The ownership of Sabah by Sulu can be disputable. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid.
If you called it rent, where is the agreement between Sulu and Malaysia? Why in the 1878 agreement, was Malaysia not mentioned as one of the parties? Is there any clause in the 1878 agreement that Malaysia has the responsibility to continue paying Sulu? Why do the receipts in Sulu's possession not mention the money is for the rent? Why is the amount so small in value and not what has been stipulated in the agreement? Why did Malaysia give the money from 1963 until 2013? But the agreement was dated 22/1/1878. When Sulu relinquished its territories and dependencies to Spain on 22/7/1878, it left Sulu with nothing. That 1878 Sulu-BNBC agreement automatically became invalid as Sulu lost its ownership. Why must we pay when Sulu is no longer the owner? Why did Sulu never complain about Malaysia not adhering to the above agreement? In 2013, when Malaysia stopped giving the money, why did Sulu never bring the matter to court? Giving away money is not an offense. Can give or stop giving any time
Pag- hindi isurreder ng sabah tiyak gira pinas vs malaysia kaya kinabahan na.. PBBM hindi pabayaan ng sabah babawiin na, kaya huge ng france nag- utos isauli ng sabah sa pinas..
The ownership of Sabah by Sulu can be disputable. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid.
north borneo is never a colony of Spain and Britain a peace/agreement of colonial spain and sulo empire//colonize archipelago under Spain//southwest of mindanao includes islands and parts of Palawan and North borneo under Sulo empire //hence beliefs still the same//British NBC lease North borneo for exploitation of resources that is timber and etc to the Sultanaye of Sulo//in 1963 the creation of malaysia under british empire continue thelease to Sultanate//A fake ownership Chinese malaysian
If you called it rent, where is the agreement between Sulu and Malaysia? Why in the 1878 agreement, was Malaysia not mentioned as one of the parties? Is there any clause in the 1878 agreement that Malaysia has the responsibility to continue paying Sulu? Why do the receipts in Sulu's possession not mention the money is for the rent? Why is the amount so small in value and not what has been stipulated in the agreement? Why did Malaysia give the money from 1963 until 2013? But the agreement was dated 22/1/1878. When Sulu relinquished its territories and dependencies to Spain on 22/7/1878, it left Sulu with nothing. That 1878 Sulu-BNBC agreement automatically became invalid as Sulu lost its ownership. Why must we pay when Sulu is no longer the owner? Why did Sulu never complain about Malaysia not adhering to the above agreement? In 2013, when Malaysia stopped giving the money, why did Sulu never bring the matter to court? Giving away money is not an offense. Can give or stop giving any time
@@hopelope1703we filipinos don't have the habit of taking something that doesn't belong to us.. that's why we are fighting because it belongs to the philippines.
there is nothing that malaysia can do about it as long AS that rent contract is alive ....they can stop paying BUT THAT WOULD MEAN PH HAVE THE RIGHT TO TAKE BACK SABAH BY FORCE " BREACH OF CONTRACT " NOT PAYING RENT
The ownership of Sabah by Sulu can be disputable. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid.
Lalabas din ang katotohanan Divine Justice for sabah Philippines 🇵🇭 di daanin sa legal lahat para malaman ang katotohana na walang claims ng mga sultanate of sulu na Pinoy lalabas din ang katotohanan kung kanino talaga ang sabah
Gawin ng lahat ng government ng Philippines 🇵🇭 ang nararapat para mabawi na ang sabah itoy pàg aari ng mga sultanate of sulo na Pilipino matagal na itong ipinaglalaban nila sana ang governo ng Pilipinas matulungan nila ang may ari ng lupa sa sabah
Birmingham mo nakatambay lang ang Malaysia biglang binigyan ng lupain na malayo sa bansa nila ang Sabah.... Na imbes na isauli ng Britanya sa may ari which is kay Datu Kiram doon binigay sa wqlang kamalay malay na Malaysia na ngayon kanila na daw ang Sabah???
If you called it rent, where is the agreement between Sulu and Malaysia? Why in the 1878 agreement, was Malaysia not mentioned as one of the parties? Is THERE any clause in the 1878 agreement that Malaysia is responsible for continuing to pay Sulu? Why do the receipts in Sulu's possession not mention the money is for the rent? Why is the amount so small in value and not what has been stipulated in the agreement? Why did Malaysia give the money from 1963 until 2013? But the agreement was dated 22/1/1878. When Sulu relinquished its territories and dependencies to Spain on 22/7/1878, it left Sulu with nothing. That 1878 Sulu-BNBC agreement automatically became invalid as Sulu lost its ownership. Why must we pay when Sulu is no longer the owner? Why did Sulu never complain about Malaysia not adhering to the above agreement? In 2013, when Malaysia stopped giving the money, why did Sulu never bring the matter to court? Giving away money is not an offense. Can give or stop giving any time
Sulu’s ownership of Sabah can be disputed. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid.
mabawi lang yan sobra lakas na military ng pilipinas hindi yan ibagay malaysia sa korte2x lang. malaki pakinabang malaysia sa sabah oil at gas.kung gusto talaga mabawi ng pilipinas digmaan ano jan
😂😂😂😂😂😂sus china coast guard duwag na mga sundalo natin.... bat di niyo mo masabi pag china???? Dahil mahina ang malaysia? Mas maliit kesa china??😅@@user-fc2qz5mf3f
Intindihin nyu muna Ang west philiphines sea,,kawawa mga fisherman,,,sa west d n NGA kyu Maka ubra ,,pupunta p kyu ng Saba,,,,mga pasikat sa publico,,KC election nnman Kya papasikat mga senador
Bago pa sila sakopin ng British noon hindi pa kasama ang Sabah inuupahan lng nila yan sa Sultan na sulo dumating yung Panahon na binigyan na ng kalayaan ang Malaysia hindi na ito isinauli sa Sultan ng Sulo isinama na nila ito sa Malaysia hanggang ngayon hawak pa rin nila
@@hopelope1703get out of here and let the government take care of that problem. don't stress too much😂😂even the problems of the west philippines sea you are interfering with..
@@JAwashini I can guarantee you that PH submission to the UN concerning PH EEZ and continental shelf will be rejected or been put aside. Because it encroached into the Mlalaysia's EZ and continental shelf in the state of Sabah. The UN recognized Sabah in Malaysia since 1963.
Treaty of paris 1898 Treaty of WASHINGTON 1900 370 nautical miles are PAID by USA Under this ROCK ,SAND ,,LAND ,WATER & air space are belong to USA / PILIPINAS
PH was colonized by the Spanish and later by the US before she gained its independence in 1946. Therefore, applying the principle of uti posseditis juris is justified as it is an internationally accepted and recognized approach by ICJ in resolving any sovereignty dispute. PH got what was given by the US under the 1946 Treaty of Manila. Historical evidence is no longer valid. The South China Sea outcrops were not stated in the territories under the Treaty of Manila 1946 and the Treaty of Paris 1898. However, the Treaty of Washington 1900 stated that all “islands” beyond the 1898 Treaty particularly the 3 islands namely Cagayan, Sibutu, and Sulu belong to the US and later claim by PH. But those outcrops in the Spratly’ are defined as “rocks” (not islands) by PCA in 2016 and eligible for the territorial sea. Thus, the claim by PH is ambiguous and cannot apply to all the “rocks” in the South China Sea. In this context, the statement regarding the Treaty of Washington in the Treaty of Manila 1946 served no purpose. Furthermore, if those outcrops are truly under PH, it should have been clearly stated in 1935 (PH Commonwealth), 1946, and 1973 PH Constitution where it has sovereignty and jurisdiction. Surprisingly, it was only established in the 1987 PH Constitution and the details are in the 2009 Baseline Law (RA 9522).
Sabah. Belong to Phil. Territory , at pangaari ito ng Sulu sultanate, let the history speak about it, diyan ninyong malalaman ang lahat, Ina aking lang ito ng Malaysia, hanggang mgayon at ayaw ibigay sa Sultanate of Sulu, and it’s part of our territory.coz maraming natural resources na pinakikinabamgan nila mgayon, , tulad ng Gas, Oil at palm trees, lumber, rubber, at iba pa, more than century na ito, na kanilang ayaw ibalik sa Sultanate, at ng babayarad lang buwis sa Sahab ask rent , but natilgil ng kung ilang taon na Dina binayaran ng Buwis at ayaw ng returnat inang kin ng tuluyan ng Malaysia ang Sabah , Borneo. History will tell everything. Iyan malakas pinanghahawakang Sultanate at ng Phil Gou’t.
Sulu’s ownership of Sabah can be disputed. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid.
Sulu’s ownership of Sabah can be disputed. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid. Try reading what is uti posseditis juris. PH can only claim territories given by the US (PH colonizer) under the Manila Treaty of 1946. No Sabah.
Malaysin pay the Sulu Sultan RM5,300 per year as “cession money” because there is a court judgement awarded in favour of the Sulu Sultanate against the successor to the lease agreement signed between the Sulu Sultanate and the British North Borneo Company in 1878.
If you called it rent, where is the agreement between Sulu and Malaysia? Why in the 1878 agreement, was Malaysia not mentioned as one of the parties? Is there any clause in the 1878 agreement that Malaysia has the responsibility to continue paying Sulu? Why do the receipts in Sulu's possession not mention the money is for the rent? Why is the amount so small in value and not what has been stipulated in the agreement? Why did Malaysia give the money from 1963 until 2013? But the agreement was dated 22/1/1878. When Sulu relinquished its territories and dependencies to Spain on 22/7/1878, it left Sulu with nothing. That 1878 Sulu-BNBC agreement automatically became invalid as Sulu lost its ownership. Why must we pay when Sulu is no longer the owner? Why did Sulu never complain about Malaysia not adhering to the above agreement? In 2013, when Malaysia stopped giving the money, why did Sulu never bring the matter to court? Giving away money is not an offense. Can give or stop giving any time
Did you see any celebration in PH if Sulu won the case? Are there any Sulu billionaires around? The news has been published internationally as well as in PH itself. Check the latest in June 2023. These are a few. The Manila Times: Dutch court rules against sultan's heirs AlJazeera: Malaysia hails ‘victory’ in row with Sulu sultan’s Filipino heirs Philippine Star: French court upholds Malaysia’s challenge vs $15-B award to Sulu heirs Reuters: Spain charges arbitrator who awarded $15 billion to sultan's heirs in Malaysia dispute Reuters: Malaysia says Luxembourg court sets aside request to enforce $15 bln arbitration award Bloomberg: Malaysia Wins Court Fight Over Sulu Heirs’ $15 Billion Award
@@rosannamendoza9825 I think it is the other way around. Sulu can be the scammer for pretending to be the owner of Sabah without evidence and consent from Brunei. The British might believed Sulu and signed the 1878 agreement. For Sulu if you are not the owner of Sabah, why make an agreement with the outsider (British).
@@hopelope1703 the sultan of Brunei give the Sabah to sultan of sulu as thanks for helping them to get rid off the rebellion. And the sultan of sulu rent the Sabah to British north Borneo company and the war began, Japan took over the Sabah and after Japan loss the battle they give back the Sabah to British and became the crown colony and after that Malaysia took over the Sabah. Because of the resources Sabah had, Malaysia is ready to fight for it. Philippines want to bring the Sabah not because of the gas resources, just because the Sabah is belong to the Philippines.
ipakita na sa un ung hawak natin ibedencia na nagrenta lng sila sa sultan nh sulu at yn ay kinikilala ng korte sa france kya ayw nh malaysia dalhin sa un ung problema sa sabah dhil tyk matalo sila sa kso
If you called it rent, where is the agreement between Sulu and Malaysia? Why in the 1878 agreement, was Malaysia not mentioned as one of the parties? Is there any clause in the 1878 agreement that Malaysia is responsible for continuing to pay Sulu? Why do the receipts in Sulu's possession not mention the money is for the rent? Why is the amount so small in value and not what has been stipulated in the agreement? Why did Malaysia give the money from 1963 until 2013? But the agreement was dated 22/1/1878. When Sulu relinquished its territories and dependencies to Spain on 22/7/1878, it left Sulu with nothing. That 1878 Sulu-BNBC agreement automatically became invalid as Sulu lost its ownership. Why must we pay when Sulu is no longer the owner? Why did Sulu never complain about Malaysia not adhering to the above agreement? In 2013, when Malaysia stopped giving the money, why did Sulu never bring the matter to court? Giving away money is not an offense. Can give or stop giving any time
Sulu/PH needs to resolve 3 legal aspects before making any claim on Sabah from Malaysia. Firstly, Sulu needs to show undisputable proof that earlier, the Brunei Sultanate (original owner) gave North Borneo (Sabah) to Sulu as a gift for assisting in Brunei’s civil war. This is to rebuke the existence of the 29/12/1877 agreement (consisting of 4 agreements) signed by the Brunei Sultanate grants the whole of North Borneo to the British North Borneo Company (BNBC). These agreements exist and are kept at the National Archives in London. The word “grant” has been used, and it has never been challenged or protested by Brunei, even when the British turned North Borneo into a British Charter (1881), Protectorate (1888), Colony (1946), and finally British Parliament under the Malaysia Act 1963 incorporated it into Malaysia. Secondly, let's assume North Borneo belongs to Sulu. The Sultanate of Sulu signed many agreements to relinquish his territories and dependencies (including North Borneo) to the colonizers. These include the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement with Spain on 22/7/1878 and the Carpenter Agreement on 22/3/1915 with the US. Later Spain and the US relinquished North Borneo under the Madrid Protocol of 1885 and Anglo-US Border Convention 1930 to the British respectively. In the end, Sulu has nothing. Thirdly, PH claims North Borneo (Sabah) is null and void. For any colonized colony that seeks independence, the territory (sovereignty) is based on what has been given by their colonizer. In this regard, the principle of uti posseditis juris is applicable, acceptable, and recognized internationally. PH got their independence from the US in 1946 and under this principle, there is NO North Borneo. Rebut with facts and references. Not hearsay. The UN has recognized Sabah in Malaysia since 1963.
Did you see any celebration in PH if Sulu won the case? Are there any Sulu billionaires around? The news has been published internationally as well as in PH itself. Check the latest in June 2023. These are a few. The Manila Times: Dutch court rules against sultan's heirs AlJazeera: Malaysia hails ‘victory’ in row with Sulu sultan’s Filipino heirs Philippine Star: French court upholds Malaysia’s challenge vs $15-B award to Sulu heirs Reuters: Spain charges arbitrator who awarded $15 billion to sultan's heirs in Malaysia dispute Reuters: Malaysia says Luxembourg court sets aside request to enforce $15 bln arbitration award Bloomberg: Malaysia Wins Court Fight Over Sulu Heirs’ $15 Billion Award
I can guarantee that the UN will reject or keep the PH submission on the continental shelf aside. The problem is that the submission was inclusive of Malaysia's EEZ and continental shelf, particularly in the state of Sabah, which the UN has recognized in Malaysia since 1963. The UN cannot be contradicting itself. Every country surrounding the South China Sea has the rights to EEZ and continental shelf under UNCLOS.
Sulu/PH needs to resolve 3 legal aspects before making any claim on Sabah from Malaysia. Firstly, Sulu needs to show undisputable proof that earlier, the Brunei Sultanate (original owner) gave North Borneo (Sabah) to Sulu as a gift for assisting in Brunei’s civil war. This is to rebuke the existence of the 29/12/1877 agreement (consisting of 4 agreements) signed by the Brunei Sultanate grants the whole of North Borneo to the British North Borneo Company (BNBC). These agreements exist and are kept at the National Archives in London. The word “grant” has been used, and it has never been challenged or protested by Brunei, even when the British turned North Borneo into a British Charter (1881), Protectorate (1888), Colony (1946), and finally British Parliament under the Malaysia Act 1963 incorporated it into Malaysia. Secondly, let's assume North Borneo belongs to Sulu. The Sultanate of Sulu signed many agreements to relinquish his territories and dependencies (including North Borneo) to the colonizers. These include the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement with Spain on 22/7/1878 and the Carpenter Agreement on 22/3/1915 with the US. Later Spain and the US relinquished North Borneo under the Madrid Protocol of 1885 and Anglo-US Border Convention 1930 to the British respectively. In the end, Sulu has nothing. Thirdly, PH claims North Borneo (Sabah) is null and void. For any colonized colony that seeks independence, the territory (sovereignty) is based on what has been given by their colonizer. In this regard, the principle of uti posseditis juris is applicable, acceptable, and recognized internationally. PH got their independence from the US in 1946 and under this principle, there is NO North Borneo. Rebut with facts and references. Not hearsay. The UN has recognized Sabah in Malaysia since 1963.
hindi ma porsigi noon kasi isa ang goberno ng malaysia na nag laan ng pondo sa mga terrorista para guluhin ang mindanao para walang progreso at ayawan ng saba ang Pilipinas dahil magulo..
Sulu’s ownership of Sabah can be disputed. Because Brunei Sultanate (original owner) granted North Borneo (Sabah) to BNBC dated 29/12/1877. Much earlier than the 1878 agreement. How can it belong to Sulu if Brunei can give it away? Sulu Sultanate relinquished its territories to the Spanish under the Bases of Peace and Capitulation Agreement on 22/7/1878. Sulu has nothing left. Thus the 1878 Sulu-BNBC Agreement dated 22/1/1878 is null and void. The cession of Sabah from Sulu to PH in 1962 is invalid. Try reading what is uti posseditis juris. PH can only claim territories given by the US (PH colonizer) under the Manila Treaty of 1946. No Sabah.
Para Kang di Pilipino kung mag isip.my mga anak ka din seguro ng maaring makunabang ng biyaya ng yaman ng sa SABA Pag yan nakuha ng ating bansang Pilipinas .pasalamat tyo my OBBMJr na .may tunay malasakit sa ating bansa at pagmamahal .dapat suportahan natin ..huag ka tumulsd sa nga taksel na mga filipino
