Malaysia Says Johor Govt In 1953 Did Not Have Right To Disclaim Disputed Island

Source : Channel NewsAsia, 23 November 2007

THE HAGUE, NETHERLANDS: On the first day of its rebuttals to Singapore's statements, Malaysia on Thursday stated that the Johor government then did not have the authority to disclaim ownership of Pedra Branca.

Malaysia was referring to the 1953 letter that Singapore had cited which read that Johor clearly said it did not own Pedra Branca, also known as Pulau Batu Puteh to the Malaysians.

The dispute over the sovereignty of Pedra Branca and its two outcrops of Middle Rocks and South Ledge is now being heard at the International Court of Justice at The Hague.

The dispute arose after Malaysia published a map of its territories in 1979 that included Pedra Branca. Singapore objected to that because it said it owns the island.

The hearing of the case has been on-going since 6 November.

On Thursday, Malaysia's Foreign Affairs Minister Syed Hamid Albar returned to The Hague to see his team rebut Singapore's statements.

Malaysia's first speaker, Attorney-General Abdul Gani Patail zoomed in on the 1953 letter, pointing out that Johor's Acting State Secretary then did not have the authority and no legal capacity to renounce, disclaim or confirm ownership of any of its territories.

The Johor Acting State Secretary had replied in that letter to Singapore that Johor did not own Pedra Branca.

Mr Abdul Gani cited two Johor treaties with Britain in 1948 which said that Johor had transferred all its rights, powers and jurisdiction on matters of defence and external affairs to the British.

He said: "The Johor Acting State Secretary M Seth Bin Saaid was merely a civil servant of the Johor State. He was definitely not authorized or had the legal capacity to write the 1953 letter, or to renounce, disclaim, or confirm title of any part of the territories of Johor - if that is what the 1953 letter purported to do, which Malaysia denies."

Singapore had said earlier that the letter was from the Johor government then and it confirms the republic's ownership of Pedra Branca.

In addition, Singapore had shown many examples of how it consistently and openly conducted numerous activities and works on Pedra Branca to exercise its sovereignty over the island for the past 130 years. These are all evidences of Singapore's ownership of the island.

Singapore, in its rebuttal, had said that if the British had not funded the lighthouse construction and decided on it, there would not even have been one on Pedra Branca.

However, Malaysia's counsel disagreed that it was the British who initiated the construction of the lighthouse and took ownership of the island.

Sir Elihu Lauterpacht said: "Singapore would have us believe, a moment came when the Governor suddenly realized the possibilities. Hey presto! Here was a great chance to expand the British Empire. Acquire a rock and build a lighthouse on it.

"Surely, this was not the thinking that went on in Government House in Singapore, or in Bengal, or in the East India Company or in the Admiralty in London. What they wanted was a light. The addition of a so small an item to the vast British Empire never entered their minds."

Singapore had said before that the island was a no man's land when the British went there to build the Horsburgh Lighthouse in 1847. It then took possession of the island.

One foreign counsel for Malaysia also dismissed the two photographs taken of Pedra Branca in relation to its distance from Johor.

He glossed over the fact that the photograph taken by Malaysia was inaccurate and that Singapore had questioned the source of the picture.

Singapore had shown the two photographs earlier this week to illustrate that the one taken by Malaysia had exaggerated the height of the Johor hill by about seven times so that it can be seen clearly.

But Singapore highlighted its picture, as seen by a human eye, which showed Johor very faintly in the backdrop of Pedra Branca.

Speaking in French, Professor Marcelo Kohen questioned why Singapore's Attorney-General would prefer to spend his time on the issue of "photographic tricks, accusing Malaysia of manipulation. It's all a question of perspective. Two photos, taken from a little boat and from the bridge of a big tanker, taken from the same place and in the same direction, but from different heights, would not present the same view. I don't think that it's worthwhile to discuss this question".

Malaysia also failed to reply to Singapore's rebuttal of allegations that the republic had hidden the 1844 letter. Malaysia claims the letter show the British asking permission to build the Horsburgh Lighthouse and that the Johor rulers then had given permission to them to do so on any of its islands, including Pedra Branca.

But Singapore maintains the British never asked for permission to build the lighthouse specifically on Pedra Branca then.

Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister, S Jayakumar had said on Monday that Singapore does not have a copy of the letter as many of its documents were lost in the war. He had rebutted Malaysia saying that if the British had sent the letter to the Johor rulers, the original letter should be with them.

Malaysia completed its first day of rebuttals about 10 minutes ahead of time, the first time the court session has ended slightly earlier than scheduled.

Malaysia will wrap up its rebuttals on Friday. Malaysia's agent for the case, Abdul Kadir Mohamad, is expected to be the last speaker. He will sum up his country's position. - CNA/ir