What is next for Batu Puteh?

Staking a claim: A 2008 file photo of Malaysia’s Department of Survey and Mapping carrying out topographical surveys of Batuan Tengah, which was warded to Malaysia then. Now the government is trying to get Batu Puteh back – but can we after all this time? — Filepic/Utusan Malaysia

ONE year ago, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob announced the setting up of a task force to conduct a comprehensive study as well as to scrutinise and recommend necessary options by seeking the views of international legal experts on the Pedra Branca/Batu Puteh case.

“The purpose of this effort is to review laws in relation to application for revision and interpretation in the case of Batu Puteh.

“The Cabinet also decided to seek preliminary legal views on legal action under the tort of misfeasance against parties found to have committed negligence and error for not proceeding with the application for review and interpretation of the Pedra Branca/Batu Puteh case,” Ismail Sabri said in the statement.

The Prime Minister announced former attorney general Tan Sri Apandi Ali would chair the task force.

On May 23, 2008, the Inter-national Court of Justice (ICJ) passed a judgment following Malaysia and Singapore seeking a decision on the territorial sovereignty of the two rock features and a low tide elevation.

The ICJ said that Pedra Branca belongs to Singapore, while awarding Middle Rocks (Batuan Tengah) to Malaysia. The ICJ also ruled that the sovereignty of South Ledge (Tubir Selatan) belongs to the state in whose territorial waters it lies in.

Following that judgment, the Malaysia-Singapore Joint Technical Committee was set up to implement the ICJ decision and for the two countries to negotiate the maritime boundaries delimitation.

In 2017, the Malaysian government filed an application for review of the ICJ decision following the discovery of “some important facts”.

In 2018, the Pakatan Harapan government under Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad withdrew that application to overturn the ruling – awarding legal jurisdiction of Batu Puteh to Singapore before the hearing of the case, which was scheduled for June 11 that year.

Ismail Sabri’s move to review the case came as a surprise to many, including those who familiar with the case.

Just before that, an individual by the name of Hatta Sanuri filed suit against the government on Batu Puteh, claiming he was affected by Pakatan’s decision to withdraw the application to review the ICJ award of sovereignty over Batu Puteh to Singapore. The suit was quashed by the High Court due to a lack of legal standing.

One year on, the special task force’s (STF) final report which contains proposals on the government’s next move, is ready for the Cabinet. The STF’s work during its mandate was not without any drama. Dr Mahathir refused to appear before the STF in June in protest against Apandi as the task force chairman. Dr Mahathir’s office said he has not been called back since.

Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Parliament and Law) Datuk Seri Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar last Sunday issued a statement that the government is committed to ensuring that the sovereignty of the nation’s maritime borders is preserved.

“The set up of the special task force to review the Batu Puteh, Batuan Tengah and Tubir Selatan case, chaired by former attorney general Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali for nine months, from Nov 9 to Aug 30, is clear proof of this commitment,” he said.

In the statement Wan Junaidi said the STF comprised lawyers who handled the case from 2016 to 2017 as well as legal practitioners, maritime surveyors and representatives of relevant ministries and they have completed their task based on the terms specified by focusing on legal aspects as well as Malaysia and Singapore relations.

Wan Junaidi also said that during the mandate, various measures were taken by the STF, including reviewing relevant documentation and materials, conducting a series of discussions and making domestic and overseas visits, and engaging foreign legal consultants and hydrography experts among others.As we’re still in a guessing game about when the 15th General Election will be held, it is only fair that this government answers several questions about the case review and work done by the STF after the report has been presented to the Cabinet.

Can Malaysia still file an application for a revision after the lapse of 10 years from the date of the ICJ judgment? For the record, Article 61 (5) of the Statute of the ICJ states that an application for revision may not be made after a lapse of 10 years from the date of judgment.

Is there new relevant information to reopen the case at the ICJ?

What are the recommendations contained in the report? Will they be to Malaysia’s advantage?

How much information can actually be revealed to the public when the dispute involves two countries? Is Malaysia going back to the ICJ to review the case?

Wan Junaidi’s statement also said the STF members went overseas to carry out its work. What are the countries they visited, who did they meet? How much allocation has been given to the STF to do its work?

Another relevant question is what is the STF’s exact mandate and has it fulfilled it?

Let’s just hope the task force’s work has not been a waste of time. The public has the right to know if the government’s move to get the STF to review the case is helpful for Malaysia to reclaim its sovereignty of Batu Puteh when there has already been a 10-year lapse.