Singapura gulung hujah Batu Putih

THE HAGUE, Belanda 20 Nov. – Singapura hari ini menutup kes tuntutan bertindih Pulau Batu Putih, Middle Rocks dan South Ledge dengan mempertahankan dakwaan bahawa republik itu mempunyai hak kedaulatan ke atas ketiga-tiga pulau tersebut.

Duta Kelana republik itu, Tommy Koh di akhir ucapan penutupnya meminta mahkamah membuat keputusan berdasarkan perenggan kedua, Perkara 60, Peraturan-Peraturan Mahkamah bahawa Singapura mempunyai hak ke atas pulau-pulau tersebut.

Pasukan Singapura memberitahu Mahkamah Keadilan Antarabangsa (ICJ) di sini, pihaknya telah membuktikan bahawa ketiga-tiga pulau itu milik mereka berdasarkan hujah serta bukti bertulis yang terkandung dalam memorialnya.

Republik itu mendakwa telah berjaya mengemukakan kesnya sepanjang pusingan pertama dan pusingan kedua hujah lisan selama enam hari di hadapan barisan 15 hakim yang diketuai oleh Naib Presiden ICJ, Hakim Awn Shawkat Al-Khasawneh.

Kesemua hujah Singapura itu akan dijawab oleh pasukan Malaysia yang diketuai oleh Duta Tugas-Tugas Khas, Tan Sri Abdul Kadir Mohamad Khamis ini.

Koh yang bertindak sebagai ejen utama Singapura dalam tempoh 15 minit membentangkan 10 hujah bagi menyokong dakwaan republik itu bahawa ketiga-tiga pulau tersebut adalah milik mereka sejak tahun 1851.

Hujah-hujah tersebut ialah Pulau Batu Putih terra nullius (tiada pemilik), justeru kehadiran British di situ pada tahun 1847 untuk membina Rumah Api Horsburgh serta tindak-tanduknya sehingga tahun 1851 jelas menunjukkan British mempunyai hak kedaulatan di pulau itu.

Malaysia dalam hujahnya mendakwa, Pulau Batu Putih adalah sebahagian daripada Kesultanan Johor, justeru ia merupakan pemilik asal pulau tersebut.

Keduanya, Koh merumuskan bahawa, di antara tahun 1847 hingga 1851, British tanpa perlu mendapatkan kebenaran daripada mana-mana pihak menyempurnakan pembinaan rumah api di Pulau Batu Putih.

Bagaimanapun, bagi dakwaan itu, Malaysia baik dalam memorialnya atau ketika hujah lisan membangkitkan tentang surat keizinan oleh Sultan dan Temenggung kepada British berhubung pembinaan rumah api.

Hujah ketiga Singapura seperti yang dibangkitkan oleh Koh ialah sepanjang tahun 1847 dan 1851, British telah mendapatkan hak kedaulatan di Pulau Batu Putih berdasarkan;

i) Niat untuk memasukkan hak kedaulatannya dan

ii) Segala tindak-tanduk yang dijalankan di pulau tersebut.

Malaysia dalam hujahnya berulang kali menegaskan, bahawa semua tindak-tanduk British itu adalah selari dengan peranan mereka sebagai pengendali Rumah Api Horsburgh dan ia tidak lebih daripada itu.

Koh kemudian membangkitkan hujah keempat iaitu sepanjang tempoh 130 tahun (1847-1979), kedaulatan Singapura ke atas pulau itu dipamerkan secara terbuka dan diakui oleh pelbagai pihak dan Malaysia hanya mengeluarkan bantahan pada tahun 1979 menerusi penerbitan peta barunya.

Semasa pusingan pertama hujah lisan dan dalam memorialnya, Malaysia mempertahankan pendiriannya bahawa setiap tindak- tanduk Singapura sepanjang tempoh itu juga berkaitan dengan pengurusan rumah api semata-mata.

Ejen Singapura itu kemudian menarik perhatian mahkamah mengenai hujah kelima iaitu surat balasan Pemangku Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri Johor pada 21 September 1953.

Beliau menekankan tentang ayat yang tertera di dalam surat itu iaitu: “Kerajaan negeri Johor tidak menuntut hak milik ke atas Pulau Batu Putih”.

Koh mendakwa menurut undang-undang antarabangsa surat itu mengikat Malaysia dan pemangku setiausaha kerajaan negeri mempunyai kapasiti untuk menulis surat tersebut terutamanya selepas merujuk pelbagai pihak.

Malaysia dalam hujahnya mendakwa surat tersebut bertujuan menjelaskan pendirian Malaysia berhubung pemilikan Rumah Api Horsburgh dan bukannya Pulau Batu Putih.

Hujah keenam Singapura merujuk pula kepada bantahan Malaysia berhubung pengibaran panji-panji marin Singapura di Pulau Pisang pada tahun 1968 iaitu tiga tahun selepas republik itu berpisah daripada Malaysia.

Koh berhujah, republik itu menghormati hak kedaulatan Malaysia ke atas Pulau Pisang dan segera bertindak menurunkan panji-panji tersebut.

Namun dalam kes Pulau Batu Putih, hujahnya, Malaysia tidak pernah menunjukkan bantahan berhubung pengibaran panji-panji marin Singapura di Rumah Api Horsburgh dan ia disifatkan sebagai mengakui kedaulatan Singapura di Pulau Batu Putih.

Malaysia dalam hujahnya mendakwa pengibaran panji-panji marin Singapura di Pulau Batu Putih menandakan bahawa republik itu berfungsi sebagai pengendali rumah api dan bukannya mengiktiraf kedaulatan ke atas pulau tersebut.

Koh menarik perhatian mahkamah mengenai hujah ketujuh iaitu enam peta Malaysia yang dikeluarkan bagi tempoh 1962 hingga 1975 yang jelas menunjukkan bahawa Pulau Batu Putih adalah milik Singapura.

“Sebaliknya Singapura tidak pernah mengeluarkan peta mengiktiraf Pulau Batu Putih adalah dalam wilayah Malaysia,” hujah Koh.

Malaysia mendakwa, Singapura tidak pernah mengeluarkan peta yang menunjukkan Pulau Batu Putih dan dua lagi bentuk maritim itu terletak di dalam wilayah mereka.

Mengenai Middle Rocks dan South Ledge, ejen Singapura itu berhujah, kedua-dua bentuk maritim itu adalah gugusan Pulau Batu Putih dari sudut kedudukannya, geologi, sejarah serta undang-undang, justeru ia tidak boleh dipisahkan.

Bagaimanapun, Malaysia berhujah bahawa, ketiga-tiga bentuk maritim itu mempunyai ciri-ciri tersendiri dan dipisahkan oleh laluan pelayaran, oleh itu ia bukan menjadi sebahagian daripada Pulau Batu Putih.

Koh kemudian berhujah mengenai pentadbiran berkesan yang dilakukan oleh Singapura di Pulau Batu Putih bagi membuktikan bahawa ia mempunyai kedaulatan ke atas pulau itu.

“Jika mahkamah menyemak, melihat pentadbiran berkesan di pulau itu, Singapura secara jelas telah membuktikan bahawa ia mempunyai kedaulatan di Pulau Batu Putih.

“Singapura faham mengapa Malaysia prihatin (berhubung pentadbiran berkesan) itu, ini kerana Malaysia tidak mempunyai sebarang aktiviti di situ,” katanya.

Hujah terakhir ejen Singapura itu merujuk kepada kenyataan bahawa republik itu akan terus berperanan sebagai pengendali Rumah Api Horsburgh jika keputusan memihak kepada Malaysia.

Beliau merumuskan bahawa, kenyataan seumpama itu adalah satu percubaan oleh Malaysia untuk mengubah susunan undang-undang yang telah berlangsung selama 150 tahun.

Di akhir penggulungannya, Koh berhujah, Singapura terus menjalankan tindak-tanduk di Pulau Batu Putih dan perairannya secara terbuka sambil mendakwa Malaysia tidak pernah menyuarakan sebarang bantahan.

“Surat Pemangku Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri Johor dan peta-peta yang dikeluarkan oleh Malaysia mengukuhkan lagi gambaran keseluruhan ini.

“Tidak ragu-ragu lagi Pulau Batu Putih, Middle Rocks dan South Ledge milik Singapura,” hujahnya.

Persidangan bersambung Khamis ini dengan pasukan Malaysia mengemukakan hujah-hujah pada pusingan kedua hujah lisan - Utusan Malaysia

S'pore: Malaysia had zero activities

By : V. Anbalagan reporting from The Hague

SINGAPORE yesterday closed its case on the territorial claim over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh and the two adjacent maritime features of Middle Rocks and South Ledge.

Its agent, Tommy Koh, said the island republic had proved its case and called on the International Court of Justice to adjudge and declare that the country had sovereignty over the disputed areas.

"Our evidence presents a consistent picture. All the pieces of the puzzle fit together," said Koh in his concluding remark, outlining 10 reasons why the court should decide in Singapore's favour.

He said Malaysia failed to produce evidence that Pedra Branca was a no-man's island and that it was part of Johor.

"Malaysia has failed to prove her only argument, in this case that Johor had an historic title over Pedra Branca."

He said Singapore had shown that the British was in Pedra Branca between 1847 and 1851 without the consent of Johor.

"Malaysia argues that Johor had given permission for the construction of a lighthouse in Pedra Branca. Again, she has not provided evidence of such permission."

He said all that Malaysia relied on was indirect inference from letters which did not mention Pedra Branca.

He said Britain had satisfied the two criteria: intention to acquire the island and state activities undertaken subsequently.

He said from 1847 to 1979, Singapore's sovereignty over Pedra Branca was "open, continuous and notorious".

"It was acknowledged by all and challenged by none.

"It was only in 1979, like a bolt out of the blue, that Malaysia published her map which claimed the island for the first time."

He said in 1953, the acting state secretary of Johor, then a sovereign state, had disclaimed "ownership" of the island.

"This disclaimer is binding on Malaysia under international law."

He said Malaysia also did not demand Singapore to lower its marine ensign flown over Pedra Branca, unlike in Pulau Pisang where the island republic complied.

He said between 1962 and 1975, Malaysia published six maps which attributed Pedra Branca to Singapore while the island republic did not do otherwise to recognise Malaysia's claim.

He said the three maritime features were inseparable because they formed a group and that the court should make a decision that the winner would take all three.

He said Singapore's stand was that the sovereignty should be decided based on who had carried out activities on the island. "Malaysia had zero activities."

Koh said Malaysia's offer to Singapore to continue managing the light house, although appearing magnanimous, was in reality aimed at changing the legal order which had existed for 130 years.

The Malaysian legal team will return on Thursday and Friday to rebut Singapore's case, bringing to a close the 28-year-old dispute.

Decision is expected from the 16-man panel in the middle of next year.

Malaysia maintains that the island had always been part of the Johor empire and the British had sought permission to build a light house for navigational safety - The New Straits Time

Malaysia's Sovereignty Dispute Team Still Perky Despite Sleepless

From Nor Faridah Abdul Rashid

THE HAGUE, Nov 21 - "Sleepless in the Netherlands." This is what the Malaysian delegation working here tirelessly on the Pulau Batu Puteh sovereignty dispute must have felt over the last few weeks.

They only sleep for about two-and-a-half hours each night but early in the morning they are up and about, in high spirits, ready to tackle the case which is being heard before the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The case had started at 10am (5pm Malaysian time) daily for the last 10 days of sitting. On Thursday and Friday the hearing will commence at 3pm when Malaysia replies to Singapore's second final round of oral arguments.

Since the dispute involves legal and historical factors, extensive research had to be done.

Raja Nazrin Aznam, Under-Secretary of the Adjudication and Arbitration Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said that various agencies were involved in the research work, which had to be carried out thoroughly.

"Our officers get only two-and-a-half hours of sleep, They work until the wee hours of the morning," he told Malaysian reporters covering the case.

Describing the research work as "voluminous and extensive", he said that it was also carried out worldwide in archives and museums.

The parties involved included the Department of Survey and Mapping, the National Archives, the National Hydrographic Centre of the Royal Malaysian Navy and individuals who are experts in their fields, apart from the Attorney-General's Chambers and officers from the Adjudication and Arbitration Division.

Raja Nazrin said that the Johor state government and the Johor palace had also been helping a lot in the preparations for the sovereignty dispute between Malaysia and Singapore concerning Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge.

Malaysia's first navy chief, Tan Sri K.Thanabalasingam, who had written the Letter of Promulgation in 1968, was also involved.

"We have people who can think out of the box," Raja Nazrin said.

The Letter of Promulgation describes the outer limits of Malaysian territoral waters and the so-called foreign claimed waters in West Malaysia for purposes of Royal Malaysian Navy patrols. Malaysia had submitted this letter to the court to show that it regarded Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and South Ledge and their surrounding waters as Malaysian territory.

Others in the Malaysian delegation who are acting as technical advisors include Tan Ah Bah, Director of Survey (Boundary Affairs Section), Department of Survey and Mapping, and Professor Dr Sharifah Mastura Syed Abdullah, Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanitites, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM).

Raja Nazrin said each of the team members had background experience and are experts in their own fields.

"We do not create a team overnight. It is a good team and their spirits are always up," he said, adding that meetings were held everyday.

"Quality control" was carried out at 7am everyday to make sure that all the papers prepared for the judges carried references and the draft speeches must also be checked, he said, adding that up to today, "17,500 pages" had been prepared for the case.

Raja Nazrin also said that the graphics for presentation were all done in-house - Bernama