Malaysia_Sulu_case

Malaysia Sulu case

Malaysia Sulu case

Add article description


The Malaysia Sulu case refers to an arbitration case which involving the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu and the government of Malaysia in the Spanish and later French court system.[1]

Quick Facts Heirs to the Sultanate of Sulu v. Malaysia, Court ...

Background

The North Borneo dispute arises from an agreement between the now defunct Sultanate of Sulu and the British North Borneo Company in 1878. Under the agreement the Sulu Sultanate gave control of lands in North Borneo and the British are to pay for them a fee annually.[2][lower-alpha 1]

Malaysia after its formation in 1963,[4] would pay the heirs of the Sulu Sultanate a token fee annually until the 2013 Lahad Datu standoff.[2] Heirs, who insist they are not involved with the standoff, sought arbitration over the stoppage of the payment.[5]

Case history

Case in Madrid

The Sulu heirs started the ad hoc arbitration process regarding the 1878 agreement in Spain on 30 July 2019. Malaysia did not consent on being part of the arbitration process insisting that the proper venue to resolve the dispute is within its legal system. [6]

In December 2019, the Government of Malaysia commenced proceedings to stop the arbitration.[7]

Malaysian Government argued that the premise of the dispute settlement must in accordance with the provision in the Deed of Cession provided: “In case of any dispute shall arise between His Highness the Sultan, his heirs or successors and the said Gustavus Baron de Overbeck or his Company it is hereby agreed that the matter shall be submitted to Her Britannic Majesty’s Consul-General for Borneo.”[8]

Gonzalo Stampa would be the arbitrator of the case. On 25 May 2020, Stampa would grant a partial award to the Sulu heirs. This would be stopped by the Madrid High Court in June 2021 which annulled Stampa's appointment due to failure to properly notify Malaysia, who had no official representation, about the case. Malaysia non-representation because they already filed the challenge of jurisdiction upon the arbitration earlier[9]

Move to Paris and final award

The arbitration would be moved by Stampa to a court in Paris. In February 2022, Stampa now hearing the case in the French legal system would rule that Malaysia owes the Sulu heirs $14.92 billion.[10]

Malaysian appeal and assets seizing attempt

Malaysia would obtain a favorable ruling from the Court of Appeal of Paris on 6 July 2023 which concluded that court which granted award to the Sulu heirs has no jurisdiction to hear the case in the first place. It also obtained a stay order to prevent the enforcement of the final award in the French court system the month prior.[9]

Nevertheless th Sulu heirs would pursue the award ruling's enforcement. They made failed bids to acquire Malaysian assets in France, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg.[11]

Sampa criminal case

Sulu case arbitrator, Gonzalo Stampa was faced with criminal charge for "unqualified professional practice" in December 2023.[12] Stampa was found guilty of contempt of court and has been sentenced by the Spanish courts to six months in prison together with a ban from practising as an arbitrator for a year.[13]

Claimants

According to the Malaysian government, the following are the heirs involved in the Sulu case which it says to be Filipino citizens:[14]

  • Nurhima Kiram Fornan
  • Fuad A. Kiram
  • Sheramar T. Kiram
  • Permaisuli Kiram–Guerzon
  • Taj–Mahal Kiram–Tarsum Nuqui;
  • Ahmad Nazard Kiram Sampang (d. 2023)
  • Jenny K.A. Sampang
  • Widz–Raunda Kiram Sampang

Reactions

Malaysia has viewed the move by the Sulu heirs as a violation of its sovereignty by seeking arbitration in foreign courts without its consent.[15] Sampa and the Sulu heirs has been criticized for forum shopping.[9]

In mid-2023, Malaysian parliament member Khlir Mohd Nor, who believe that the Philippine government is involved in the 2013 Lahad Datu standoff also alleges that the Philippine government is involved in the Sulu case. Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim who had met with Philippine President Bongbong Marcos said that the Philippine government is not involved in the Sulu case and iterated Malaysian policy of not entertaining claims on the sovereignty over Sabah. [15]

Notes

  1. There is a dispute whether this is a cession or a lease fee. Malaysia, interprets it as the later, while the Philippines which lays territorial claim to North Borneo treats it as the latter.[3]

Reference

  1. Beattie, Elizabeth (7 July 2023). "Fresh from 'Sulu case' win, Malaysia's law minister turns to domestic reforms". The Japan Times. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  2. "Malaysia stopped paying cession money to Sulu Sultanate in 2013". New Straits Times. 23 July 2020. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  3. "'Sabah is not in Malaysia': When Locsin awakens a sleeping giant". Rappler. 7 August 2020. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  4. "Sabah: A Timeline". Philippine Daily Inquirer. 31 July 2020. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  5. "Blow to the Philippine claim". Daily Express. Sabah Publishing House Sdn. Bhd. 2 June 2020. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  6. Borneo High Court in Government of Malaysia v Nurhima Kiram Fornan & Ors (Originating Summons No. BKI-24NCvC-190/12-2019 (HC2))
  7. Strangio, Sebastian (7 June 2023). "Malaysia Wins Court Battle Over $15 Billion Sulu Heirs Award". The Diplomat. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  8. "French court rules Malaysia owes $14.92 billion to sultan of Sulu's heirs". Philippines Daily Inquirer. The Star, Asia News Network. 2 March 2022. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  9. Van den Berg, Stephanie; Latiff, Rozanna (27 June 2023). "Dutch court rules sultan's heirs cannot seize Malaysian assets". Reuters. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  10. "FAQ". Malaysia Sulu Case. Retrieved 15 December 2023.
  11. "Malaysia PM Anwar says Philippines has nothing to do with Sulu heir claims". South China Morning Post. 14 June 2023. Retrieved 15 December 2023.

Share this article:

This article uses material from the Wikipedia article Malaysia_Sulu_case, and is written by contributors. Text is available under a CC BY-SA 4.0 International License; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.