Search This Blog

Tuesday, March 19, 2013

Brunei Times article counter argument against Sulu claim

(The Brunei Times) - Succeeding Sultans of Brunei have denied that northern Borneo was given to Sulu, and only the weight of Sulu tradition supports the claim. The weight of Brunei tradition challenges it

#Sultan Abdul Mubin usurped the throne after killing Sultan Muhammad Ali when the latter tried to stop Sultan Abdul Mubin from taking his revenge for the death of his son killed by the son of Sultan Muhammad Ali. Sultan Abdul Mubin appointed Sultan Muhydin as Bendahara but eventually SultanMuhydin tricked Sultan Abdul Mubin into leaving Brunei for Pulau Cermin and appointed himself as the new Sultan of Brunei. The two Sultans fought against each other and Sultan Muhyidin finally triumphed, said to be due to the assistance provided by the Sulu Sultanate.

Earlier Sir Hugh Low described the negotiation between Sulu and Brunei: "the Bataraa of Soolok went up to Bruni and met the Sultan Muaddin and having feasted and drank, the Sultan asked the Batara for his assistance to destroy the enemies at the island, promising that if the island should be conquered, the land from the North as far as westward as Kimani should belong to Soolook".

HR Hughes-Hallett writing in the Journal of the Malayan Branch of the Royal Asiatic Society published in August 1940 entitled A Sketch of the History of Brunei wrote: "by the beginning of the 18th century, the kingdom (Brunei) had been territorially diminished by the cession to the Sultan of Sulu in the north".

CA Majul in his book Muslims in the Philippines (1973) referred to a letter from Sultan Jamalul Azam of Sulu to the Governor General of Spain on 17 September 1879 that the coast area from Kimanis to Balikpapan was to pay tribute to the Sultan which he said proved that the Brunei territory facing Suluk was ceded to Suluk.

Interestingly enough, Pehin Jamil Umar writing in his book, Tarsilah Brunei II: Period of Splendour and Fame (2007), countered all of the above. Pehin Jamil did not deny the fact that the Sulus were invited and promised the northern Brunei territory by Sultan Muhydin if they helped him win the civil war against Sultan Abdul Mubin. However, during the battle for Pulau Cermin, the Sulu forces who were supposed to attack the island from Pulau Keingaran and from the sea, did not do so. They were terrified by the resistance of Sultan Abdul Mubin's forces in Pulau Cermin. It was only after Sultan Muhydin had won the battle did the Sulu forces landed and took the opportunity to seize a number of war booties.

According to Pehin Jamil, Sultan Muhydin refused to cede the territories claimed by Sulu. Pehin Jamil noted that the area was only "claimed" and not "ceded", as Sir Stamford Raffles, in his book "History of Java" (1830), had noted "on the north-east of Borneo proper (Brunei) lies a very considerable territory (Sabah), the sovereignty of which has long been claimed by Sulu Government".

Pehin Jamil further noted that according to the oral tradition, Sulu continued to press their claim. In 1775, one of their chiefs came to Brunei pretending to seek fresh water. What they really wanted was to seek an audience with the Sultan regarding Sabah. However, the Sultan ordered one of the chief wazirs to see them and he threatened that if they wanted to pursue their intention, he will kill them all. The Sulus immediately left. Despite that setback, the Sulus continue to maintain their claims.

The argument that Brunei has not ceded Sabah to Sulu is supported by LR Wright in her book The Origins of British Borneo (1970). She wrote: "indeed, the legitimacy of the Sulu claim to the territory (North Borneo) is in considerable doubt partly because of the unreliability of tarsilas such as 'Selesilah', which in many cases are nothing more than written-down legends to enhance the status of the royal house which produced them. Succeeding Sultans of Brunei have denied that northern Borneo was given to Sulu, and only the weight of Sulu tradition supports the claim. The weight of Brunei tradition challenges it".

The Sulu claim is currently resting on that treaty which was mentioned at the beginning of this article signed by Sultan Jamalalulazam of Sulu appointing Baron de Overbeck as Dato Bendahara and Raja Sandakan on 22nd January 1878. But at the beginning of this article, there is, in fact, another treaty which was signed earlier by Sultan Abdul Momin appointing Baron de Overbeck as the Maharaja Sabah, Rajah Gaya and Sandakan signed on 29th December 1877. In 1877, the Brunei Sultanate then still believed and maintained that the territory was in fact still under the control of the Brunei Sultanate.

Another interesting document is the British North Borneo Treaties Protocol of 1885 signed in Madrid, which is also known as the Madrid Protocol of 1885, a copy of which can be found on Sabah State Attorney General's website. It was signed by the British, Germany and Spain who was the predecessor government of the Philippines. The two most important articles are Article I British and Germany recognising the sovereignty of Spain over the Sulu Archipelago and Article III Spain relinquishing all claims to Borneo.

This article serves only to point out that past events have repercussions on the present and more so if the past events were not clearly defined as in this particular case.

The Brunei Times

60 comments:

  1. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    Most heirs to long-dead sultanates would be laughed out of the room if they laid claim to modern territory on the basis of a 135-year old claim. Yet, with the self-styled Sultan of Sulu sending an armed gang to invade Sabah on the basis of such a claim, let us consider whether his claim is valid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. INTERESTING HOW UMNO CYBER HACKERS SPAM THE PAGES.....

      NO MATTER WHAT THEY SAY TO JUSTIFY MALAYSIA it does not detracts from what Nur Musuari observed in his latest Al Jazeera interview.

      He said Malaya colonised Sabah and Sarawak.

      If Sabah is not part of Malaysia neither is is part of Malaysia since the original Malaysia concept ceased to exist when Singapore left in 1965.

      Malaysia now exists because Malaya militarily occupies Sabah and Sarawak and this is recognised as a de facto occupation, therefore the current ruler of Sabah and Sarawak.

      If the people can unite to expel the UMNO rule and occupation than Malaysia will be no more!

      THE ONLY VALID CLAIM ON SABAH IS THE CLAIM OF THE SABAH PEOPLE TO TAKE BACK THEIR COUNTRY FOR SELF-DETERMINATION OUTSIDE MALAYSIA.

      NEITHER SABAH NOR SARAWAK DOES NOT BELONG TO MALAYA!



      Delete
    2. SORRY SABAH SARAWAK DID NOT "JOIN" MAlAYSIA BUT SHANGHAID INTO MALAYSIA - WHY REPEAT THIS MISTAKE?

      Sabah and Sarawak were forced into Malaysia under an UNEQUAL Malaysia Treaty made on 9 July 1963.

      You need to read just the first few clauses of the Agreement to figure this out. The Agreement described the status of North Borneo and Sarawak as "colonies". It was not signed by Sabah and Sarawak as represented by its own elected MPs of independent states at the time of signing.

      Sabah only became independent on 31 August 1963 and Sarawak on 22 July 1963. Any one can see that these dates are after 9 July 1963. Colonies do not have the legal standing as "sovereign states" to make international treaties.

      See this You Tube videos for further education:

      NORTH BORNEO & SARAWAK NOT PART OF MALAYSIA
      http://youtu.be/MG6v9_b7NGE

      NUR MISUARI REVEALS UMNO BEHIND PEOPLE SMUGGLING (PAID ABU SAYYAF 30 MILLION TO DO JOB)
      http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/talktojazeera/

      MAHATHIR BBC INTERVIEW
      http://youtu.be/N8HmKgxw-HE

      MERDEKA MERDEKA SABAH MERDEKA!
      http://youtu.be/8Z9N-oPpkVo

      Sabah Sarawak Keluar Malaysia (SSKM): Doris Jones Part 1
      http://youtu.be/CUku_a5pW5E

      REQUIEM FOR A LOST KINGDOM
      http://www.youtube.com/user/SarawakMerdeka?feature=watch

      SARAWAK MERDEKA!
      http://youtu.be/a1mS1Xdzv2U
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5iK8jWhhUQ&feature=share&list=UU_WQKhQzuB8PNecHwENJVZw

      Delete
    3. There are important lessons to be learnt from the intrusion by Sulu terrorists into Sabah, which resulted in an armed conflict between security forces and the gunmen.



      Delete
    4. Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said: "It was a wake-up call". This speaks volumes about Malaysia facing external threats and why it is important for the government and the people not to take safety for granted.

      Delete

    5. We have been blessed with peace and stability all this while and this intrusion by terrorists from a foreign country took us by surprise.

      Delete
    6. Questions are being asked why it happened now and over a claim to Sabah by the terrorists.

      Delete
    7. It is a reminder to everyone that the safety and security of our country must never be taken for granted, even during peace times.

      Delete
    8. Steps are being taken to beef up security in the east coast of Sabah in terms of the military's equipment, training, skills and intelligence gathering.

      Delete

    9. Measures are in place to establish the Eastern Sabah Security Command to deal with threats.

      Delete
    10. Six police stations will be built there.

      Delete
    11. It is our hope that these measures will keep Sabah safe now and in the future.

      Delete

    12. What I would like to see from the Lahad Datu episode is not only a boost in the safety aspect but also the spirit of patriotism, which must be present at all times.

      Delete
    13. It is only in crises that the patriotism of Malaysians is put to the test.

      Delete

    14. Instead of rallying behind our security forces, there are some who belittle and make insensitive remarks about our courageous men, who are risking their lives to defend and protect the honour, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Malaysia.

      Delete
    15. The Bernama documentary about the Sabah intrusion should not only be shown on television channels but also made available to schools so that our young generation will understand about this intrusion and why it is important for them to appreciate the sacrifices by security forces in defending the sovereignty of our country.

      Delete
    16. It will also help to instil patriotism in our young generation and make them realise the importance of peace, harmony and unity.

      Delete
    17. Apakah tujuannya serangan yang menyebabkan kematian dan merosakkan keamanan.

      Delete
  2. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    First of all, Jamalul Kiram is just one of nine claimants to the defunct title of Sultan of Sulu. He is by no means the recognised heir, rather he has chosen to call himself the "Sultan", his brother the "Crown Prince", and his daughter "Princess" etc. More importantly, the Sulu sultanate was itself abolished way back in 1917. This would a laughable situation if the Kirams weren't backed up by an armed gang, ready to kill in a desperate bid to be taken seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    The Sulu claim to Sabah stems from its acquisition by the Sulu sultanate in 1704 as a reward for helping the Sultan of Brunei to quell a rebellion. In 1878, the then Sulu ruler ceded the territory to the British North Borneo Company (NBC), which, in turn, transferred sovereign rights over Sabah to Britain in 1946.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    When the British granted independence to the Federation of Malaysia in 1963, Sabah was one of the territories turned over to Malaysia, which continues to pay a token rent to the heirs of the Sulu sultanate to this day. That in a nutshell is the history.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    It is important to remember that, after Sabah was ceded to Britain in 1946, neither the Sulu clan, nor the Philippine government that was its formal successor, made any claim on Sabah till 1962. The fact that they didn't see fit to raise this claim for sixteen years shows that they realised an opportunity much later. In June 1962, the Philippine government lodged a formal claim to sovereignty over Sabah, or British North Borneo as they called it. But Malaysia's claim proved far stronger.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Philippines did not lodge it's claim in 1946 because the Sultanate still exists and exercises proprietary rights hence the lease payments in action. By 1962, Sultan Ismael Kiram II relinquished his sovereign power to the government of the Republic of the Philippines and asked the government to press it's claim on Sabah at all cost since the Sultan still has the proprietary rights on the territory. So you see, it makes you an idiot if you are not researching history with intellectual honesty.

      Delete
    2. It was not even "Malaysia's claim" but rather "British cunning".

      Delete
  6. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    The legal question centred on the translation of the Malay-Arabic word 'pajak' that appeared in the vernacular version of the 1878 agreement that handed Sabah over to the British North Borneo Company (NBC). In common parlance, the term could be used to denote both "to lease" or "to cede".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "to cede" = untuk mengesid
      "to lease" = untuk memajak

      cede = menyerahkan
      lease = pajakan

      Language 101

      Delete
  7. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    The British and Malayan governments pointed out that the English language document agreed by the Sultan of Sulu categorically stated that the land was ceded "forever and until the end of time", and not leased as the Philippines claimed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, do we need to study Bahasa Melayu just to get the point? Or do we need language expert to accurately translate it for us?

      Delete
  8. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    Malaya's position was further reinforced by the International Court of Justice ruling that "a historic title, no matter how persuasively claimed on the basis of legal instruments and exercise of authority, cannot – except in the most extraordinary circumstances – prevail in law over the rights of non-self-governing people to claim independence and establish their sovereignty through the exercise of bona fide self-determination."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "except in the most extraordinary circumstances" which means the ruling is not absolute. And in this case you are giving us the hint on how to win this issue.

      Delete
  9. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    Indeed, in line with the internationally accepted principle of self-determination, the people of Sabah expressed their preference to join the larger Malaysian Federation through a free referendum in 1962 that was supervised by a United Nations fact-finding mission.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Cobbold Commission, was a Commission of "Enquiry" set up to determine whether the people of North Borneo (now Sabah) and Sarawak supported the proposal to create the Malaysia consisting of Malaya, Singapore, North Borneo, and Sarawak. How can you be sure if it was really a REFERENDUM when it says it was a Commission of ENQUIRY? There was no election but a mere poll survey just like what Pulse Asia is doing. And besides, how can you be sure that the survey was not "biased" when the members of the commission are BRITISH AND MALAYANS? An another point is, the commission does not have the exact statistics of the findings like demographics - ethnic groups, age, gender, profession or occupation, etc etc. I know this as I worked for a survey company in the US.

      Delete
  10. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    And again in the 1963 election, the majority of the people of Sabah showed they had no desire to be a part of the Philippines, or, for that matter, of the historical Sulu sultanate.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    That is where the matter rests today. To mollify Jamalul Kiram, the Philippine government is now considering taking Malaysia to the International Court of Justice, but any Philippine claim to Sabah stands little chance of being recognised.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh really!? Then why is it that since 1963 Malaysia continually ignored the case that the Philippines filed in ICJ in the Hague to settle the ownership?

      Delete
  12. The joining of Sabah in the formation of Malaysia in 1963 eliminates any claim on the state. as such, any claims made on Sabah today was invalid.

    It is perhaps ironic that Sabah first came into Sulu possession in 1704 because they helped end an uprising, yet in 2013 the Sulu claimants are trying to regain it by attempting an armed intrusion themselves. This is their last stab at history, before the Sulu claim will have to give way finally to the modern reality.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So you underestimated Filipino resolve eh. Well, let's see.

      Delete
    2. Kedua kerajaan harus kerjasama untuk selesaikan isu ini.

      Delete
  13. arisan Pembebasan Kebangsaan Moro (MNLF) mengiktiraf dan menghormati keputusan rakyat Sabah menyertai Malaysia pada 1963 dan menurut Pengerusinya Muslimin Sema rakyat Sabah berhak menentukan masa depan mereka dengan menyertai Malaysia 50 tahun lalu dan hak ini tidak boleh dipertikai.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Kami (MNLF) akur dengan kehendak rakyat Sabah menentukan nasib mereka sendiri. Mereka membuat keputusan menyertai Malaysia dan kami menghormati keputusan mereka, itu pendirian kami,” katanya dalam temu bual melalui telefon dari Manila,

    ReplyDelete
  15. Muslimin, yang juga Naib Datuk Bandar Cotabato City di selatan Filipina berkata, dalam kunjungannya ke Sabah pada 1973, beliau melihat sendiri kebahagiaan dinikmati rakyat negeri itu setelah menyertai Malaysia. Muslimin menjelaskan beliau mempunyai ramai saudara-mara di Sabah yang setia kepada Malaysia dan hidup dengan penuh sejahtera.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Mereka hidup selesa dan makmur di Sabah, keadaan yang tidak mungkin dapat mereka nikmati sekiranya terus berada di selatan Filipina. Saya tidak mahu sesuatu yang buruk berlaku kepada mereka berikutan apa yang berlaku sekarang,” katanya.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Here is the obvious answer to all the questions about Sulu owning Sabah...... It was only after Sultan Muhydin had won the battle did the Sulu forces landed and took the opportunity to seize a number of war booties. War Booties....simple plain Pirates..just like in the past they caused terror in the Philipines, against cargo, boats,torists, and went to sovereign lands and kidnapped tourist for its own gain.....Lust, Greed for Booties... It has always been about stealing to them and lying, it states in the article they coward to fight till after all were dead and stole war booties....so to answer do they have the authority or decency to take this matter to courts or talk it over with Sabahans and malaysians? The answer has been in front of us all these years...Pirates have or own nothing, they been terrorizing the world for decades..nothing respectable about that. With the obvious attitude they show the world on claiming only proves they are just a bunch of crooks,pirates,terrorists and gangsters who have no patience for courts,talks and whatsoever but instead only show their true colors they own nothing...they are nothing and always pose as nothing to the world..bunch of crooks on a tiny island breeding more crooks... If I was Malaysia I eradicate that island and claim it..the price for their wrongful evil deeds....and if any Govt. supports them or have sympathy for them are as well crooks and needs to be eradicated simple as that... I am lad Brunei stepped up to the plate and exposed those pirates for who they are...5 stars for Brunei....as for the current govt. in Malaysia if you have any doing in this mess it be wise to change your ways and stop supporting gansters and crooks before you lose everything....It appears not only Sabah and Sarawak states are getting tired of the Political BS..many West Malaysian states are starting to show grief...You will lose so much if you look down on your people... Tyranny never wins... Malu this mess.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is a big case of stereotyping. The ancestors may have been acting like pirates but the Sultanate did not. The people you are referring to are the Abu Sayaf terrorists and are in no way subject to the Sultan of Sulu nor are part of the Sultanate. See how you look like an idiot if you are not researching history before posting something like the one above. Very laughable!

      Delete
    2. There are truths in what Roland was saying, except on his personal opinions on certain matters.

      There are so many legal evidences pointing out that to the facts that many local native land titles within the area of territorial claim are still bearing the Seal of Sultan of Brunei Government till this very day. Having say that, I never heard or seen, perhaps there are out there somewhere, any native land titles bearing the Seal of Sulu Sultanate in the same area.

      Anak Sabah

      Delete
  18. Here is the obvious answer to all the questions about Sulu owning Sabah...... It was only after Sultan Muhydin had won the battle did the Sulu forces landed and took the opportunity to seize a number of war booties. War Booties....simple plain Pirates..just like in the past they caused terror in the Philipines, against cargo, boats,torists, and went to sovereign lands and kidnapped tourist for its own gain.....Lust, Greed for Booties... It has always been about stealing to them and lying, it states in the article they coward to fight till after all were dead and stole war booties....so to answer do they have the authority or decency to take this matter to courts or talk it over with Sabahans and malaysians? The answer has been in front of us all these years...Pirates have or own nothing, they been terrorizing the world for decades..nothing respectable about that. With the obvious attitude they show the world on claiming only proves they are just a bunch of crooks,pirates,terrorists and gangsters who have no patience for courts,talks and whatsoever but instead only show their true colors they own nothing...they are nothing and always pose as nothing to the world..bunch of crooks on a tiny island breeding more crooks... If I was Malaysia I eradicate that island and claim it..the price for their wrongful evil deeds....and if any Govt. supports them or have sympathy for them are as well crooks and needs to be eradicated simple as that... I am lad Brunei stepped up to the plate and exposed those pirates for who they are...5 stars for Brunei....as for the current govt. in Malaysia if you have any doing in this mess it be wise to change your ways and stop supporting gansters and crooks before you lose everything....It appears not only Sabah and Sarawak states are getting tired of the Political BS..many West Malaysian states are starting to show grief...You will lose so much if you look down on your people... Tyranny never wins... Malu this mess.

    ReplyDelete
  19. If the Philippines and Malaysia take their claim over Sabah to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), Malaysia would win the case based on two reasons – the right to self determination and the continued administration of the disputed territory.

    ReplyDelete
  20. The Sulu Sultanate does not have a legal standing to claim Sabah because they do not have a nation of their own. Sulu is part of modern day Philippines.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Bar Council’s constitutional law committee chairman Syahredzan Johan said Sabahans had used their right to self determination and their choice was documented in the findings of the Cobbold Commission 1962. In 1963 Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore formed the Malaysia.

    ReplyDelete
  22. “If there’s one argument, linked to human rights, democracy and yes, our Constitution, it would be the basic right of self-determination.

    ReplyDelete
  23. “The people of Sabah, have manifested their desire to join Sarawak and Malaya in the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. This was the finding of the Cobbold Commission in 1962. Thus, Sabah, Sarawak and Malaya formed Malaysia, and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia was born.

    ReplyDelete
  24. In 1976 President Ferdinand Marcos announced that Philippines was dropping its claims over Sabah.

    ReplyDelete
  25. In 1987 the Philippines amended their constitution and dropped the phrase “by historical and legal rights” as part of the definition of the national territory.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Senate Bill No. 206 also redefined the boundaries of the Philippines archipelago by amending Republic Acts 5546 where it excluded Sabah from its territory.

    ReplyDelete
  27. The security forces believe that there are fewer than 50 Sulu terrorists left in Kampung Tanjung Batu, said Sabah Police Commissioner Datuk Hamza Taib.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Expressing his confident that they will be decimated soon, he said the security forces were unperturbed over self-proclaimed Sultan Jamalul Kiram’s warning that Sulu terrorists would embark on a guerrilla war in Malaysia.

    ReplyDelete
  29. “Jamalul Kiram can say anything he wants. We are all out to flush them out,” he said at a joint news conference with Army First Infantry Division commander Maj-Gen Datuk Ahmad Zaki Mokhtar at Felda Sahabat 16 near here, today.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Hamza said two clashes occurred this morning, the 14th day of Ops Daulat, between the security forces and the terrorists at 8.05 am and 9.45 am.

    ReplyDelete
  31. To a question from a reporter from Philippines GMA TV Channel 7 whether the security forces were taking advantage on a ceasefire announced by Jamalul Kiram, Hamza said the terrorists were the ones who set upon the security forces by killing two policemen and wounding three others in an ambush in Kampung Tanduo on March 1.

    ReplyDelete
  32. “We do not respect Jamalul Kiram’s words for his followers had shot dead two policemen after declaring a ceasefire a day earlier,” he added.

    Hamza said Malaysia and the Philippines were discussing a request to claim the bodies of 28 terrorists who were killed in the mopping up operations.

    ReplyDelete