IREFER to the report on Malaysia discontinuing its claim on Pulau Batu Puteh.
The report is on Malaysia’s decision to withdraw two applications to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) regarding the Pulau Batu Puteh dispute.
The first is a request for interpretation of the 2008 judgment, while the second is an application on June 30 for a revision of the same judgment made on Feb 2 last year.
The decision to discontinue the claim has improved bilateral relations with Singapore, with the latter welcoming the move.
I am concerned that the government has not explained to the people its reasons for the withdrawal, especially given that this is a case of great public interest and the decision has lasting implications.
My concerns are these:
FIRST, the case involves an
important subject matter: sovereignty over an island. In other words, does Malaysia have sovereignty over Pulau Batu Puteh?
ICJ in 2008 decided that Malaysia did not have sovereignty over the island.
However, Malaysia had, through the revision application, attempted to persuade the court to decide otherwise.
By withdrawing the revision application, we now accept that Malaysia does not have sov-ereignty over the island, despite the discovery of at least three new documents in the United Kingdom’s national archives.
SECOND, according to the previous government, the “revision proceedings are exceptional. It is only after careful consideration that the government of Malaysia has decided to submit this application”.
Ordinarily, this would mean that there was a sound basis for the revision application.
One would expect that “careful consideration” here would include the government having sought sound legal advice from government and external lawyers.
As such, why are we now withdrawing from a “carefully considered decision”?
THIRD, the withdrawal of the revision application diminishes any hope of similar applications in future, as the statute of the ICJ dictates that the deadline for a revision application is 10 years from the 2008 judgment and within six months of the discovery of new documents.
Again, this highlights the serious implications of the decision to withdraw the claim.
LASTLY, I am certain that a lot of financial resources and manpower have gone into preparations for the applications, especially since the withdrawal was made only days before the oral submissions at ICJ, which was scheduled for June 11.
Given this, and in line with the spirit of transparency heralded by the Pakatan Harapan administration, it is hoped that the government will explain to the people its decision to discontinue the proceedings.
S.K.
Kuala Lumpur