Justification for International Court of Justice for Malaysia on Borneo Territories
BREAKING NEWS! . . . International Court of Justice awaits Malaysia on Borneo Territories . . .
International Court of Justice awaits Malaysia on Borneo Territories . . .
ICJ advisory body for UN Security Council on self-determination for North Borneo, Sarawak.
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10159551802723620&id=522048619
The Borneo Territories are not in the Federation defined in Article 160(2). The signatories in the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1948 were confined to the sultanates and states in Malaya.
In response to a suit by the Kelantan gov’t, the Malayan gov’t told the Supreme Court on 11 Sept 1963 that the Federation of Malaya will continue after 16 Sept 1963.
The right and proper Forum to decide on whether the Borneo Territories, North Borneo and Sarawak, have been “internally colonised” is the UN Security Council through the International Court of Justice (ICJ) at the Hague, Netherlands.
The case of South Sudan refers. South Sudan was ruled by “proxy” gov’ts until matters came to a head. The UN Security Council declared that South Sudan had been “internally colonised”. It had the right under international law for self-determination. The region became independent on 9 July 2011 after a Referendum in Jan the same year.
Colonisation was outlawed by international law, after World War II, as a form of “criminal enterprise”.
Colonialism has been defined by international law as a phenomenon whereby a country is ruled by another country for the benefit of the latter.
Refer to Ongkili’s statement on revenue sharing talks, and related issues, being delayed because of Petronas.
The Proclamation of Malaysia, in its own words, refers to Sabah and Sarawak as colonies on 16 Sept 1963.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proclamation_of_Malaysia
Under international law, North Borneo and Sarawak did not have “legal capacity” to sign the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA’63) on 9 July 1963 as they were still British colonies.
The British transferred the Administration of the Borneo Territories, North Borneo and Sarawak, to the Malayan gov’t on 16 Sept 1963.
British troops marched out.
Royal Malay Regiment (RMR) troops marched in.
The Sarawak Rangers and the Sabah Border Scouts were disbanded.
Tunku decided on the S’pore Separation Act 1965 after MCA prevailed upon him.
MCA and Umno wanted to get rid of PAP.
MCA capitalised on the rhetoric and polemics between LKY and roadside medicine peddler Syed Jaffar Albar on this and that.
If LKY had ignored Syed, Tunku would have had no excuse to kick out S’pore.
Putrajaya avoids rhetoric and polemics with the people on Borneo rights.
Instead, they use their proxies — running dogs — to taroh Borneo rights advocates kaw kaw.
Why don’t the proxies ask Putrajaya to settle the PTI issue? Instead, they want to take the issue to the international stage.
Likewise, the internal colonisation of North Borneo and Sarawak can be taken to the international stage.
The UN Security Council can refer to the ICJ based on a Petition of the People.
https://www.nst.com.my/news/nation/2021/11/745658/show-proof-putrajaya-colonising-sabah-says-ongkili
“O you, who believe; fulfill your contracts” (al-Ma’idah, 5:1).
This is a command that covers all contracts.
A hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari tells us,
الْمُسْلِمُونَ عِنْدَ شُرُوطِهِمْ
“Muslims are bound by all the conditions they have agreed upon.”
Another hadith in al-Tirmidhi tells us,
“Fulfill any pledge you make in Allah’s name and do not break oaths after you have sworn them, for you have made Allah your surety: Allah knows everything you do” (al-Nahl, 16:91).