0
yes
Wiki User
∙ 11y ago
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Why does Malaysia claim the Spratly Islands and Sabah when the Philippines claims them too?
The Philippines base their claims of sovereignty over the Spratlys on theissues of res nullius. The definition of res nullius is "A thing which has no owner or A thing which has been abandoned by its owner is as much res nullius as if it had never belonged to any one
Is Australia bigger than Malaysia?
yes of course austaralia is bigger than malasia
Why Malaysia keeps holding Sabah if not belong to them?
Malaysia has seen what the British has done and so they imitate to grab the opportunity when they got their independence from the British empire in 1963. Peninsular government of Malaysia slowly edge to make it appear Sabah is part of Malaysia by appointing interim administration and change the name from North Borneo to Sabah in a blink of an eye. It was also clear to the Malaysian Constitution that Sabah is a partner rather than a member state of Malaysia. It was also clear that Sabah is only interim member state. Sabah is now currently contributing 30% to the whole economy of Malaysia. From this standpoint, simple calculations will give us at least US$12 billion dollars generated income annually. Malaysia has all the reason to hold Sabah ,a merely US$1,500 dollars rental to Sabah since 1963 is being paid by Malaysia. In short, the only capitalization involved is the rental versus billion dollar earning every year, Is that not enough reason to hold Sabah? It was said that Malaysia is continually muddling the traditional leadership of the Royal Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo by paying fake sultans among the relatives to the throne, to make it appear that squabble is there to reason out that they do not know who is the genuine sultan of whom Sabah will return. There is also rumors that even the past and present administrations of the the Philippine government is continually secretly receiving dole out money from Malaysia in condition not to interfere or help the now traditional governance of the Royal Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo.
What is the legal basis of sabah claim by the sultanate of sulu?
Malaysia was formed and given independence by the British Government in 1963. The Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo was also given by the British Government the 'Letter of Administration to Sabah, acknowledging all the property of the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah in 1939. To the effect that 1939 is earlier than 1963 explicitly telling us which one is genuine and legal.Another striking solid and legal evidence of the Sabah ownership is the case filed by Indonesia to the United Nations to claim part of Sipadan,Sabah against Malaysia . The UN ruling under ICJ explicitly stated that Indonesia has no sovereign rights over Sipadan ,Sabah because it is owned by the Sultanate of Sulu under administration of Malaysia.Therefore, if Malaysia will not acknowledge the ownership by the Sultanate of Sulu over Sabah, Malaysia is directly violating ( for in fact being violated for 47 years) the UN sanctions over Sipadan, Sabah stating that the Sultanate of Sulu is the legitimate owner of Sabah.Moreover , if Malaysia will not acknowledge the 1939 High Court decision and the implementation of the 'Letter of Administration over Sabah that the Sultanate of Sulu is the owner of Sabah , Malaysia has to nullify their Independence given by the British Government in 1963 ,simply because it is the same government , the British Government who gave authority over the ownership of Sabah which is far earlier than their independence in 1963.The continued ignoring of Malaysia to this day of the rights to possessed the ownership, over Sabah by the Sultanate of Sulu Kingdom, creates a continuous anger on the part of the Sultanate people for prohibiting them ti live in their own land and even expulsing the people of the Sultanate living in Sabah today.
What is the population of people in race in Malaysia year 2010?
Malaysia's multi-racial society contains many ethnic groups. Malays comprise a majority of just over 50%. By constitutional definition, all Malays are Muslim. About a quarter of the population is ethnic Chinese, a group which historically played an important role in trade and business. Malaysians of Indian descent comprise about 7% of the population and include Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, and Christians. Non-Malay indigenous groups combine to make up approximately 11% of the population. Population density is highest in peninsular Malaysia, home to some 20 million of the country's 28 million inhabitants. The rest live on the Malaysian portion of the island of Borneo in the large but less densely-populated states of Sabah and Sarawak. More than half of Sarawak's residents and about two-thirds of Sabah's are from indigenous groups.
How many hours behing is kuching in sarawak than Tokyo?
zero
What is the history of sabah claim?
FOR BETTER INFO PLS REFER TO: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabah THIS IS MINE: i wish too that this will be discussed again AND I THINK!!! that the claim is upon to the present sultan of sulu because he is a descendant of the original sultan owner to which SABAH was given to. at first the sultan of Brunei(which conquered SABAH and below)and his brother wanted to take over but needed the help of the sultan of sulu at that time at the end they had won so as a reward the brother gave sabah to the sultan of sulu but the British wanted to lease SABAH so the agreed with the sultan and i think it was about $1,200 only and this kept on and on until british said it was sold to Malaysia and that started it all but i think the sultan of sulu right now is still getting the money... but british had constructed bases... but now some questions are why is it revived? there are cases of deportations of and this is one reason second we want a bigger country meaning bigger resources... ===BUT EXPERTS SAY THAT THE BEACHES ARE BETTER THAN PALAWAN AND THAT COULD BE A REASON=== ++THE CONDITION IS PEACEFUL THERE WAS A PEACE TALK TO STOP IT UNTIL IT WAS REVIVED =) i want to revive it if i was the president... I HAVE READ some posts in Malaysia saying that it should be in Malaysia because it was handed down and there was a contract of sale and all that but one message got me it was that there was a filipino chief minister that handled sabah and i think it was 1966-1976 and he said that "he handled non-moslem badly and not as good as the moslem so no more Filipinos!!! this was excatly it i wanted to comment but no i think my knowledge of it was low hehe...=) and basically it was part of Malaysia which made them very conscious of happenings about it we just revived it because of the reasons above.... P.S. IM PINOY AND IM NOT A HISTORIAN I JUST KNOW THESE FROM RESEACRHING AND READING I HOPE THIS HELPS!!! AS FOR THE NO MORE FILIPINOS THING GO TO HERE: http://www.topix.com/forum/world/Malaysia/T7S5UU62KSOO4H8PT and find: (USING ALT+F) cina bangsa hebat) LETS JUST LET THIS TO THE GOVERNMENT OR PROTEST=) SO THAT IT WILL BE REVIVED BECAUSE I THINK THEY KNOW ALL THE info NEEDED TO CLAIM AND WE GOT HISTORIANS =)
Biggest flower on earth?
They have said that in Malaysia they found a flower bigger than a tall man and the flower is called the Giant Raflesia.
Is Malaysia better then England?
No. Malaysia is not better than England, and England is not better than Malaysia. End of story.
Is the UK larger than Malaysia?
Yes. Is a a lot larger than Malaysia.
What is the legal Basis of Malaysia in absorbing Sabah from the British government?
Sabah has been Leased on 1878 by two merchant Overbeck and Dent under their private company. When this company was dissolved , the leased was absorbed by the British government, when Malaysia got their independence n on 1963, Sabah was again absorbed by Malaysia. This series of transfer built a suspicious thinking that from the beginning , the idea is to diminished it's owner , the Sultanate of Sulu of the sovereign rights over Sabah. The legal position of Malaysia is not clear being not a party to the original Lease of Sabah. The suspected manaipulations and the misinterpretations from the word 'Padjak " as cession or sale is not also clear , because the signatory to the Contract is only one person but Sultan Jamallul Ahlam. If it is a sale two party must be involved as signatory . The analysis of most expert of the Agreement is more of a 'Franchise " rather than lease or sale because only the owner has signed the contract permitting the two merchant to act as a holder of the area perfettually to the life of the company or any of it's heir represented by Dent and Overbeck. The transfer by the private company or non government entity to British Government is strongly questionable, because the Sultanate has 'Friendship Treaty to the Sultanate of Sulu kingdom that was violated. Much more that the transfer to the Malaysian Federal is questionable being not a partner to the 1878 Franchise Agreement.
What is your stand on sabah claimed by the Philippines?
Up to present, Malaysia is still renting Sabah to Philippines. Yes, the Philippines can get it back because it legally belongs to the Sultanate of Sulu (Philippines). The Best way for the Philippine government to claim it back is improve first its Economy. Make the Philippine economy more than enough to support and for the Sabahans and Sarawakans to be happy to go back and be united again with their Muslims brothers and Christian neighbours in Mindanao.
