MalacaƱang on Monday dismissed a report that the
“There is absolutely no basis to such report,” its spokesman
Edwin Lacierda said in a statement.
Lacierda’s comment was sought on a Vera Files story that was
published by The Manila Times on Monday.
The article said a note verbale recently handed over by the
Philippine government to Kuala Lumpur amounted
to a quid pro quo in which Manila would
backpedal on its Sabah claim if Malaysia
manifests before a UN body an extended continental shelf (ECS) definition
favoring the Philippines in
its case against China .
The note verbale was given by the Department of Foreign
Affairs (DFA) to visiting Malaysian Defense Minister Dato Seri Hishammuddin Tun
Hussein.
Quoting a DFA statement, Lacierda clarified that the note
verbale is part of the two neighbors’ “friendly bilateral relations” and does
not in any way include the Sabah issue.
“The Philippines
has excellent relations with Malaysia
in the context of our friendly bilateral relations. Our two countries have been
for years exchanging ways on how to address the issue of the [ECS] in the South
China Sea [West Philippine Sea ],” he said.
“The note verbale that was written about was part of this
process. The note is about the features in the South China
Sea and their implications on ECS claims. Sabah
is not in any way part of the note,” Lacierda added.
While the note verbale, a copy of which was obtained by VERA
Files, indeed made no mention of Sabah, it alluded to a 2009 complaint filed by
Manila against a joint submission by Malaysia and Vietnam before a UN body.
The Philippines
had said then that such joint submission would impact its standing claim on
Sabah–a resource-rich territory leased by British overlords from the Sultanate
of Sulu, but which Britain
later simply handed over to Malaysia .
According to the Vera Files story, the note verbale referred
to the May 6, 2009 joint submission by Malaysia
and Vietnam to the UN
Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in which Malaysia claimed an extended continental shelf
(350 nautical miles from baseline) that was clearly projected from Sabah .
The Philippines ,
in an August 4, 2009 note to the UN Secretary General, protested the joint
submission because it effectively declared Sabah
to be a Malaysian territory.
The Philippines
claims ownership of Sabah, which at present is occupied by Malaysia , based on the title of the Sultan of
Sulu who ceded proprietary rights over the 76,115-square-kilometer land to the Philippines in
1962.
In last week’s note verbale, however, the DFA informed the
Malaysian government that it is “reviewing” its 2009 protest–something that an
expert said could weaken Manila ’s claim to Sabah .
The note verbale said the Philippines ’
action as its reviews the 2009 complaint would depend on Malaysia ’s response to Manila ’s
two requests related to the South China Sea
conflicting territorial claim.
The first request is for Malaysia
to “confirm” that its claim to an extended continental shelf is “entirely from
the mainland coast of Malaysia ,
not from any of the maritime features in the Spratly islands” in the South China Sea .
The DFA also requested Malaysia to confirm that it “does
not claim entitlement to maritime areas beyond 12 nautical miles from any of
the maritime features in the Spratly islands it claims.”
Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (Unclos), a
state is entitled to 12-nautical-mile territorial sea over which it exercises
sovereignty.
There are some parts in the Spratlys where the 200 nautical
mile EEZs of the Philippines
and Malaysia
overlap.
http://www.manilatimes.net/palace-no-such-sabah-offer/173021/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.