PM: No compromise on sovereignty in border negotiations
Anwar said that border matters, whether land, sea, or air, directly impact national sovereignty.
"It is true that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) decision in 2002 awarded Sipadan and Ligitan to Malaysia," he said during the Prime Minister's Question Time in Dewan Rakyat today.
Anwar said before the ICJ's ruling, he negotiated the matter with then-Indonesian president Suharto while in government.
"That (negotiation) helped clarify the borders, including ND6 (Block Y) and ND7 (Block Z). We are bound by a treaty, and the process also involves the state."
He was responding to Beluran member of parliament Datuk Seri Dr Ronald Kiandee, who asked how the ICJ's decision on Sipadan and Ligitan may influence the determination of maritime boundaries in the Sulawesi Sea.
Anwar said what was important was that Malaysia must not repeat the errors made in the Pulau Batu Puteh case, where the former administration "surrendered too easily".
He said at the time, those on the "other side", in reference to the opposition, "remained silent" on the Pulau Batu Puteh case.
"Just as Beluran feels affected by the Sulawesi Sea issue, so do other Malaysians, especially Johoreans, who were impacted by the handover of Pulau Batu Puteh.
"Why the double standards?" he said.
Anwar was referring to the former Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad-led administration's decision to withdraw the claim over Pulau Batu Puteh.
Previously, critics of Dr Mahathir blamed him for losing Batu Puteh, which Singapore calls Pedra Blanca, by withdrawing the application for review.
A royal commission of inquiry formed to look into all matters related to Batu Puteh later found that Dr Mahathir had acted to influence his cabinet to drop the review application.
The RCI also recommended that a police report be lodged against the former prime minister for cheating.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
18 minutes ago
- The Sun
Malaysian aid reaches Gaza after six-month blockade via Jordan
KUALA LUMPUR: A Malaysian humanitarian mission has successfully delivered 2,400 tonnes of aid to Gaza through a Jordan-led convoy, marking the first cross-border delivery since Israel blocked all access to the territory on March 2. Karisma Humanitarian Aid Mission (KHOM) director Nik Marina Datuk Hussein confirmed that the supplies, including food boxes and infant formula funded by public donations, were transported on four trucks as part of a 60-truck convoy coordinated by the Jordan Armed Forces (JAF). The effort was supported by the World Food Programme (WFP) and World Central Kitchen. The convoy entered Gaza early yesterday through the King Hussein Bridge in Jordan, becoming the sixth humanitarian delivery organised by Jordan in recent days. 'The aid from KHOM had been stored in Jordan since February due to the closure but was immediately handed over to JAF once clearance was granted. 'We were informed the convoy has now reached Gaza, with KHOM's aid among the first to reach starving residents,' Nik Marina said in a statement today. She explained that the breakthrough came after Jordanian authorities confirmed on July 26 that KHOM's aid had been approved for entry, making it the first Malaysian NGO to deliver external aid to Gaza in nearly six months. Nik Marina expressed gratitude to Jordan's King Abdullah II for issuing the Royal Decree that enabled the mission, as well as to JAF, the Jordan Hashemite Charity Organization (JHCO), and other agencies for prioritising KHOM's supplies in Jordan's sixth aid mission to Gaza. 'The political truce in Gaza announced by Israel remains fragile. Even before the war, Gaza needed no less than 1,000 truckloads of food a day, let alone now when starvation is being used as a weapon of war,' she said. She assured that KHOM will continue its relief efforts with public support, emphasising the trust Malaysians have placed in the organisation since the conflict began on Oct 7, 2023. Donations can be made via KHOM's official website at – Bernama
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Analysis-World Court climate opinion turns up the legal heat on governments
THE HAGUE (Reuters) -A landmark opinion delivered by the United Nations' highest court last week that governments must protect the climate is already being cited in courtrooms, as lawyers say it strengthens the legal arguments in suits against countries and companies. The International Court of Justice, also known as the World Court, last Wednesday laid out the duty of states to limit harm from greenhouse gases and to regulate private industry. It said failure to reduce emissions could be an internationally wrongful act and, found that treaties such as the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change should be considered legally binding. While not specifically naming the United States, the court said countries that were not part of the United Nations climate treaty must still protect the climate as a matter of human rights law and customary international law. Only a day after the World Court opinion, lawyers for a windfarm distributed copies of it to the seven judges of the Irish Supreme Court on the final day of hearings ona case about whether planning permits for turbines should prioritise climate concerns over rural vistas. It is not clear when the Irish court will deliver its ruling. Lawyer Alan Roberts, for Coolglass Wind Farm, said the opinion would boost his client's argument that Ireland's climate obligations must be taken into account when considering domestic law. Although also not legally binding, the ICJ's opinion has legal weight, provided that national courts accept as a legal benchmark for their deliberations, which U.N. states typically do. The United States, where nearly two-thirds of all climate litigation cases are ongoing, is increasingly likely to be an exception as it has always been ambivalent about the significance of ICJ opinions for domestic courts. Compounding that, under U.S. President Donald Trump, the country has been tearing up all climate regulations. Not all U.S. states are sceptical about climate change, however, and lawyers said they still expected the opinion to be cited in U.S. cases. In Europe, where lawyers say the ICJ opinion is likely to have its greatest impact on upcoming climate cases, recent instances of governments respecting the court's rulings include Britain's decision late last year to reopen negotiations to return the Chagos Islands in the Indian Ocean to Mauritius. That followed a 2019 ICJ opinion that London should cede control. BONAIRE VERSUS THE NETHERLANDS Turning to environmental cases, in a Dutch civil case due to be heard in October - Bonaire versus The Netherlands - Greenpeace Netherlands and eight people from the Dutch territory of Bonaire, a low-lying island in the Caribbean, will argue that the Netherlands' climate plan is insufficient to protect the island against rising sea levels. The World Court said countries' national climate plans must be "stringent" and aligned to the Paris Agreement aim to limit warming to 1.5 Celsius (2.7 Fahrenheit) above the pre-industrial average. The court also said countries must take responsibility for a country's fair share of historical emissions. In hearings last December at the ICJ that led to last week's opinion, many wealthy countries, including Norway, Saudi Arabia, and The United States argued national climate plans were non-binding. "The court has said (...) that's not correct," said Lucy Maxwell, co-director of the Climate Litigation Network. In the Bonaire case, the Dutch government is arguing that having a climate plan is sufficient. The plaintiffs argue it would not meet the 1.5C threshold and the Netherlands must do its fair share to keep global warming below that, Louise Fournier, legal counsel for Greenpeace International, said. "This is definitely going to help there," Fourniersaid of the ICJ opinion in the Bonaire case. 'URGENT AND EXISTENTIAL THREAT' The ICJ opinion said climate change was an "urgent and existential threat," citing decades of peer-reviewed research, even as scepticism has mounted in some quarters, led by the United States. A document seen by Reuters shows the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency may question the research behind mainstream climate science and is poised to revoke its scientific determination that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health. Jonathan Martel of the U.S. law firm Arnold and Porter represents industry clients on environmental issues. He raised the prospect of possible legal challenges to the EPA's regulatory changes given that an international court has treated the science of climate change as unequivocal and settled. "This might create a further obstacle for those who would advocate against regulatory action based on scientific uncertainty regarding the existence of climate change caused by anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases," he said. The U.S. EPA changes would affect the agency's regulations on tailpipe emissions from vehicles that run on fossil fuel. Legal teams are reviewing the impact of the ruling on litigation against the companies that produce fossil fuel, as well as on the governments that regulate them. TheWorld Courtsaid that states could be held liable for the activities of private actors under their control, specifically mentioning the licensing and subsidising of fossil fuel production. Notre Affaire à Tous, a French NGO whose case against TotalEnergies is due to be heard in January 2026, expected the advisory opinion to strengthen its arguments. "This opinion will strongly reinforce our case because it mentions (...) that providing new licences to new oil and gas projects may be a constitutional and international wrongful act," said Paul Mougeolle, senior counsel for Notre Affaire à Tous. TotalEnergies did not respond to a request for comment. (Reporting by Stephanie van den Berg and Alison Withers, additional reporting by Valerie Volcovici from Washington; editing by Barbara Lewis)
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Malaysian aid finally enters Gaza after six-month blockade
Children jostle for free meals at a charity kitchen. KUALA LUMPUR: A Malaysian humanitarian mission has successfully delivered 2,400 tonnes of aid to Gaza in a Jordan-led convoy, the first cross-border delivery since Israel closed off all access to the territory on Feb 2. Karisma Humanitarian Aid Mission (KHOM) director Nik Marina Datuk Hussein said the supplies, comprising food boxes and infant formula funded by public donations, were transported on four trucks that joined a 60-truck convoy coordinated by the Jordan Armed Forces (JAF) with support from the World Food Programme (WFP) and World Central Kitchen. The convoy, which entered Gaza early Monday (July 28) through the King Hussein Bridge in Jordan, was the sixth humanitarian delivery organised by Jordan in recent days. "The aid from KHOM had been stored in Jordan since February due to the closure, but was immediately handed over to JAF once clearance was granted. We were informed the convoy has now reached Gaza, with KHOM's aid among the first to reach starving residents," she said in a statement on Tuesday (July 29). Nik Marina said the breakthrough followed confirmation from Jordanian authorities on July 26 that KHOM's aid had been approved for entry, making it the first Malaysian non-governmental organisation (NGO) to deliver external aid to Gaza in almost six months. She thanked Jordan's King Abdullah II for issuing the Royal Decree that enabled the mission, as well as JAF, the Jordan Hashemite Charity Organization (JHCO) and other agencies for prioritising KHOM's supplies in Jordan's sixth aid mission to Gaza. "The political truce in Gaza announced by Israel remains fragile. Even before the war, Gaza needed no less than 1,000 truckloads of food a day, let alone now when starvation is being used as a weapon of war," she said. She added that the delivery reflects the trust of Malaysians who have been contributing since the conflict erupted on Oct 7, 2023 and assured that KHOM will continue its relief work with public support. Donations to KHOM can be made via its official website at – Bernama
