Baptized Sultan

One of the most interesting figures ever to rule the Sultanate of Sulu was Muhammad Alimuddin I, who, in 1735, took over as sultan from his older brother Nasaruddin. He was a complex man with an advanced instinct for statecraft and diplomacy, which was not common among Sulu’s lesser nobility.

The late Jesuit historian Fr. Horacio de la Costa wrote a fascinating account of Alimuddin’s life that appeared in a few scholarly journals in 1965.  I recently found the wonderful essay in a compilation of Father De la Costa’s writings put together by Roberto M. Paterno and published in 2002. Alimuddin’s story transports us back to an era when being sultan meant something.

As soon as he became sultan, Alimuddin made calculated moves to put the administration of the sultanate on a stable foundation, free from the vagaries of a system of rule that rested on the uncertain loyalty of local chieftains. He signed a peace treaty with Spain, ratified no less by Philip V himself, which provided not just for a cessation of hostilities but also for a mutual obligation to come to each other’s aid in the event of an attack.

In 1749, he converted from Islam to Catholicism, assuming the name “Don Fernando Primero, Rey Christiano de Jolo.” The Jesuits who gave him religious instruction objected to his baptism until he could show strong proof of the sincerity and depth of his religious disposition. They suspected that he might have sought conversion in order to get the Spaniards to help him recover the throne that his younger brother Bantilan had seized during his prolonged absence from Sulu.

De la Costa argued that the question of motive wasn’t so simple. “On the other hand, the lively interest which Alimuddin had always shown in Christian belief, his friendship for the Jesuit missionaries, his refusal to close down the Jolo mission under severe pressure and, above all, his willingness to be regarded as a renegade by his own people, could scarcely have been feigned.”  Alimuddin remained a puzzle to him.

Wildly applauded in Manila, the significance of Alimuddin’s conversion to Christianity was not lost on the people of Sulu, particularly on Bantilan, who had meanwhile taken the name Sultan Mu’izzuddin. Accusing the Spaniards of interfering in the purely internal affairs of the Sulus, Mu’izzuddin ordered the resumption of hostilities against the Spanish forces. Spain responded by ordering the reinstallation of Alimuddin to his throne.

On May 19, 1751, a Spanish expedition left Manila for Jolo to help Don Fernando, the Christian sultan, regain his rightful seat in Sulu. They arrived in Jolo on June 26.

The Sulu datus quickly capitulated and agreed to meet Alimuddin in Zamboanga, and escort him back to Sulu. Governor Zacarias of Zamboanga, however, smelled something fishy. He doubted the authenticity of Alimuddin’s conversion. At the last minute, he decided to take both Alimuddin and Datu Asin’s welcoming party prisoner. The Spaniards shipped them back to Manila, hoping to swap them later for Spanish prisoners. Some were released a year later, but Alimuddin spent the next decade inside Intramuros, subsisting on a monthly pension given to him by the Spanish government.

His brother, Sultan Mu’izzuddin, saw that the British, who had ventured into Sulu, could be used as a foil against the Spaniards. He signed a treaty of friendship and commerce with Alexander Dalrymple of the English East India Company. The plan was to position Sulu as a transshipment point to China. Later, the British saw that there was greater potential for making money in North Borneo than in Sulu. In January 1763, Dalrymple obtained a treaty with Mu’izzuddin allowing the English flag to be flown over Balambangan in North Borneo.

Neither the East India Company, which Dalrymple represented, nor the Sulus expected the British attack on Manila in 1762 as a result of Spain’s entry into the Seven Years’ War.

Alimuddin volunteered to fight on the side of Spain, and was wounded in the defense of Manila. He asked to be allowed to return to Sulu so he could raise an army to fight the British. Simon de Anda ordered him instead to proceed to Pampanga, where the provisional capital of the Spanish government had moved. On his way to Pampanga, Alimuddin realized that the Spaniards, in fact, had been defeated.  He sent a note to the British informing them that he was a captive of Spain and that he wished to return to his own country. The British recognized his value, but they already had an agreement with his brother, Sultan Mu’izzuddin.

When the war ended, and Spain was poised to get back the Philippines as part of the settlement, the British saw the need to confirm in a separate treaty with Alimuddin all the concessions they had obtained from Mu’izzuddin.  The result was the cession of North Borneo and Palawan to the East India Company on July 2, 1764. Dalrymple kept his end of the bargain by personally accompanying Alimuddin to Jolo in May so he could retake his throne. Eight years later, the formidable sultan abdicated in favor of his son, Muhammad Israel.

De la Costa concluded his account thus: “The portrait of Muhammad Alimuddin that emerges from the available sources is that of a highly intelligent and sensitive individual, capable of conceiving large views on the government of his realm, but somewhat lacking in the resolution of will and the practical grasp of affairs necessary to carry them into effect.” Even so, one can only marvel at Alimuddin’s ability to get the attention and earn the respect of the European powers. But that was a time when the Sultanate of Sulu was a sovereign entity in its own right.

* * *

public.lives@gmail.com

Read more: http://opinion.inquirer.net/48487/the-sultan-who-became-christian#ixzz3lP9pijlH
Follow us: @inquirerdotnet on Twitter | inquirerdotnet on Facebook

COMMENTS:

  • pptttng inamo damaso salot sa pilipinas! gus2 mag parami ng batang hubo radical mapia billion private school in the philippines stock holder billion money terrorist!

  • Avatar

    ptttng inamo cbcp bishops radical salot!

  • Avatar

    Hi Randy David! Great historical facts and should not be forgotten. These events should shape our future. I used to walk in front of your house when I was still a student.

  • Avatar

    pttttng inamo cbcp bishops mga salot gus2 mag parami ng batang hubo mapia katoliban!

  • Avatar

    ptttttng inamo cbcp bishops muka mo unggoy gus2 mag parami ng batang hubo mapis salot!

  • Avatar

    Pedobear catholics clapping hands when seeing Muslims killing each other.

  • Avatar

    puttttang inamo damaso cbcp bishops gus2 mag parami ng batang hubo mapia radical salot!

  • Avatar

    Mr. David, napapansin ko po na ikatlo na ninyo itong artikulo na tumutulong sa Malaysia. Kayo po ba ay Pilipino? O marahil po ay nais ninyong magpalit ng citizenship at maaaring Malaysian citizenship ang mapili ninyo. Sana po, kung hindi kayo makakatulong sa cause na ipinaglalaban ng mga kapwa ninyo Pilipino ay magsawalang-kibo na lamang kayo. Labis-labis na panlilinlang ang ginawa ng Great Britain at Malaysia, kaya napunta sa kanila ang Sabah. Sana ay huwag na kayong gumawa ng paraan para madagdagan pa ang kawalang katarungan sa mundo. Ako po ay tagahanga ninyo mula 1990s. Malabis po akong disillusioned sa inyo. Sana ay huwag tanggalin ng moderator ang comment na ito.

  • Avatar

    Mr. David, napapansin ko po na ikatlo na ninyo itong artikulo na tumutulomg sa Malaysia sa issue ng Sabah. Kayo po ba ay Pilipino? May balak po ba kayong magpalit ng nationality at mukhang Malaysian citizenship ang puwedeng piliin ninyo? Sana po, kung hindi kayo makatutulong sa cause na ipinaglalaban ng mga kapwa ninyo Pilipino ay magsawalang kibo na lang kayo. Pulos panlilinlang ang ginawa ng Great Britain at Malaysia kaya napunta sa kanila ang Sabah. Huwag ninyo na po sanang tulungang madagdagan pa ang kawalang katarungan sa mundo. Hindi ko po akalain na ito ang tunay ninyong pagkatao. Tagahanga ninyo ako mula 1990s. Masyado po akong disillusioned sa inyo.

  • Avatar

    Ang gagaling ng mga Filipino.

  • Avatar

    kill all filipinos terrorist!

    • Avatar

      stu pid malaysian!!!

    • Avatar

      there are no filipino terrorist. they are malaysians and chinese.

      check it out!

    • Avatar

      This is why you become what is now known as “MADERPHACKING” Malaysian…….from now on ….we will call all Malaysian…”MADERPHACKING Malaysian”…..is that okay, Kamal?….as you can see Tamil is the lowest creature in the strata of family of homo sapiens…..Tamil belongs to borderline primate (monkey) and homo sapien….the reason behind is Tamil’s odor similar to monkey odor….Thank you.

      • Avatar

        Pinoys smell more. I know and I’ve smell it. Pinoys = mongreloid creatures which don’t deserve to have equal footing with other human species.

      • Avatar

        Have you people ever met the dayak warriors…? They are far more superior than thye suluk and the tausug……………. I mean it!!!

        • Avatar

          but the dinosaurs already ate all the dayak warriors and they are all gone…..and I mean it too…….if you think that “head hunting warriors” like dayak are more ferocious than suluk and tausug, research how many “head hunting tribes” in the Philippines during the time of the viciousness of your dayaks…..your dayak warriors are no longer relevant these days….the same with those “numerous” head hunting tribes in the Philippines……both dayak and “head hunting” tribes in the Philippines no longer do “HEAD HUNTING”……they are all totally irrelevant now and all of them live a peaceful and civilized lives now…..

  • Avatar

    Malaysia is a terrorist country for sponsoring rebellion in the Southern Philippines.

    • Avatar

      Philippines is a lazyass country always love to blame others for own mistakes. It can even solve its south region problem for many years still yet want to blame others.

      • Avatar

        Your country sponsors, funds, finances, and arms the following group:

        1) Pattani United Liberation Organization (PULO) – this group is based in Kelantan State of Malaysia and taken care of by Malaysia through its Islamic Party PAS.  PULO kills, maims, desecrate Thai Army.  P.U.L.O. has been waging insurgency war against a sovereign nation of Thailand.
        2) Free Aceh Movement – this group is based in Kedah.  They are armed, fed, sheltered, clothes, funded, and trained by the Malaysian government to wage insurgency against a sovereign nation of Indonesia.

        Now, Jonathan Lim….I hope I wont see you here again or else I will send you back to China so that they will send you to North Korea and be trained in terrorism too.

        Go…and get me some spring rolls and jasmine tea….before I kick your ashzz.

        MATHERPHACKING SONOVOBEACH!!

  • Avatar

    A Reply To EdgarEdgar’s Post.

    No.  I am not really replying to that bigger part of his post which I consider as mere unwarranted polemics against Prof. David’s informative article, and false propaganda against the present administration. My reply is a purely academic one and concerns only this statement which he wrote:

    “Readers who read through former Senator Salonga’s speech on our Sabah claim delivered in 1963 will of course understand why our claim on Sabah remains solid and strong to this day.”

    With all humility and due respect to Sen.  Salonga, I find that his 1963 “refutational” speech against the position of Sen. Sumulong (Sen. Umatras, to some) was, in the most part, rhetoric and veiled ad hominems. On its substantive aspect, I must say Sen. Salonga’s arguments were studded with straw men and ambiguous language here and there, and by other fallacies in reasoning. In fact, his main argument undermined his own position.  It may not be obvious because it was done with a “sleight of mind” that could easily escape one’s notice.  Below is one example. It involves the deliberate use of ambiguity by foregoing giving a definition of what one means by a term, and using it loosely and deploying it in more senses than one to suit one’s contention.

    When Sen. Salonga declared, as against Sen. Sumulong—-

    “If the Senator believes that the claim of sovereignty was so “tardily presented”, how could the proprietary claim of dominion or ownership — which is the main element of sovereignty — regardless of whether it is the Philippine Government or not that institutes the claim — be considered still seasonable and appropriate? “

    —-we should clearly see that Sen. Salonga was implying  that “sovereignty” has some other elements aside from “dominion or ownership.”  However, note that he has not priorly stated what “sovereignty” is, as used in his speech. Likewise, what these other elements of sovereignty are, Sen. Salonga chose also not to say.  Yet, in another part of his speech, he states, “Be it noted that the Philippine claim includes sovereignty and dominion over North Borneo.”  But if “dominion or ownership,” as he earlier said, is the “main element of sovereignty,” why now say that “the Philippine claim includes sovereignty and dominion”?  Why make a separate mention of that which he previously considered as already included in the whole, and now again  imply that it is after all separate and distinct from it?

    On the other hand, Sen. Sumulong, in his speech, actually made a distinction between sovereignty and “dominion or ownership” as positively shown when he said—-

    “If the said heirs had any claims to sovereignty over North Borneo — as distinguished from their proprietary claims — they could have filed a petition or a reservation to the United Nations protesting against British rule and administration over North Borneo, but they did not file any such petition or reservation. It was only in February of last year (1962) that the said heirs informed our Department of Foreign Affairs that they were claiming sovereignty to North Borneo and they offered to turn over such claim of sovereignty to the Republic of the Philippines, reserving however to themselves their proprietary claims.”

    Based on the foregoing, Sen. Salonga was far from being fair and forthright to Sen. Sumulong’s presentation..  He would, by his own fiat and in this particular instance, erase the distinction between “sovereignty” and “dominion or ownership”—-legal concepts that are definitely not the same; and others even distinguish between dominion and ownership, the former requiring both title and possession—-whenever it suited his argument’s purpose. The correct conceptual delineation is that while it is true that “sovereignty” includes the concept of “dominion or ownership” insofar as what a “sovereign” supposedly has sovereignty over is concerned, the converse is not true.  Ownership does not necessarily include sovereignty.  An entity—-a state or government, or even a private person—-may own or have dominion over a piece of real property located in another place over which such entity does not have sovereignty.

    As an example which would be very close to the heart of Sen. Salonga, the first victory of the Philippine government in its pursuit of the ill-gotten wealth of the Marcoses was the one when, on September 13, 1986, the Superior Court of New Jersey ruled in favor of, and ordered the transfer to, the Philippine Government two residential properties at 2659 Princeton Pike, located near Princeton University.  These were properties which Marcos had bought for the use of his children. The New Jersey court’s decision certainly did not imply that the Philippines also acquired sovereignty over the particular territory on which those properties stood. The court merely declared the Philippine government as the owner of those particular properties located in New Jersey.  If, for example, the state of New Jersey or the US Federal Government chooses to exercise the right of eminent domain over those properties, the Philippines cannot validly resist it on the ground that the Philippines has sovereignty over those real properties.

    To my mind, Sen. Salonga’s marked omission in defining the term “sovereignty” speech was probably due to his acute awareness that while the heirs of the then Sultanate of Sulu could possibly but remotely maintain a claim of ownership over Sabah, such a claim could never really amount to a claim of sovereignty.  He certainly was aware of the myriad of events and circumstances, including WWII and the birth of the United Nations, as well as  the principles and policies the UN was seeking to realize with respect to lands formerly colonized or possessed by the world powers.  In this respect, I cannot help thinking that the good Senator may have sacrifced some logic in return for some gain in his patriotic image.

    Sovereignty can be lost.  It is a matter of operative historical facts.  After all, there can be no doubt that on July 4, 1946, when the Philippines gained independence from the U.S.A. by virtue of the “Treaty of Manila of 1946,” whatever vestiges of sovereignty, if any, that remained with the Sultanate of Sulu, even over Sulu itself, was completely extinguished.  Sulu being deemed an integral part of the Philippines and under the Philippines’ sovereignty.

    So, what is “sovereignty”?  The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy defines sovereignty this way: “Sovereignty, though its meanings have varied across history, also has a core meaning, supreme authority within a territory. It is a modern notion of political authority.  Historical variants can be understood along three dimensions — the holder of sovereignty, the absoluteness of sovereignty, and the internal and external dimensions of sovereignty. The state is the political institution in which sovereignty is embodied.”

    Thus, even granting as true, for the sake of argument, the factual bases of Sen. Salonga’s main contention, to wit—-

    “Our claim is mainly based on the following propositions: that Overbeck and Dent, not being sovereign entities nor representing sovereign entities, could not and did not acquire dominion and sovereignty over North Borneo; that on the basis of authoritative British and Spanish documents, the British North Borneo Company, a private trading concern to whom Dent transferred his rights, did not and could not acquire dominion and sovereignty over North Borneo; that their rights were as those indicated in the basic contract, namely, that of a lessee and a mere delegate; that in accordance with established precedents in International Law, the assertion of sovereign rights by the British Crown in 1946, in complete disregard of the contract of 1878 and their solemn commitments, did not and cannot produce legal results in the form of a new tide”.

    —-by the same line of reasoning, neither could the “Sultanate of Sulu” assign to the Philippine government a claim of sovereignty over Sabah because when it effected such a transfer in 1962, it too was not or no longer a sovereign entity.  If the “sultanate” was not even a sovereign with respect to the very land it was actually occupying and over the population of which it had some degree of influence, how could it have sovereignty over Sabah, the effective administration of which already pertained to another entity?

    Yes, the matter of annual payments by Malaysia, “rentals,” from the Kirams’ viewpoint, is only consistent with ownership, not with sovereignty.  In fact, if it were a lease that started such a relationship, the absence of a period implied a perpetual lease.  It is one which is virtually a surrender of one’s prerogatives as owner.  A perpetual lease is renewable at the lessee’s option and cannot be terminated by the lessor-owner. On the other hand, the same annual payment is also not incompatible with a cession the consideration for which was precisely the said perpetual payments of the amount fixed.  So either way, with respect to a Philippine claim of sovereignty over Sabah based on a derivative “title” from the defunct Sultanate of Sulu, or from the successors-in-interest of its former Sultans, cannot in all likelihood be resolved much less granted, say, by an international tribunal, on the sole basis of a claim of ownership by historic title.  If the ICJ decision in the sovereignty dispute between Malaysia and Indonesia over the Sipadan-Ligitan islands can be a gauge of how the ICJ would probably rule on a dispute between the Philippines and Malaysia regarding sovereignty over Sabah (assuming both parties agree and consent to the ICJ’s taking jurisdiction of such a case), one should concern himself with, in the ICJ’s language, the “effectivités” of the case.  It includes and means no less than the realities of the present state-of-affairs.  The ICJ, I believe, looks more at the present and to the betterment of the future, rather than at the past, and to the detriment of the present or the uncertainty of the future.

    – – – – – –

    I make this post with absolutely no disloyal intent to the land of my birth, and with full sympathy for the present plight of our Filipino brothers and sisters now in Sabah; to their families who may have lost their loved ones.  And I also join the call of  my fellow citizens—- be they those that also think that the course of action that the Kirams’ took is neither wise nor prudent, or those who think otherwise— for our Government to do everything within its power, consistent with the ways of peace and amity among civilized nations, to prevent the further loss of lives in Sabah, but consistent with our honor as a nation.  And if, the Heavens forbid, Malaysia perpetrates acts against the Filipinos now in Sabah in violation of the International Humanitarian Law, then let us all unite to intervene and stop them, even if it means crossing over and fighting the Malaysians.  Perchance, Providence may favor us this time, and the righteousness of our common cause will prevail and bring back to our patrimony what we once lost due to two things: the lure of easy money and Filipino Time, both Christian and  Muslim.  After all, the march of history has its own twists of fate.

    – – – – – – – –

    • Avatar

      Thanks for opening an academic discussion, mad_as_Hamlet. You have apparently read Salonga’s “guns” against Sumulong in 1963. For the sake of academic discussion, some elucidations are in order regarding the legal aspects of the claim.

      Based on historical facts, it is unlikely that the Sultan relinquished it by the Deed of 1878. Cession of territory is an act which ONLY A SOVEREIGN can do. Also, cession can only be done by means of a Treaty, and a Treaty can be concluded only between Sovereigns. Neither Alfred Dent or Overbeck were representing the British Government when they signed the contract with the Sultan. They were NOT also sovereigns.

      His sovereignty over the territories was not extinguished during the Spanish and American periods. The U.S., under the Bates Treaty (August 20, 1899) and the Carpenter Agreement (March 22, 1915) knew about the North Borneo possessions of the Sultan. The fact that the Agreement divested the Sultan of his temporal jurisdiction only within the limits of American territory is tantamount to allowing him to remain what he was all along: the sovereign of North Borneo. The clarification, specifically mentioning that the U.S.recognizes the Sultan’s sovereignty over the territory, was made by no less than Governor Carpenter himself. Also, by the Treaty of Paris and the Treaty at Washington of 1900, North Borneo was never ceded to the U.S.

      But through a series of unilateral illegal acts and collusion (in 1888 and 1946), the territory was stolen from him by Great Britain and the North Borneo Company. The Sultan of Sulu could not have considered the Protectorate Treaty (1888) between the British Government and the North Borneo Company as tantamount to a denial of his sovereignty over the territory for it was agreed in the Deed of 1878 that in case of dispute, Great Britain would be called upon to arbitrate. Also, no less than Great Britain’s PM Gladstone (1881), in clarifying the nature of the Royal Charter granted to the North Borneo Company in the House of Commons said that, the powers that the North Borneo Chartered Company were NOT derived from the British Government but from the SOVEREIGNTY of the native chief.

      North Borneo always remained under the sovereignty of the Sultan of Sulu—a sovereignty which could not have been extinguished merely because Britain had extended unilaterally in 1888 her protectorate over a territory that was merely leased to the North Borneo Company (i.e., land grabbing). The British North Borneo Company had no right whatsoever to cede the territory to the British Crown. The Company never became the owner nor the sovereign of North Borneo. The Company could not cede to the British Crown whatever had been granted to it by the Sultan.

      If, finally the Sultanate ceded North Borneo to the Philippines on August 29, 1962—before the formation of the Federation of Malaysia, would not the government of the Philippines then become the rightful sovereign?

      Some have cited “decolonization” (and the right of self-determination) as an argument why the claim is no more, and have quoted Judge Franck’s words when the Philippines’ filed a motion to intervene in the Ligitan and Sipadan dispute between Indonesia and Malaysia:  that “..whatever interest the Philippines might have inherited from the Sultan of Sulu—even were it to be a fully demonstrable—cannot now be held to prevail over a validated exercise of so fundamental a right.”  (Note, that this is not a decision over Sabah, but in the context of the Philippines’ motion to intervene as an interested party to a dispute that does not concern it directly).

      (A note: The Philippines never questioned this right. As what VP Emmanuel Pelaez stated before the UN General Assembly in September 27, 1962 the Philippines recognizes the Sabahans right to self-determination (if such turns out to be the case).

      North Borneo became a colony by the simple act of land grabbing (we can argue endlessly, if due to this historical note, North Borneo became a colony and therefore, an object of “decolonization”—but for the sake of discussion, let us accept that it was decolonized and eventually joined the Federation). Let us gloss over the important point that the “referendum” and the eventual inclusion of North Borneo to the Federation of Malaysia were consequent results of Great Britain’s and North Borneo Company’s unilateral collusion to annex the territory illegally. Let us also gloss over the armed support that Great Britain and other Commonwealth countries gave Malaysia so she can keep North Borneo. In short, let us forget the important point that after stealing the land, Great Britain (and later, with the Commonwealth countries) ensured that the stolen property would remain fully under her control; and that when she was ordered to yield her stolen possession, she did not return it to the rightful owner.

      The question is, does the referendum removes or nullifies the injury done to the Sultan and his heirs by the illegal act of the North Borneo Company (in collusion with the British Government) based on the contract that they have signed (i.e., Deed of 1878)?

      Maybe the answer can be gleaned from the initiatives of some very senior Malaysian statespersons in the wake of the unfortunate incident in Lahad Datu: Before the bloody dispersal on March 1. The old, former 6th Mentri Besar (Chief Minister) of Sabah, Tan Sri Datuk Seri Panglima Harris bin Mohd Salleh proposed to Malaysian Home Minister Hishamuddin that the matter be settled with the Sultan of Sulu (through a one-time payment). There are also suggestions that the issue be settled but in full cognizance of the present realities and status quo.

      The present world view and spirit encourages the correction of history’s twists–those past wrongs and unsettled cases of injustice. For the Philippines and the Sultanate, “might” dictated what was right not so long time ago. It would be a shame if we join the party of those who wish to overlook the opportunity to correct an injustice and just succumb to the diktat of history that was based on the twisted account of, and written in blood by the mighty.

      • Avatar

        Pardon me, but are you saying that the Sultanate of Sulu remains a sovereign entity up to this day?  That is what your post is actually implying.  On the other hand, if your answer is in the negative, please tell us then when it lost the same. I mean, the date.

  • Avatar

    No quick solution to the Sabah debacle. Malaysia cannot go on arresting people on the streets and kampongs. That is barbarism. The truth is Malaysia is hurting so much since the start of the conflict. By this time, hundred of its forces have died and dying trying to finish off  ragtag intruders from Sulu. No diplomatic or political solution in sight. Only one solution-BREAK OF THE FEDERATION.

    Guerrilla fighters are doing well, inflicting huge casualties against the Malaysian forces. The Malaysian economy is already hurting.

    • Avatar

      hope you’re telling the truth…

    • Avatar

      guerila fighters inflicting huge casualties against malaysian forces? It isnt the malaysian forces thatre asking for a ceasefire!!!!!
      Yep..we’re stopping, checking and arresting the terrorists sympathisers while sending back illegal filipinos or should we say….sulu people?
      Its a normal thing anywhere in the world in dealing with insurgency, terrorists and illegal immigrants.
      Philipines is a good exporter of maids, palm oil workers, go go dancers, prostitutes, guest relations officers, terrorists, illegal immigrants…..what a very sicko country!!!
      and yet Pinoys support these terrorists….

      • Avatar

        Your corrupt country trained these so-called terrorists in Sabah….similarly your corrupt country is training, funding, and arming Free Aceh Movement in Kedah to wage war against a sovereign nation – Indonesia…..your corrupt country is training, financing, and arming Pattani United Liberation Organization through your corrupt Islamic Party PAS in Kelantan State of Malaysia to wage war against the sovereign country Thailand and wreck havoc within the Pattani Malays in Thailand……so what are you talking about, Alicia?   malaysia breeds terrorism in the South East Asia region by exporting terrorists and your misplaced islamic ideology…….PHACK OFF, Alicia…..and get me some curry flavored tandoori……..go…..quick!!!

      • Avatar

        your hearth
        is full of hatred… PIG HEAD

        • Avatar

          She said the truth. Pinoys such a wanker. Everyone smells.

        • Avatar

          If you guys want this crisis to end and STOP the suffering of your relatives in Sabah, beg you President to take quick action against Tiram and his family. Do it right now, declare Kiram as your public enemy. Why sacrifice so many lives for the sake of the self-centered lunatic Kiram.

          • Avatar

            YOUR COMMENT MAKE “SENSE”…  IT WAS NOTED…

          • Avatar

            If you guys want to end this crisis…..Malaysia must go with the Philippines and the Sultanate of Sulu to International Court of Justice……The Sabah issue has been put on the backburner for quite sometime now……Tunku Abdul Raham Putra, the first PM of Malaya, had acknowledged that there is a Sabah issue…..now, Malaysia and its present leaders (shall I say tortures and human rights violators) must not sweep this issue under the rug…….it is immaterial and irrelevant to declare the present Sultan of Sulu Kiram as public enemy.  Once he is eliminated, the “heir” to the Sultan throne will take over.  Your proposal is totally useless.  The Sultanate is an entity and it exists……You can eliminate the Sultan but not the Sultanate.

      • Avatar

        no matter what you say, malaysia is a bigtime land grabber worst than the china’s 9-dash line in the West Phil. Sea.  be happy to be a racist.  despite the F18s, helicopters, 7 battalions, personal carriers, etc…you can’t even effectively flush out 50-100 armed man with small arms, now tell who is your kind???

      • Avatar

        Alicia Mottershed is a delusional racist. Don’t you know that the people who are prostituting themselves are your kind?

      • Avatar

        you must be a very lonely menopausal spinster.

  • Avatar

    randy david lost his touch and intelligence in writing. he is more of a peddler of inconsistencies now. he is trying to imply that (1) conversion to christianity and (2) conflict of interests between his brother led to the downfall of sultanate of sulu, hence, the cession of north borneo to the british crown. seems that a very simple established truth, facts, realities and history that what was signed was a “pajak” a “lease”. can’t he understand or is he just being narrow-minded now due to old age and weakness of wisdom? i don’t think that he is thinking progressively. twisting the facts is making it worst. i hope somebody in his family will enlighten him. it’s not to late to redeem himself.

  • Avatar

    The problem is we have not acted when the Federation of Malaysia was being formed in 1963. It is compounded by the fact that the newly formed government of Sabah themselves chose to be with Malaysia. By now the sovereignty of Malaysia over Sabah is well in place and is recognized by the whole international community. Even our maps, as far as i can remember, does not include Sabah as part of Philippines.

    But sovereignty of Malaysia over Sabah is one thing. Proprietal claim of Sultan of Sulu is another. Still the payment of cession/rent money may prove ownership by the sultan but it was not clear when its gonna end. Can the Sultan end the agreement unilaterally?

    Unless the contract is abrogated the proprietor cannot just barged in uninvited and armed. The people of Sabah themselves may be a force to reckon with. The Sabah Progressive Party (SPP), a Malaysian dissident organization, fights for Borneonization, not Filipinization. Meanwhile, the UN puts priority on people’s right to self-determination.

    Right now, it barely matter who’s to blame historically for loss of sovereigny over a territory. The native indians lose their land to the whites.Even Manila was part of the Brunei sultanate but was captured by the Spanish. Brunei now is just a very small fraction of what it used to be. Civilization and society change and moves on.

    I agree with the Sultan’s claim, but today the sultan is not anymore a legal entity. He is even subject to the law of the Barangay he is in. Monarchial and feudalclans have fallen from power in the last century or so in most nations of the world. Practically every dynasties in Europe dont even hold any political power nowadays. Today the Sultan still has army, but it is just a private army. And landing in Sabah stealthily in violation of Malaysian and Philippine laws is an act that invites real trouble.

    Lastly, a third of my salary is taken monthly by the government as tax. And i dont want to spend that money to support lawbreakers, or finance a war that would cost lives not to mention a huge burden to our economy. A war is not a game which ends when a certain time or score is met. War is the costliest and draining of all human endeavor, with outcome uncertain, ask Robert E. Lee. We cannot even suppress with finality the decades-old Muslim separatist rebellion.

    Sabah is another muslim territory which, if we acquired, would surely be an integrated part of ARMM or, worse, an integrated part of the separatist movement of our brothers in the South.

    Just my humble opintion on this issue.

  • Avatar

    catholic is a pegan saan ka nakaita ng alagad ng diyos na utusan si atienza na ipag bawal ang pills health center at daanin sa padasal ang mga dumarami ang anak at sasabihin blesing  yan cbcp bishops lilinlangin ka ng mga yan salot yan sa pilipinas gus2 dumami ang batang hubo go multiply and eat garbage!! cbcp bishops radical mapia organization terrorist!!

  • Avatar

    Hello Milo! It looks like you have done your extensive homework on this potentially explosive problem which, if not handled with sobriety (although Razak has already lost his), can cause what an originally minor skirmishes to develop into a potentially full-blown military engagement between two sovereign states although the capabilities of the Philippines to engage into such is highly suspect.  Further  mishandling of this already mishandled issue may also cause the unexpected eventual disintegration of a regional association of independent states meant for their common good.  Having said thus, kindly allow me to intrude (please forgive the intrusion) in your praiseworthy treatise.  But I believe there are some points–for the education of everyone–that needs elucidation.  To leave those ambiguities unclarified would be an injustice to such a vital issue that concerns the very sovereignty of the country.  Rest assured that only for clarifying such ambiguities that this reply was prompted upon and nothing else.

    Firstly, it may not necessarily be accurate to say that those early explorers were private companies or “peddlers” working for territorial expansion of the european powers of the time.  The majority of them were sanctioned, financed, and given mandates by their sovereigns.  Such were the case of the voyages of explorations of Columbus, Magellan, etc., one of the modes of acquiring territories of the times, the rest of which are: by prescription, cession, conquest and subjugation, and accretion.  To touch on the Sabah claim again elaborately herein would be superfluous considering that we should be aware of the whole issue by now from earlier articles published in this forum.  Suffice it to say that “cession” is the contentious issue involving the said Sabah case.

    The absence of international body to handle conflict resolution among nations was precisely the reason for the develoment of international law which, unfortunately for the less “civilized” nations of the time, “developed at a time when the dominant Western European nations could impose their will upon the rest of the world”..which according to some authorities, “was not a totally malevolent phenomenon as the European nations not unjustly considered that they were bringing a superior way of life to backward and dependent peoples in exchange for certain material advantages.” (See International Law, The Stragegy of World Order, Falk and Mendlovitz, World Law Fund, 1966, p.178.)

    As for the Sultan of Sulu making a claim “without any recognizable legal authority”, we have to bear in mind that such authority is established by the continued payment of rent to the family by the Malaysian Government up to the present.  However, if what is meant by legal authority is in reference to the sovereign right of the Sultan to file a claim to the territory, such was already transferred to the Philippine Government by an execution of deed to it as clarified by Salonga in his treatise on the issue.  And it is precisely such dereliction in prosecuting the claim coupled with the inexcusable ignoring by this administration of the allegedly “lost” letters of the current Sultan that instigated this desperate misadventure.

    It might be problematic to allege much less categorically assert that those who went to Sabah waged this “war” without clearly proving the element of ‘animo belligerendi’ in their intentions. What was clearly manifested by this Sultan and his followers is that they went there to make a long standing proprietary claim to a land they consider an ancestral “home”.

    If it could be established accurately from the testimonies of refugees from Sabah that atrocities are being committed against non-combatant by Malaysia’s armed forces, that people are virtually summarily executed after being told to run, I, as a Filipino and without necessarily siding with our Tausog brothers and condoning their act, wouldn’t worry at all about this problem reaching the
    jurisdiction of the UN.

    In closing and in all fairness, if there’s any party guilty of violating another’s sovereignty, it is Malaysia for it is now a common knowledge that she helped these muslim brothers of ours wage a rebellion against their own government. Malaysia and her erstwhile protector are the ones in bad faith in this tragedy. Merci!

  • Avatar

    please take note Catholics are not CHRISTIAN but Pagan they only pretending christian the apostles not idol worshipper

  • Avatar

    What we keep missing and forgetting is the birth of the Malaysian republic was only in 1963. This is the date where Sabah was illegally annexed by the Brits so that its former colonies, that which was called the confederacy of Malaya, would become “independent” when the Brits leave the colonies. All other dates prior to 1963 serve to indicate manipulative tendencies of the colonial powers over their colonies. Prof. Randy David is story-telling of an interesting sidelight of a sultan and is purely for literary purposes. If we are interested on what transpired during Malaysia’s takeover of Sabah, then we must focus on what happened in 1963…this is what matters most and is the best starting point for the debate whether Sabah was taken illegally or not by Malaysia.

    Therefore, all the historical and finer points of the succession of sultans in the family tree of the Kirams are mere footnotes and provide anecdotal interest that validates that, even in the life of the royalty, certain family members do not follow the route that is expected of the heirs and there will always be some breakaways with regards to sustaining the royal household’s esteemed traditions.

    Whatever earlier attempts to annex Sabah by virtue of colonial power initiatives, these do not change the reality that the entity called Malaysia took another entity called Sabah which belongs to a much-earlier freed republic called the Philippines. The point is distinctly lucid where the colonizer powers’ actions in the historical past do not alter the irrevocable and inalienable right of the sultanate’s succession of sultans over Sabah which had complete control and ownership over it even as an “absentee landlord.” Unfortunately, some Filipinos themselves opine that Sabah was already developed by Malaysia and, thus, the Philippines must abandon its claim. This kind of argument is flawed. Had Sabah NOT TAKEN by Malaysia, its rich natural resources could have produced the same economic wealth to the real sovereign, the Philippines.

    Moreover, the principle of “Self-determination” is the latest of defenses being forwarded by land-grabbing Malaysia. It is defective at the very instant where the said group of people asked to decide in a sham referendum did not hold any citizenship at that time. Before the referendum, the operators of the pre-independent Malaysia orchestrated that “self-determination” approach when Sabah was still legitimately owned by the Philippines by virtue of explicit declaration by the Sulu sultan that he is a Filipino and those lands and properties possessed by Philippine citizens are part of the Philippine national territory from as early as the 17th century until now. The said “Sabahans’ self-determination” was defective and wrong. These Sabahans were permanent FOREIGN RESIDENTS in Sabah. They do not have any exclusive right nor privilege to decide to annex Sabah to the confederacy of Malaya before and after the bloody Brits granted independence to its former colonies, Malaysia and Singapore. The greatest hoax of ‘self-determination’ imagined by the Sabahans is still being perpetuated today to serve Malaysia’s economic status as a very prosperous nation only 49 years ago. Malaysians must wake up to this hoax and, if the world wants to respect their national dignity as one nation, Malaysians must reject this continuing falsehood pervading in their country’s history and in their people’s identity as an upright race. A wrong must be corrected as quickly as possible before tomorrow’s generations in this world will look down on Malaysia as one who stole a rich natural resource land called North Borneo or Sabah from its rightful owner, the Filipino sultan and the sovereignty of the Filipino people to preserve its national territory from kleptomaniacs. [Like China that has been attempting to lay its dirty hands over some islets and shoals west of the Philippine Sea and well within the international definition of national territory and by sheer common sense when China is hundreds of miles away from the nearest shoal or islet being claimed illegally].

    • Avatar

      Too late……………………. We can’t revive history that was buried 100 years ago. Forget it!!
      Hi people, lets live in peace.

    • Avatar

      A very good analysis…I couldn’t agree more!!  However, I don’t think Malaysia would just hand over Sabah to us.  A peaceful solution would be best…but sooner or they would be playing with fire – considering the Suluans know the terrain better than the Malaysians as their natural habitat.

      Mga 100s nga lang, nataranta na ang Malaysians!  What more if by the 1000s.  They should think of East Timor!

      • Avatar

        and you forgot…the local ethnic sabahans have been there longer than any sulu and theyve chosen to be part of a developing and already developed country rather than a part of a war mongering, head chopping and infighting animals as in Sulu.
        Yes….send more of your animals here….we will help Manila with your insurgency problems.
        We can use more filipino terrorists to turn into fertilisers for our huge palm oil plantations….

        • Avatar

          You’re not Sabahan but people planted by the british, just what they have done to Argentina so you don’t have the right to speak in behalf of the Sabahan. Go back to your parasitic country!

      • Avatar

        Yes, East Timor reminds me a REFERENDUM – how Sabahans self-determined to join Malaysia through COBBOLD COMMISSION Referendum. Hehe 😀

  • Avatar

    the conversion of a roman emperor to christianity also converted the empire;
    the conversion of sulu sultan did not bring about the conversion of the sultanate?
    this is hogwash done by filipino bastards.

  • Avatar

    history is a continuing process, evolving and unfolding, being produced and reproduced or even erased, defaced or resurrected. Escathology is the best source of knowledge to understand the Sabah issue and other global events. The impending rise of China, US downfall as superpower, riding tide of Islam, etc. etc. are explained by His Eminence Maulana Imran of Jamaica.

    Pray to Almighty God to hasten the return of the Promised Messiah or Al Mahdi to save humanity from its on inventions and weakness. But he will not come until the appointed time has finally arrived. Meantime, listen to Minister Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam on how the Blacks will redeem their homeland, the USA from virtual collapse.

  • Avatar

    the latest Kiram misadventure drives home this point:  that too many Filipinos waste too much time, resources and lives using 20th century tools to argue 19th century (or even earlier) issues, instead of accepting it’s the 21st century.  we should work hard now for tomorrow.

  • Avatar

    THE MAIN REASONS WHY CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES HAVE BEEN CONCENTRATED IN MOROLANDIA HAVE THE EVANGELIZATION AND CHRISTIANIZATION OF THE MORO PEOPLE,  ESPECIALLY SULU AND COTABATO. CHURCHES, PRIESTS & NUNS DEPLOYED, CONVENTS, CATHOLIC SCHOOLS, LIKE NOTRE DAMES, WERE ESTABLISHED OSTENSIBLY TO “EDUCATE” THE MOROS  AND ‘ MODERNIZE” THEM, BUT IN REALITY, TO DRAW THEM AWAY FROM THEIR MORO/ISLAMIC CULTURE UNDER THE GUISES OF MODERNISM AND DEVELOPMENT?. EVEN TODAY, IN SULU AND COTABATO, MANY APPARATUSES OF CHRISTIANIZATION STILL STOOD, BUT THEY ALL FAILED MISERABLY IN THEIR GOALS. THEY WILL NEVER SUCCEED IN THEIR EFFORT.
    THE KILLINGS IN SABAH IS DOOMING BUT TRUTH WILL TRIUMPH EVEN IF LIVES ARE LOST AND SACRIFICED. SUCH IS THE NATURE OF THINGS AND EVEN JESUS, SON OF MARY AND THE MESSIAH, HAD TO SUFFER IN DELIVERING THE MESSAGE PLOTTERS TRIED TO CRUCIFY HIM, JUST LIKE THE CHRISTIANIZED SULTAN ALIMUDIN, HE WAS TRICKED, BUT CERTAINLY INCURRED NO SIN, EXCEPT DEMOTING HIMSELF BY NOT FOLLOWING THE STRAIGHT PATH THAT PROPHET CHRIST HIMSELF SUFFERED FOR. NO BIG FUSS IN THAT HISTORIC INCIDENT AS SULTAN ALIMUDIN DIED A MUSLIM, JUST THE SAME.WE HOPE TO SEE THE EPISODE ENDS IN PEACE FOR PEACE AND BY PEACE, NOT PIECES..

  • Avatar

    Marcos could had been the real villain here…

    Jabidah massacre was intended to antagonize our muslim brothers in the south…

    The clamor of getting Sabah during Marcos time was resurrected…and it created problems to those who were involve…they’re in a dilemma how to resolve the matter without losing their interests…

    The solution was to stop the claimants from pursuing its claim…

    War is inevitable….a necessity to silence our muslim brothers…

    No thanks to the organization of Islamic conference headed by Muamar Gadaffi…the war drag on for decades…

  • Avatar

    Whether that Sultan was a Christian or a Muslim the fact is he was a leader respected by his people.  And that is the kind of Sultan that the Sultanate needs now to recover Sabah, their land.

  • Avatar

    Your historical narrative confirms what is essentially the influence of organized nation state power brokers and their peddlers during those times where boundaries, allegiance and loyalty are shifting like the blowing sands of the Sahara Desert.

    These peddlers are individuals and private companies working for expanding the territorial domain and business interest of colonial powers of Europe(Spain, England, Dutch) and the Americas with the intent of continuing their struggle and influence to dominate their continent like a chess game.

    In the absence of an international body to arbitrate and non-existent political boundaries, they used the method of divide and conquer on the native population and their leaders and using alliances and military power to imposed their will.

    But those are the PAST as part of the evolution of human political history. The resulting conflagration of the two Major World Wars has convince the power brokers and the victors of both wars to create international bodies to arbitrate and prevent wars and settle dispute.

    The political boundaries created by the power brokers after the two wars and the subsequent independence movement and self determination is what we have in existence right now. There are still stalemates around the world countries  where boundaries are still in contention but the threat of war and the resultant impact is what keeps them at a distance.

    The problem on Sabah is very unique where a private citizen the sultan without any recognizable and legal authority is making a claim without the Sovereign approval and sponsorship of the country of its citizenship.

    How is the country to proceed in resolving this claim when according to the Article 1 of the United  Nations Charter and I quote:

    “To develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and SELF-DETERMINATION of peoples, and to take other appropriate measures to strengthen universal peace:

    How can we as a  member state and a signatory of the United Charter file a claim  and explain to the UN Security Council the actions of the sultan which are not peaceful in nature and which are not deliberated and approve by Congress and the President of the Republic and is clearly in violation of the UN charter?

    How can we explain to the international authorities the resulting death and mayhem and cost and disruption of lives on a sovereign state if we pursue a claim on behalf of a sultan whose authority is NOT even mentioned in our laws and does not have a mandate?

    How can we as part of the negotiation and compromise if the Malaysia will demand just compensation for the death and mayhem and impact on their economy which could run into the billions of dollars  and the United Nations will decide as result of the attacked as an attack by the Republic of Philippines to another member state?

    If we file our claim and proceed base on our emotions, that will leave us too many unanswered questions?? The actions by the sultan essentially invalidated his claim and the clamor of a sovereign state and its people are more significant than the actions of the sultan and his followers.
    If we file a claim of sovereignty over Sabah how will the Malaysian government react after this mayhem cause by the sultan actions? Will they see this as an act aggression and threat causing massive insecurities on our soft underbelly in Mindanao and whose Muslim population have not been pacified and embrace our narrative as nation?

    How are we going to commit massive amounts of resources which we do not have to confront the dislocation of Filipinos from Sabah as a result of our claim to UN body and Malaysia will see it as an act of aggression on our part?

    These is a very serious offense by the sultan and we need to proceed carefully considering the nations best interest and its international obligation. We need to factor the 800,000 Filipinos in Malaysia and the global 10 million OFW who are recipients of this international order.

    We are seeing the very serious impact of the sultan actions by the Filipinos who are coming back and bad stories to tell about the actions of Malaysians and Malaysian authorities and we do not like what we are seeing. We do not have idea how this will play out on the emotions of our people.

    The People of Malaysia will not capitulate on this matter and as a proud and sovereign nation. We are also proud of our heritage and it is PARAMOUNT that we should react accordingly based on the rule of law and our interest.

    • Avatar

      Milo, it seems you have to go back to some books and documents. You might also wish to read some blogs in the past weeks, and the need shows in your comments.

      You state that “the problem on Sabah is very unique where a private citizen the sultan without any recognizable and legal authority is making a claim without the Sovereign approval and sponsorship of the country of its citizenship.”

      This is actually false. If you will study the background of the claim (and read the salient points raised by Jovito Salonga in 1963), the Sultan of Sulu does not need that approval. The Sultan might be a subject of one sovereign (in this case, the Philippine government) but this does not nullify his being a sovereign in another territory (please look for the Bates and Carpenter Agreements that the Sultanate signed with the Americans). Charles Brookes, the White Raja and Sultan of Sarawak was a British citizen, but was recognized as the sovereign of Sarawak.

      To quote you: “If we file our claim and proceed base on our emotions, that will leave us too many unanswered questions?? The actions by the sultan essentially invalidated his claim and the clamor of a sovereign state and its people are more significant than the actions of the sultan and his followers.” You might want to note that the Philippines has filed it claim in the 1960s and the action of the Sultan does not necessarily invalidates his claim. By the way, it is this claim that the government has been keeping in the back burner.

      If we file a claim of sovereignty over Sabah how will the Malaysian government react after this mayhem cause by the sultan actions? Will they see this as an act aggression and threat causing massive insecurities on our soft underbelly in Mindanao and whose Muslim population have not been pacified and embrace our narrative as nation?”Why are you putting your concern of the Malaysian government first rather than your own people? Would you bear suffering in silence (because you are not one who is directly being affected and not the victim of the unjust land grabbing) at the cost of your own? Why are you saying that the Muslim population has not been pacified? Is there a need to pacify them or does this need stem from the same “colonial mindset” of having them act and think like “we” do? (whatever this means).You might suggest that perhaps, it is not the right time to settle the issue. The question is since, 1962, when do you think should it be?

      • Avatar

        Simon in due I would like to respond to your very good dissertation. I am for one do not question the presence of documents indicating and proving that there was indeed an agreement between the parties but would focus and concentrate my response in the context of the “political” environment and the power brokers at the time the sultan made his agreement with the British to  today

    • Avatar

      Mr. Ovaltine you must know with your intelligence that any resolution in the UN is attended to only if back up by a member of the G7 or mass killings are already happenning. The Sabah Claim or the non-attention of the Claim are brokered by 2 most powerful nation on earth – US and Great Britain while our leaders then and now acts only under the baton of US who is against the claim due to England’s behest. The Sultanate never have a Legal Chance to reach the ICJ as no one powerful enough will sponsor their Claim thru Legal means. I hope you see through the realpolitik of the powerful who control all international poltical and financial fora. If Red China is a weak nation do you honestly believe that the very wealthy and progressive Hongkong will be returned by the Brits? Do you have any idea how much worth Hongkong was when it was returned? What about Falklands.

      • Avatar

        what a naive pile of twoddle written by someone with a chip on their shoulder. the article above identifies the historical background as to why cession of Sabah or North Borneo took place, and the posting identified that the UN and ICJ for that matter uphold self-determination above any historical claim.

    • Avatar

       Thanks for highlighting the most important point in this debate: UN Principle of Self-Determination.

    • Avatar

      How can we as part of the negotiation and compromise if the Malaysia will demand just compensation for the death and mayhem and impact on their economy which could run into the billions of dollars  and the United Nations will decide as result of the attacked as an attack by the Republic of Philippines to another member state?

      what if :

      — malaysia  demands that we drop the claims on Sabah

      or

      malaysia will demand that Bangsamoro to Tawitawi  will be completely part of Sabah.

      and mang simeon will be in dire straits.

      • Avatar

        oy, mamang pulis! kmusta?  with respect, as far as the UN is concerned, Sabah is part of Malaysia, and has been for the past 50 years.  that piece of international law recognizes the possibility of past sovereignty / ownership, but all these are by far secondary to the wishes of a non-self-governing people for self-determination.  the burden of proving “extraordinary circumstance” to reclaim it belongs to the Philippines.  and i doubt very much there could be extraordinary circumstance.

        • Avatar

          :)) julius—boy—–give me on something which I HAVE NOT read YET….salamat.—-baka naman mataas ang asukal mo—paki basa ulit yun komento.

    • Avatar

      These brutal incidents happening now had been prevented, had this long controversy with Malaysia and the Philippines as state parties, acted and pursued with dispatch the existing claim of  the Philippines over Sabah, which is now pending in the ICJ. We can not actually determine at this point of time who are the villains now or the illegals here. This needs court court action which can only be well addressed by the ICJ.. The unfortunate series of incidents  happening in Sabah were just aftermaths of the non resolution of this issue. The bottom line here is the Claim issue and the succeeding incidents (bloodshed, deportataion, deprivation, arrests, cyber wars, etc,,) were just the inevitable consequences.

      We can not blame the protagonists here. Both have have their  own reasons and justifications of their actions.There is a law that authorizes land owners to use any possible means to defend ownership of the land, in the other hand, those who are in the possession of the land have also the right also to employ available means to expel intruders. Who are then the illegals here? This question can be best dealt by the court..Ceasefire and go to ICJ…Is this difficult to do?

      • Avatar

        precisely what is this pending ICJ claim – please enlighten us – the only claim ever made related to Sipadan which is in Sabah waters and that was rejected by the ICJ

      • Avatar

        I agree with you this should have been settled many years ago by the the previous administration. marcos who is supposed to be a brilliant lawyer with all his dictatorial power for almost 21 years did not file a claim to the proper international body while our neighbors Indonesia and Malaysia did on some of the contentious island. I would imagine as signatory to the UN charter he determined it will be losing cause.  I do not know if the ICJ is the appropriate body to settle this claim now that the sultan has disturbed the peace in Sabah. The dynamics have change and the UN Security Council might be the proper venue since one member state was “attacked” by another member state and besides we might embarrass ourselves if there are no international support on our claim which made it impossible by the actions of the sultan and essentially close all the peaceful options.

        Besides if we ever bring this up with any international body the issue will not be the claim but the aggressive actions and disturbance of peace by the sultan.

        Even our intent on bringing this issue into the international arena will constitute an aggressive action by the Malaysian Federation at urging of its people and they may not participate in any deliberation in the world body and just ignore our claim. Without Malaysia’s participation any world institution will not hear the claim

        • Avatar

          why do you write garbage like “one member state attacked another”. this has not happened as is quite clear from what the Philippine government has publicly stated. instead a bunch of armed thugs illegally entered a foreign country brandishing arms. it is not a matter for the UN at all. it is a matter for the violated country to deal with under its own laws which flow from that country’s own self-determination!

          • Avatar

            Roger, I am describing a scenario that has a possibility of being played out and that is why I place the word attacked on quotation marks. I am deeply concern how the people on the streets in the whole Philippines will see the many Filipinos telling bad stories coming back from Malaysia and the “SYMBOLIC importance of the claim by the sultan as a manifestation of the colonialism impact on our national conciousness which a majority of Filipinos blame as reason of the nation inability to improve its standard of living. You and I know politicians will respond to the clamor of people especially our politicians as result of the recent People Power initiatives.

            The questions is how will the Malaysian government react if the Philippine government due to local political consideration will file a claim of sovereignty in the International Arena and would this action be considered an aggressive action by the Malaysian and as technically sanctioning the actions of the Sultan and therefore a declaration of aggressive action and a threat to its sovereignty?? Do you not foresee the seriousness of this issue?

            The Malaysian authorities and government as a sovereign nation have every right to enforce its LAWS to deal with the intrusion.

  • Avatar

    Wa nice stoty, I don’t know that…the few last sultanate of sulu had divert to our belief

  • Avatar

    The downfall of the Sultanate of Sulu was expedited when its leaders made pact to the foreign devils…they not only succumbed to the superior firepower of their foreign invaders but weakened by their personal ambitions…

  • Avatar

    That’s good to know. He’s a brave man and must have struggle a lot after the conversion. In other countries it’s a death sentence. Real conversion to Christianity just makes life better because it hurts going through life with an endless feeling of uncertainty. Life has been good to me, it’s only my wife that drive me nuts!

  • Avatar

    It is good to know the history of our people, our land, how it came to be, it only tells me the exploits of one of our fierciest sultan and yet use his brains for his people and this is tausug mind you, irrigardless what happened to his religious beliefs.

  • Avatar

    What this historical narrative points out is that then as now, religious conversion was dictated more by political and economic expediency than spiritual necessity.  The superficial and external value of a rosary can easily be exchanged for a bible if warranted by the preservation of one’s political and economic interests. The bible on the other hand can easily be embraced in exchange for ideological principles if, by doing so, it would advance one’s political ambitions.   Although generally nations, as men, should be concerned with the protection of their national patrimony and sovereignty, in our case, particularly as of late, those interests are invariably subordinated to the personal, economic, and political interests of our national leaders. Not only Sabah, but eventually the islets that lie in the western Philippine sea will be sacrificed to a more dominant emerging power because we have lost our national resolve to protect what is our own.  Nationalism, patriotism, idealism and all other isms man had conceived are now relegated to the sidelines in the name of the mighty buck.  By default, we have lost Sabah and our national honour.  Merci!

  • Avatar

    Prof. Randy David knows what he knows. But does he know what Filipinos go through in Sabah before being deported? Does he know that Filipinos get caned long before the Sabah Standoff happened? Does he know Filipinos are arbitrarily arrested and then caned? Will it change his opinion if he gets to see a video sampler of what caning is all about?

    01. Watch in YouTube “Amnesty International – Malaysia caning ‘epidemic’ violates international law”

    02. Google Search “liveleak Malaysia Caning Judicial Corporal Punishment”

    03. Watch in YouTube “Corporal punishment in Malaysian women’s prison”

    Here’s what Sultan Kiram’s wife said a few days ago.

    Many stories of poor Filipinos maltreated by Malaysian authorities in Sabah provided the final straw, Kiram’s wife said. “It’s good if they were placed in jail,” she said. “The problem is they are caned, they are punished and then deported … we couldn’t do anything.”

    source: PDI report “Filipino Sultan’s quest sparks crisis in Malaysia”

    • Avatar

      Had it ever occur to you that they broke the law there and have entered illegally hence the caned? Also, had it ever occur to you that our jail and authorities here do the same and even worse?

      • Avatar

        @acrem.  that’s a very good point.  western countries frown on corporal punishment; yet some of these same countries maintain the death penalty.  i cannot make an assessment for the effectivity or the objectivity of corporal punishment in malaysia, but i can tell you that exactly the same corporal punishment is extremely effective in singapore and to some extent china.  not even americans or europeans are exempt.  that’s why they behave well in singapore and in china, and not in the philippines.

        • Avatar

           had it ever occurred to you that the “westerners” you allege do not behave in the Philippines have probably taken lessons from the ill-discipline and bad behaviour of Filipinos themselves – i.e. if its OK for them to do it then it must be OK for us to do it too or tolerating the intolerable. It has nothing to do with caning in Singapore and only a naive fool would ever think it was!

      • Avatar

        Broke a law? Filipinos on Sabah is breaking the law? You are so dumb!

        • Avatar

           yeah, we are all so dumb outside the Philippines, we forgot that you do not even like obeying your own laws in the Philippines, so why would we expect you to respect laws in another country?

          • Avatar

            Even if I am dumb, even if I don’t understand your laws in Malaysia, it still doesn’t make it right to cane Filipinos until the skin of their behind falls off like shown in the videos.

            Filipinos in the south have been crossing to Sabah back and forth for centuries. Why cane them?

      • Avatar

        Wrongs do not justify doing what is right.  Just because it is done here “and even worse” does not justify, in other words, what Malaysians are doing to Filipino residents of Sabah.  In addition, the interest of ancestral land had been relegated too long to dubious diplomacy that doing an action to compel peace, i.e., so that the parties come to the table to settle once and for all that “forgotten” issue may be justified, if we have to believe admissions of neglect here.  Bearing arms was never meant for violence but for protection only, if attacked.  Events apparently had the Malaysians fire the first shots, all hell broke loose and precious lives have been lost….. This situation now calls for decisive action in peace.

        • Avatar

           WEll articulated, a miilion likes!

        • Avatar

           “bearing arms was never meant for violence but for protection”? Which fairy story have you been reading?

        • Avatar

          @bgcorg.  anyone with a decent mind should assume that someone who brings weapons definitely has the intention to use them. and when brought to a location where residents are unarmed, the further presumption is that the intention of armed men is intimidation.

        • Avatar

          i’m very hopeful that Amnesty International can also come out with a documentary how women in Mindanao are treated.  and from what i’ve witnessed over the past 50 years, it’s not a lot better than in Malaysia.

  • Avatar

    At the time of colonialism, converting to Christianity was a ‘no other choice’ option. What with the Sword on one hand and a Cross on the other, colonist were pretty persuasive. Just the same, seems Prof Randy ‘usurped’ Ambeth Ocampo’s forte.

  • Avatar

    we never learned from the betrayals our race had suffered from the colonial powers. and yet we embraced them and admired them. in so doing, we contracted their treachery and learned the trade very well. can’t we get back to that honorable state of being? we could have been as strong as the most progressive country if our politicians did not tread the crooked path. daang matuwid is a farce.

    • Avatar

      I guess you will not join the bandwagon of  PersiNoynoy-reelection-2016….   sabi mo kasi, daang matuwid is a farce.     Nag sa-survey na ata para masabing kopong-kopong sa mamayang-Pilipino ay gusto  One-More-TERM for PersiNoynoy.

  • Avatar

    The research story shows that Mindanao, Palawan and Sabah were really owned by our Muslim brothers.
    Poor Muslims…they are now landless, homeless in the land they owned.

    • Avatar

      wrong, sabah was originally owned by animist Malays, and if you go back far enough so was Sulu and Mindanao. please end this muslim brother crap which only breeds religious intolerance and violence

  • Avatar

    basta ako mahal ko ang mga kababayan nating muslim…naaawa ako kay Kiram dahil maski na ang paniniwala nila at ang pagmamay-ari nila ay hindi man lang isinang alang ng kapanalig nilang Malaysia… dito nila makikila ang katotohanan na wala silang makikilingan kundi ang maging Pilipino lamang..

  • Avatar

    He converted to Catholicism not Christian.

    • Avatar

      as far as I know, Catholics are Christians, one of their saints compiled those early scriptures which we call now the bible. How come they are not Christians?, for me they are the original the least commercialized Christian religion of the world…Before you they were there already…as for the stand of Saba, I am with Kiram our good Muslim brother who really should be the heir of the sultan that owned Saba as a gift from the sultan of Brunei…mabuhay ang pinoy regardless of religion we are all brothers of race!

    • Avatar

      You must be a proud one then? Is your God a respecter of person? If you say yes, He must have died for your own kind of christian then. I’m not a catholic, just a very low low Christ follower who believes that He died for all catholics or non-catholics, muslims or atheist.
      Oh yeah, He doesn’t show favorites to anyone (and that includes you). Why? Because He loves ALL just the same. The reason why people like you fail to understand this is because of the wrong concept about what God is. And it shows. But hey, He still loves you and I can’t explain why. It’s just His nature.

      • Avatar

        You know God but does God know you?  You believe in God and so is the Devil who also believes in God.  Why call God’s name in vain yet you do not follow and obey His commands?  Muslims, Hindu, Buddhists more so the Atheists are not Christians.  Don’t divert the issue.

        • Avatar

           there speaketh a religious bigot with blind faith

          • Avatar

            Blind faith?  True faith is following and obeying God’s teachings not human practices and traditions.  So, you mean to say worshiping the idols by bowing down, kneeling down, hugging, touching, kissing to these is true faith?  You mean praying the rosary with repeated prayers and praying to invented Saints a true faith?  You mean celebrating Fiestas and other pagan practices is true faith?

        • Avatar

          It doesn’t matter whether I know God or not, His love is the same, if not He’s a liar and selective just like what you’re thinking. Being in you’re situation where everything is dependent on what we do is living in endless uncertainty whereby every mistake we do (and we’re very good at that) we are being punished and then make amends everytime. He sacrifice Himself only once and it’s DONE! What more do you want?

          There are no condemnation to those who love God. He keeps no record of wrongs hence forgiveness is never an issue. It’s just us who cannot forgive ourselves and ends up making our own suffering. If we, especially you, who strive to live by every commands and keeping it, it’s an endless torture just like everybody else (like Israel did) who believes that impressing God by obeying every rules makes Him happy.

          God doesn’t want anything coz He got everything! God’s plan is for all His creation to participate in that love. God has given all of us a conscience and a reason to live life, and that is how we and the rest of humanity run our life. We mess up, there are consequences. He make everything good didn’t He. So, we screw that good, the opposite happens.

          Life is just much better being a Christian but He doesn’t discriminate the rest who chose not to. Christian or no Christian, the price is the same.

          There is nothing you can do to make God love you more and there is nothing you can do to make God love you less. Anything other than this isn’t a gospel but a counterfeit.

    • Avatar

      Catholics are not Christians?

      If he converted to any of the Protestant Christian religions, it would still be more apt to say he converted to Christianity.

      Therefore you said that not because you are a non-Catholic Christian but because you have a beef against Catholics.

      • Avatar

        I don’t want to start a discussion or debate about Christianity here or who is a true Christian.  Catholics can claim they’re Christians too.  But you need to define what Christian is.  Christian is a follower of Christ.  To follow Christ is to obey His words written in the Bible.  Since many of the Catholic teachings are based on man-made doctrines and traditions of pagan origins that are alien to God’s commands written in the Holy Scriptures, the Catholics cannot be considered true Christians.  That’s all I can say.

        • Avatar

          I was curious about your post. Now I know. You say, “I don’t want to start a discussion or debate about Christianity here or who is a true Christian” because you are a righteous Christian who knows the truth and others don’t.

          That says it all.

          • Avatar

            Politics and religion are two most controversial and difficult topics to discuss.  It would make friends enemies.  But no matter how painful the truth is, it must be told and exposed.

            • Avatar

              You must be a fountain of truth. Good for you.

              I hope you also realize that humility as opposed to “righteousness” is also a valued Christian virtue. There was One who is the greatest example this unsung virtue.

  • Avatar

    Prof Randy David is a sell-out. Shame on him.

  • Avatar

    reply kay parokya ni edgar:

    parang nahhihiwatigan ko rin na ganoon nga ang tumbok nya—

    By citing Alimuddin, Randy David is hoping to put the blame on the Sultanate of Sulu for bringing upon itself the loss of Sabah

  • Avatar

    AT ANG BUOD AY :

    kung may natitirang talino sa mga pangkasalukuyang sultan ngayun–yun dapat ang ginamit at hindi nagpagamit.

    yun ba tinutumbok ni Kgg na Maestro David? :))

  • Avatar

    Conversion to Christianity in what was then a Spanish colonial theocracy was commonplace in the Philippines. Many sultans and datus before Alimuddin converted to Christianity when these Iberian conquistadors first came to our shores. They converted to Christianity for various reasons, political alliances being one of them. Rajah Humabon was not perceptive enough to see the evil designs of Magellan and gladly converted to Christianity. Alimuddin’s case is therefore hardly unique.

    Even in Japan at that time, daimyos and shoguns in Nagasaki and nearby prefectures also converted to Christianity in exchange for guns and other weaponry sold to them by European Jesuits masquerading as traders. European missionaries were ultimately expelled from Japan because the Japanese rightly detected the real intent of these colonizers. Matteo Ricci, one of the few European missionaries to be ever trusted by the Chinese Qing imperial court, lamented about the European interference and intrusion into local Asian affairs in order to divide and conquer and then colonize.

    Homefront, many chinamen during the Spanish period also converted to Christianity in order to gain entry into our society. Without Christianity and a Filipino wife, these chinamen and sojourners were considered as third-class citizens (or the equivalent thereof as we native Filipinos were considered second-class citizens to the Spaniards). The father of our very own San Lorenzo Ruiz had to convert to Christianity to overcome this legal and social “barrier to entry”. The Dominicans enlisted Lorenzo to help them in infiltrating Japan because Lorenzo could read Chinese characters which is widely used in Japan back then as it is now. The ancestors of Noynoy’s clan, the pigtailed chinamen from the coastal province of Fujian, also converted to Christianity in order to gain access to mainstream society. Rizal’s great grandfather also converted to Christianity and rechristened himself as Domingo Lamco from his strange-sounding Chinese name. So did the opium dealer Carlos Palanca, whom Rizal depicted as intsik Quiroga.

    By citing Alimuddin, Randy David is hoping to put the blame on the Sultanate of Sulu for bringing upon itself the loss of Sabah. Readers who read through former Senator Salonga’s speech on our Sabah claim delivered in 1963 will of course understand why our claim on Sabah remains solid and strong to this day. By distorting history, by cherrypicking historical facts, by misrepresenting history, Randy David the scholar is trying to deflect the blame from the clueless president Noynoy and assign more of the blame on the Sultanate of Sulu. That’s the long and short of Randy David’s column today, paid for by the palace.

    see more

    • Avatar

       hmmm …. and what about your cherry picking eh …. not to mention all of your assumptions and presumptions … now then why should anyone blame the “sultanate” which has not been internationally recognised for rather a long time? …. perhaps because even today they cannot even agree among themselves who the real “sultan” is! i.e. the same type of problem that Randy David identified was also happening several centuries ago, Nothing has changed and Randy David is making an ever so subtle commentary that is evidently beyond your comprehension.

    • Avatar

      Cherry picking history? why not bring your own version so we will know who’s getting paid?

    • Avatar

      Yes this Mr. Randy’s article is sipsip to Noy. Another respectable columnist CDQ is now a PR man of Noynoy.  Dozens of palace boys netizens sprouted in the last 2 weeks. I thought that only Gloria has the likes of Belinda O., Jurado, Mata, Tiglao, doronilla, and all the writers of Manila Standards but I was wrong. Sir Randy I hope you will NOT be like Fr. Bernas in the last 2 years of Gloria’s term. Anyway Fr. Bernas is now back to his former pleasant self. What honest Noy needs are barrage of brutal truths to awaken him not sipsip half truths.

    • Avatar

      Very nice! I’m glad someone was able to read through Randy David’s writing who is just trying to reinforce his argument in his previous column that the Sultan should be on his own.
      He was even trying to insinuate that the Sultan is not a Filipino. He is a pseudo intellectual socialist who have no respect for property rights.

    • Avatar

      Interesting read, and a persuasive argument, though you oversold your point in the end. Your dismissive sarcasm is a little frustrating but I guess that’s just you Edgar2.

      Oh, and “chinamen”? Even the dictionaries describe the word as contentious and offensive but even respectful enough to consider it a proper noun. That one I don’t get. It seems you simply took the word from your source including the putdown. Tell me you don’t have Chinese ancestry, he he.

    • Avatar

      I read in yesterdays news brief in the Inquirer that the authority granted by the Sultanate of Sulu to the Philippine government to reclaim Sabah has been rescinded by the Sultanate in 1989. This according to the Sultanate spokesman, Idjirani. If this were the case and I assume the spokesman was speaking honestly in behalf of the Sultanate, then, the Philippines has no business interfering in what essentially is a private claim. Also, why blame the government for the fiasco in Sabah experienced by the men of Sultan Kiram? Since 1963 to 2013 is 50 years. What have the Sultanate done to assert their right over Sabah all these past 50 years? And now it is convenient to blame the government for the debacle suffered by Kiram/s men?

  • Avatar

    Nice read. Although I didn’t realize that the current Sulu and Sabah conflict actually finds its roots from the concessions of the Seven Years War. As always in history, the fate of smaller countries and their naïve leaders is often dictated and manipulated by bigger , powerful and more forward-looking Western countries.  The future of China then was no exception, and we see it shaping up again in the Asia Pacific region where the world attention for economic progress is now focused. Big war causes both joy and untold miseries to many people depending on which side one could be on the equation, but as always nothing is permanent forever except we continually make our options to do or undo our choices. And so I say, the theater for the next big war could be in the Asia Pacific region for the Western countries and culture to keep their hold and maintain the resources flowing West, as it faces dwindling economic resource. And that’s why it’s not smart for China to mess with her neighbors as it only gives the West the casus belli for war to project its self-serving cause.

    • Avatar

       who brainwashes you with this garbage?

      • Avatar

        Huh? You must be suffering from the bondage of rejection as you project your seeming unhappiness with the things around you. Go and please don’t spread your feeling of lack of self-worth to others. Thanks.

    • Avatar

      Remember the opium war committed against the people of China? Now its China’s turn to   drugged the lowly Filipinos(bigtime drug syndicates caught in our country mostly came from the mainland)

      • Avatar

        the ones that are caught are only small time.  the big ones are locals who are untouchables.  you must make a distinction between private interests and secret foreign policy.  China has been acknowledged by the US as a valuable ally in the international fight against illegal drugs. China’s humiliating losses in the 2 opium wars are what drives China’s fight.  however, China’s prosperity also opens itself to a huge opportunity for criminals.  many of the illegal drugs manufactured are actually for export to China and areas where these drugs fetch far better prices.  it’s my speculation only that what is being distributed here are the “scraps” from the local production.  and these synidcates can’t operate without local protection.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: