As Malay Moslem ...we don't want to have war against Philippines whether Moslem or non muslim. In fact we support Philippines fight against colonialism. We also hate Spain colonized Philippines
Yeah... Some of our brother are arguing about heirs of Sabah.. but ppl didn't realize that we brother by blood we claim that the part of southern Philippines got Malay blood but some ppl are want fighting on this piece of shit.
The Philippines claims Sabah on the basis that Sabah was said to be once under Sulu Sultanate. Descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claim that Sabah belonged to Sulu Sultanate because Sabah was given by Brunei the original owner to Sulu as a gift for purportedly helping Brunei to fight rebels. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. In fact on 29 December 1877, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the whole of Sabah to BNBC/British and concurrently appointed Baron Von Overback, the co-owner of BNBC as Maharajah of Sabah and Rajah of Sandakan and Gaya. This cession agreement was documented. When BNBC went to Sabah to begin their business, Sulu claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu. BNBC agreed to enter a "pajak" agreement with Sulu after they were advised by their fellow businessmen in Hong Kong who advised that Sulu would attack them if they didn't have a deal with Sulu. This "pajak'' agreement was signed on 22 January 1878. BNBC understood that this "pajak" was a "cession", so did early generation of Sulu Sultan accepted it as "cession". Only later generation of descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claimed that the "pajak" agreement was meant to be "rent" or "lease''. Still there was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. The two above events led to an overlapping issue on Sabah. What ever it was, the above agreement and overlapping issue were superceded by later event. On 22 July 1878, the then Sultan of Sulu had relinquished all his possession and sovereignty of Sulu and it's territories including Sabah to Spain. The Sultanate of Sulu only remained as hereditary cultural and traditional entity without any sovereign territory. In 1885, to resolve overlapping issue on Sabah and other issues involving other islands, Britain, Spain and Germany arrived to an agreement known as Madrid Protocol in which Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. As new owner of Sabah Britain had full control and sovereignty over Sabah and they could do what ever they wanted. Sulu could not claim anything because they had already relinquished the sovereignty of Sabah to Spain and Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. What ever happened to Sabah after that was under British jurisdiction. Even though British had full control and sovereignty of Sabah, they still honoured the annual "cession money" payment stipulated in the "pajak'' agreement as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. So did Malaysia when formed in 1963, still honoured the annual "cession money" payment as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. The term "cession money" was used because to use the term "consolation" was felt to be too degrading. Thus the term "cession money" was continually used as used before by the British. Even the argument about the word "pajak" and it's meaning in the "pajak" agreement still favoured the British. The "pajak" agreement was written in classical Malay, in jawi script (Arabic alphabet). Malay is the national language of Malaysia and Brunei, and mother tongue of majority Malaysians and Brunei. In those days, Malay was also used by people of Sulu because Malay was the "lingua franca" of this region including the present Philippines. That was why the agreement was written in Malay. But over the years Sulu people had lost their Malay language (standard Malay) because of several reasons like colonisation by different European. This made Sulu relied on translation of the agreement. Things got worse when they translated it to Sulu's local language, be it Tagalog or Tausug, which was rather translation of another translation, that they translated it to their favour. The word "pajak" carried several meanings depending on the contact used in the sentence or passage. It could mean "tax, rent, pawn, lease, or cession". In the agreement between BNBC/ British and Sulu, the word "pajak" was used together with the phrase "selama-lamanya" which meant "forever". When "pajak" was used together with the phrase"selama-lamanya", in this contact the word "pajak" meant "cession". Cession means "the formal giving up of rights, property or territory by a state". When Sulu "pajak" Sabah to BNBC it meant Sulu ceded Sabah and it meant Sabah no longer belonged to Sulu. This was further clarified. There was a second agreement which was a supplementary to the first agreement known as "Confirmation of Cession of Certain Islands Agreement". It was regarding certain islands between Sabah and Sulu which they were not sure whether they were included in the first agreement or not. In this second agreement, the word "pajak" was no longer used because they thought it might lead to misunderstanding by later generation. Instead the word "menyerahkan" which meant "surrender" was used, and the annual payment was increased from 5,000 dollars to 5,300 dollars due to certain islands included. Another example where the Philippines generally or Sulu in particular misunderstood due to wrong translation or translation to their favour, was about the clause that the territory could not be transfered to another party. Yes, there was a clause that Sabah could not be transfered to another party "... without the consent of 'Duli Queen'...". The British translated "Duli Queen" as "Her Britannic Majesty", even though it was not correct literally but it was correct in the meaning. The "... Queen" was referring to Queen Victoria, the ruler of England / Britain at that time. But Sulu translated "Duli Queen" (or rather translated from a translation) as "Their Majesties' Government". This led to an understanding that "Duli Queen" was the ruler of Sulu. The question was since when Sulu as a Muslim state had a female as their ruler (Sultanah or Queen)? The above showed that North Borneo (Sabah) had indeed been ceded to Britain, that was why it could not be transfered to another party without the consent of 'Duli Queen' (Queen Victoria), the ruler of England/ Britain at that time. And further it was stated that any dispute about the agreement had to be referred to the "Consul General" being the Queen's representative in Borneo to be resolved. It meant that outside Arbitrator had no jurisdiction over the agreement. This fact became the main reason of judgement by Paris Court of Appeal in setting aside and annulling the Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. On 31 August 1963 Britain gave independence to Sabah and before that on 22 July 1963 Sarawak was given independence. The people of Sabah and Sarawak had exercised self determination to form Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore. The sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak as component states of Malaysia is intact and recognized internationally and recognized by the UN. This was confirmed and clearly stated in the United Nations Malaysia Mission Report "Final Conclusion of the Secretary-General", 14 September 1963. The last sentence of the report says: "I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfillment as component states of Malaysia". Full text of the report can even be accessed from the Philippines Government Gazette website. About the arbitration award by Paris Court to Sulu of US$14.92B, it had since been set aside and annulled by Paris Court of Appeal. Here is the latest situation. Latest as in June 2023: 1. June 6th - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside and annulled the previous Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate. 2. June 27th - Dutch Court of Appeal in The Haque had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award by Paris Court (lower court) ruling, and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. 3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost. 4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Now is already January 2024, no news about Sulu's claim proceeding in Luxembourg Court. It looked like they withdrew their case when they acknowledged the Paris Court of Appeal decision. Malaysia had spent around RM32m, equivalent to about US$6.6m to deal with these Sulu claim cases in various European courts, in Madrid, Paris, Luxembourg and Netherlands. Apart from the €100,000.00 Sulu has to pay to Malaysia as legal cost, Malaysia is planning to sue Sulu for compensation for the loss of RM32m (USD6.6m) spent.
Alhamdulillah.. Sisters.. I'm from Mindanao southern Philippines, My tribes are Iranon who belong to Moro This a term that called in Spanish conquistadors. We are bound to this land, because my ancestors worth fighting since the colonizer's didn't return to the proper owner to this land, the tribe of sulu are the real owners. Sultanates of sulu been fought of many wars because of land dispute.
Move on. The Sultan of Kedah lost half of it's territory to Siam on the southern part of Thailand. Siam and British make The Anglo Siamese treaty and deny the Sultan Kedah power. That is why there are alot of malay muslim live in the southern of Thailand. Yet after independance we move on didn't claim back those land. Kedah have fight against Siam many times long time ago even seek help from Sultan of Johor. We all know if continue provoking war there is no benefits for us. that is why we also let Singapore to separate. Sabah and Sarawak choose to join Malaysia. No one force them. They can go alone if they want in the beginning. Imagine if Sabah is out. Own govern like Brunei. It will look like claiming Sabah from Sabah country. haha
@@Sam-yj6br Yeah... I know it I explain it what happened in this video, if you understand what mean.. this not about blaming is about knowledge, you get it?
@@Sam-yj6br I know A lot Our Past history Beyond All Asian countries, actually Philippines is a big participation of world war 2 and Vietnam, and also Korean war that's why Filipino and Korean love each other .. how about your country do have any participation in the world? Don't talking to me like that because I know a lot of history about this land so don't mock me as a child.
@@inf4mousvloglife1572 our target is modernize our country. not wasting time for war. why help american kill vietnamese? there are alot of korean mercenaries anyway during the vietnam war doin genocide to vietnamese people. like america want to provoke war with china. use philipines as base. later do firearms business. as a test for united states military complex for their weapon business. later war kill and kill. alot of people die. for what. nothing to achive. while US dollar still on top.
How do they get that story.. Malaysia and Philippines are in good terms and having a diplomatic conversation over sabah. Perhaps sulu sultanate wins in the international tribunal. And the international court had already released an order to tha Malaysian government to pay 14 billion dollars to the sultanate heirs.
@@twinssf8956 dont trust that claim. find the right source.sulu lose the case .even sulu descendent are non existent today. they go to foreign courts file a case which doesnt have power to a country. those pinoys want something doesnt belong to them also want easy money. pinoy doesnt recognize sulu sultanate but busy claiming sabah. move on go built your nation stop dreaming
Sabah is really part of the Philippines but when the Spanish American war started they left Sabah. Then Malaysia decided to rent Sabah from the leader of the sultan. When the Philippines wanted to take Sabah, Malaysia did not want to give it to the Philippines so they decided the Philippines president to go to war with Malaysia. by the Lord's mercy, it won't go on😊
As Malay Moslem ...we don't want to have war against Philippines whether Moslem or non muslim. In fact we support Philippines fight against colonialism. We also hate Spain colonized Philippines
This is really good, we agree with you😌
Yeah... Some of our brother are arguing about heirs of Sabah.. but ppl didn't realize that we brother by blood we claim that the part of southern Philippines got Malay blood but some ppl are want fighting on this piece of shit.
And this is sad, we hate violence, fighting is never a good solution 😢
Why should Philippines even bother by sulu claims over sabah. Phillipines doesnt even recognise sulu as sultan. 🗿
The Philippines claims Sabah on the basis that Sabah was said to be once under Sulu Sultanate. Descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claim that Sabah belonged to Sulu Sultanate because Sabah was given by Brunei the original owner to Sulu as a gift for purportedly helping Brunei to fight rebels. But Brunei refuted this claim and denied ever having given Sabah to Sulu. There was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans.
In fact on 29 December 1877, the Sultan of Brunei ceded the whole of Sabah to BNBC/British and concurrently appointed Baron Von Overback, the co-owner of BNBC as Maharajah of Sabah and Rajah of Sandakan and Gaya. This cession agreement was documented.
When BNBC went to Sabah to begin their business, Sulu claimed that Sabah belonged to Sulu. BNBC agreed to enter a "pajak" agreement with Sulu after they were advised by their fellow businessmen in Hong Kong who advised that Sulu would attack them if they didn't have a deal with Sulu. This "pajak'' agreement was signed on 22 January 1878. BNBC understood that this "pajak" was a "cession", so did early generation of Sulu Sultan accepted it as "cession". Only later generation of descendants of former Sultan of Sulu claimed that the "pajak" agreement was meant to be "rent" or "lease''. Still there was NO DOCUMENT regarding the transfer of ownership of Sabah from Brunei to Sulu signed by both Sultans. The two above events led to an overlapping issue on Sabah.
What ever it was, the above agreement and overlapping issue were superceded by later event. On 22 July 1878, the then Sultan of Sulu had relinquished all his possession and sovereignty of Sulu and it's territories including Sabah to Spain. The Sultanate of Sulu only remained as hereditary cultural and traditional entity without any sovereign territory.
In 1885, to resolve overlapping issue on Sabah and other issues involving other islands, Britain, Spain and Germany arrived to an agreement known as Madrid Protocol in which Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain. As new owner of Sabah Britain had full control and sovereignty over Sabah and they could do what ever they wanted. Sulu could not claim anything because they had already relinquished the sovereignty of Sabah to Spain and Spain surrendered Sabah to Britain.
What ever happened to Sabah after that was under British jurisdiction. Even though British had full control and sovereignty of Sabah, they still honoured the annual "cession money" payment stipulated in the "pajak'' agreement as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. So did Malaysia when formed in 1963, still honoured the annual "cession money" payment as consolation for the Sulu Sultan. The term "cession money" was used because to use the term "consolation" was felt to be too degrading. Thus the term "cession money" was continually used as used before by the British.
Even the argument about the word "pajak" and it's meaning in the "pajak" agreement still favoured the British. The "pajak" agreement was written in classical Malay, in jawi script (Arabic alphabet). Malay is the national language of Malaysia and Brunei, and mother tongue of majority Malaysians and Brunei. In those days, Malay was also used by people of Sulu because Malay was the "lingua franca" of this region including the present Philippines. That was why the agreement was written in Malay. But over the years Sulu people had lost their Malay language (standard Malay) because of several reasons like colonisation by different European. This made Sulu relied on translation of the agreement. Things got worse when they translated it to Sulu's local language, be it Tagalog or Tausug, which was rather translation of another translation, that they translated it to their favour.
The word "pajak" carried several meanings depending on the contact used in the sentence or passage. It could mean "tax, rent, pawn, lease, or cession". In the agreement between BNBC/ British and Sulu, the word "pajak" was used together with the phrase "selama-lamanya" which meant "forever". When "pajak" was used together with the phrase"selama-lamanya", in this contact the word "pajak" meant "cession". Cession means "the formal giving up of rights, property or territory by a state". When Sulu "pajak" Sabah to BNBC it meant Sulu ceded Sabah and it meant Sabah no longer belonged to Sulu.
This was further clarified. There was a second agreement which was a supplementary to the first agreement known as "Confirmation of Cession of Certain Islands Agreement". It was regarding certain islands between Sabah and Sulu which they were not sure whether they were included in the first agreement or not. In this second agreement, the word "pajak" was no longer used because they thought it might lead to misunderstanding by later generation. Instead the word "menyerahkan" which meant "surrender" was used, and the annual payment was increased from 5,000 dollars to 5,300 dollars due to certain islands included.
Another example where the Philippines generally or Sulu in particular misunderstood due to wrong translation or translation to their favour, was about the clause that the territory could not be transfered to another party. Yes, there was a clause that Sabah could not be transfered to another party "... without the consent of 'Duli Queen'...". The British translated "Duli Queen" as "Her Britannic Majesty", even though it was not correct literally but it was correct in the meaning. The "... Queen" was referring to Queen Victoria, the ruler of England / Britain at that time. But Sulu translated "Duli Queen" (or rather translated from a translation) as "Their Majesties' Government". This led to an understanding that "Duli Queen" was the ruler of Sulu. The question was since when Sulu as a Muslim state had a female as their ruler (Sultanah or Queen)?
The above showed that North Borneo (Sabah) had indeed been ceded to Britain, that was why it could not be transfered to another party without the consent of 'Duli Queen' (Queen Victoria), the ruler of England/ Britain at that time. And further it was stated that any dispute about the agreement had to be referred to the "Consul General" being the Queen's representative in Borneo to be resolved. It meant that outside Arbitrator had no jurisdiction over the agreement. This fact became the main reason of judgement by Paris Court of Appeal in setting aside and annulling the Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate.
On 31 August 1963 Britain gave independence to Sabah and before that on 22 July 1963 Sarawak was given independence. The people of Sabah and Sarawak had exercised self determination to form Malaysia together with Malaya and Singapore. The sovereignty of Sabah and Sarawak as component states of Malaysia is intact and recognized internationally and recognized by the UN. This was confirmed and clearly stated in the United Nations Malaysia Mission Report "Final Conclusion of the Secretary-General", 14 September 1963. The last sentence of the report says:
"I fervently hope that the people of these territories will achieve progress and prosperity, and find their fulfillment as component states of Malaysia".
Full text of the report can even be accessed from the Philippines Government Gazette website.
About the arbitration award by Paris Court to Sulu of US$14.92B, it had since been set aside and annulled by Paris Court of Appeal. Here is the latest situation.
Latest as in June 2023:
1. June 6th - Paris Court of Appeal had set aside and annulled the previous Paris Court (lower court) ruling awarding the heirs of the defunct Sulu Sultanate.
2. June 27th - Dutch Court of Appeal in The Haque had dismissed a bid by eight descendants of former Sultan of Sulu to enforce the arbitration award by Paris Court (lower court) ruling, and dismissed an attempt to seize Malaysian assets following the Paris Court of Appeal decision.
3. Paris Court of Appeal also imposed on Sulu €100,000.00 (Euro currency) to be paid to Malaysia as legal cost.
4. Mean while in Luxembourg, a second attempt to seize Malaysian Petronas assets had been filed in Luxembourg Court due for hearing in September 2023 after the first attempt was dismissed. This will likely be dismissed too following the Paris Court of Appeal decision.
Now is already January 2024, no news about Sulu's claim proceeding in Luxembourg Court. It looked like they withdrew their case when they acknowledged the Paris Court of Appeal decision.
Malaysia had spent around RM32m, equivalent to about US$6.6m to deal with these Sulu claim cases in various European courts, in Madrid, Paris, Luxembourg and Netherlands. Apart from the €100,000.00 Sulu has to pay to Malaysia as legal cost, Malaysia is planning to sue Sulu for compensation for the loss of RM32m (USD6.6m) spent.
Yeah.. Suki is right Borneo is colonized by british while Philippines is colonized by Spain.
Alhamdulillah.. Sisters.. I'm from Mindanao southern Philippines, My tribes are Iranon who belong to Moro
This a term that called in Spanish conquistadors. We are bound to this land, because my ancestors worth fighting since the colonizer's didn't return to the proper owner to this land, the tribe of sulu are the real owners. Sultanates of sulu been fought of many wars because of land dispute.
Move on. The Sultan of Kedah lost half of it's territory to Siam on the southern part of Thailand. Siam and British make The Anglo Siamese treaty and deny the Sultan Kedah power. That is why there are alot of malay muslim live in the southern of Thailand. Yet after independance we move on didn't claim back those land. Kedah have fight against Siam many times long time ago even seek help from Sultan of Johor. We all know if continue provoking war there is no benefits for us. that is why we also let Singapore to separate. Sabah and Sarawak choose to join Malaysia. No one force them. They can go alone if they want in the beginning. Imagine if Sabah is out. Own govern like Brunei. It will look like claiming Sabah from Sabah country. haha
@@Sam-yj6br Yeah... I know it I explain it what happened in this video, if you understand what mean.. this not about blaming is about knowledge, you get it?
@@Sam-yj6br I know A lot Our Past history Beyond All Asian countries, actually Philippines is a big participation of world war 2 and Vietnam, and also Korean war that's why Filipino and Korean love each other .. how about your country do have any participation in the world? Don't talking to me like that because I know a lot of history about this land so don't mock me as a child.
@@inf4mousvloglife1572 our target is modernize our country. not wasting time for war. why help american kill vietnamese? there are alot of korean mercenaries anyway during the vietnam war doin genocide to vietnamese people. like america want to provoke war with china. use philipines as base. later do firearms business. as a test for united states military complex for their weapon business. later war kill and kill. alot of people die. for what. nothing to achive. while US dollar still on top.
How do they get that story.. Malaysia and Philippines are in good terms and having a diplomatic conversation over sabah. Perhaps sulu sultanate wins in the international tribunal. And the international court had already released an order to tha Malaysian government to pay 14 billion dollars to the sultanate heirs.
Ah really? Very nice! Thank you for you information!!! 🥰
@@twinssf8956 dont trust that claim. find the right source.sulu lose the case .even sulu descendent are non existent today. they go to foreign courts file a case which doesnt have power to a country. those pinoys want something doesnt belong to them also want easy money. pinoy doesnt recognize sulu sultanate but busy claiming sabah. move on go built your nation stop dreaming
@@jopesulaiman Really? Prove me wrong? 😂😂😂 Funny argument.
Sabah is really part of the Philippines but when the Spanish American war started they left Sabah. Then Malaysia decided to rent Sabah from the leader of the sultan. When the Philippines wanted to take Sabah, Malaysia did not want to give it to the Philippines so they decided the Philippines president to go to war with Malaysia. by the Lord's mercy, it won't go on😊
Thank you very much for the explanation ❤❤