Pemberian Pulau Mangsee, Kagayan dan Penyu mungkin mengkhianati Hak Sabah
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Sabah#:~:text=The%20history%20of%20Sabah%20can,Crown%20Colony%20of%20North%20Borneo.
Berita ini tidak betul sebab pada 1932, masih Chartered Company, bukan British Colony. Lepas perang dunia 2, setahu aku, pulau pulau itu di beri sebagai hadiah kepada USA oleh UK setelah North Borneo menjadi koloni UK pada 1946. Tapi USA berikan kemerdekaan kepada Filipina pada tahun 1946. Pengambil alih kuasa USA untuk kawasan Sabah cuma di buat pada tahun 1947 secara resmi.
Ada pembohongan dan penipuan, sebab itu tidak konsisten.
Jadi bukan setakat administrasi atau pentadbiran sahaja sebelum 1946, tapi sa bahagian dari Sabah di bawah kawalan Chartered Company, yang memegang cagaran selama lamanya terhadap Sabah.
Jelas juga di 1930 USA and UK Convention:
https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/35/13039#:~:text=WHEREAS%20a%20convention%20between%20the,Henry%20L.
ARTICLE III
All islands to the north and east of the said line and all islands and rocks traversed by the said line, should there be any such, shall belong to the Philippine Archipelago and all islands to the south and west of the said line shall belong to the State of North Borneo.
Perjanjian ini lah asas kawasan Filipina sebelum 1947.
Ertinya, UK mungkin melanggar perjanjian ini dan mengkhianati Sabah dengan memberi tanah Sabah kepada Filipina. Mau cari kuasa kerajaan Koloni dan perjanjian di antara Chartered Company dengan UK.
Jelas juga dari Gemini. Jika perpindahan hak melibatkan penduduk, Parliament UK mesti meluluskan nya. Bukan sahaja di pulau pulau itu tapi keluarga mereka di tanah besar Sabah. Sabah boleh minta balik hak kepada pulau pulau tersebut.
The authority of a British colonial government to transfer territory or land to another sovereign power depends largely on the legal status of the colony and the specific period in history.
In British constitutional law, the transfer of territory is generally considered an exercise of the **Royal Prerogative**, but this power is not absolute and is often constrained by the role of the UK Parliament.
## 1. The Royal Prerogative vs. Parliament
Historically, the Crown had the power to cede territory under the Royal Prerogative (the executive power of the monarch). However, a significant legal shift occurred in the late 19th century.
* **Pre-1890s:** It was widely believed the Crown could transfer land via treaty without Parliamentary consent.
* **The Anglo-German Agreement (1890):** When the UK ceded **Heligoland** to Germany, the government of the day sought Parliamentary approval via an Act of Parliament. This set a lasting constitutional precedent: while the Crown negotiates the treaty, the actual transfer of British subjects' rights and the alteration of British territory usually requires **statutory authority**.
## 2. Settlement vs. Conquest/Cession
The type of colony dictated the level of local or parliamentary control:
* **Settled Colonies:** In colonies where British settlers established themselves (like parts of Australia or North America), the settlers carried English law with them. The Crown’s power to change the law or transfer land without an Act of Parliament was more limited.
* **Ceded or Conquered Colonies:** In territories acquired through war or treaty (like many parts of the Caribbean or Africa), the Crown initially held broader "plenary" powers to legislate via **Orders in Council**. In these cases, the colonial government (acting as the Crown’s representative) had more direct authority, but large-scale transfers to foreign powers still typically required London’s oversight.
## 3. The Role of Colonial Administrators
A colonial Governor or local administration rarely had the independent authority to transfer land to a *foreign* government on their own. Their powers were defined by **Letters Patent** and **Royal Instructions**.
* **Internal Land Transfers:** Governors could grant or transfer land to individuals or corporations within the colony based on local land ordinances.
* **External Transfers:** Any transfer of territory to another nation was a matter of foreign policy, which remained the exclusive domain of the Imperial Government in London.
## 4. Modern Statutory Requirements
For most of the 20th century, the decolonization process or the transfer of territory (such as the transfer of Hong Kong to China) was executed through specific Acts of Parliament (e.g., the **Hong Kong Act 1985**). This ensures that the executive cannot strip residents of their status or change the jurisdiction of the land without the oversight of the legislature.
### Summary Table: Authority Levels
| Action | Authority Required |
|---|---|
| **Granting land to a settler** | Local Governor (via Colonial Ordinances) |
| **Altering internal boundaries** | Order in Council (Executive) |
| **Ceding territory to a foreign power** | Treaty (Executive) + **Act of Parliament (Legislative)** |
> **Note:** While the Executive (the government) can sign a treaty to transfer land, that treaty cannot usually be enforced or finalized in a way that affects the rights of the inhabitants without Parliament passing a corresponding law.
>
