國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
21
around 20% of liquid reserves estimated to be in the form of condensates. Sabah has
approximately half of the liquid reserves in the country.31
The state’s finances have generally been favourable with a RM730.3 million
surplus registered in 2010, higher than the RM186.6 million surplus recorded in the
preceding year. Commodities such as crude palm oil (CPO) and crude petroleum were
the main contributors to state government revenue in the form of sales tax and
royalties.32
2.4 Related Literature Review
The dispute between Malaysia and the Philippines over Sabah continue to be a
contentious diplomatic concern. A limited quantity of literature tackling this
complicated dispute exists. Nevertheless, the following resources written by Filipino,
Malaysian and British authors and researchers help to shed light on this issue.
K. G. Tregonning, former Raffles Professor of History in the University of
Singapore, wrote A History of modern Sabah: 1881-1963 (1960). The author analyzed
that the agreement in 1878 between the Sulu Sultans and Baron Van Overbeck was
one of a cession not a lease; furthermore, several treaties and international
31 Eugene Thean Hock Lee, “Scope for improvement: Malaysia’s oil and gas sector,” Scoping Report Malaysia (July 2013): 9. Retrieved December 12, 2013 from
http://refsa.org/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/OG-Scoping-Report-Malaysia-final-20130701.pdf.
32 Mohd Afzanizam Abd Rashid, Nor Zahidi Alias, James Foo Kok Chye, Economic Research, p. 2.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
22
conventions have excluded North Borneo from the territory of the Philippines.33
Originally Michael H. Baker’s MA thesis submitted to Stanford University
Sabah: the First Ten Years as a Colony, 1946-1956 (1965) should be read side by side
with Tregonning’s. Baker studied and assessed the ten-year postwar development in
Sabah in terms of political governance, trade and industry, social services, agriculture
and communications after devoting a chapter on Sabah’s history from its earliest
history to the advent of World War II.
At the goodwill shown by the United Kingdom in holding diplomatic
communication in London in pursuance of the Philippine claim of sovereignty,
jurisdiction and proprietary ownership over Sabah, the Philippine government
published the proceedings of this meeting under the title Philippine Claim to North
Borneo Volume I (1964). This book has four parts. The first part starts with excerpts
from the president’s State of the Nation Address with reference to the claim to North
Borneo; followed by the second part, the Opening Statement of Vice President Pelaez
in the British-Philippine Talks held in London. The third part “The Historical and
Legal Bases of the Philippine Claim to North Borneo” lays the legal and historical
arguments of the Philippine claim, which includes the statements made by
Congressman Salonga before the London Ministerial Meeting and by Mr. Eduardo
33 Tregonning, A History of Modern Sabah., p. 68.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
23
Quintero before the Legal Committee. The appendices, which constitute the last part
of the book, contain 33 copies of the original documents. These form the basis of the
Philippine claim over Sabah and the preceding diplomatic engagements between the
Philippines and the United Kingdom.
After only three years, that the second volume of the Philippine Claim to North
Borneo Volume II (1967) was published during the Marcos administration. This
volume is divided into two parts excluding the appendices. Part one includes six
sections namely: The Disputed Territory; The Sulu Sultanate Institution; Relations of
the Sultan of Sulu with Foreign Powers; the British North Borneo Company; The
Transfer of the North Borneo Territory from the Company to the British Crown; and
The Transfer of the North Borneo Territory from the British Crown to Malaysia. Part
two consists of the “Report on the Anglo-Philippine Talks held in London from
January 28 to February 1, 1963 (Extract).”
There were a number of Filipino-or foreign-authored articles or pamphlets
published on the claim. These included the articles of Lorenzo Sumulong, “A Report
on Malaysia and on the Greater Malayan Confederation in connection with the
Philippine claim to Sovereignty to a portion of North Borneo” (1962); Bernabe Africa,
“The Legal Status of the British Occupation of North Borneo” (1963); Martin
Meadows, “The Philippine Claim to North Borneo” (1962); Pacifico Ortiz, “Legal
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
24
Aspects of the North Borneo Question” (1963); and Leigh R. Wright, “Historical
Notes on the North Borneo Dispute” (1966).
The period from 1968 to 1976 saw an upsurge on the number of publications on
the Philippine claim to Sabah. One of the first foreign scholars to have extensively
analyzed the Philippine claim to Sabah was Michael Leifer, author of the monograph
The Philippine claim to Sabah (1968). It was a major departure from the documents
published by the Philippines government because it was the first to put the Sabah
issue in its proper historical context. The paper provides a good background of the
Philippine claim to Sabah, although it relies heavily on a two-volume set of
documents published by the Philippine government. Leifer also utilizes newspaper
articles and books to place the Sabah issue in the context of Macapagal’s presidency.
Meanwhile, the Philippine government also published a booklet The Facts about
Sabah (1968) containing a question-and-answer narrative on the Philippine claim
written for the enlightenment of the general public. On this same year, the government
also published the Memorandum on the Philippine claim to North Borneo containing
61 points of clarification regarding issues surrounding the Sabah question with the last
point arguing for “the return of North Borneo to the rightful sovereign and owner, the
Republic of the Philippines as the best solution of this dispute.”34 Narciso Ramos, the
34 Republic of the Philippines. Memorandum on the Philippine Claim to North Borneo. (Manila: The Department, 1968), p. 63
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
25
Secretary of Foreign Affairs, in his Philippines brings the Sabah dispute to the United
Nations (1968), the text of the statement he delivered before the UN General
Assembly on October 15, 1968, specifically called for the Malaysia case to be
submitted to the World Court in concurrence with the clamor of Arturo Tolentino,
member of the Philippine delegation to the United Nations in his The Philippines
challenges Malaysia to bring the Sabah issue to the world court (1969), a text of his
reply to the Malaysian statements of October 15 & 16, 1968 delivered before the UN
General Assembly on October 25, 1968. Tolentino first issued a succinct rebuttal to
the points made by Mr. Radakrishna Ramani of Malaysia, and then, dared Malaysia to
bring the dispute to the International Court of Justice. Constancio B. Maglana, a
member of the House of Representatives published Sabah is Philippines (1969), a
privilege speech delivered on March 27, 1968, which, besides laying the basis for the
Philippine claim to Sabah, also advocated the prosecution of the claim.
In 1969, under the auspices of the National Historical Commission, a conference
on Sabah was held and the proceedings were published in a book entitled Symposium
on Sabah. One of the important chapters within the book is that of Prof. Rolando N.
Quintos, who suggested alternatives for the solution of the Sabah dispute in his
chapter, “The Sabah Question: Prospects and Alternatives." Quintos offers some
provocative ideas and argues that the issue of Sabah should be seen in its two aspects:
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
26
first, the legal issue in regard to the proprietary rights of the heirs of the Sultanate; and
second, the question of political jurisdiction over Sabah. Quintos proposed a
compromise deal, arguing further that "the Philippines [shall] accept the justice of the
Malaysian appeal to self-determination and accept as final the conclusion of the U.N.
Secretary General the United Nation of September 1963, provided that the Malaysians
are willing to submit the issue to the World Court or to a mutually acceptable
mediating body.”35
The work of a Malaysian named Mohammed bin Dato Othman Ariff, The
Philippine Claim to Sabah: Its Historical, Legal and Political Implications (1970),
extensively discusses the legal issues surrounding the claim. The main thesis of this
book is to discredit the legal basis of the Philippine claim to Sabah. The author
emphasizes the legal foundation of the British claim to Sabah based on possession and
consolidation through peaceful and continuous display of State activities. Moreover,
Ariff illuminates the basis for the integration of Sabah to Malaysia through the
principle of self-determination, the Sabahans having already expressed their desire to
remain in the Federation. Finally, Ariff argues that the peaceful settlement of the
dispute would require the Philippines to drop the claim and concentrate all of its
efforts in working closely and cooperating with Malaysia in the context of Association
35 National Historical Commision. Symposium on Sabah. (Manila: National Historical Commision, 1969), pp. 82-86
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
27
of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN).36 For the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu, given their
established proprietary rights in 1931 through the North Borneo Court, this kind of
suggestion is unacceptable.
Another non-Filipino scholar, S. Jayakumar, vice-dean of the Faculty of Law of
the University of Singapore, in his article on The Philippine claim to Sabah (1969)
also argues that the Philippine case is weak and tenuous. Like Ariff, Jayakumar also
invokes the idea of effective occupation on the part of the United Kingdom in Sabah
since 1878, which granted the British North Borneo Company a charter of corporate
character. The author contends that the Philippine claim is abstract and vague, based
only on historically derived rights of the heirs of the Sultan of Sulu. Jayakumar
further argues that neither the Philippines nor the heirs of the Sultan have exercised
sovereignty or been in effective occupation of Sabah since 1878. Also like Ariff, the
author emphasizes the effective occupation of Sabah by the United Kingdom.
Therefore, Malaysia, as the successor state, is now the legitimate sovereign of Sabah.
Like Ariff, Jayakumar emphasizes the principle of self-determination.
Leigh R. Wright in her book entitled The origins of British Borneo (1970),
explored British policy changes from 1860 to 1888 from having commercial interests
on the island to eventually lording over it under a chartered company. Wright’s study
36 Mohammed Bin Dato Othman Ariff. The Philippine Claim to Sabah: Its historical, Legal and Political Implications. (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1970), p. 64.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
28
reveals that the shift was mainly a reaction to the French presence in Indochina, also
fueled by German interests on the area, which led Great Britain to sign an agreement
with Germany and Spain to delineate and secure her colonial sphere in Borneo.
One of the scholars in the field political science who has done considerable work
on the Sabah issue was Lela Garner Noble, author of the book Philippine Policy
Towards Sabah: Claim to Independence (1977). The author argues that the Philippine
foreign policy on the Sabah issue during the time period from Macapagal through
Marcos was evidence of Philippine’s desire to be seen as independent from outside
forces, most notably the United States.
In Sulu and Sabah: A study of British policy toward the Philippines and North
Borneo (1978), Nicholas Tarling, an 18th century historian and author of various
books on Southeast Asia, postulates British policy going back as far as the 18th
century and continuing until 1903 was the context for Sulu and Sabah. He
acknowledges that the 1878 agreement between the Sultan of Sulu and Baron Van
Overbeck was a lease rather than a cession. He does however agree with Quintos that
a continuation of the lease in perpetuity could very well be the solution to the ongoing
dispute.37
Paridah Abd. Samad and Darussalam Abu Bakar in "Malaysia-Philippine
37 Nicholas Tarling. Sulu and Sabah: A Study of British Policy toward the Philippines and North Borneo from the Late Eighteenth Century. (Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 349.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
29
Relations: The Issue of Sabah,” published in 1992, emphasized the bilateral relations
between the two countries. The paper presented sub-themes such as the political and
security repercussions of the Sabah dispute with regard to the Moro secessionism in
the south, the overlapping of territorial boundaries, Malaysian incursion into
Philippine waters, and the issue of Filipino refugees and illegal immigrants in Sabah
from the Macapagal to the Aquino administrations.
Arnold M. Azurin’s Beyond the Cult of Dissidence in Southern Philippines and
Wartorn Zones in the Global Village (1996) devoted Part Two of the work to the
Sabah issue. Azurin argues in favor of dropping the Philippine claim, except
the proprietary rights of the heirs, in order to face realities and promote better ASEAN
relations. The various treaties signed by the Sulu Sultan since the 18th century
followed a historical pattern of ceding and leasing certain portions of the sultanate’s
dominion to outside powers, depending on the rise and ebb of its own fortunes and
powers relative to that of the contracting parties.
Another work that has a fresh interpretation of the issue is Asiri Abubukar’s
“Bangsa Sug, Sabah and Sulus' quest for Peace and Autonomy in Southern
Philippines” (2000). The author asserts that there exists a continuing sense of
identification and affiliation among the Sulu people with Sabah. Because of the strong
sense of connection and affiliation to Sabah among the people in Sulu, Abubakar
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
30
argues that settling the Sabah issue is vital to peace process in the southern
Philippines, particularly in the quest for autonomy by the Sulu people. The
identification, connection, and affiliation of the Sulu people with Sabah is through the
defunct Sulu Sultanate; the influx of Filipino immigrants to Sabah further reinforces
the connection.38
Another factor that Abubakar pointed out is that the strategic location for trade of
the Sulu-Sabah area since the height of the Sulu Sultanate will continue to be
significant as part of the Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines-East Asian Growth
Area (BIMP-EAGA). The author believes the Sabah issue is intertwined with the
Moro problem in Mindanao.39 He postulates that resolving the Sabah issue would
indeed move Southern Philippines closer to a lasting peace.
Finally, one should also not exclude the hefty The Philippine claim to a portion
of North Borneo: materials and documents (2003), an indispensable volume intended
for the use of government officials, legislators, lawyers and researchers. It contains
pertinent documents that in one way or another are related to the Philippine claim to
Sabah. This volume, an updated and expanded edition of Readings on the Sabah
question (1987) was necessary in the light of recent developments concerning the
Philippine claim.
38 Asiri Abubakar. Bangsa Sug, Sabah and Sulus’ Quest for Peace and Autonomy in Southern Philippines. (Ph.D. Dissertation in Philippine Studies, University of the Philippines, 2000), p. 248.
39 Ibid., p. 265.
‧
國立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
31