Transmenu powered by JoomlArt.com - Mambo Joomla Professional Templates Club

©New Straits Times (Used by permission)

A 30-YEAR-OLD territorial dispute between Malaysia and Singapore over Pulau Batu Puteh (PBP) and two adjacent marine features will be decided tomorrow.

The International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands, will deliver the much-awaited ruling on which country is the rightful owner of the island and the features.

PBP is 7.7 nautical miles off Johor and 25 nautical miles from Singapore.

It is almost the size of a football field and holds a light house, a communications tower, a helipad and jetty, which were constructed by Singapore, which calls the island Pedra Blanca.

The key issue for the 16-man panel of judges is to decide whether Malaysia or Singapore has rights over the island, which has been an irritant in the bilateral relations between the two countries.

Failing which, the bench would proceed to determine which country continued to display state authority on the island.

Malaysia wants the ICJ to affirm her title over PBP as she always maintained that the Temenggong and Sultan of Johor had given permission to Great Britain in 1844 for the building and operation of a lighthouse "near Point Romania" (Tanjung Penyusoh) or any spot deemed eligible.

PBP was selected as the site. Great Britain and then Singapore had operated the lighthouse ever since.

"Therefore, it matters a great deal to Malaysia when Singapore claims sovereignty over PBP simply because it has been running a lighthouse on it with our consent," Malaysia's agent Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Mohamad had said in his opening remarks during oral submissions at the ICJ last November.

Malaysia had also submitted that Singapore's claim over PBP simply rested on inference and the island republic remained silent or failed to produce the "incontrovertible legal evidence" that she claimed in 1978 to be in possession.

Malaysia said Singapore endeavoured to create itself a maritime regime in this region and wanted to radically change the basis on which it acquired the lighthouse on PBP.

In 1977, Singapore had placed military communications and in 1986 sent its naval vessels to PBP. Since then, they have been maintaining a permanent guard over the island.

Singapore has also been harping on a 1953 letter from the then Johor state secretary M. Seth Saaid, who had written to the Singapore government to renounce ownership of the island.

Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail responded that Seth did not have the legal authority to reply.

This was because the defence and external affairs of Johor then came under the jurisdiction of the British following the formation of the Federation of Malaya in 1948.

This union brought together nine Malay states, including Johor, under one umbrella.

Abdul Gani said the conduct of Singapore after Feb 14, 1980 must be disregarded as a normal continuation of its prior acts of administering the light house.

"Singapore's conduct, especially in the 1990s, to strengthen her legal position is irrelevant for the purposes of assessing the value of 'effectivites'," he had said.

Malaysia, he said, had always respected the position of Singapore as lighthouse operator and would continue to honour that position.

Singapore's argument is that PBP in 1847 was terra nullius or no man's island and that it was in possession of the island without the consent of any native ruler.

Singapore said that Malaysia relied on indirect inferences from letters which did not mention PBP.

Further, the island republic submitted that the British acquired sovereignty over PBP because it had the intention to undertake sovereign acts.

Singapore's agent Tommy Koh had said that for 130 years -- from 1847 to 1979 -- sovereignty over PBP was open, continuous and notorious.

He added that Malaysia failed to demand that Singapore lower the marine ensign from the lighthouse in PBP after their separation in 1965.

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (0)

Subscribe to this comment's feed