The Philippines claims Sabah on the basis that Sabah was said to be once under Sulu Sultanate. Descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claim that Sabah belonged to Sulu Sultanate because Sabah was given by Brunei the original owner to Sulu as a gift for purportedly helping Brunei to fight rebels. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. In fact on 29 December 1877, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the whole of Sabah to BNBC/British and concurrently appointed Baron Von Overback, the co-owner of BNBC as Maharajah of Sabah and Rajah of Sandakan and Gaya. This cession agreement was documented. When BNBC went to Sabah to begin their business, Sulu claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu. BNBC agreed to enter a "pajak" agreement with Sulu after they were advised by their fellow businessmen in Hong Kong who advised that Sulu would attack them if they didn't have a deal with Sulu. This "pajak'' agreement was signed on 22 January 1878. BNBC understood that this "pajak" was a "cession", so did early generation of Sulu Sultan accepted it as "cession". Only later generation of descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claimed that the "pajak" agreement was meant to be "rent" or "lease''. Still there was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. The two above events led to an overlapping issue on Sabah. What ever it was, the above agreement and overlapping issue were superceded by later event. On 22 July 1878, the then Sultan of Sulu had relinquished all his possession and sovereignty of Sulu and it's territories including Sabah to Spain. The Sultanate of Sulu only remained as hereditary cultural and traditional entity without any sovereign territory. In 1885, to resolve overlapping issue on Sabah and other issues involving other islands, Britain, Spain and Germany arrived to an agreement known as Madrid Protocol in which Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. As new owner of Sabah Britain had full control and sovereignty over Sabah and they could do what ever they wanted. Sulu could not claim anything because they had already relinquished the sovereignty of Sabah to Spain and Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. What ever happened to Sabah after that was under British jurisdiction. Even though British had full control and sovereignty of Sabah, they still honoured the annual "cession money" payment stipulated in the "pajak'' agreement as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. So did Malaysia when formed in 1963, still honoured the annual "cession money" payment as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. The term "cession money" was used because to use the term "consolation" was felt to be too degrading. Thus the term "cession money" was continually used as used before by the British. Even the argument about the word "pajak" and it's meaning in the "pajak" agreement still favoured the British. The "pajak" agreement was written in classical Malay, in jawi script (Arabic alphabet). Malay is the national language of Malaysia and Brunei, and mother tongue of majority Malaysians and Brunei. In those days, Malay was also used by people of Sulu because Malay was the "lingua franca" of this region including the present Philippines. That was why the agreement was written in Malay. But over the years Sulu people had lost their Malay language (standard Malay) because of several reasons like colonisation by different European. The word "pajak" carried several meanings depending on the contact used in the sentence or passage. It could mean "tax, rent, pawn, lease, or cession". In the agreement between BNBC/ British and Sulu, the word "pajak" was used together with the phrase "selama-lamanya" which meant "forever". When "pajak" was used together with the phrase"selama-lamanya", in this contact the word "pajak" meant "cession". Cession means "the formal giving up of rights, property or territory by a state". When Sulu "pajak" Sabah to BNBC it meant Sulu ceded Sabah and it meant Sabah no longer belonged to Sulu. This was further clarified. There was a second agreement which was a supplementary to the first agreement known as "Confirmation of Cession of Certain Islands Agreement". It was regarding certain islands between Sabah and Sulu which they were not sure whether they were included in the first agreement or not. In this second agreement, the word "pajak" was no longer used because they thought it might lead to misunderstanding by later generation. Instead the word "menyerahkan" which meant "surrender" was used, and the annual payment was increased from 5,000 dollars to 5,300 dollars due to certain islands included. On 31 August 1963 Britain gave independence to Sabah and before that on 22 July 1963 Sarawak was given independence. The people of Sabah and Sarawak had exercised self determination to form Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore. The sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak as component states of Malaysia is intact and recognized internationally and recognized by the UN. This was confirmed and clearly stated in the United Nations Malaysia Mission Report "Final Conclusion of the Secretary-General", 14 September 1963. The last sentence of the report says: "I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfillment as component states of Malaysia". Full text of the report can even be accessed from the Philippines Government Gazette website. About the arbitration award by Paris Court to Sulu of US$14.92B, it had since been set aside and annulled by Paris Court of Appeal. Here is the latest situation. Latest as in June 2023: 1. June 6th - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside and annulled the previous Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. 2. June 27th - Dutch Court of Appeal in The Haque had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award by Paris Court (lower court) ruling, and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. 3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost. 4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Now is already October 2023, no news about Sulu's claim proceeding in Luxembourg Court. It looked like they withdrew their case when they acknowledged the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Malaysia had spent around RM32m, equivalent to about US$6.6m to deal with these Sulu claim cases in various European courts, in Madrid, Paris, Luxembourg and Netherlands. Apart from the €100,000.00 Sulu has to pay to Malaysia as legal cost, Malaysia is planning to sue Sulu for compensation for the loss of RM32m spent.
Latest news 2023. 1. June 6th 2023 - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside the Paris Arbitration Court award to heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. 2. June 27th 2023 - Dutch Court of Appeal had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award following the Paris Court of Appeal decision.
2. .....and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets. 3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost. 4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision.
SHES COURAGE TO TALK ,... IN A REAL WORDS...MAKES U A REAL PERSON I HOPE THAT WE PILIPINOS CAN ALWAYS FIGHT AND STAND FOR OUR OWN RIGHT AND PRINCIPLES WHATEVER MIGHT IT TAKES FOR I KNOW GOD WANT US TO STAND FOR WHAT IS RIGHT.....
its time to terminate the contract lease, due to violation. and return to its original owner the royal family of KIRAM from the sultanate of sulu of Muslim mindanao.
According to the history of mom jacel kiram understood that Sabah is belongs to sultanate of sulu Filipino from the Philippines very correct po mabuhay po kayo family kiram we support you Mom From Angeles City Pampanga Philippines
Sulu only claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu because Brunei gave Sabah to Sulu. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans.
The Philippines claims Sabah on the basis that Sabah was said to be once under Sulu Sultanate. Descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claim that Sabah belonged to Sulu Sultanate because Sabah was given by Brunei the original owner to Sulu as a gift for purportedly helping Brunei to fight rebels. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. In fact on 29 December 1877, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the whole of Sabah to BNBC/British and concurrently appointed Baron Von Overback, the co-owner of BNBC as Maharajah of Sabah and Rajah of Sandakan and Gaya. This cession agreement was documented. When BNBC went to Sabah to begin their business, Sulu claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu. BNBC agreed to enter a "pajak" agreement with Sulu after they were advised by their fellow businessmen in Hong Kong who advised that Sulu would attack them if they didn't have a deal with Sulu. This "pajak'' agreement was signed on 22 January 1878. BNBC understood that this "pajak" was a "cession", so did early generation of Sulu Sultan accepted it as "cession". Only later generation of descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claimed that the "pajak" agreement was meant to be "rent" or "lease''. Still there was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. The two above events led to an overlapping issue on Sabah. What ever it was, the above agreement and overlapping issue were superceded by later event. On 22 July 1878, the then Sultan of Sulu had relinquished all his possession and sovereignty of Sulu and it's territories including Sabah to Spain. The Sultanate of Sulu only remained as hereditary cultural and traditional entity without any sovereign territory. In 1885, to resolve overlapping issue on Sabah and other issues involving other islands, Britain, Spain and Germany arrived to an agreement known as Madrid Protocol in which Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. As new owner of Sabah Britain had full control and sovereignty over Sabah and they could do what ever they wanted. Sulu could not claim anything because they had already relinquished the sovereignty of Sabah to Spain and Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. What ever happened to Sabah after that was under British jurisdiction. Even though British had full control and sovereignty of Sabah, they still honoured the annual "cession money" payment stipulated in the "pajak'' agreement as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. So did Malaysia when formed in 1963, still honoured the annual "cession money" payment as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. The term "cession money" was used because to use the term "consolation" was felt to be too degrading. Thus the term "cession money" was continually used as used before by the British. Even the argument about the word "pajak" and it's meaning in the "pajak" agreement still favoured the British. The "pajak" agreement was written in classical Malay, in jawi script (Arabic alphabet). Malay is the national language of Malaysia and Brunei, and mother tongue of majority Malaysians and Brunei. In those days, Malay was also used by people of Sulu because Malay was the "lingua franca" of this region including the present Philippines. That was why the agreement was written in Malay. But over the years Sulu people had lost their Malay language (standard Malay) because of several reasons like colonisation by different European. The word "pajak" carried several meanings depending on the contact used in the sentence or passage. It could mean "tax, rent, pawn, lease, or cession". In the agreement between BNBC/ British and Sulu, the word "pajak" was used together with the phrase "selama-lamanya" which meant "forever". When "pajak" was used together with the phrase"selama-lamanya", in this contact the word "pajak" meant "cession". Cession means "the formal giving up of rights, property or territory by a state". When Sulu "pajak" Sabah to BNBC it meant Sulu ceded Sabah and it meant Sabah no longer belonged to Sulu. This was further clarified. There was a second agreement which was a supplementary to the first agreement known as "Confirmation of Cession of Certain Islands Agreement". It was regarding certain islands between Sabah and Sulu which they were not sure whether they were included in the first agreement or not. In this second agreement, the word "pajak" was no longer used because they thought it might lead to misunderstanding by later generation. Instead the word "menyerahkan" which meant "surrender" was used, and the annual payment was increased from 5,000 dollars to 5,300 dollars due to certain islands included. On 31 August 1963 Britain gave independence to Sabah and before that on 22 July 1963 Sarawak was given independence. The people of Sabah and Sarawak had exercised self determination to form Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore. The sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak as component states of Malaysia is intact and recognized internationally and recognized by the UN. This was confirmed and clearly stated in the United Nations Malaysia Mission Report "Final Conclusion of the Secretary-General", 14 September 1963. The last sentence of the report says: "I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfillment as component states of Malaysia". Full text of the report can even be accessed from the Philippines Government Gazette website. About the arbitration award by Paris Court to Sulu of US$14.92B, it had since been set aside and annulled by Paris Court of Appeal. Here is the latest situation. Latest as in June 2023: 1. June 6th - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside and annulled the previous Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. 2. June 27th - Dutch Court of Appeal in The Haque had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award by Paris Court (lower court) ruling, and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. 3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost. 4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Now is already October 2023, no news about Sulu's claim proceeding in Luxembourg Court. It looked like they withdrew their case when they acknowledged the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Malaysia had spent around RM32m, equivalent to about US$6.6m to deal with these Sulu claim cases in various European courts, in Madrid, Paris, Luxembourg and Netherlands. Apart from the €100,000.00 Sulu has to pay to Malaysia as legal cost, Malaysia is planning to sue Sulu for compensation for the loss of RM32m spent.
one blood...one creator....lets forget and forgive...tuluyan natin kalimutan ang skitng dulot ng nakaraan..patuloy tayung magpatawad..para sa ating mga sarili...
How could be allah the almighty god will give protection to your arms rebel went they already committed murder by killing 9 malaysian Police comandos by using shameless tactics at the moment Malaysian arms force not yet lounge attack on them???
ABOUT MONEY N WEALTH RIGHT??...ALL THESE YEARS WANDERING WHY THIS KIRAM IS NOT RICH LIKE SULTAN OF BRUNEI.....KIRAM IS DREAMING ABOUT THIS FOR A LONG TIME....
In 1658, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the northern and eastern portion of Borneo to the Sultan of Sulu in compensation for the latter's help in settling a civil war in the Brunei Sultanate. In 1749, the Sultanate of Borneo ceded southern Palawan, to Spain (now Philippines) Within late 1700s, Sultanate of Sulu gave up the rest of its territories to Spain (now Philippines). it means North Borneo is belongs to Sultanate Of Sulu. but the british govt proclaim sabah indepedence to malaysia.???
It was only a claim by Sulu that Brunei gave Sabah to Sulu. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was no document regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans.
The Philippines claims Sabah on the basis that Sabah was said to be once under Sulu Sultanate. Descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claim that Sabah belonged to Sulu Sultanate because Sabah was given by Brunei the original owner to Sulu as a gift for purportedly helping Brunei to fight rebels. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. In fact on 29 December 1877, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the whole of Sabah to BNBC/British and concurrently appointed Baron Von Overback, the co-owner of BNBC as Maharajah of Sabah and Rajah of Sandakan and Gaya. This cession agreement was documented. When BNBC went to Sabah to begin their business, Sulu claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu. BNBC agreed to enter a "pajak" agreement with Sulu after they were advised by their fellow businessmen in Hong Kong who advised that Sulu would attack them if they didn't have a deal with Sulu. This "pajak'' agreement was signed on 22 January 1878. BNBC understood that this "pajak" was a "cession", so did early generation of Sulu Sultan accepted it as "cession". Only later generation of descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claimed that the "pajak" agreement was meant to be "rent" or "lease''. Still there was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. The two above events led to an overlapping issue on Sabah. What ever it was, the above agreement and overlapping issue were superceded by later event. On 22 July 1878, the then Sultan of Sulu had relinquished all his possession and sovereignty of Sulu and it's territories including Sabah to Spain. The Sultanate of Sulu only remained as hereditary cultural and traditional entity without any sovereign territory. In 1885, to resolve overlapping issue on Sabah and other issues involving other islands, Britain, Spain and Germany arrived to an agreement known as Madrid Protocol in which Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. As new owner of Sabah Britain had full control and sovereignty over Sabah and they could do what ever they wanted. Sulu could not claim anything because they had already relinquished the sovereignty of Sabah to Spain and Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. What ever happened to Sabah after that was under British jurisdiction. Even though British had full control and sovereignty of Sabah, they still honoured the annual "cession money" payment stipulated in the "pajak'' agreement as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. So did Malaysia when formed in 1963, still honoured the annual "cession money" payment as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. The term "cession money" was used because to use the term "consolation" was felt to be too degrading. Thus the term "cession money" was continually used as used before by the British. Even the argument about the word "pajak" and it's meaning in the "pajak" agreement still favoured the British. The "pajak" agreement was written in classical Malay, in jawi script (Arabic alphabet). Malay is the national language of Malaysia and Brunei, and mother tongue of majority Malaysians and Brunei. In those days, Malay was also used by people of Sulu because Malay was the "lingua franca" of this region including the present Philippines. That was why the agreement was written in Malay. But over the years Sulu people had lost their Malay language (standard Malay) because of several reasons like colonisation by different European. The word "pajak" carried several meanings depending on the contact used in the sentence or passage. It could mean "tax, rent, pawn, lease, or cession". In the agreement between BNBC/ British and Sulu, the word "pajak" was used together with the phrase "selama-lamanya" which meant "forever". When "pajak" was used together with the phrase"selama-lamanya", in this contact the word "pajak" meant "cession". Cession means "the formal giving up of rights, property or territory by a state". When Sulu "pajak" Sabah to BNBC it meant Sulu ceded Sabah and it meant Sabah no longer belonged to Sulu. This was further clarified. There was a second agreement which was a supplementary to the first agreement known as "Confirmation of Cession of Certain Islands Agreement". It was regarding certain islands between Sabah and Sulu which they were not sure whether they were included in the first agreement or not. In this second agreement, the word "pajak" was no longer used because they thought it might lead to misunderstanding by later generation. Instead the word "menyerahkan" which meant "surrender" was used, and the annual payment was increased from 5,000 dollars to 5,300 dollars due to certain islands included. On 31 August 1963 Britain gave independence to Sabah and before that on 22 July 1963 Sarawak was given independence. The people of Sabah and Sarawak had exercised self determination to form Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore. The sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak as component states of Malaysia is intact and recognized internationally and recognized by the UN. This was confirmed and clearly stated in the United Nations Malaysia Mission Report "Final Conclusion of the Secretary-General", 14 September 1963. The last sentence of the report says: "I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfillment as component states of Malaysia". Full text of the report can even be accessed from the Philippines Government Gazette website. About the arbitration award by Paris Court to Sulu of US$14.92B, it had since been set aside and annulled by Paris Court of Appeal. Here is the latest situation. Latest as in June 2023: 1. June 6th - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside and annulled the previous Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. 2. June 27th - Dutch Court of Appeal in The Haque had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award by Paris Court (lower court) ruling, and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. 3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost. 4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Now is already October 2023, no news about Sulu's claim proceeding in Luxembourg Court. It looked like they withdrew their case when they acknowledged the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Malaysia had spent around RM32m, equivalent to about US$6.6m to deal with these Sulu claim cases in various European courts, in Madrid, Paris, Luxembourg and Netherlands. Apart from the €100,000.00 Sulu has to pay to Malaysia as legal cost, Malaysia is planning to sue Sulu for compensation for the loss of RM32m spent.
your goverment is faceng now so many violation...even if the civilian people who is realy not involved to the tension was on bar and some of them is captured without any evidence and some of them were killed...
"...discuss it in ICJ or in UN". Only a country or a nation can bring matters to ICJ or UN, not a group of people who have some followers. ICJ is not a place to discuss but a place to judge. And UN had already made decision on this matter i.e Sabah is rightfully Malaysian. It was stated in the UN Secretary General Final Conclusion report on Malaysia Mission as published in the Philippines Government Gazette. www.officialgazette.gov.ph/1963/09/14/united-nations-malaysia-mission-report-final-conclusions-of-the-secretary-general-14-september-1963/ The last sentence of the report says "I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfilment as component States of Malaysia".
Dia tidak tahu sejarah Datuk nenek moyangnya..bagaimana Peristiwa pembunuhan Raja North- Borneo olehnya dengan Pakatan Rahsia dengan British North- Company..Dia tidak Sedar bahwa Istanah Raja North -Borneo masih Wujud di Tanah Sabah..Istanah itu bukan milik Sultan Sulu..melainkan milik Sultan North -Borneo ( Sabah )..
Allah Bless to those who will die, to kiram family, they are ready to die, i admired they bravery because they want to claim the stolen land from them to a nation which has more resources compared to them. Ph goverment has no support to kiram's want to sabah. but i guess this war will not end, it will repeat and repeat until it will sounds like "terrorize". it will solve if the land will returned to the Kiram sultanate.
yah but dont pretend to me that your malaysia is perfect goverment according to my malayisan friend sometimes she did not believe in your goverment...because they always telling a false information to the public....for example in my profile i post the dead people in profile and your goverment said that this is the sulu army but if you will realy compare to your police it has a similarities and my question is what is the purpose of telling a lie????
i have seen a raw video of the moros landing in sabah, they were randomly shooting. i'm not sure where you get those ideas they settled peacefully. Videos don't lie.
ask for more rm10000... nicely goverment will give...but when u came with guns... do you think we are going to be afraid...our army are not afraid to die, we are brave...we will defend our country till the last of our blood... we would not attack others, thats barbarian..we live in peace...
latest: through some secret intelligence made. There are those who help the Kiram this so happens to hostilities between the Muslims in the southern Philippines and Malaysia. accidentally hits his party in order to take advantage of the supply of oil in Sabah to fight with a nuclear country in the Asian region. The help that is a foreign country and a great authority in the world. but the information was not disclosed. Currently not enough evidence.
Bloodshed will not solve this issue. Let everyone sit and discuss the issue between 2 sides, if both has papers to claim the island then do it in proper way. As a Filipino, Jacel is right. Our president should not ignore our people let their sentiment be heard and discuss it in peaceful manner. I understand jacel at sa mga epal dito well bahala na si lord sa inyo.
I think what the Sultan Sulu family should do is to take the the question to ICJ for the independent from Phil government or try to get the blessing from Phil government as Sultan. Get your royalty status. You can't cross the boarder of the country with your army and claiming, Hey dude! I'm you Sultan! I own your land!
Ever wondered why Roman law always ends up with Pilate. Washing the hands off an issue concerning the law is evident in Philippine law, with magistrates and politicians throwing back the issue to the people. That is inciting the people to put the law on their hands, where it properly belongs.
Dia hanya untuk Sulu bukan lagi untuk Sabah..Sebabnya Dulunya ,Sulu was part of North Borneo Raja's Domain desend from Brunei ..The Question of Heirs to Land of North - Borneo ( Sabah ) should not be arise anymore Koz a Brother in law has no Right to Claim The Estate of His..The Land Of Sabah has its own Raja ..The Deeds was only between Company ( foreign Company ) and Sulu Sultan the Brother in -Law of Raja of North Borneo of Brunei Descend..
A lot of Filipinos ancestors came from Borneo what is now part of Indonesia, Malaysia and Brunei. Instead of solving the issue in a peaceful manner. Why both side have to kill each other? This bloodshed will not solve this issue. I'm sure Allah don't want his people to fight against each other.
GOD BLESSED YOU AND OUR BROTHER WHO FIGHT FOR OUR RIGHT WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF THIS GOVERMENT OR EVEN MORALE SUPORT. hehehe nais kung makapunta ng sabah kc without pasport
We Malaysia not the first government recognize and called your rebels organization as a rebels arms group.. the Philippines government who is named it for you with a names rebels arms group organization...
There are two Kiram camps - the militants and the non-militants. It is unfortunate that the militants have threatened the non-militant Kirams and the governments of Malaysia and the Philippines. This has jeopardized the Kirams’ claim on Sabah.
The Philippines has a territorial claim over much of the eastern part of Sabah, the former North Borneo. It claims that the territory, via the heritage of the Sultanate of Sulu, was only leased to the North Borneo Chartered Company in 1878 with the Sultanate's sovereignty never being relinquished.
"...much of the eastern part of Sabah,..". You all couldn't make up your mind. In other videos in other channels, the claim was the whole of Sabah. In some other videos, it was only eastern half of Sabah. Now you claim "... much of the eastern part of Sabah,..". In some others it was only eastern coastal part of Sabah, the distance from coastal line about the distance Sulu's cannon fire can reach.
The Philippines claims Sabah on the basis that Sabah was said to be once under Sulu Sultanate. Descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claim that Sabah belonged to Sulu Sultanate because Sabah was given by Brunei the original owner to Sulu as a gift for purportedly helping Brunei to fight rebels. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. In fact on 29 December 1877, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the whole of Sabah to BNBC/British and concurrently appointed Baron Von Overback, the co-owner of BNBC as Maharajah of Sabah and Rajah of Sandakan and Gaya. This cession agreement was documented. When BNBC went to Sabah to begin their business, Sulu claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu. BNBC agreed to enter a "pajak" agreement with Sulu after they were advised by their fellow businessmen in Hong Kong who advised that Sulu would attack them if they didn't have a deal with Sulu. This "pajak'' agreement was signed on 22 January 1878. BNBC understood that this "pajak" was a "cession", so did early generation of Sulu Sultan accepted it as "cession". Only later generation of descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claimed that the "pajak" agreement was meant to be "rent" or "lease''. Still there was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. The two above events led to an overlapping issue on Sabah. What ever it was, the above agreement and overlapping issue were superceded by later event. On 22 July 1878, the then Sultan of Sulu had relinquished all his possession and sovereignty of Sulu and it's territories including Sabah to Spain. The Sultanate of Sulu only remained as hereditary cultural and traditional entity without any sovereign territory. In 1885, to resolve overlapping issue on Sabah and other issues involving other islands, Britain, Spain and Germany arrived to an agreement known as Madrid Protocol in which Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. As new owner of Sabah Britain had full control and sovereignty over Sabah and they could do what ever they wanted. Sulu could not claim anything because they had already relinquished the sovereignty of Sabah to Spain and Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. What ever happened to Sabah after that was under British jurisdiction. Even though British had full control and sovereignty of Sabah, they still honoured the annual "cession money" payment stipulated in the "pajak'' agreement as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. So did Malaysia when formed in 1963, still honoured the annual "cession money" payment as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. The term "cession money" was used because to use the term "consolation" was felt to be too degrading. Thus the term "cession money" was continually used as used before by the British. Even the argument about the word "pajak" and it's meaning in the "pajak" agreement still favoured the British. The "pajak" agreement was written in classical Malay, in jawi script (Arabic alphabet). Malay is the national language of Malaysia and Brunei, and mother tongue of majority Malaysians and Brunei. In those days, Malay was also used by people of Sulu because Malay was the "lingua franca" of this region including the present Philippines. That was why the agreement was written in Malay. But over the years Sulu people had lost their Malay language (standard Malay) because of several reasons like colonisation by different European. The word "pajak" carried several meanings depending on the contact used in the sentence or passage. It could mean "tax, rent, pawn, lease, or cession". In the agreement between BNBC/ British and Sulu, the word "pajak" was used together with the phrase "selama-lamanya" which meant "forever". When "pajak" was used together with the phrase"selama-lamanya", in this contact the word "pajak" meant "cession". Cession means "the formal giving up of rights, property or territory by a state". When Sulu "pajak" Sabah to BNBC it meant Sulu ceded Sabah and it meant Sabah no longer belonged to Sulu. This was further clarified. There was a second agreement which was a supplementary to the first agreement known as "Confirmation of Cession of Certain Islands Agreement". It was regarding certain islands between Sabah and Sulu which they were not sure whether they were included in the first agreement or not. In this second agreement, the word "pajak" was no longer used because they thought it might lead to misunderstanding by later generation. Instead the word "menyerahkan" which meant "surrender" was used, and the annual payment was increased from 5,000 dollars to 5,300 dollars due to certain islands included. On 31 August 1963 Britain gave independence to Sabah and before that on 22 July 1963 Sarawak was given independence. The people of Sabah and Sarawak had exercised self determination to form Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore. The sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak as component states of Malaysia is intact and recognized internationally and recognized by the UN. This was confirmed and clearly stated in the United Nations Malaysia Mission Report "Final Conclusion of the Secretary-General", 14 September 1963. The last sentence of the report says: "I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfillment as component states of Malaysia". Full text of the report can even be accessed from the Philippines Government Gazette website. About the arbitration award by Paris Court to Sulu of US$14.92B, it had since been set aside and annulled by Paris Court of Appeal. Here is the latest situation. Latest as in June 2023: 1. June 6th - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside and annulled the previous Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. 2. June 27th - Dutch Court of Appeal in The Haque had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award by Paris Court (lower court) ruling, and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. 3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost. 4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Now is already October 2023, no news about Sulu's claim proceeding in Luxembourg Court. It looked like they withdrew their case when they acknowledged the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Malaysia had spent around RM32m, equivalent to about US$6.6m to deal with these Sulu claim cases in various European courts, in Madrid, Paris, Luxembourg and Netherlands. Apart from the €100,000.00 Sulu has to pay to Malaysia as legal cost, Malaysia is planning to sue Sulu for compensation for the loss of RM32m spent.
philippines should help sulu that is our land to... if we have to wage war so be it they are filipinos to we need to help them plss Pnoy send some reinforcement to help the sulu armed forcess they have the right lets help the sultan
itu baru polis belum orang kampung masuk campur .. putery penganas..banyak lagi sumandak suluk yg sabah seratus lebih cantik dari kau tapi diorang cintakan kedamayan..no like u..you are prinses you think lah..in the world you princes like ........... and storme fire
Maybe the letter said "Sulu should call for referendum seeking full independence from the Filipinos. When Sulu becomes an independence nation Sulu can restore its monarch system headed by a legitimate Sultan".
wandy dont talk too much if you dont like them then you can step out from thier property. is just like you just renting a house then the owner wants to use his house.what will you do?you can go to other part of malaysia.
You have no choice but to accepts the fact Malaysian government is paying a lease ...or perhaps this is a "rent to own" deeds :P. If you do want to be considered Sulu citizen then get off sabah..Kiram has the right to claim your land.
How can Philipines president protect their pple overseas, if they traveled illegally without passports, bypassing immigration checkpoints and carrying weapons? Unless the President sanctioned such actions?
Sultan kabus, papaguwae niyu IC kad pengenalan in manga bangsa niyu.. maka ulung pag binsanaun sin parinta sabah.. kamu pa in tagdapu sin sabah. Rakyat niyu pa in mabinsanah.. bisan niyu hi sanda na in sabah. amun dih niyu na lukatun.. sah pikila niyu in manga rakyat niyu.. bangsa niyu.. pag binsanaun sin manga parinta sabah bang wayruun IC kad pengenalan.. saggaun nila..
I thought muslims are peaceful people specially if you're same muslim. I am not muslim. For me, I like this issue to be discuss in peaceful manner not bloodshed between our people and your people.
11.7+ million numbers Pilipinos migrants working abroad international professional job watching again and again in 3 x a day all in 24 hours in all watching again and again.
people to be killed???i will understand if your police can killed an arm person but innocent..one my god it is not acceptable anywhere you go....your goverment can face court marshall in united nation
why didn't they issued the case at ICJ. Like what Singapore did when they claimed Batu Putih. No bloodshed, no corpses, no war. I mean yeah we lost to Singapore but we lose with manners.. If they really have the evidence suggesting Sabah is still their property, then show it to the court (more civilized way don't u think). I think there is a hidden issue behind all of this. It isn't entirely about claiming Sabah, but about something else.. Not sure what it is..
Sam Fander the reason behind these people of Sultan Jamalul was invited by Malaysian Government to resettle in sabah. But these people were used by a Malsysian politician to crackdown the project IC so that the holder of Project IC won't beable to vote. Observe what happen the project IC did it not the target?
Only a country or a nation can bring a case to ICJ. Sulu is not a country and the "Sultan" or the "heirs" are just ordinary people without any sovereign territory.
There are two separate issues. One, the claim on Sabah (whether lease or cession) is debatable and negotiable. Two, invading Sabah with two hundred armed men who refuse to leave and are ready to die is clearly terrorism which no government can condone.
@@josephmontesclaros3757Sulu only claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu because Brunei gave Sabah to Sulu as a gift. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans.
"Dan barangsiapa yang membunuh seorang mukmin dengan sengaja maka balasannya ialah Jahannam, kekal ia di dalamnya dan Allah murka kepadanya, dan mengutukinya serta menyediakan azab yang besar baginya." [An Nisaa' 93]
We won in last stand off in lahad datu incursion in 2013. The sultanate soldiers were able to collect almost 300 high powered firearms from malaysian amateur rangers, it means we killed them and they left their firearms after numerous retreats in a 2weeks skirmishes. Long live our sultanate fighters. The best fighters in southeast asia. Our next target for incursion is xiamen, china...wazz up mr. "Bully" xi jinping of china
Hindi man kasing yaman ng ibang bansa ang bansa natin. pero walang imposible sa mga Pilipinong di nawawalan ng pag asa, kaya natin. wala lang maibato itong mga ito at nag hihimutok. dead-ma lang din ako eehehe kahit ano pang sabihin nila sa atin, mas kilala ko naman ang sarili ko para patulan pa 'tong mga ito.
Sabe nong bata 3years old palang salamat po sa tubeg banal na ama hende napo ako galit sa babae at lalake at ahas kase po pinapainom nyo po kame ng tubeg banal na ama amen
you just dont get what i mean right..? your turning the wrong way...the original owner of Sabah is Brunei right..? did Brunei gave Sabah to Malaysia.? what is your proof that Sabah is owned by Malaysia....?when in fact Sabah is originally own by Brunei right.
Yes, you were right, Sabah was originally owned by Brunei. The question of Brunei giving Sabah to Malaysia did not arise because the issue here was Sulu / Philippines was claiming Sabah which they said was given to them by Brunei. So it was for them Sulu to prove that Brunei had given Sabah to them.
