning in his book entitled Under Chartered Company Rule and borne out by the descriptions contained in the four contracts of the Sultan of Brunei.
    “The Sultan (of Brunei), in three grants of territory from Gaya Bay on the west coast to the Sibuco River on the east; and the Pengeran Tumongong (heir to the Sultan of Brunei) in a grant of his west coast possessions, the rivers Kimanis and Benowi, ceded to Overbeck and Dent, with all the powers of sovereignty, some 28,000 square miles of territory, embracing 900 miles of North Bornean coastline, for a total yearly payment of Malayan $ 5,000.” (op.cit. P-14)
    In the later contract with the Sultan of Sulu, the territory ceded to Overbeck and Dent was from the Pandassan River on the west coast to the Sibuco River on the east, for which the Sultan of Sulu was to receive a yearly payment of Malayan $ 5,000. A look at the map of North Borneo will show that Gaya Bay is farther to the west than Pandassan River. So the territory ceded under the four contracts with the Sultan of Brunei was more extensive and embraced the territory ceded under the contract with the Sultan of Sulu. Why did Overbeck and Dent still contracted with the Sultan of Sulu for territory already ceded to them under the four contracts with the Sultan of Brunei? According to Professor Tregonning in his aforecited book, after Overbeck and Dent had negotiated the four contracts with the Sultan of Brunei, they learned later that the northeast coast, which comprised a large portion of the territory ceded by the Sultan of Brunei, was in the hands of the Sultan of Sulu who claimed to have received it from the Sultan of Brunei in 1704 in return for the help in suppressing a rebellion and it was for this reason that they negotiated the contract with the Sultan of Sulu on January 12,1878 (op. cit. pp. 11,14-15). From this it appears that the territory claimed and ceded by the Sultan of Sulu on January 12, 1878 was likewise claimed and had been previously ceded by the Sultan of Brunei on December 29,1877 and that Overbeck and Dent evaluated the rights acquired from the Sultan of Brunei to be three times greater than the rights acquired from the Sultan of Sulu, the yearly payment to the former being Malayan $ 15,000 and to the latter Malayan $ 5,000. It is small wonder that the administration of President Macapagal is at a loss to identify the portion of North Borneo subject of their claim of sovereignty.
    Common concern
    It should be the common concern of the Philippines and of all countries whose peoples believe in the free and democratic way of life, to see to it that Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo, are not only speedily decolonized and granted self-government or independence, but also adequately safeguarded against the danger of communist infiltration and subversion once they become self-governing or independent.
    The balance of power in Asia between the forces of freedom on the one hand and the forces of communism on the other, is in a very precarious and critical posture today. Laos has turned neutralist. The ruler of Cambodia has decided to align himself on the side of Red China. South Vietnam is facing a life and death struggle with the Viet Congs. India’s borders have been invaded by Red China. If Sarawak, Brunei, North Borneo and Singapore, should be lost to the free world by their turning communist or neutralist, the peace and security of the free world countries in Asia including the Philippines would be gravely imperilled.
    We in the Philippines are firmly and uncompromisingly against communism. Whether under the former Nacionalista administration or under the present Liberal administration, that has been our consistent policy. We are a religious people and we cannot accept a godless ideology. We want progress, but we do not want to achieve progress through dictatorship and violence; we want to achieve progress through freedom and peaceful reform.
    In the fight between the forces of freedom and the forces of communism, we do not believe in being neutralist or non-aligned. We want to stand up and be counted on the side of the forces of freedom.
    And because the military power of the forces of communism is great due to their tremendous human and material resources, no nation can resist and fight them alone and unaided. The forces of freedom must combine and cooperate militarily and economically in order to balance the military and economic power of the forces of communism. Thus, we have entered into defensive alliances like the mutual defense pact with the US and the SEATO pact.
    British plan
    The Federation of Malaysia is the British plan of giving self-government to Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo and at the same time safeguard them against communist infiltration and subversion. Under the plan, Britain will relinquish sovereignty over Sarawak and North Borneo and withdraw protection over Brunei and then these three newly independent states will join the 11 states now composing the Federation of Malaya and Singapore in forming the Federation of Malaysia. In other words, the present Federation of Malaya will be enlarged by bringing in Singapore, Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo as new members and as thus enlarged it will be renamed Federation of Malaysia. The present mutual defense pact between Britain and the Federation of Malaya will then be extended to this enlarged Federation of Malaysia.
    The plan is to follow the same pattern by which Malaya was given independence on August 31, 1957 and by means of a mutual defense pact with the former mother country (Britain), receive such military and economic aid to enable her to fight communist infiltration and subversion successfully.
    Let us recall the history of Malaya. For a hundred years, Malaya was under British rule before she won her independence on August 31, 1957. Malaya is a Federation of 11 states, two of which were formerly British colonies and the remaining nine were formerly protectorates. Under her constitution, these 11 states upon becoming independent agreed to form a Federation with a federal parliament composed of two houses in which each of the 11 states was given representation.
    When she became independent in 1957, Malaya was faced with a grave internal problem of communist infiltration and subversion. In population, the Chinese is the second biggest in number, next only to the Malays, so that the danger of Chinese communist infiltration and subversion was real and acute. This danger had to be met realistically and the leaders of Malaya realized that it had to be fought not only with military but also with economic weapons, for which they needed British aid and cooperation. So, the leaders of Malaya evolved a five-year development plan to improve the livelihood of the people so that they will not be enticed by communist propaganda harping on the poverty of the masses and promising a classless society where there will be no poor and no rich. This five-year development plan involved an expenditure of Malayan $ 1,358,000,000 and the British government agreed to give extensive financial help to it and the plan was so well implemented that Malaya has achieved an economic progress next only to Japan in the whole Far East as shown by her per capita income which is second only to Japan. Also, there was a British grant of Malayan $ 114 million for the establishment of the federal armed forces of Malaya and for the first three years a yearly grant of Malayan $ 25 million to help Malaya deal with the terrorist problem. Through these economic and military measures, Malaya under the leadership of Tungku Abdul Rahman was able to break the communist backbone in that country, in the same way that through similar economic and military measures, Magsaysay was able to break the communist backbone here in our country, so that the names of Abdul Rahman and Magsaysay rank high in the roster of successful communist fighters in Asia.
    Because of the success of the Federation of Malaya under the leadership of Abdul Rahman and with the British military and economic aid to fight communist infiltration and subversion, it is also expected that the enlarged Federation of Malaysia under the same leadership of Abdul Rahman and with continued British military and economic aid will be able to meet and overcome any communist attempt to capture Singapore, Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo through infiltration and subversive activities.
    It is pertinent to point out that Singapore, Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo are outside the SEATO area so that they cannot rely on the SEATO for protection against communism. Neither can they rely on US military or economic aid, since the present trend in American foreign policy as manifested in Senator Mansfield’s position is to cut down on American foreign aid by not giving to those countries to which the US has not heretofore given aid and to gradually reduce the amount as to those countries to which the US has been giving aid. It is only Britain which can be expected to extend military and economic aid to these countries once they become independent because Britain is their former mother country and because of the close trade and economic ties that will have to continue even after the severance of political ties between’ them.
    Alternative plan
    Let me now turn to the Greater Confederation of Malay States proposed by President Macapagal. Is this a better substitute to the Malaysia plan as an instrumentality to make Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo safe and secure against communist infiltration and subversion once these countries become self-governing or independent? According to President Macapagal, it is a better substitute. For my part, I cannot say whether it is a better substitute or not, for the simple reason that its proponents cannot give us any information as to what concretely and specifically are the plans and the ways and means by which this Greater Malayan Confederation is expected to help protect Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo against communist infiltration and subversion. All that we are told is that the proposed members of are Malaya, Singapore, Sarawak, Brunei, North Borneo and the Philippines. According to President Macapagal in a recent interview with a correspondent of Agence de France, all that he could say was that the proposed members will retain their separate sovereignties. This means that the Philippine claim to a portion of North Borneo will be given so that North Borneo may become independent and sovereign and thus qualify to be a member of this Greater Malayan Confederation. I have asked before and I now again ask: Is it the plan that this Greater Malayan Confederation will not seek any outside military or economic aid either from Britain or from the US and that each member state will just rely on her own military and economic resources to fight communist infiltration and subversion? Is the Philippines ready to extend military and economic aid to North Borneo, Brunei and Sarawak and if so, how much is the present administration willing to appropriate for this purpose? What joint and common measures will the member states take in order to help each other in fighting communist infiltration and subversion? Will there be a common armed force? Will there be a common economic program? Or will this be a purely social club? These questions are relevant, material and pertinent and must be answered by President Macapagal and the proponent of the Greater Malayan Confederation, before they can expect any Filipino to rally to its support and before they can expect the proposed member-states of such Confederation to be convinced that it is a better and more effective instrument than the Malaysia plan to combat and overcome the communist menace in their respective territories. I regret to report that in the joint committee hearings of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations and National Defense and Security, none of the defense and foreign officials present could give any answer to these questions and they confessed to our amazement and surprise that the detailed plans and objectives of this projected Greater Malayan Confederation have not been spelled out.
    Conclusions
    From the foregoing facts and considerations, I submit to the Senate and to our people the following conclusions:
    (1) If the administration of President Macapagal seriously believes that the Philippine claim of sovereignty to a portion of North Borneo should be prosecuted to the bitter end, it must be prepared to establish the identity of that portion whether the case is brought before the International Court of Justice or before the United Nations.
    (2) If the Philippines lose its case, the damage to the honor and prestige of our Republic would be incalculable. We would appear as having attempted to colonize a portion of North Borneo without any lawful or just cause, forgetting our colonialism and our loud demands for accelerating the grant of self-government or independence to subject peoples especially those in Asia.
    (3) Even if the Philippines win its case, we stand to gain nothing because under the United Nations charter, the Bandung Conference declaration and the 1960 decolonization resolution of the United Nations General Assembly, we have to give up our rule and administration to the portion of North Borneo we are claiming, grant its people self-government or independence and respect their will and wishes as to whether they will join the Federation of Malaysia or the Greater Malayan Confederation or exist as a separate independent state. In this connection, it is worthy of note that judging from press reports of Filipino newspapermen who had gone to North Borneo, the popular reaction there to our claim of sovereignty is one of surprise and resentment rather than sympathy and support.
    (4) If President Macapagal honestly believes that the Federation of Malaysia plan is not according with the freely expressed will and wishes of the people of North Borneo, despite the information recently given by the Mayor of Jesselton while here as an ECAFE delegate that 96 out of 111 representatives elected to the legislative council of North Borneo last December favor Malaysia, he can raise the question before the United Nations and ask that a plebiscite be held under the auspices of the world organization to determine whether the people of North Borneo really favor Malaysia or not. And if Indonesia insists that the peoples of Sarawak, Brunei and North Borneo are against Malaysia, we should point out to her that there is available UN machinery and there is the peaceful remedy of asking for a plebiscite under the auspices of the United Nations, which renders unnecessary resort to war or use of force and violence.
    (5) If President Macapagal honestly believes that his proposed Greater Malayan Confederation is a better substitute to the Malaysia plan to defend and protect ourselves and the other Malayan peoples of Asia against the danger of communist infiltration and subversion, then he must abandon talking in platitudes and generalities and at once spell out concretely and specifically, the ways and means, the military and economic aid if any by which the Greater Malayan Confederation expects to help the people of North Borneo, Brunei and Sarawak to fight and overcome successfully the forces of communism once they become self-governing or independent.
    (6) Our people must be told and made to realize that if we are to be consistent with our avowed policy of opposing communism firmly and uncompromisingly, then for the peace and security not only of ourselves but of our free world allies in Asia, we must see to it that North Borneo, Brunei and Sarawak, remain on the side of the free would and not turn communist or neutralist, once they become self-governing or independent.
    (7) Rather than prosecute the Philippine claim of sovereignty to a portion of North Borneo to the bitter end. I for one believe in all sincerity that under the present circumstances, the better course to follow is for our government to inform the United Nations in due time, i.e., when the Federation of Malaysia plan is submitted for consideration in the United Nations that we are voluntarily relinquishing whatever claim of sovereignty we may have to any portion of North Borneo in order to accelerate the changing of its status from a non-self governing territory to that of a self-governing or independent state and that we favor holding a plebiscite under United Nations auspices to give the people of North Borneo the opportunity to freely express their will and wishes as to whether they want to join the Federation of Malaysia or the Greater Malayan Confederation or exist as a separate independent state.

  21. setelah di baca cerita diatas, berarti malaysia, mengikuti inggris dan sepanyol, kedua negara ini kan menjajah sabah/ kerajaan sulu, berarti malaysia sama hal nya dengan penjajah/ penjarah kerajaan sulu, ini adalah cubaan buat malaysia yang selalu menjarah pulau/ wilayah negara lain, dan sampai saat ini banyak tentara malaysia dan polis mati tertembak, ini menunjukkan kelamahan tentara diraja malaysia, kerana tentara malaysia banyak yang gendut-gendut dan tidak disiplin, jangan cuba malaysia mau melawan negara indonesia, sebentar habis hancur bagai debu

    • Salam saudara wolis dari Indonesia,

      1. Tiada tentera Malaysia yg terbunuh.
      2. Malaysia tidak menjajah Sabah. Sabah yang memilih Malaysia menerusi referendum – berbanding Indonesia dan Filipina.

      • Saudara andak, pada mulanya saya rasa lega dan faham dgn segala kemelut yg sdg berlaku. Tapi, bila ada berita di dalam akhbar hari ini menyatakan ada rundingan PM sblum ni dgn mereka ditambah pula dgn keberanian Anwar utk menyaman Tv3 dan utusan yg melibtkn Anwar sbg dalang dlm kes ini menimbulkn keraguan pula pd saya dgn laporan Saudara di atas.

      • Tak perlu ragu kalau tiada dakwaan.

        Saya ada byk baca sumber, tapi kalau saya petik semua, analisis sudah jadi karangan panjang yg org tak boleh nak baca.

        Jadi saya petik yg mana ada rujukan. Kalau rujukan blog – saya tak dapat nak letak.

  22. Salamualaikum tuan,
    Sedihnya mereka ini berjuang berdasarkan kpd emosi dan sentimen bukan berdasarkan fakta dan lojik. Menghantar 200 orang utk menentang sebuah negara berdaulat adalah satu tindakan bodoh dan bunuh diri. Akhirnya seorang general mereka yg berdekad dekad disanjung sebagai freedom fighter mati sebagai penjenayah. Apa pun terdapat kelemahan di pihak PDRM (SB) dalam mengesan penceroboh ini masuk dan berkumpul seramai itu. PDRM perlu menguatkan semula sistem pengumpulan maklumat ancaman seperti mereka laksanakan semasa ancaman komunis dahulu. Penubuhan Special Security Area di timur Sabah itu adalah satu permulaan yg baik. Selain kehadiran pskn keselamatan penduduk setempat juga perlu memainkan peranan dalam memerhati dan melapor kpd pihak keselamatan apa-apa shj yg difikirkan menjadi ancaman kpd negara.

  23. terima kasih banyak banyak saudara andak
    saya juga berfikir lebih kurang macam @KasihSayangSemasaUmat …. orang2 jolo ni, hidup mereka dengan laut.. berulang alik dari satu pulau ke pulau yang lain… setuju, faktor kemiskinan dan pelajaran menyebabkan mereka jauh ketinggalan dari pelbagai aspek berbanding dengan sabahan yang lain… di sinilah, tanah tumpah darah mereka.. di sinilah mereka membesar sehingga ke anak cucu…berpuluh puluh tahun mereka tinggal di sini, kenapa kita tidak membantu mereka memberi taraf kewarganegaraan yang membolehkan mereka sekurang kurangnya, dapat pendidikan… sakit pening, boleh ke klinik..TETAPI saya tidak menafikan, ramai juga di kalangan mereka telah menerima taraf kewarganegaraan CUMA, barangkali ada pemimpin2 yang di “hormati” di kalangan mereka, telah menjadi tamak ….sayang sangat rasanya, kerana pemimpin yang telah “menjual” maruah mereka kepada orang putih, masih lagi di “hormati” dan arahannya pemimpin tersebut, tidak di sanggah hinggakan sanggup berperang…. ber kali kali di “kencing” oleh pemimpin yang mementingkan diri sendiri…. pada saya, orang putih bukan le bijak sangat, tetapi mereka yang “binga”
    sekali lagi saya mengucapkan ribuan terima kasih dengan posting ini
    ikhlas

    • masalah pendatang dari jolo atau mindanau ini ialah , mereka tidak tahu erti beradab , tidak tahu erti sedar diri , mereka hidup dan berperangai di sabah seolah mereka masih di filipina , budaya mereka budaya gasar, cara mereka cara filipina, sifat mereka sifat gerila , tiada disiplin dan buat apa mahu tanpa fikir kiri kanan ,
      lihat saja penempatan mereka bagaimana keadaan , sampah jangan cakap , buang sampah sesuka hati , ini contoh paling mudah , belum dikira cara pergaulan mereka , sikap baran mereka dan sifat negatif lain .

      kedua, kesetiaan mereka belum terbukti , sesiapa yg mahu menjadi warganegara mestilah taat dan setianya tidak berbelah bahagi , sanggup berkorban demi negara ini , tetapi bayangkan jika berlaku perang di malaysia , adakah mereka akan tetap disini atau melarikan diri ke filipina balik kampung asal ?

      bukan mudah memberikan kerakyatan kepada penduduk asing, negara ini ada protokolnya , ada undang-undangnya , jika kamu mahu menjadi rakyat negara ini maka hormatilah undang-undang dan peraturan tuan rumah, bukan buat undang-undang sendiri ,

  24. AND THIS SULTAN WILL CARRY THE CRIME OF HIS GRANDFATHERS FOR KILLING THE SULTAN OF SULU IN 19 36- AND FOR CONSPIRING WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES & THE PACKAGER OF THE MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT..ROYAL DECREE 101
    REDEMPTION OF ALL THE ASSETS, BANK ACCOUNTS- GOLDS & DIAMONDS DEPOSITED IN ALL PRIME BANKS ALL OVER THE WORLD,BURIED ASSETS & NATURAL RESOURCES, THE LAND TERRITORIES OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO, AND ITS SOVEREIGN PEOPLE FROM THE BONDAGE OF THE OPPRESSORS AND SUPPRESSORS OF THE POLITICAL & MILITARY GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA AND INDONESIA WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF SINGAPORE AND BRUNEI THAT WOULD CALL THE IMMEDIATE RECALL OF THE QUEEN OF SOUTHEAST ASIA & QUEEN OF ENGLAND HER ROYAL MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II TO RETURN THE POWER TO THE RIGHTFUL HEIRS & SUCCESSORS OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST HIS EXCELLENCY THE HONORABLE ICJ SULU AND NORTH BORNEO SOVEREIGN JUDGE THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK THE ROYAL CHARTER COMPANY SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM 1304-1405 & HER EXCELLENCY THE HONORABLE ICJ SULU & NORTH BORNEO SOVEREIGN JUDGE THE QUEEN OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS HER ROYAL HIGHNESS QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK & FOR THE SIGNING OF THE PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC TREATY IN MARCH 14, 2014 THUS MAKING THE ROYAL ICJ AS THE UMBRELLA OF THE PEACE & ORDER AND MASSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENTIRE SULU ARCHIPELAGO WITH THE TENURE OF 5O YEARS THAT WILL END IN MARCH 14, 2064.
    WE DECLARE TODAY JANUARY 31, 2014 AT 12:05 PM ON THE FAILURE OF THE 72 HOURS ULTIMATUM FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES CARETAKER PRESIDENT BENIGNO SIMEON AQUINO III AND THE CABINETS TO HONOR TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK & RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & THE CALL FOR CEASEFIRE UNTIL MARCH 14, 2014 SIGNING OF PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC TREATY AS SUCH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES SHALL BE CHARGED FOR TREASON, REBELLION AND SEDITION BY THE ROYAL IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF SHARIAH OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO. THIS LEGAL STEPS IS BASED ON,
    1. THAT THE CARPENTER AGREEMENT GOT ITS DEFAULT BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IN CONSPIRACY OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT SHALL BE GIVEN SANCTION FOR THE CONNIVANCE WITH SULTAN AMIRUL OMRA AMIRBANGSA, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, FIDEL V. RAMOS AND HIS COHORTS. IN THIS LIGHT THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS SHALL IMPOSE DAMAGES & PROPER COMPENSATION THROUGH THE ROYAL ICJ SUPREME JUDGE HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS RICKY NATHANIEL CHAIRMAN OF ICC/ICJ & THE NEW GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS.
    2. THAT THE KILLING OF SULTAN JAMALUL KIRAM II ALSO KNOWN AS SAHIBOL GARY ABDURAJAK OF MAIMBUNG SULU IN JUNE 6, 1936, SHOULD BE GIVEN JUSTICE AND THAT HIS KILLING LED TO MULTIPLE MASSACRES FROM JABIDAH, TO PATA, TO SABAH STAND OFF, TO ZAMBOANGA STAND OFF AND NOW THE KILLINGS IN LIGUASANG MARSH AS ORDERED BY THE SAME MANIPULATORS INSDIDE THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. REAL CULPRIT SHOULD BE LITIGATED IN THE COURT OF LAW OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF SHARIAH OF THE LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO. WHOEVER FINDS GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT SHALL BE JAILED RECLUSION PERPETUA AND ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF SHARIAH OF THE HADITH AND QURAN.
    3. THAT IN CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTIVENESS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY IN BRUNEI DARUSSALAM, THEY KEPT THE REAL IDENTITY OF JAMALUL KIRAM II AND NEVER LINK HIM TO THE ROYALTY OF BRUNEI AND EVEN HIS NAME AS AL-MARHUM PENGIRAN PERMANCHA SAHIBUL RAE WAL-MASHUARAH PENGIRAN ANAK HAJI MOHAMMAD ALAM AL MARHUM PENGIRAN BANDAHARA PENGIRAN ANAK ABDUL RAHMAN WAS COVERED AND MISLED AS THE YEARS GOES ON, SO AS NOT TO CONNECT TO HIS SON PENGIRAN MOHAMMAD KAMALUDDIN AND HIS DAUGHTER PENGIRAN RAJA SALEHA BUT TODAY AND ONWARD THIS TRUTH OF DIRECT LINEAGE MUST NOW BE KNOWN THROUGH OUT THE BANKING INSTITUTIONS AND THE BANK OF ENGLAND ,WORLD BANK, CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES & BANK NEGARA AND THE HIGH COURTS OF ALL POLITICAL GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD IN FAVOR OF THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK.
    4. THAT THE INSTRUMENT OF CESSION OF THE TERRITORY OF NORTH BORNEO DONE BY SULTAN MOHAMMAD ESMAIL KIRAM THE APPOINTED SULTAN OF FERDINAND E. MARCOS & ACTED ON THE AUTHORITY OF THE RUMA BECHARA IS NULL & VOID ON THE BASIS OF THE CONSPIRACY IN KILLING THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO SULTAN JAMALUL KIRAM II AND THE CONCEALMENT OF THE TRUE IDENTITY OF SAHIBOL GARY ABDURAJAK & SAHIBUL RAE OF BRUNEI AS SULTAN OMAR ALI SAIFFUDIN II LED TO THE CONSPIRACY AND DECEIT OF PLACING THE POLITICAL HEIRS IN 1939 DAYANG DAYANG HADJI PIANDAO, PUTLI TARHATA KIRAM, PUTLI SAKINUR KIRAM, ESMAIL KIRAM, DATU PUNJUNGAN KIRAM, SITTI MARIAM KIRAM, SITTI RADA KIRAM, SITTI PUTLI JAHARA KIRAM AND MORA NAPSA THE CLAIMANTS HEIRS THAT FILED CASE TO THE HIGH COURT OF BORNEO (CIVIL SUIT NO. 16/39, ENTITLED DAYANG DAYANG PIANDAO KIRAM OF JOLO,PHILIPPINES & 8 OTHERS VS. THE GOVERNMENT OF BORNEO AND OTHERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECLARING THEM AS HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS OF THE SULTAN OF SULU ENTITLEMENT TO RECEIVE THE SAID ANNUAL RENTAL. IN DECEMBER 19, 1939 THE HIGH COURT OF NORTH BORNEO RENDERED DECISION DECLARING THE ABOVE 9 HEIRS AS THE “PRIVATE HEIRS” ENTITLED TO RECEIVE WHAT THE SAID COURT CALLED “CESSION MONEY” BUT THE HEIRS CALLED “RENTAL”, WHICHEVER THEIR FIGHT BE, WE RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK DECLARED THAT THE SAID DECISION OF THE COURT IS OVER RULLED BY OUR EXISTENCE AND AS THE GENUINE REDEEMERS OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO WEALTH, ASSETS AND PROPERTIES, AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA AGREEMENT IN SEPTEMBER 16, 2013, THAT EVEN THE DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF NORTH BORNEO THAT THE “SUCCESSORS IN SOVEREIGNTY OF THE SULTAN ARE THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS” BECOMES ILLEGAL & NULL & VOID IN THE BASIS OF THE REDEMPTION OF THE GENUINE REDEEMERS RAJA MOHAMAMD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK AND THAT THE THREE POLITICAL GOVERNMENT, MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA REPRESENTED BY THEIR HEAD OF STATES ARE CONSIDERED CARETAKERS OF THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO SINCE JUNE 6, 1936. THEREFORE THE JUDGEMENT OF JUSTICE C.F.C MAKASKIE OF THE HIGH COURT OF BORNEO DATED DECEMBER 18, 1939 IS CONSIDERED NULL & VOID UPON THE ICJ RULING REFERENCE BOE/SIG-SULU/999999999-11/MINDANAO ECONOMY/RM/6T-THURSDAY,OCTOBER 10,2013 (GREGORIAN CALENDAR) THAT SAID REDEMPTION IS BACK TO THE RIGHTFUL OWNERS OF THE SOVEREIEGNTY OF THE ENTIRE SULU ARCHIPELAGO OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO, THAT OVER RULED ALL THE CLAIMS OF PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA, INDONESIA AND ALL CLAIMANTS SULTAN OF SULU ON THE SOVERIEGNTY & SUCCESSORSHIP OF THE THRONE OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF LUPAH SUG SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO.
    5. THAT IN JUNE 20, 1946, THE BRITISH COMPANY THROUGH THE REPRESENTATION OF GUSTAVUS BARON DE OVERBECK AND ALFRED DENT THAT SIGNED THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH OUR GRANDFATHER JAMALUL ALAM IN JANUARY 22, 1878 TRANSFERRED TO THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT ITS RIGHTS AND INTEREST OVER THE TERRITORY OF NORTH BORNEO COULD ONLY BE FIXED BY THE HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK, AS THE REDDEMERS OF THE SAID TERRITORIES TO BE DEALTH WITH THE ROYAL INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE HEADED BY HRH RICKY NATHANIEL AND THE ROYALTIES OF GREAT BRITAIN QUEEN ELIZABETH II OF ENGLAND & THE ROYALTIES OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM. ALL CLAIMANTS SHALL BE GIVEN DUE PUNISHMENT IF THEY CONTINUE CLAIMING WITH THE PROOF THAT THEY ARE THE BLOODS THAT CONCEAL THE TRUTH AND KILLED JAMALUL KIRAM II & THE CRUCIAL CONSPIRACY DONE BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES SINCE 1936 AS EVIDENCED BY THE HOUSE OF CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 42 , 2ND C.R.P) THAT HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRENSETATIVES IN APRIL 28, 1950 CERTIFIED BY SECRETARY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NENE PIMENTEL THAT”THE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES THAT NORTH BORNEO BELONGS TO THE HEIRS OF THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO AND TO THE ULTIMATE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES AND AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO CONDUCT NEGOTIATIONS OF THE RESOLUTION OF OWNERSHIP SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OVER SAID TERRITORY”. THEREFORE UPON OUR DECLARATION OF THE INSTRUMENT OF CESSION AS NULL & VOID – NO. 4, OF THE ABOVE DECLARATION MAKE THE ENTIRE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES AS ILLEGAL AND WE DENOUNCE THEIR CRIMINAL STEPS IN SIGNING AGREEMENTS ILLEGALLY WITH GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA SINCE 1936 AND USING THE ILLEGAL ASSUMPTION INTO POWER OF SULTAN AMIRUL OMRA AMIR BANGSA THAT UNLAWFULLY CONTROLLED THE POWER TOGETHER WITH FERDINAND E. MARCOS,FIDEL V. RAMOS,JUAN PONCE ENRILE, HARRIS SALLEH, TUN MUSTAPHA, TUN MAHATHIR & CURRENTLY PRIME MINISTER NAJIB RAZAK SULTAN HASSANAL BOLKIAH & SAFIE AFDAL OF SEMPORNA SABAH MALAYSIA. THIS CONSPIRACY MADE STEPS TO KILL , USED AND ABUSED THE LEGAL HEIRS & SUCCESSORS RIGHTS AND AUTHORITY OF OWNERSHIP AND TERRITORIAL DOMAIN TOGETHER WITH SOVEREIGN PEOPLE, BY CONSPIRING WITH THE CLAIMANTS SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO THAT THEY HAVE HARBORED AND KEPT FOR THIS INTENT TO CONCEAL THE ENTIRETY OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF SULU ARCHIPELAGO IN CONSPIRACY WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA & INDONESIA AND GOVERNMENT OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM. IT IS BY THIS AUTHORITY THAT SULTAN ESMAIL KIRAM MADE THE INSTRUMENT OF CESSION IN APRIL 22, 1962 AND THIS ILLEGAL ACTS OF TRANSFERRING THE SOVEREIGNTY WAS SEALED BY THE OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES & CONCURRENTLY THE SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS EMMANUEL PELAEZ TOGETHER WITH THE SULTAN POLITICAL APPOINTED AS PROGRAMMED SULTAN MOHAMMAD ESMAIL KIRAM BY FERDINAND E. MARCOS AS SULTAN OF SULU THAT PUT THE LIVES AND PROPERTIES OF THE TAUSUGS, MAGUINDANAOS, THE ILONGGOS MIGRANTS THE BLOOD OF RAJA SULAYMAN FROM PANAY ISLAND AT THE MERCY OF THIS ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT THAT ITS AUTHORITY WAS FROM THE ILLEGAL SULTAN OF SULU WHOSE AUTHORITY WAS BY APPOINTMENT OF THE LATE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES FERDINAND E. MARCOS WHO CONSPIRED WITH TUN MUSTAPHA THAT LED TO THE MULTIPLE MASSACRES IN MAKING THE POLITICAL AND MILITARY PROPAGANDA SUBSTANTIVE MEASURES TO COVER THEIR GREEDINESS TO TAKE OVER THE SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO, ITS BURIED ASSETS GOLD, OIL AND DIAMONDS INCLUDING THE 617, 500 METRIC TONS OF GOLD ROBBED BY ILLEGAL SULTAN AMIRUL OMRA AMIR BANGSA AND HIS LAWYER FERDINAND E. MARCOS BROUGHT TO BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS TOGETHER WITH THE TRUSTEE OF JAMALUL KIRAM II – FR. ANTONIO DIAZ/SEVERINO STA. ROMANA AND JULIAN MCLEOD TAGEAN TALLANO. FR. ANTONIO DIAZ BROUGHT IN 1939 GOLD BARS TO VATICAN AND LATER MARCOS BROUGHT IN 1965-1970 35,000 METRIC TONS OF GOLD BARS TO RED CHINA, HONGKONG, AND JAPAN, FOLLOWED BY 82,500 METRIC TONS OF GOLD SENT TO AMERICA AND AUSTRALIA AFTER WHICH 5,000 METRIC TONS SENT TO DUBAI,AND THE BALANCE OF 464,990 METRIC TONS FROM THE ORIGINAL 617,500 METRIC TONS HAD BEEN ALL MOVE TO 57 COUNTRIES ALL OVER THE WORLD AND WE AS THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS REDEEM WHAT BELONGS TO THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO FOR THE SAKE OF OUR POOR SOVEREIGN PEOPLE AND TO THE WHOLE WORLD.
    6. THAT MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA SINGAPORE BRUNEI AND THE GOVERNMENT OF ENGLAND GREAT BRITAIN SHOULD HONOR THE EXPIRATION OF THE MAPHILINDO AGREEMENT AND SHOULD CONVENE FOR THE NEW TREATY TO SIGN IN MARCH 14, 2014, THE PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC TREATY FOR 50 YEAR TENURE TO RESTORE, REHABILITATE & RECONSTRUCT THE SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO & THAT THE FEDERATIONS OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF LUPAH SUG UNTIED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO AS THE KING & QUEEN- WE STAND AS THE RULER OF THE SULTANATE OF PALEMBANG, SULTANATE OF MAGUINDANAO RAJA SULAYMAN, SULTANATE OF SULTAN KUDARAT, SULTANATE OF NORTH COTABATO RAJA MUDA OTIC, SULTANATE OF ZAMBOANGA SIBUGAY PENINSULA RAJABUAYAN, SULTANATE OF ZAMBOANGA ,SULTANATE OF BASILAN, SULTANATE OF PALAWAN & SULTANATE OF TAWI –TAWI WITH THEIR SOVEREIGN ROYAL ARM FORCES THE MORO NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT, MORO ISLAMIC LIBERATION FRONT, BANGSAMORO ISLAMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS TO BE FIXED AND REHABILITATED TOGETHER WITH THE NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT OF SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES AND THE ARM FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES UNDER THE COMMAND OF THE QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK AND THE APPOINTED PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS DARLAN P. BARCELON & THE PRIME MINISTER OF THE TRIBAL GOVERNMENT JOSE ENGINCO & THE 4 CHAIRMEN NUR MISUARI -MNLF,USTADZ EBRAHIM MURAD – MILF, USTADZ AMERIL UMBRA KATO -BIFM,SHARIEF PROFESSOR MOHAMMAD ABUBAKAR-NLFSP & THE ROYAL IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF SHARIAH & KING COUNCIL OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO SHARIEF ABDULPATTA HADJIBUN, AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC PROGRAM WITH OUR IMPLEMENTOR ERNESTO M. LUIS, JR., AND THE QUEEN COUNCIL MOVEMENT OF UNIFICATION , RESTORATION, REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION.
    7. THAT THIS DAY JANUARY 31 ,2014 IS THE END OF THE POLITICAL SUPPRESSION AND OPPRESSION OF THE SOVEREIGN PEOPLE OF THE ENTIRE SULU ARCHIPELAGO-MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA SABAH & SARAWAK TO KALIMANTAN NORTH BORNEO- WE THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK REDEEMED EVERYTHING THAT BELONGS TO THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO ITS SOVEREIGN PEOPLE AND ITS LAND WITH BURIED WEALTH & NATURAL RESOURCES, THE GOLD, OIL AND DIAMONDS BENEATH OUR SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES.
    SIGNED : JANUARY 31,2014 AT 12.:05 PM-ZAMBOANGA CITY PHILIPPINES.

    • ALL CLAIMANTS SULTAN BLOOD OF PUNJUNGAN SONS- THE KIRAMS & THE JULASPI KIRAMS- YOU WILL CARRY THE SINCE/CRIMES OF YOUR GRAND PARENTS IF YOU CONTINUE TO CONSPIRE WITH GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES- OFFICE OF THE PEACE PROCESS OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES AS BROKERED BY THE MALAYSIAN GOVERNMENT FROM THE TRIPOLI AGREEMENT- TO FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT AND THE PEACE ACCORD- TARGETING THE OIL FIELD OF LIGUASANG MARSH- THOSE THE MIS REPRESENTED THE NAME OF THE KIRAMS- AND FOR KILLING MY UNCLE JAMALUL KIRAM II IN 1936- WILL BE GIVEN DUE PUNISHMENT THAT LED TO MULTIPLE MASSACRES FROM JABIDAH, TO PATA, TO MAPATUAN TO SABAH STAND OFF, TO ZAMBOANGA STAND OFF AND NOW KILLING THE POOR INNOCENT YOUNG SOLDIERS IN THE NAME OF PEACE BUT UNDERNEATH IN TO CONTROL THE OIL FIELD AND THUS BRANDING THE BANGAMORO ISLAMIC FREEDOM FIGHTER AS THE TERRORIST BUT THE ONE DOING THE ACT OF TERROR ARE THE MILITARY OF THE ARM FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES. PLEASE 4 CLAIMANTS- MUEDZUL LAIL TAN KIRAM- RODINOOD JULASPI KIRAM/KHUDAR JULASPI KIRAM- MOHAMMAD FUAD ABDULLAH KIRAM I-ESMAIL PULALON, AND NOW AFTER JAMALUL KIRAM III DIED NOW THE BROTHER ESMAIL KIRAM– ALL OF YOU MADE MINDANAO & SULU AT THE MERCY OF THE KILLERS OF TRUTH & JUSTICE– THIS ROYAL DECREE 101– WILL MAKE YOU BOW LOW TO THE TRUE LINEAGE OF THE LAST MONARCH JAMALUL KIRAM II- MY UNCLE —THE QUEEN & I- WOULD FIX THE WRONG AND PEACE & PROSPERITY SHALL REIGN–ROYAL DECREE 101
      REDEMPTION OF ALL THE ASSETS, BANK ACCOUNTS- GOLDS & DIAMONDS DEPOSITED IN ALL PRIME BANKS ALL OVER THE WORLD,BURIED ASSETS & NATURAL RESOURCES, THE LAND TERRITORIES OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO, AND ITS SOVEREIGN PEOPLE FROM THE BONDAGE OF THE OPPRESSORS AND SUPPRESSORS OF THE POLITICAL & MILITARY GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA AND INDONESIA WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF SINGAPORE AND BRUNEI THAT WOULD CALL THE IMMEDIATE RECALL OF THE QUEEN OF SOUTHEAST ASIA & QUEEN OF ENGLAND HER ROYAL MAJESTY QUEEN ELIZABETH II TO RETURN THE POWER TO THE RIGHTFUL HEIRS & SUCCESSORS OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST HIS EXCELLENCY THE HONORABLE ICJ SULU AND NORTH BORNEO SOVEREIGN JUDGE THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK THE ROYAL CHARTER COMPANY SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM 1304-1405 & HER EXCELLENCY THE HONORABLE ICJ SULU & NORTH BORNEO SOVEREIGN JUDGE THE QUEEN OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS HER ROYAL HIGHNESS QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK & FOR THE SIGNING OF THE PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC TREATY IN MARCH 14, 2014 THUS MAKING THE ROYAL ICJ AS THE UMBRELLA OF THE PEACE & ORDER AND MASSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENTIRE SULU ARCHIPELAGO WITH THE TENURE OF 5O YEARS THAT WILL END IN MARCH 14, 2064.
      WE DECLARE TODAY JANUARY 31, 2014 AT 12:05 PM ON THE FAILURE OF THE 72 HOURS ULTIMATUM FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES CARETAKER PRESIDENT BENIGNO SIMEON AQUINO III AND THE CABINETS TO HONOR TO THE AUTHORITY OF THE QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK & RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & THE CALL FOR CEASEFIRE UNTIL MARCH 14, 2014 SIGNING OF PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC TREATY AS SUCH THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES SHALL BE CHARGED FOR TREASON, REBELLION AND SEDITION BY THE ROYAL IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF SHARIAH OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO. THIS LEGAL STEPS IS BASED ON,
      1. THAT THE CARPENTER AGREEMENT GOT ITS DEFAULT BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES IN CONSPIRACY OF THE PHILIPPINE GOVERNMENT SHALL BE GIVEN SANCTION FOR THE CONNIVANCE WITH SULTAN AMIRUL OMRA AMIRBANGSA, FERDINAND E. MARCOS, FIDEL V. RAMOS AND HIS COHORTS. IN THIS LIGHT THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS SHALL IMPOSE DAMAGES & PROPER COMPENSATION THROUGH THE ROYAL ICJ SUPREME JUDGE HIS ROYAL HIGHNESS RICKY NATHANIEL CHAIRMAN OF ICC/ICJ & THE NEW GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS.
      2. THAT THE KILLING OF SULTAN JAMALUL KIRAM II ALSO KNOWN AS SAHIBOL GARY ABDURAJAK OF MAIMBUNG SULU IN JUNE 6, 1936, SHOULD BE GIVEN JUSTICE AND THAT HIS KILLING LED TO MULTIPLE MASSACRES FROM JABIDAH, TO PATA, TO SABAH STAND OFF, TO ZAMBOANGA STAND OFF AND NOW THE KILLINGS IN LIGUASANG MARSH AS ORDERED BY THE SAME MANIPULATORS INSDIDE THE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES. REAL CULPRIT SHOULD BE LITIGATED IN THE COURT OF LAW OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF SHARIAH OF THE LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO. WHOEVER FINDS GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT SHALL BE JAILED RECLUSION PERPETUA AND ACCORDING TO THE LAW OF SHARIAH OF THE HADITH AND QURAN.
      3. THAT IN CONSPIRACY AND PROTECTIVENESS OF THE ROYAL FAMILY IN BRUNEI DARUSSALAM, THEY KEPT THE REAL IDENTITY OF JAMALUL KIRAM II AND NEVER LINK HIM TO THE ROYALTY OF BRUNEI AND EVEN HIS NAME AS AL-MARHUM PENGIRAN PERMANCHA SAHIBUL RAE WAL-MASHUARAH PENGIRAN ANAK HAJI MOHAMMAD ALAM AL MARHUM PENGIRAN BANDAHARA PENGIRAN ANAK ABDUL RAHMAN WAS COVERED AND MISLED AS THE YEARS GOES ON, SO AS NOT TO CONNECT TO HIS SON PENGIRAN MOHAMMAD KAMALUDDIN AND HIS DAUGHTER PENGIRAN RAJA SALEHA BUT TODAY AND ONWARD THIS TRUTH OF DIRECT LINEAGE MUST NOW BE KNOWN THROUGH OUT THE BANKING INSTITUTIONS AND THE BANK OF ENGLAND ,WORLD BANK, CENTRAL BANK OF THE PHILIPPINES & BANK NEGARA AND THE HIGH COURTS OF ALL POLITICAL GOVERNMENT OF THE WORLD IN FAVOR OF THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK.
      4. THAT THE INSTRUMENT OF CESSION OF THE TERRITORY OF NORTH BORNEO DONE BY SULTAN MOHAMMAD ESMAIL KIRAM THE APPOINTED SULTAN OF FERDINAND E. MARCOS & ACTED ON THE AUTHORITY OF THE RUMA BECHARA IS NULL & VOID ON THE BASIS OF THE CONSPIRACY IN KILLING THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO SULTAN JAMALUL KIRAM II AND THE CONCEALMENT OF THE TRUE IDENTITY OF SAHIBOL GARY ABDURAJAK & SAHIBUL RAE OF BRUNEI AS SULTAN OMAR ALI SAIFFUDIN II LED TO THE CONSPIRACY AND DECEIT OF PLACING THE POLITICAL HEIRS IN 1939 DAYANG DAYANG HADJI PIANDAO, PUTLI TARHATA KIRAM, PUTLI SAKINUR KIRAM, ESMAIL KIRAM, DATU PUNJUNGAN KIRAM, SITTI MARIAM KIRAM, SITTI RADA KIRAM, SITTI PUTLI JAHARA KIRAM AND MORA NAPSA THE CLAIMANTS HEIRS THAT FILED CASE TO THE HIGH COURT OF BORNEO (CIVIL SUIT NO. 16/39, ENTITLED DAYANG DAYANG PIANDAO KIRAM OF JOLO,PHILIPPINES & 8 OTHERS VS. THE GOVERNMENT OF BORNEO AND OTHERS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DECLARING THEM AS HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS OF THE SULTAN OF SULU ENTITLEMENT TO RECEIVE THE SAID ANNUAL RENTAL. IN DECEMBER 19, 1939 THE HIGH COURT OF NORTH BORNEO RENDERED DECISION DECLARING THE ABOVE 9 HEIRS AS THE “PRIVATE HEIRS” ENTITLED TO RECEIVE WHAT THE SAID COURT CALLED “CESSION MONEY” BUT THE HEIRS CALLED “RENTAL”, WHICHEVER THEIR FIGHT BE, WE RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK DECLARED THAT THE SAID DECISION OF THE COURT IS OVER RULLED BY OUR EXISTENCE AND AS THE GENUINE REDEEMERS OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO WEALTH, ASSETS AND PROPERTIES, AFTER THE EXPIRATION OF THE MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA AGREEMENT IN SEPTEMBER 16, 2013, THAT EVEN THE DECISION OF THE HIGH COURT OF NORTH BORNEO THAT THE “SUCCESSORS IN SOVEREIGNTY OF THE SULTAN ARE THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS” BECOMES ILLEGAL & NULL & VOID IN THE BASIS OF THE REDEMPTION OF THE GENUINE REDEEMERS RAJA MOHAMAMD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK AND THAT THE THREE POLITICAL GOVERNMENT, MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA REPRESENTED BY THEIR HEAD OF STATES ARE CONSIDERED CARETAKERS OF THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO SINCE JUNE 6, 1936. THEREFORE THE JUDGEMENT OF JUSTICE C.F.C MAKASKIE OF THE HIGH COURT OF BORNEO DATED DECEMBER 18, 1939 IS CONSIDERED NULL & VOID UPON THE ICJ RULING REFERENCE BOE/SIG-SULU/999999999-11/MINDANAO ECONOMY/RM/6T-THURSDAY,OCTOBER 10,2013 (GREGORIAN CALENDAR) THAT SAID REDEMPTION IS BACK TO THE RIGHTFUL OWNERS OF THE SOVEREIEGNTY OF THE ENTIRE SULU ARCHIPELAGO OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO, THAT OVER RULED ALL THE CLAIMS OF PHILIPPINES, MALAYSIA, INDONESIA AND ALL CLAIMANTS SULTAN OF SULU ON THE SOVERIEGNTY & SUCCESSORSHIP OF THE THRONE OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF LUPAH SUG SULTANATE OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO.
      5. THAT IN JUNE 20, 1946, THE BRITISH COMPANY THROUGH THE REPRESENTATION OF GUSTAVUS BARON DE OVERBECK AND ALFRED DENT THAT SIGNED THE LEASE AGREEMENT WITH OUR GRANDFATHER JAMALUL ALAM IN JANUARY 22, 1878 TRANSFERRED TO THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT ITS RIGHTS AND INTEREST OVER THE TERRITORY OF NORTH BORNEO COULD ONLY BE FIXED BY THE HEIRS AND SUCCESSORS RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK, AS THE REDDEMERS OF THE SAID TERRITORIES TO BE DEALTH WITH THE ROYAL INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE HEADED BY HRH RICKY NATHANIEL AND THE ROYALTIES OF GREAT BRITAIN QUEEN ELIZABETH II OF ENGLAND & THE ROYALTIES OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM. ALL CLAIMANTS SHALL BE GIVEN DUE PUNISHMENT IF THEY CONTINUE CLAIMING WITH THE PROOF THAT THEY ARE THE BLOODS THAT CONCEAL THE TRUTH AND KILLED JAMALUL KIRAM II & THE CRUCIAL CONSPIRACY DONE BY THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES SINCE 1936 AS EVIDENCED BY THE HOUSE OF CONCURRENT RESOLUTION NO. 42 , 2ND C.R.P) THAT HAD BEEN PASSED BY THE HOUSE OF REPRENSETATIVES IN APRIL 28, 1950 CERTIFIED BY SECRETARY OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES NENE PIMENTEL THAT”THE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION EXPRESSING THE SENSE OF THE CONGRESS OF THE PHILIPPINES THAT NORTH BORNEO BELONGS TO THE HEIRS OF THE SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO AND TO THE ULTIMATE SOVEREIGNTY OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES AND AUTHORIZING THE PRESIDENT TO CONDUCT NEGOTIATIONS OF THE RESOLUTION OF OWNERSHIP SOVEREIGN JURISDICTION OVER SAID TERRITORY”. THEREFORE UPON OUR DECLARATION OF THE INSTRUMENT OF CESSION AS NULL & VOID – NO. 4, OF THE ABOVE DECLARATION MAKE THE ENTIRE SOVEREIGN AUTHORITY OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE PHILIPPINES AS ILLEGAL AND WE DENOUNCE THEIR CRIMINAL STEPS IN SIGNING AGREEMENTS ILLEGALLY WITH GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA SINCE 1936 AND USING THE ILLEGAL ASSUMPTION INTO POWER OF SULTAN AMIRUL OMRA AMIR BANGSA THAT UNLAWFULLY CONTROLLED THE POWER TOGETHER WITH FERDINAND E. MARCOS,FIDEL V. RAMOS,JUAN PONCE ENRILE, HARRIS SALLEH, TUN MUSTAPHA, TUN MAHATHIR & CURRENTLY PRIME MINISTER NAJIB RAZAK SULTAN HASSANAL BOLKIAH & SAFIE AFDAL OF SEMPORNA SABAH MALAYSIA. THIS CONSPIRACY MADE STEPS TO KILL , USED AND ABUSED THE LEGAL HEIRS & SUCCESSORS RIGHTS AND AUTHORITY OF OWNERSHIP AND TERRITORIAL DOMAIN TOGETHER WITH SOVEREIGN PEOPLE, BY CONSPIRING WITH THE CLAIMANTS SULTAN OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO THAT THEY HAVE HARBORED AND KEPT FOR THIS INTENT TO CONCEAL THE ENTIRETY OF THE OWNERSHIP OF THE SOVEREIGNTY OF SULU ARCHIPELAGO IN CONSPIRACY WITH THE GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA & INDONESIA AND GOVERNMENT OF BRUNEI DARUSSALAM. IT IS BY THIS AUTHORITY THAT SULTAN ESMAIL KIRAM MADE THE INSTRUMENT OF CESSION IN APRIL 22, 1962 AND THIS ILLEGAL ACTS OF TRANSFERRING THE SOVEREIGNTY WAS SEALED BY THE OFFICE OF THE VICE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES & CONCURRENTLY THE SECRETARY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS EMMANUEL PELAEZ TOGETHER WITH THE SULTAN POLITICAL APPOINTED AS PROGRAMMED SULTAN MOHAMMAD ESMAIL KIRAM BY FERDINAND E. MARCOS AS SULTAN OF SULU THAT PUT THE LIVES AND PROPERTIES OF THE TAUSUGS, MAGUINDANAOS, THE ILONGGOS MIGRANTS THE BLOOD OF RAJA SULAYMAN FROM PANAY ISLAND AT THE MERCY OF THIS ILLEGAL GOVERNMENT THAT ITS AUTHORITY WAS FROM THE ILLEGAL SULTAN OF SULU WHOSE AUTHORITY WAS BY APPOINTMENT OF THE LATE PRESIDENT OF THE PHILIPPINES FERDINAND E. MARCOS WHO CONSPIRED WITH TUN MUSTAPHA THAT LED TO THE MULTIPLE MASSACRES IN MAKING THE POLITICAL AND MILITARY PROPAGANDA SUBSTANTIVE MEASURES TO COVER THEIR GREEDINESS TO TAKE OVER THE SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO, ITS BURIED ASSETS GOLD, OIL AND DIAMONDS INCLUDING THE 617, 500 METRIC TONS OF GOLD ROBBED BY ILLEGAL SULTAN AMIRUL OMRA AMIR BANGSA AND HIS LAWYER FERDINAND E. MARCOS BROUGHT TO BANGKO SENTRAL NG PILIPINAS TOGETHER WITH THE TRUSTEE OF JAMALUL KIRAM II – FR. ANTONIO DIAZ/SEVERINO STA. ROMANA AND JULIAN MCLEOD TAGEAN TALLANO. FR. ANTONIO DIAZ BROUGHT IN 1939 GOLD BARS TO VATICAN AND LATER MARCOS BROUGHT IN 1965-1970 35,000 METRIC TONS OF GOLD BARS TO RED CHINA, HONGKONG, AND JAPAN, FOLLOWED BY 82,500 METRIC TONS OF GOLD SENT TO AMERICA AND AUSTRALIA AFTER WHICH 5,000 METRIC TONS SENT TO DUBAI,AND THE BALANCE OF 464,990 METRIC TONS FROM THE ORIGINAL 617,500 METRIC TONS HAD BEEN ALL MOVE TO 57 COUNTRIES ALL OVER THE WORLD AND WE AS THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS REDEEM WHAT BELONGS TO THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO FOR THE SAKE OF OUR POOR SOVEREIGN PEOPLE AND TO THE WHOLE WORLD.
      6. THAT MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA SINGAPORE BRUNEI AND THE GOVERNMENT OF ENGLAND GREAT BRITAIN SHOULD HONOR THE EXPIRATION OF THE MAPHILINDO AGREEMENT AND SHOULD CONVENE FOR THE NEW TREATY TO SIGN IN MARCH 14, 2014, THE PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC TREATY FOR 50 YEAR TENURE TO RESTORE, REHABILITATE & RECONSTRUCT THE SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES OF THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO & THAT THE FEDERATIONS OF THE ROYAL IMPERIAL KINGDOM OF LUPAH SUG UNTIED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO AS THE KING & QUEEN- WE STAND AS THE RULER OF THE SULTANATE OF PALEMBANG, SULTANATE OF MAGUINDANAO RAJA SULAYMAN, SULTANATE OF SULTAN KUDARAT, SULTANATE OF NORTH COTABATO RAJA MUDA OTIC, SULTANATE OF ZAMBOANGA SIBUGAY PENINSULA RAJABUAYAN, SULTANATE OF ZAMBOANGA ,SULTANATE OF BASILAN, SULTANATE OF PALAWAN & SULTANATE OF TAWI –TAWI WITH THEIR SOVEREIGN ROYAL ARM FORCES THE MORO NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT, MORO ISLAMIC LIBERATION FRONT, BANGSAMORO ISLAMIC FREEDOM FIGHTERS TO BE FIXED AND REHABILITATED TOGETHER WITH THE NATIONAL LIBERATION FRONT OF SOUTHERN PHILIPPINES AND THE ARM FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES UNDER THE COMMAND OF THE QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK AND THE APPOINTED PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES ISLANDS DARLAN P. BARCELON & THE PRIME MINISTER OF THE TRIBAL GOVERNMENT JOSE ENGINCO & THE 4 CHAIRMEN NUR MISUARI -MNLF,USTADZ EBRAHIM MURAD – MILF, USTADZ AMERIL UMBRA KATO -BIFM,SHARIEF PROFESSOR MOHAMMAD ABUBAKAR-NLFSP & THE ROYAL IMPERIAL HIGH COURT OF SHARIAH & KING COUNCIL OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO SHARIEF ABDULPATTA HADJIBUN, AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PEACE DEFENSE ECONOMIC PROGRAM WITH OUR IMPLEMENTOR ERNESTO M. LUIS, JR., AND THE QUEEN COUNCIL MOVEMENT OF UNIFICATION , RESTORATION, REHABILITATION AND RECONSTRUCTION.
      7. THAT THIS DAY JANUARY 31 ,2014 IS THE END OF THE POLITICAL SUPPRESSION AND OPPRESSION OF THE SOVEREIGN PEOPLE OF THE ENTIRE SULU ARCHIPELAGO-MALAYSIA PHILIPPINES INDONESIA SABAH & SARAWAK TO KALIMANTAN NORTH BORNEO- WE THE HEIRS & SUCCESSORS RAJA MOHAMMAD GHAMAR MAMAY HASAN ABDURAJAK & QUEEN MARIA MAKILING HELEN FATIMA NASARIA PANOLINO ABDURAJAK REDEEMED EVERYTHING THAT BELONGS TO THE ROYAL EMPIRE OF THE EAST LUPAH SUG UNITED KINGDOM OF SULU & NORTH BORNEO ITS SOVEREIGN PEOPLE AND ITS LAND WITH BURIED WEALTH & NATURAL RESOURCES, THE GOLD, OIL AND DIAMONDS BENEATH OUR SOVEREIGN TERRITORIES.
      SIGNED : JANUARY 31,2014 AT 12.:05 PM-ZAMBOANGA CITY PHILIPPINES.

  25. salam, boleh kah saudara memberikan sumber dimana saudara dapatkan surat memorendum yang mengistiharkan filipina tidak lagi mengiktiraf kesultanan Sulu itu. ?? mkluman tuan sy harapkan untuk mnyiapkan tesis sy

  26. bukan nak menyalahkan angkatan bersenjata malaysia,tapi ada kelemahan..
    kenapa hampir 2 minggu diberi peluang untuk berbincang dengan penceroboh/pengganas..lihat kes al amaunah..tak sampai seminggu sudah selesai.
    pimpinan sulu ckp mahu berjumpa seseorang yg penting untuk berbincang?siapa?..
    mereka berani dtg kerana sabah sudah dipenuhi oleh saudara mara mereka..yang haram..yang ada ic..malah anggota keselamatan kita juga dikatakan jadi dalang..orang politik pon sibuk manipulasi mengatakan lawan mereka jadi dalang sebenar..yang kesudahannya tak dapat dibuktikan dengan fakta yang kukuh..

    percayalah..isu sebegini takkan habis..sebab borneo terutama sabah sudah diduduki oleh pendatang asing dgn jumlah yang begitu ramai..

Tinggalkan Jawapan

Masukkan butiran anda dibawah atau klik ikon untuk log masuk akaun:

WordPress.com Logo

Anda sedang menulis komen melalui akaun WordPress.com anda. Log Out / Tukar )

Twitter picture

Anda sedang menulis komen melalui akaun Twitter anda. Log Out / Tukar )

Facebook photo

Anda sedang menulis komen melalui akaun Facebook anda. Log Out / Tukar )

Google+ photo

Anda sedang menulis komen melalui akaun Google+ anda. Log Out / Tukar )

Connecting to %s