Sabah - Sulu Sultanate or Malaysia

lemoneko

apa jadi jo?
di KL ni mana sia mo baca Daily express...
kasitau la perkembangan...

kalau sabah jatuh ke sultan sulu, nanti sia di KL ni jadi pelarian pendatang haram la..palis-palis....:geram:

jojack

Ada satu rancana yg ditulis oleh Datuk fauzi Patel (baru ja dpt anugerah wartawan terbaik 2 or 3 days before) dlm DE 13/10 bertajuk: Siapa Sultan Rodinood julaspi Kiram II?

Sa kasi isi penting ja:

1. Menurut pewaris pesaing kpd kesultanan sulu (ramai yg mengaku dorang ni waris s.sulu) si robinhood (susah mo spell nama dia) ni penipu dan teda darah raja.

2. Republik Filipina melalui President Quezon telah mengistiharkan k'sultnn Sulu tidak diiktiraf setelah sultan Jamalul Esmail Kiram mangkat pada 1936.he..he..he..

3. Dalam masa yg sama, kira2 70 keluarga masih bertelagah kerana mendakwa pewaris sebenar sultan sulu. uuinaa..

4.pada 27 Mei 1961 Tunku Abd Rahman, mgumumkan cadgn pbntukan Malaysia, presiden Macapagal (bapa Arroyo) rasa terancam sbb dia sebenarnya berhasrat mau merampas Borneo utara supaya mjadi wilayah Filipin. dia secara rasminya membuat tuntutan pada 22 jun 1962

5. Macapagal mendapatkan sepucuk surat bertarikh 5 feb 1962 drpd pewaris2 kesultanan sulu ( yg tidak wujud dlm perlembagaan lagi) utk mengumumkan hasrat mereka mengambil borneo utara.

6. kemudian disusuli oleh kelulusan Revolusi Ramos pada 24 Apr 1962 yg memberi kuasa kpd Macapagal utk mengambil apa jg langkah mendptkan borneo utara.Dlm masa yg sama sultan jamalul Esmail Kiram (pewaris terakhir) mengiktiraf kuasa  macapagal memfailkan tuntutan thdp sabah serta memaklumkan kedaulatan beliau thdp sabah.

7. Macapagal dan Sukarno membantah penubuhan Malaysia walaupun borneo utara memang berhasrat menyertai Malaysia bermula dgn  Suruhanjaya Cobbold- misi mencari fakta PBB- menyertai pilihanraya kerajaan tempatan dan pilihanraya umum negeri.

8. Bgmanapun, Indonesia kemudian menerima penubuhan Malaysia dan menjadi jiran yg baik, manakala filipina spt musuh dlm selimut (menurut penulis) kerana enggan meggugurkan tuntutan dan terus menggunakan istilah "pewaris sultan sulu" utk mencetuskan keadaan tidak selesa.

9. Setiap kali malaysia cuba menghantar pulang PTI, wlalau dlm jumlah kecil, manila akan membangkitkan isu tuntutan tsbt. Terbaru, bila Sabah memaksa filipina mengambil semula "kanak2 jalanan/yatim"  isu tuntutan dibangkitkan. Manila lebih berminat rakyat PTInya terus berada di Sabah berbanding menerima kepulangan mereka.

10.  Latarbelakang sultan Rodinood Julaspi -

Menurut penulis- Sultan Julaspi adalah tetamu tun mustapha (KM sabah ketika itu). Menurut Tun Mustapha, Julaspi boleh dmanfaatkan  utk menentang hasrat filipina, kerana julaspi juga adalah salah seorang waris sultan sulu terakhir yg juga boleh membantu menggugurkan tuntutan filipina. Taktik ini diterima Kuala Lumpur.

11.  Semasa era Berjaya, julsapi tidak pernah dtg sendiri ke pejabat Ketua Menteri utk mendapatkan bantuan kerana menganggap tindakan itu merendahkan martabatnya, beliau selalu menghantar anaknya Rodinood utk mengambil apa juga bentuk bantuan kewangan yg diberi oleh KM. Penulis (selaku setiausaha akhbar kpd KM datuk Harris pd masa itu) sering melihat Rodihood menunggu Datuk Harris beberapa kali sebulan. Mereka tinggal di sebuah rumah kecil  di Likas Jln Bukit Bendera pertengahan 1970-an. Beliau sering kelihatan di pejabat KM mendapatkan kontrak kecil dan bantuan $ semasa ayahnay sakit. Selepas ayahnya mati, Rodihood menghilangkan diri dan kini muncul semula dgn tuntutannya....


Selepas Rodi membaca rencana ini dlm DE, dia bilang " Patel, mind your own business" kononnya tulisan itu menjatuhkan martabat dia sambil menafikan dakwaan penulis..................fuhh..panat sia menaip..

Remy_3D

Malaysia nie banyak isu bertindih ngan jejiran, ngan Brunei, isu limbang, ngan Singapura isu pulau batu putih

lonely_surina

jangan lah amik sabah.. nanti lagu pun kene tukar..

"dari Perlis sampai lah ke Sarawak kita telah berjaya"

cam ne?..

hihihihi....

lonely_surina

Originally posted by lonely_surina at 14-10-2004 06:52 PM:
jangan lah amik sabah.. nanti lagu pun kene tukar..

"dari Perlis sampai lah ke Sarawak kita telah berjaya"

cam ne?..

hihihihi....

silap...

jangan lah amik sabah.. nanti lagu pun kene tukar..

:pompom: "dari Perlis sampai lah ke Sabah, kita telah berjaya":pompom:

cam ne?..

Claim based on fantasy
14 October, 2004

Kota Kinabalu: Leading historian, Prof. Dr D.S. Ranjit Singh of the University of Malaya has debunked the incessant Sulu Claim over Sabah, citing two important historical documents as evidence of the then Sultan relinquishing his rights and sovereignty over Sabah permanently.
He told Daily Express that these were Sabah Document l and Sabah Document ll of 22 January,1878, both signed by the then Sultan of Sulu, Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam, son of the late Sultan Muhammad Fadzalun, at the palace of the former.
Prof. Ranjit of the university’s History Department said photocopies of the documents (English Translation) could be obtained from the Public Records Office in London.
The witness to the Sultan’s seal and signature was William Hood Treacher, then Governor of Labuan and Acting Consul-General for Borneo. The first document pertained to the grant by the Sultan of Sulu of territories and lands on the mainland of the island of Borneo.
Quoting the contents of the document, he said: “We, His Highness the Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam son of His Highness the late Sultan Muhammad Fadzalun, Sultan in the State of Sulu and all its districts and dependencies, on behalf of Ourself Our heirs and successors and with the consent of all the Dato’s in council assembled have been pleased to grant of Our own will and pleasure to Gustavus Baron de Overbeck residing at Hong Kong and Alfred Dent Esquire residing in London, as representatives of a British Company, together with their heirs, associates, successors and representatives forever all the rights and powers belonging to us over all the territories and lands which are tributary to us on the mainland of the island of Borneo from the Pandasan River on the west extending along all the lands on the east coast as far as the Sibuku River in the south and including all the territories on the coast of the Pandasan River and the coast lands of Paitan, Sugut, Bonggaya, Labuk, Sandakan, Kinabatangan, Mumiang, and all the other territories and coast lands to the southward thereof on the coast of Darvel Bay as far as the Sibuku River together with all the islands included therein within nine miles of the coast.”
Last week, newly-crowned 29th Sultan of Sulu in the Southern Philippines, Rodinood Julaspi Kiram ll said he would “fight to get back the State of Sabah from Malaysian control, claiming territorial rights over the North Borneo territory.”
Prof. Ranjit said based on the spirit of Sabah Document l, the then Sultan of Sulu had transferred his rights and sovereignty over Sabah to the Overbeck-Dent Association (ODA).
(Alfred Dent, the younger partner of a British firm called Dent Brothers of London, and Overbeck (Consul-General for Austria-Hungary) formed ODA on 27 March 1877 for the purpose of acquiring territorial concessions in Borneo).
“The treaty is very clear the then reigning Sultan had surrendered all his rights and powers to ODA. There is nothing left already for his successors (including the newly-installed Sultan).”
Prof Ranjit went on to say that the territories acquired by ODA were subsequently transferred to the British North Borneo Provisional Association (BNBPA or Provisional Association) which was formed in March 1881 on Dent’s initiative. (In May 1881, Treacher was appointed first Governor of British North Borneo to administer the possessions of BNBPA in Borneo).
In the meantime, Dent had on behalf of ODA applied for a Royal Charter from the British Government for a British company to administer and develop the concessions. Hence the British North Borneo Company (BNBC) was incorporated in April 1882.
Records show that the BNBC which took over the administration in June 1882 became the new owner of the concessions in Sabah after acquiring the rights of BNBPA.
“From the Administration of the BNBC (1882-1946), the territories were transferred to the British Colonial Government in 1946 (when British North Borneo became a British Colony).
“And then from the Colony, the concessions were transferred to Malaysia (when it was formed in 1963). The name ‘North Borneo’ was officially reverted to Sabah.
“So, it was a succession but these lands were never returned to the Sultan of Sulu because there was no reason why the lands should be returned to him. After all, Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam had surrendered all rights and powers over the territories to ODA forever, and the association could dispose of them as they wished.”
On why Malaysia reportedly still pays an annual rent of 5,000 Spanish dollars ($1,315) to the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu, Prof Ranjit said it is stipulated in Sabah Document 1.
“The exact words are ‘The consideration of this grant is that the said Baron de Overbeck and Alfred Dent promise to pay to His Highness the Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam, his heirs and successors the sum of five thousand dollars a year payable every year’.
“The terms of the grant were such that we need to pay annual rent...so, we still have to keep to the terms unless it is revoked but it has never been done.”
Prof Ranjit drew attention to the second document which was signed by the Sultan of Sulu on the same day and at the same venue, also witnessed by Treacher.
“This is quite interesting. By a Commission, the Sultan also appointed Overbeck as ‘Dato’ Bendahara and Rajah of Sandakan’.”
Named Sabah Document ll, it stated that Overbeck had the fullest power of life and death over all the inhabitants of these countries (lands towards the eastward on the coast on the Island of Borneo from the Pandasan River including all the territories on the coast of the Sibuku River and the coast lands of Paitan, Sugut, Bonggaya, Labok, Sandakan, Kinabatangan and Mumiang, and the other lands and coast lands near Darvel Bay as far as the Sibuku River together with all the islands included therein), and over all matters that were Ours and over the revenues of these countries, with power to let these lands, as well as over things in the soil and plants and animals, with the rights of making laws, coining money, creating and maintaining soldiers and ships of war, levying taxes on goods in these countries and on goods of other nations and other taxes and dues on the inhabitants of these countries as he (Overbeck) may deem fit and proper together with all powers properly exercised by sovereign rulers in general; and We have given and granted all this of Our own free will.”
Prof Ranjit said the fact that Overbeck was empowered to let those lands indicated that sovereignty had changed hands.
Is Rodinood the rightful claimant?
Said the historian: “He is not a sovereign ruler...his forefathers were sovereign rulers when the January 1878 Treaty was signed.
“Six months later, the Spaniards conquered Sulu so the archipelago became part of the Philippines under Spanish rule. At that time, the Spaniards recognised Sulu as the Sutanate.
“However, in 1898, America took over the Philippines from the Spanairds but the sultanate was still recognised by the American Government.
“In 1932 or 1933, I believe, the Sultanate was de-recognised by the Philippine Government (under American rule). So it is only titular without any recognition, political or legal standing.
“The present Philippine Government does not recognise him as a sovereign ruler or Head of State of the Sultanate. It is self-claimed, and maybe a family tradition. The title goes on but no political or legal standing.”
Prof. Ranjit said even if Rodinood Julaspi Kiram II has a palace in Sabah, he cannot stake a claim because he is not the sovereign ruler of this place.
“It’s similar to any monarch anywhere. Take the case of the princes in India. When their privileges were taken away by the Government of India, they (monarchs) were left without any stipends. All they had was their private property.
“Anybody can buy or own private property but you must have a title to the land. But you cannot claim to say, ‘Look, I was once a ruler of this place, so the whole land belongs to me.”
The historian said even the Queen of England cannot say England belongs to her. “It’s only her private estates that belong to her.”
The Sultan of Sulu has got no title to any property here “unless, of course, he has bought some land, which we don’t know, because as a private person, he can buy land and be an owner of a large tract of land.”

[ Last edited by kakikutuk on 22-10-2004 at 10:20 AM ]

DAILY EXPRESS NEWS
15.10.2004

Not in Manila’s interest to revive Sulu Sultanate: Expert

Kota Kinabalu: Leading historian Prof. Dr D.S. Ranjit Singh of the University of Malaya said any attempt to settle an international dispute at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague must have the concurrence of both the parties involved.
Hence, a reported claim that the so-called dispute over the ownership of Sabah has been taken to the ICJ cannot be true.
“The ICJ will not accept the case if it is done unilaterally as both Malaysia and the Philippines must agree on the matter before it is brought before the World Court.
“Malaysia has not agreed to take the claim to ICJ because Sabah has been recognised as part of Malaysia when the case of Sipadan and Ligitan Islands was decided (by the ICJ) in December 2002.
“Furthermore, the United Nations also recognises Malaysia as comprising the Peninsula, Sabah and Sarawak.
“So if Malaysia were to agree to bring the matter to the World Court, it would mean that we acknowledge the (so-called Sulu Sultan’s) claim,” he said at a dialogue with the Sabah Law Association (SLA) at Hyatt Regency Kinabalu here.
The dialogue followed a luncheon talk on the Sipadan & Ligitan Issue and Basis of the ICJ’s Judgement organised by the association.
However, most of the discussion centred on the claim by a so-called newly-installed Sulu sultan Rodinood Julaspi Kiram II that Sabah belonged to his family.
Prof. Ranjit was responding to SLA’s Continuing Legal Education Committee Chairman Alex Decena who queried why Malaysia had not agreed to bring the Sabah claim to ICJ for a once-and-for-all resolution.
To this, Ranjit reiterated that the so-called Sultan cannot take the case to the World Court without the consent of a second party.
“Moreover, for an individual to do so is even more difficult. He (Sultan) is actually a private person without the attributes of constitutional or legal standing. “Individuals have no international standing nor the attributes of an international personality to make the move. Only sovereign states can negotiate,” he said.
To SLA Vice-President Ahmad A. Rahman query on the chances of the “Sultan” pursuing the claim with ICJ if the Philippine Government granted him sovereignty by reviving the sultanate and allowing him to form his independent kingdom, he said:
“Politically, it is not wise for the Philippine Government to do so. No country in the world will ever try to give full independence to a province and allow it to form its own government.”
SLA member Christina Liew called for a permanent settlement, saying the issue should not be swept under the carpet.
“We have been independent for 41 years, yet the claim has not been put to rest. We should resolve it by approaching the rightful heir to avert potential security problems without discounting the possibility of terrorism.”
In reply, the Professor said it was difficult to determine the rightful heir, considering the last Sultan of Sulu left 70 families as heirs.
“The sovereignty issue is out of the question. Sabah Document l and Sabah Document ll of 22 January, 1878 (signed by the then Sultan of Sulu, Sultan Muhammad Jamaluladzam) are evidence of the Sultan having relinquished all his rights and sovereignty over Sabah permanently.
“And officially, the sultanate (which existed in the past) does not exist today as the Philippine Government had de-recognised it in 1936.
“The title has no constitutional significance. Perhaps the only issue involved (if any) is the annual rent which has to be settled.”
In his reply to Syari’e lawyer Maijol Mahap, he said based on the terms of the grant, we are obliged to pay the rent of 5,000 dollars ($1,315) to the heirs and successors every year.
“We are bound by the 1878 Treaty, but at the same time, we do not want a litigation by 70 other groups.”
Answering another lawyer who raised the possibility of any inconsistency of language used in the 1878 Treaty, Prof. Ranjit said the agreement, all executed and signed by the Sultan (witnessed by William Hood Treacher, then Governor of Labuan and Acting Consul-General for Borneo), was written in three scripts (Jawi, Romanised Malay and English), using two languages (Malay and English).
Chong Ket Vui wanted to know whether the treaty was signed by thumbprint as the Sultan was illiterate, to which the historian said, it had the Sultan’s seal and signature.
“The Sultan might not understand English but he had translators. He was not entirely backward. We cannot assume that the Court of the Sultan did not have experts.
“He was a powerful ruler who had international dealings with the outside world,” said the Professor.
Teo Chee Kang asked: “Assuming that the case is taken to ICJ for a decision, who will have a better Treaty-based title and better effectivities?”
Enlightening the audience, Prof Ranjit said based on Sabah Document 1, he has no doubt that the title rests with Malaysia.
“The document is very clear the then Sultan had transferred his rights and sovereignty over Sabah to the Overbeck-Dent Association (ODA) in perpetuity. As such, the newly-crowned Sultan has no title to the land.
“Talking of effectivities, I believe we (Sabah) are in a better position, having been independent for 41 years through joining Malaysia.”
To a question by V.K. Liew, Prof. Ranjit said he did not know how the claimant arrived at the staggering figure of US$20 billion (RM76 billion), which the Sultan’s brother claimed belonged to the Sultanate of Sulu but was now being held in the Malaysian Treasury.
“But I am not saying the Government has not paid.”
This prompted Josephine Hadikusumo to question the validity of the Sabah claim. “Hypothetically speaking, if we don’t pay the annual rent or if we have skipped a couple of years, are we in breach and is the claim valid? Are we in danger?” she asked.
Going by the Sabah Document 1 and Sabah Document ll, in the event of any dispute, both parties would submit the matter to the judgment and opinion of Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul-General at Brunei. However, Brunei had gained independence from Britain in 1984.
Prof. Ranjit contended that Malaysia is now the successor to the 1878 Treaty whereby the grant by the Sultan of Sulu of territories and lands on the mainland of the island of Borneo is legally and constitutionally the inheritance of the present sovereign Malaysian Government.

witch_doctor

There was a salesman stepped in into my office.  He thought I'm Chinese assumming by my looks.  When I started to utter some words, then he asked me where do I come from.  So bla..bla...Then suddenly a question popped out from him: what if the Sultan Sulu claimed over Sabah is real? Where would you be, in Manila or Malaysia.  Without hesitate I replied, of course Malaysia.  He insisted but you're from Sabah, definitely you are likely belong to Phillipines then.  He kept on saying this that etc etc...some sort of provoking! I said, it should be accordance with my citizenship then, I'm Malaysian. Should the claim over Sabah is real, given a choice I would still prefer to live in Malaysia due to its stability in politics, economy and social.  Why should I put myself into an agony by living in some place else while I'm enjoying a great tranquility in my own place.   Eventhough Phillipines is better but I still choose to live in Malaysia.  I was born as Sabahan in the country of Malaysia.

I don't know what was wrong with the salesman. (Maybe he was frustrated I didn't sign up for the product he brought) hehehe..

Ngok juga baitu salesman...hehehe.  When I recall it, how stupid myself for debating it with the wrong person.  Alas, at least I've expressed my stance though!

SULTAN SULU SIKARANG TINGGAL KAT ITALI DALAM BUANGAN.....PILIPIN INDAK MAU DIA ...MSIA GAK..HEHE..

tinangol_csm

salam/hai,

kalau dua dua tu tida suka macam mana,
dgn malaysia kita aman tapi pembangunan sabah lambat ...macam anak tiri yang tidak disayangi mama tiri..macam drama yng di tv tu..Tapi bagi saya masih suka duduk d malaysia.
dengan kesutanan sulu? gila ka apa .tempat tu lembap dari sabah. mau berlindung di tempat macam itu..inda aku akun..

kalau sabah cakap mau berdiri sendiri ..saya cakap ya dengan hati terbuka ..:setuju:

[ Last edited by  tinangol_csm at 2-10-2006 07:26 AM ]