Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister S Jayakumar said the dispute over the sovereignty of Pedra Branca is a straightforward case.
He said evidence clearly points to Singapore's ownership of the island, which Malaysia calls Pulau Batu Puteh. Professor Jayakumar said this as he concluded four days of oral argument at the International Court of Justice.
He added that the British never asked for permission to acquire it and never needed to back in 1847.
When Singapore gained its independence, Britain passed on the title to the island to the Republic.
The three-week hearing is meant to settle the dispute between Singapore and Malaysia over the ownership of Pedra Branca and its outcrops of Middle Rocks and South Ledge.
The last day of oral presentation for Singapore lacks no punch, with its DPM Jayakumar laying out the key facts to show how Singapore is the rightful owner of Pedra Branca.
Addressing the panel of 16 judges, Professor Jayakumar, who's also the Law Minister, reminded the court of specifics like how Malaysia has not produced a shred of evidence which attributed the island to Johor.
He said Singapore, on the other hand, has openly and continuously conducted a full range of state activities on Pedra Branca.
The Deputy Prime Minister also emphasised how Malaysia did not have an original title to Pedra Branca.
He said: "The original title is but a mirage conjured up by Malaysia, and it remains a mirage."
Professor S Jayakumar reiterated that the British did not seek permission from Johor or any other power for their activities on Pedra Branca. Malaysia on the other hand, claimed that permission was given by Johor to the British.
Professor Jayakumar said "Malaysia uses this alleged permission in the written pleadings as a panacea for explaining away all of Malaysia's embarrassing silence and inaction since 1847, when the British first landed on Pedra Branca."
Professor Jayakumar highlighted a 1953 letter from the Johor government at the time to Singapore.
In that letter, Johor said it did not claim ownership of Pedra Branca.
Professor Jayakumar said: "At the very minimum, this letter constitutes clear, incontrovertible evidence that Johor never had title to Pedra Branca and that Johor officials never regarded Pedra Branca as belonging to Johor.
"But this letter is more than just evidence of a fact or evidence of a state of mind. It is a disclaimer of title given by the Johor government. It is also a declaration that Johor would not, in future, assert any claim on Pedra Branca. It is binding on Malaysia."
"Malaysia is clearly embarrassed by the 1953 disclaimer of title by Johor. Malaysia tries hard to discredit the disclaimer by arguing that 'it is not a model of clarity'. Not 'a model of clarity'? What can be clearer than these 10 words: 'the Johore government does not claim ownership of Pedra Branca'?" he said.
Professor Jayakumar added that even as late as 1975, Malaysia had published a map which indicated that Pedra Branca belonged to Singapore.
In fact, Malaysia only claimed Pedra Branca for the first time in 1979, when it published a new map of its territories, which included the disputed island.
DPM Jayakumar said: "This came after 130 years of silence, after 130 years of failure to assert Malaysian sovereignty, after 130 years of conduct and admissions against its own interest, including an express and unequivocal acknowledgement of Singapore's title."
Singapore had argued that based on all the extensive activities it had done on Pedra Branca consistently, it displayed sovereignty over the island. It said it wasn't necessary to define with accuracy or display formal acts to show the time at which the island became a British possession.
To the British, it was through its own acts and surrounding circumstances that would determine whether a territory had been acquired. But Malaysia rejects this argument.
This led Professor Jayakumar to point out that "reduced to its essence, Malaysia argues that all acquisitions must comply with a Malaysian-conceived format or procedure, and because the acquisition of Pedra Branca does not fall neatly into her pre-conceived format, Singapore's acquisition of title must necessarily be flawed. But this argument itself is flawed."
At the end of the session, Professor Jayakumar told Singapore reporters that the team worked well together with foreign counsel to present a persuasive and convincing case for Singapore.
He said: "It's still (in the) early days, there's much more work to be done and we have to be alert and agile to any surprises that may arise when Malaysia presents its case next week...Therefore our team is going to work hard in the coming two weeks to ensure that we have all our arguments covered and prepare all the rebuttals and counter arguments to any main points that may arise next week.
"Morale of the team is high, it's a closely-knit team which has worked very well and I'm sure that they will do their best to advance Singapore's interest in this important case."
Just within four days, the Singapore team of eight members gave over 10 speeches.
They dished out facts and evidence to prove Singapore's ownership of Pedra Branca.
Next Tuesday, the Malaysian team will have their say in court. And we can expect the Singapore team to be all attentive in preparing for counter arguments. - CNA/ch/ls
.jpg)
No comments:
Post a Comment