Princess Kiram to Noynoy: Study not only Mabini but Sabah too!
by Jose Rizal M. Reyes / poet-philosopher, Philippines / updated October 2, 2015 at 11:26 PM
“If you will require students to study the history of A. Mabini, can we also require you to tell us what you have learned about your study on the Sabah issue? Its long overdue, Mr. President.”
This is the message Princess Jacel Kiram recently posted on her Facebook wall addressed to Pres. Benigno Aquino III after congratulating him for knowing the history of Apolinario Mabini. The princess however said that the president would have been better if he also know the history of North Borneo, more commonly known as Sabah.
In a recent speech, the president reacted to the reported ignorance of some students about Mabini, one of the foremost Filipino heroes, oftentimes grouped together with Jose Rizal and Andres Bonifacio into a grand heroic triad. Those students were earlier asking why Mabini was portrayed seated throughout the highly acclaimed movie Heneral Luna, now on its third week in Philippine movie theaters. The said film is a biopic of Antonio Luna who is reputed to be the best Filipino general during the Philippine-American War.
For background information, Mabini is regarded as the Brains of the 1896 Philippine Revolution. He is also well known as the Sublime Paralytic, at least to previous generations of Filipino students, including elementary pupils. Mabini was struck by polio in 1895 which gradually incapacitated him. By the time the Philippine Revolution exploded in 1896, Mabini had already lost the use of both his legs.
The controversy about Mabini started when Epy Quizon — who portrayed the paralytic hero in the film — posted in Twitter expressing sadness that younger people asked him why Mabini was seated throughout the film, which meant they didn’t know about his paralysis. “You can never say that ‘I’m a proud Filipino’ without knowing these people,” he said. “If you don’t know them, get your book. Let’s go back to these people who helped shape our nation so we can proudly say that we are Filipinos.”
Quizon’s Twitter post went viral in the social media. His revelation was particularly shocking and alarming to older generations of Filipinos because Mabini’s physical condition was common knowledge among them during their student days.
The social media buzz caused by Quizon’s remark further intensified when no less than the Philippine president shared his ten pesos worth of opinion on the matter. (“Ten pesos”, which carries the image of Mabini, is a more appropriate term to use than “two cents”. — JRMR) The president waded into the issue under the most perfect circumstances. It was during the 28th Apolinario Mabini Awards held at the Malacañang’s Heroes Hall last September 29, an occasion when he handed awards to outstanding persons with disabilities (PWDs) as well as to individuals and organizations that had rendered outstanding service to PWDs.
During the said awarding ceremony, the president began his Tagalog speech by saying that he had heard about a group of college students asking Epy Quizon why he never stood up throughout the movie. The president then said: “I really shook my head when we were told about this. Even if only a few students asked such question, this reflects a lack of knowledge about history among some Filipino youths nowadays. And I will call (Department of Education secretary) Bro. Armin (Luistro) shortly afterwards to fix this.”
It was to the aforesaid presidential speech that Princess Jacel Kiram in turn reacted and commented. In sum, Princess Kiram was reacting to Pres. Aquino who was reacting to the reaction of Epy Quizon to the reaction of some students as to how Apolinario Mabini was portrayed in the movie “Heneral Luna”. Below is Kiram’s full message to Pres. Aquino:
“Congratulations that you know the history of Apolinario Mabini! But you would have been better if you also know the history of North Borneo (Sabah)! If you will require students to study the history of A. Mabini, can we also require you to tell us what you have learned about your study on the Sabah issue? Its long overdue, Mr. President.”
Princess Jacel is the daughter of the late Sultan Jamalul Kiram III. Her family belongs to the royal lineage that once ruled Sulu and North Borneo. It is claimed that the territory of the sultanate included Palawan and the Spratlys. The Spratlys is now a hotly contested area due to the aggressive intrusion of Red China aside from the claims of Malaysia, Brunei and Vietnam.
The Philippines, however, holds the superior claim by virtue of the Dodong Doctrine aside from legitimacy conferred by law and history.
The Sabah Question has a long convoluted history involving several countries including Brunei, Spain, Great Britain, the United States, the Philippines and Malaysia. In the Philippines, it is generally understood that the Sultanate of Sulu has ceded sovereignty over its territory to the Republic of the Philippines while retaining proprietary rights over the same. It should also be noted and emphasized that the Sultanate never rose up in arms against the Republic.
Sadly, it is the Republic that is remiss in performing what should be its counterpart duty — that is, pursuing the Sabah claim and at the same time upholding the proprietary right and protecting the interest of the Sultanate.
(For a video of the president’s speech, see Annex A below. Princess Jacel Kiram actually posted her message as a comment when she shared this same video on her Facebook wall . For the full text of the president’s speech, scroll down to Annex B. For a short but solid briefing on the Philippine claim to Sabah, read Annex C.)
¨*•♫.¸¸¸¸.•*¨*•☆ .｡.•*✿ ♪♫•*¨*•.¸¸ .•*¨ ¨*•✿.¸¸¸¸.•♪*¨*•
ANNEX A:
Watch this: Aquino reacts to students’ unfamiliarity with Mabini
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMBtMP3NU-Y
¨*•♫.¸¸¸¸.•*¨*•☆ .｡.•*✿ ♪♫•*¨*•.¸¸ .•*¨ ¨*•✿.¸¸¸¸.•♪*¨*•
ANNEX B:
Talumpati ng Kagalang-galang Benigno S. Aquino III Pangulo ng Pilipinas sa ika-28 seremonya ng parangal para sa Gawad Apolinario Mabini
[Inihayag sa Bulwagan ng mga Bayani, Palasyo ng Malacañan noong ika-29 ng Setyembre 2015]
Nito lang po, may umiikot na balita sa diyaryo at social media tungkol sa pelikulang Heneral Luna. [Tawanan] Aminin ko po, di ko pa napanood ito. Tampok po rito ang aktor na si Epy Quizon, na gumanap bilang si Apolinario Mabini. Ang sabi po niya, tinanong siya ng isang grupo ng mga estudyante sa kolehiyo kamakailan kung bakit ang karakter niyang si Mabini, ni isang beses, ay hindi man lang daw tumayo sa pelikula. [Tawanan] Ang komento pa raw ng ilang netizens, baka pagod lang daw noong mga panahong iyon si Mabini. Talagang napailing po tayo noong ikinuwento sa amin ito. Sabihin mang iilang estudyante lang ang nagpahayag nito, masasabing isa rin itong repleksiyon sa pagkukulang sa kaalaman sa kasaysayan ng ilang kabataan sa kasalukuyan. At maya-maya ay tatawagan natin si Bro. Armin [Luistro] para ayusin ito.
Napapanahon nga pong balikan ang isang tanong: Bakit ba natin itinuturing na isang bayani si Apolinario Mabini? Hindi po matatawaran ang laki at lawak ng ambag sa ating bansa ng tinaguriang “Dakilang Paralitiko” at “Utak ng Rebolusyon.” Siya ang kumakatawan sa talino at paninindigan ng lahing Pilipino. Talas ng isip ang kanyang naging sandata upang patibayin ang pundasyon ng ating mga demokratikong institusyon. Ipinamulat niya sa lahat na hindi lamang ang nasa katungkulan ang may tangan ng kapalaran ng bayan; may boses ang mamamayan, at sila ang bukal ng kapangyarihan sa ating bayan. Kaya nga po, sa kabila ng kondisyon ni Apolinario Mabini, ganoon na lang ang paggalang at pagdakila sa kanya, kahit pa sa panahon ng gulo at digmaan.
Nitong nakaraang taon lang, ipinagdiwang natin ang sesquicentennial, o ang ika-150 taon ng pagsilang ni Gat Apolinario Mabini. Ngayon, muli tayong nagtitipon upang bigyang parangal ang ilang indibidwal, grupo, at ahensiyang may makabuluhang ambag sa sektor ng Persons With Disabilities. Kinikilala natin ang kanilang pagsisikap upang higit na maipakilala ang mga kababayan nating may kapansanan bilang mga produktibo at huwarang kasapi ng lipunan.
Nariyan po si Ginoong Randy Weisser, na dalawampu’t anim na taon nang nag-aaruga at gumagabay sa mga kababayan nating bulag, upang mapagyaman ang kanilang mga potensiyal at kakayahan. Kahanga-hanga din ang ating kakapakinig lang na si Engineer Darlito Palermo, na di-alintana ang kondisyon upang maging ganap na inhinyero; siya po ay isa sa pinakaunang PWD youth leader sa Agdao, Davao City. Saludo din tayo sa makabuluhang ambag ni Binibining Annette Lee Esparaz, na co-author ng “TouchBooks” — ang unang picture book para sa mga estudyanteng Pilipinong visually-impaired. Gumagamit ito raw ng Braille upang matulungan silang makapa ang mga larawan at maipabatid ang ganda ng ating mundo. Para naman sa kalusugan, nariyan din ang Philippine Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine, na kumakalinga sa mahigit 250,000 PWDs, at naghandog ng funding programs upang umalalay sa gastusin sa rehabilitasyon ng mga pinaka-nangangailangan nating kababayan. Tulad ni Mabini, kayo, sampu ng iba pang mga indibidwal, mga kasamahan sa media, mga lokal na pamahalaan, at mga katuwang sa pribadong sektor na pinarangalan natin sa araw na ito ay nagsisilbing tanglaw at inspirasyon sa marami nating kababayan. Kaya naman, sa ngalan ng bawat Pilipinong nabibigyang-lakas ninyo: Isang taos-pusong pasasalamat sa inyo pong lahat.
Totoo po: Nagsisimula sa maliliit na hakbang at kilos ng pagmamalasakit sa isa’t isa ang isinusulong nating malawakang transpormasyon. Habang tungkulin ng estadong pangalagaan ang kapakanan ng ating mga Boss, hindi naman natin masasagad ang bunga ng ating mga inisyatiba, kung wala tayong mga katuwang na katulad ninyo.
Sa Daang Matuwid, itinataguyod natin ang isang lipunang nakatutok sa interes ng nakakarami, lalo na ng mas nangangailangan. Napirmahan na nga po natin noong 2013 ang RA 10366, na nagtatakda sa Commission on Elections na magpatayo o magtalaga ng mga lugar para sa mabilis at maaliwalas na pagboto ng mga PWD at senior citizens tuwing eleksiyon. Inaasahan nating mapapaigting pa ang pagpapatupad nito lalo pa’t nalalapit na ang halalan sa susunod na taon.
Doble-kayod din ang inyong gobyerno sa paghahatid ng benepisyo sa mga kababayan natin sa sektor ng PWD. Ayon sa DSWD: Sa ilalim ng Pantawid Pamilyang Pilipino Program, nito raw pong Agosto, ay nasa 217,359 na ang kabahayang may kasaping PWD ang natulungan po natin.
Mayroon din po tayong programang “Tuloy Aral, Walang Sagabal,” na layunin namang maipasok ang mga kabataang may kapansanan sa mga paaralan at daycare centers. Noong 2014, nasa 3,380 children with disabilities na ang natulungan nito. Gayundin, mayroon tayong skills training for employment, job referrals, capital assistance, at access to financing para sa PWDs upang mapalawak at masagad ang kanilang oportunidad sa pag-asenso. Asahan po ninyo, sa pagpapatuloy ng Daang Matuwid, higit pa nating mapapaarangkada ang mga inisyatiba para sa inyong sektor.
Muli ko pong ididiin: Lubos ang paghanga ko sa mga kasapi ng sektor ng PWD. Ang sabi ko nga po, imbes na tawaging “differently abled” ay mas angkop pang tawaging “more abled” ang mga kababayan nating may kapansanan. Batid ko po kasi: Bago pa man harapin ang ibang hamon sa buhay, una na nilang nilampasan ang kanilang mga sarili. Sa halip na kaawaan na lamang ang kanilang kondisyon, araw-araw nilang pinipiling lumaban. Imbes na magpadaig na lang sa kawalan ng kumpiyansa at pag-asa, inaangat nila ang kanilang sarili at nakikipagkapit-bisig sa kapwa, para maabot ang kanilang potensiyal, at makaambag, hindi lamang sa pamilya, kundi sa buong bansa.
Pinatitibay din po ni Pope John Paul II ang kaisipang ito sa isa niyang Encyclical Letter. Aniya: “Persons with disabilities are fully human subjects with corresponding innate, sacred and inviolable rights, and, in spite of limitations and sufferings affecting their bodies and faculties, they point up more clearly the dignity and greatness of man.”
Kayo pong mga pinaparangalan natin sa araw na ito ang nagpapatunay sa angking husay at pambihirang tibay ng loob ng lahing Pilipino. Ngayong malayo na po ang narating ng ating bansa mula nang magkapit-bisig tayo sa Daang Matuwid, nawa’y maipagpatuloy natin ang pag-aambagan at malasakit sa isa’t isa tungo sa pagkamit ng pinapangarap nating Pilipinas na mas patas, makatarungan, at maunlad.
Magandang hapon po. Maraming salamat po sa inyong lahat.
SOURCE:
http://www.gov.ph/2015/09/29/speech-president-aquino-28th-apolinario-mabini-awards-ceremony/
¨*•♫.¸¸¸¸.•*¨*•☆ .｡.•*✿ ♪♫•*¨*•.¸¸ .•*¨ ¨*•✿.¸¸¸¸.•♪*¨*•
ANNEX C:
An Outline of the Philippine Claim to Sabah
by Prof. Merlin M. Magallona, UP College of Law
1. From the time it was acquired by the Sultan of Sulu from the Sultan of Brunei up to 24 April 1962 when it was formally ceded and transferred to the Republic of the Philippines under the title of sovereignty, the Sultanate of Sulu had continuously been the rightful sovereign of the portion North Borneo known as Sabah.
1.1. In the course of internal armed conflict in the Sultanate of Brunei referred by some historians as “civil war,” lasting for more than 10 years, the Sultan of Brunei requested the assistance of the Sultan of Sulu, with the promise that in the event of victory he would grant him the territories in North Borneo under his dominion. Following the victory of Sultan Muaddin of Brunei, with the armed intervention of the Sultan of Sulu, accordingly he ceded Sabah to the Sultan of Sulu in 1704.
1.2. By the Declaration of 24 April 1962 issued by the Heirs of the Sultan of Sulu, the territory of Sabah as thus required by cession from the Sultan of Brunei was ceded and transferred in sovereignty to the Republic of the Philippines. The Declaration was entitled “Recognition and Authority in Favour of the Republic of the Philippines.”
1.2.1. By this Declaration, the Philippine claim to sovereignty and dominion over a portion of North Borneo became a legal claim. After the cession from the Sultanate, the Philippines acquired the rights over the territory of North Borneo which it was duty-bound as a sovereign to protect and preserve.
1.3. This Declaration followed the petition of 5 February 1962 of the Heirs of the Sultan of Sulu addressed to the Department of Foreign Affairs. In this Petition the Heirs expressed their intention to have the portion of North Borneo included in the national territory of the Philippines.
1.3.1. By the Instrument of 12 September 1962, the Republic of the Philippines accepted the cession of sovereignty over Sabah proclaimed by the Sultanate of Sabah.
1.3.2. On 24 April 1962, congress adopted “Resolution urging the President of the Philippines to take the necessary steps for the recovery of a certain portion of the Island of Borneo and adjacent islands which belong to the Philippines.
1.3.3. On the basis of the Declaration of 24 April 1962 of the Heirs of the Sultan of Sulu on the transfer of sovereignty over Sabah, Congress enacted Republic Act No. 5446 amending the Baseline Law in Republic Act No. 3046, the amendment providing that the “Philippines has acquired dominion and sovereignty” over Sabah situated in North Borneo.
2. Malaysia’s claim to sovereignty over Sabah was based on its inclusion in the formation of the Federation of Malaysia. It is a claim of derivative title, based on:
(a) whatever interests the British Government had in Sabah, which were derived from
(b) whatever interests the British North Borneo Company (BNBC) had in Sabah, which were derived from whatever interests Overbeck and Dent derived from their 1878 agreement with the Sultan of Sulu.
2.1. Sufficient evidence has been shown on the side of the Sultan of Sulu that the Deed of 22 January 1878 executed by Sultan Mohammed Jamadul Alam with Gustavus Baron de Overbeck and Alfred Dent was an agreement of lease. “In consideration of this (territorial) lease…[they] promise to pay His Highness…and to his heirs and successors the sum of five thousand dollars annually to be paid each and every year.”
2.1.1. Written in Arabic, the agreement had been authoritatively translated by an American and by a Dutch scholar as “lease.” In the Spanish translation, the agreement has been described as an “arrendamento” which means “lease.”
2.1.2. In a speech before the House of Commons, the British Prime Minister himself, William Gladstone, made reference to the Deed of 1878 as a contract of lease: “We do not see how this Protectorate Agreement [of 1888], viewed in the light of the 1878 contract, can possibly divest the Sultanate of Sulu of the latter’s sovereignty or dominion. On the contrary, after 1888, the British North Borneo Company entered into a Confirmatory Deed with the Sultan of Sulu, thereby confirming and ratifying what was done in 1878. And we hold the view that far from repudiating the lease contract of 1878, the British North Borneo Company, said to be under British protection, confirmed British protection, confirmed and reiterated in 1903 the existence of lease relationship.” (Emphasis added.)
2.1.3. Overbeck and Dent as private individuals have no legal status in international law to assume the power of sovereignty involved in the cession of territory.
2.1.4. Overbeck and Dent therefore had nothing to transfer in terms of title to sovereignty over Sabah to the British North Borneo Company (BNBC).
2.1.5. By Proclamation of 25 November 1957, the Sultan of Sulu declared “The termination of the said lease in favour of Gustavus Baron de Overbeck and Alfred Dent, their heirs and assignees, effective the 22nd day of January 1958, and that from and after that date all the lands covered by the said lease shall be deemed restituted to the Sultanate of Sulu.”
2.2. When the British Government granted a royal charter to the BNBC, did it provide authorityfor the BNBC to acquire territory by title of sovereignty?
2.2.1. Lord Earl Granville, British foreign minister, in his letter of 7 January 1882 to British Minister Morier: “The British Charter therefore differs essentially from the previous Charters granted by the Crown to the East India Company, the Hudson’s Bay Company…, in the fact that the Crown in the present case assumes no dominion or sovereignty over the territories occupied by the Company, nor does it purport to grant to the Company any powers of Government thereover; it merely confers upon the persons associated the status and incidents of a body corporate, and recognizes the grants of territory and the powers of government made and delegated by the Sultan to whom the sovereignty remains vested. (Emphasis added.)
2.2.2. In response to the protest of Spain and the Netherlands in regard to the grant of BNBC Charter in North Borneo, Glanville replied: “The territories ceded to Mr. Dent will be administered by the Company under the suzerainty of the Sultans of Brunei and Sulu, to whom they have agreed to pay a yearly tribute. The British government assumes no sovereign rights whatever in Borneo. (Emphasis added.)
2.2.3. In making assurances to the Dutch Minister Count de Bylant, Glanville stressed that BNBC was purely a private commercial enterprise, declaring: “The Majesty’s Government have already explained to the Government of the Netherlands that the grant of the Charter did not in any way imply the assumption of sovereign rights in North Borneo. It is therefore unnecessary to pursue this discussion further.”
2.2.4. Reinforcing Glanville’s position, Julian Pauncefote, assistant permanent undersecretary of the British Foreign Office, declared: “We must be careful…to preserve the Sultan’s status as a Sovereign to the east coast of Borneo.” Further he said: “The sovereignty of North Borneo is vested in the Sultan of Sulu”; any stipulation Britain might make “respecting that territory must have the previous assent of the Sultan signified by him through the Company.” (Emphasis added.)
3. However, in derogation of the foregoing commitment and declarations, on 26 June 1946 the British Government entered into an agreement with the British North Borneo Company (BNBC) whereby “The company…transfers and cedes the Borneo Sovereign Rights to the Crown with effect from the day of transfer, to the intent that the Crown shall, as from the day of the transfer, have full sovereign rights over, and title to, the territory of the State of North Borneo and that the said territory shall thereupon become part of His Majesty’s dominions.” The agreement was entitled “Agreement for the Transfer of the Borneo Sovereign Rights and Assets from the British North Borneo Company to the Crown, 26th June 1946.”
3.1.Taking into account the said Agreement of 26 June 1946, the British Crown upon the advice of his Privy Council ordered as follows:
“1. This Order may be cited as the North Borneo Cession Order in Council, 1946, and shall come into operation on the fifteenth of July 1946.”
“2. As from the fifteenth day of July, 1946, the State of North Borneo shall be annexed to and shall form part of His Majesty’s dominions and shall be called, together with the Settlement of Labuan and its dependencies, the Colony of North Borneo.”
3.2. The colonization of North Borneo by the British Crown by means of Cession Order of 1946 appears to cede and transfer all “the rights, powers and interests” of BNBC in North Borneo which the British Government itself openly acknowledged as excluding the power of sovereignty and that territorial sovereignty remained with the Sultan of Sulu.
3.3. Hence, the legality of British annexation of North Borneo, including Sabah, persists as a fundamental issue in the Philippine claim to Sabah.
3.3.1. Former American Governor-General in the Philippines, Francis Burton Harrison, described the annexation as “political aggression” and urged the Philippine Government to take action.
4. When Sabah was incorporated into the formation of the Federation of Malaysia, the illegality of annexing Sabah as a Crown Colony remains in Malaysia’s succession-in-interest from Great Britain.
4.1. Through the Government of Malaya, the British Government announced that its territories in North Borneo, including Sabah, would form part of a new Federation of Malaysia.
4.2. The Philippines protested the British decision and called Britain’s attention to the sovereign rights of the Philippines over Sabah. After protracted negotiations, the British Government agreed to meet Philippine representatives to discuss the problem of North Borneo. Held in London in 1963, the negotiations proved to be inconclusive. In the meantime, the founding date of the new Federation was announced.
5. On the initiative of President Diosdado Macapagal, a Summit conference was convened in Manila from July 30 to August 5, 1963. In this conference, on 31 July 1963, President Soekarno of Indonesia, President Diosdado Macapagal and Prime Minister Tunku Abdul Rahman of the Federation of Malaysia “approved and accepted the Manila Accord, paragraph 12 of which stipulates as follows:
“The Philippines made it clear that its position on the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia is subject to the final outcome of the Philippine claim to Borneo. The Ministers took note of the Philippine claim and the right of the Philippines to continue to pursue it in accordance with international law and the principle of the pacific settlement of disputes. They agreed that the inclusion of North Borneo in the Federation of Malaysia would not prejudice either the claim or any right thereunder. Moreover, in the context of their close association, the three countries agreed to exert the best endeavors to bring the claim to a just and expeditious solution by peaceful means…of the parties’ own choice, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations and the Bandung Declaration.” (Emphasis added.)
5.1 In the same Summit Conference, the three Heads of Government signed a Joint Statement on 5 August 1963, paragraph 8 of which reads:
“In accordance with paragraph 12 of the Manila Accord, the three Heads of Government decided to request the British Government to agree to seek a just and expeditious solution to the dispute between the British Government and the Philippine Government concerning Sabah (North Borneo)…The three Heads of Government take cognizance of the position regarding the Philippine claim to Sabah (North Borneo) after the establishment of the Federation of Malaysia as provided under paragraph 12 of the Manila Accord, that is, that the inclusion of Sabah (North Borneo) in the Federation of Malaysia does not prejudice the claim or any right thereunder.” (Emphasis added.)
Photo by the UPSIO, with the assistance of the UP Institute of Islamic Studies Library
6. Malaysia had repeatedly acknowledged the Philippine claim to Sabah and that it is a claim that should be settled as soon as possible, including the prospect of settlement in the International Court of Justice. On its part, the Philippines persistently offered the settlement of dispute arising from its claim to Sabah.
6.1. In February 1964, the Malaysian Prime Minister had the understanding with the Philippine President to discuss “as soon as possible the best way of settling the dispute, not precluding reference to the International Court of Justice.”
6.2. In August 1964, the two governments agreed in an exchange of aides memoir to a meeting of their representatives in Bangkok for the purpose of clarifying the Philippine claim and of discussing the means of settling the dispute.
6.3. In February 1966, in response to Malaysia’s diplomatic note reiterating its assurance to comply with the Manila Accord and the concomitant Joint Statement, the Philippines proposed that “both Governments agree as soon as possible on a mode of settlement that is mutually acceptable to both parties.”
6.4. In June 1966, the two Governments, in a joint communiqué, agreed once again to abide by the Manila Accord and the Joint Statement; they reiterated their common purpose to clarify the Philippine claim and the means of settling it.
6.5. In July 1968, the Philippine delegation presented the Malaysian delegation with a written question, “Will you discuss with the modes of settlement of our claim at the conference in Bangkok, irrespective of your own unilateral assessment of the sufficiency of the clarification given?” Malaysia’s answer was unqualifiedly in the affirmative.
6.6. In August 1968, again in a joint communiqué, the two Governments agreed that talks on an official level would be held as soon as possible regarding the Philippine claim to Sabah.
6.7. The foregoing undertakings assume significance for the reason that they are not unilateral acts of the Philippines; they are commitments jointly made by Malaysia and the Philippines. They repeatedly affirm Malaysia’s recognition of the existence of the Philippine claim to Sabah and its willingness to settle the dispute arising from this claim.
6.7.1. In complete disregard of its commitments, Malaysia has been in full retreat. It is now in denial of the existence of the Philippine claim to Sabah. In consequence, it rests its case on the illegality of the colonization of Sabah by the British Crown.
SOURCE:
http://www.up.edu.ph/an-outline-of-the-philippine-claim-to-sabah/
