Note: This article is based from various published
historical books and existing laws of the country. I used footnote instead of
MLA for more explained facts for it. If I have discrepancies, let me know since
my legal knowledge is limited.
Today’s headlines in ANC’s HEADSTART[1] about the armed
group of the Sultanate of Sulu, stayed and claimed the area of Sabah and
willing to die fighting against the government of Malaysia. It was more than
300 years ago since that territory ceded to the Sultan of Sulu from Royal
Family of Brunei and it was only today that this standoff happened; their
claimed and willingness to sacrifice their life for the said territory. Since
Sultanate of Sulu is part of our Royal tradition as a Filipino, we can say that
we are part of their claimed since the state has the obligation to its people.
For this, let me first discuss our legal rights for this.
The 1987 Constitution defined our territory as:
“ The national territory comprises the Philippine
archipelago, with all the islands and waters embraced therein, and all other
territories over which the Philippines has sovereignty or jurisdiction,
consisting of its terrestrial, fluvial and aerial domains, including its
territorial sea, the seabed, the subsoil, the insular shelves, and other
submarine areas. The waters around, between, and connecting the islands of the
archipelago, regardless of their breadth and dimensions, form part of the
internal waters of the Philippines.” [2]
Now, if the constitution says that “our national territory
comprises the Philippine archipelago”, we must define our Philippine
Archipelago. First, all the island and
waters embraced there in are clearly define by The Treaty of Paris of 1898
signed between Spain and the United States on December 10,1898, the Treaty
of Spain and U.S. at Washington on
November 1, 1900 and the Treaty of United Staes and Great Britain on January 2,
1930.[3] The said treaty of Spain provided that Sulu, Cagayan and Sibutu and included
territory of the Philippines.
If Sulu is considered part of the Philippines, therefore
their claimed of Sabah must be considered part of Philippine affair.
How come that Sabah claimed as part of Sulu well in fact on
the said three documents, Sabah didn’t mention?
In 1674, Sultan Mahaiddin of Brunei ceded Sabah to the
Sultan of Sulu, after they provided military aid for the war in controlling
Borneo. Since then, it was recognized and respected. Baron Von Overbeck and
Alfred Dent, leased Sabah from Jamalul Kiram for an annual rental of 5,000
Malayan dollars and that deed prohibited their successors transferring leased
of Sabah to another nation or company. They continued the annual rental until
1946 when the British Government took over the rental until 1961. When the
Federation of Malaysia was created, the lease was transferred to the new
independent Malaysian Government. In 1971, Princess Putli Tarhata Kiram stopped
collecting rentals since they already ceded to the Philippines their rights
over Sabah.[4]
If this will be the bases, does our laws sustaining it? Are
the treaties, the leased and the continued payment of the Malayan Government
can be considered as documents supporting the claimed of Sabah? Are the claimed of Sabah important not only to
our culture and History but for economic benefits? Did our government do
something about these territorial affairs for the past 100 years? Answers are
on the second part of this article.
[1] HEADSTART: Malaysian officials: Death toll in Sabah
clashes at 21.The ABS-CBN News Channel. March 4, 2013.
[2] Article I, The National Territory, the 1987
Constitution.
[3] Callanta, Rene. LLB, Notes on Political Law. PUP College
of Law. 2011 p. 7
[4] Santos, Emmanuel. The Constitution of the Philippines:
Notes and Comments.2001p.57
No comments:
Post a Comment