Results 351 to 360 of 444
-
March 16th, 2013 05:39 PM #351
Ok na ko dito sa Maynila, ok na ko sa aircon na opisina ko...sa buhay ko. Ayaw ko makipaglaban sa Malaysia.
Sa inyong mga atat kunin ang Sabah, mag boluntaryo na kayo at sumama sa giyera dun..walang mangyayari kaka satsat online...
-
March 16th, 2013 06:41 PM #352
-
-
Verified Tsikot Member
- Join Date
- Dec 2012
- Posts
- 7
March 16th, 2013 07:49 PM #354Chuc mot ngay cuoi tuan lam viec hieu qua va hang say nhe
Dung quen tiep tuc dong gop cho dien dan nhe.
Tran trong.
-
March 16th, 2013 08:50 PM #355
Buti pa itong mga kapitbansa nating mga Vietnamese, concerned din issue ng Sabah.
-
Tsikoteer
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
- Posts
- 9,720
March 16th, 2013 10:36 PM #356What i don't understand is why the Kirams, on the issue of Sabah, sent a letter instead of, oh i don't know, a meeting, even a phone call? For something as important as "giving" Sabah to the PH government...idadaan ko lang sa sulat?
Did they Kirams follow up with the DFA/P-Noy's men and discuss the matter further, e.g. "o, Mr. DFA, nabasa na ba ni P-Noy ung sulat? Ano reaksyon niya? Kelan kami pwedeng mag usap uli, e alangan magkakaintindihan kami sa isang sulat lang" ?
i had an unfortunate encounter i had with a lady over the phone; she was asking me to help her with her research. i was just starting out at the time so i really couldn't commit anything and, quite frankly, she was barking up the wrong tree. She went on this rant about me not being cooperative, etc. and all the time i was explaining to her that there are procedures to be followed, and how we can accomodate her request. Walang nangyari, her mind was made up na hindi namin siya tutulungan.
It's odd that i remember that incident now. Ako pa yung lumabas na uncooperative, when she was essentially asking for special treatment.
i once missed paying my credit card bills(company name withheld, rhymes with shmitibank)...by a few centavos: tinawagan kaagad ako following up payment. Sabah na yung pinag usapan, tapos...letter lang?
Pasensya na po, i have trouble reading legal stuff..but it seems that is is saying that we have a claim over Sabah...that the territory is in dispute..but it didn't say that Sabah belongs to PH.
So why did the Kirams go there and claim it? Doesn't that violent action put us in an awkward spot in pursuing those claims in the courts? Is Kiram a recognized representative of the PH government for that matter?Last edited by badkuk; March 16th, 2013 at 10:41 PM.
-
March 17th, 2013 12:47 AM #357
For your guidance,The issue here is whether the phil has a legal right to claim sabah. This is a case of international law ( INTERNATIONAL DISPUTE)and not municipal law whereby the procedure and application of the law is based on charter of united nations and not under the rules of court or municipal law. Under the conflicts of law, there are no vested rights in rules of procedure; hence, a party to the action MUST submit himself to the procedural formalities of the forum. If you talk about SUBSTANTIVE law like the rules on prescription, if the phil gov't does not take steps to follow up this claim with a display of authority over territory, the right acquired is merely an inchoate title and if administration is not undertaken within reasonable time, the inchoate title is lost and forfeited. Undert international law, there are two kinds of dispute, legal and political. The philippine filed a legal dispute and not political because it involves "JUSTIFIABLE RIGHTS" based on LAW or FACT. If political, it CANNOT BE decided under the rules of international law. To be enlighten, under the charter of U.N., all members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means or in any other manner inconsistent with the purpose of the U.N. the parties to any dispute SHALL first of all seek a resolution by Negotiation,inquiry, mediation, conciliation,ARBITRATION, judicial settlement. Therefore the PH shall abide with the rules of international law specifically charter of U.N. lastly your question why PH under GMA did not initiate a suit impleading malaysia over sabah? Common sense, because of the intervention case of PH under GMA administration that the ICJ recognized the philippines has a VALID and LEGAL CLAIM by saying it will not affect its SABAH claim in 2001. Take note that before ICJ could acquire jurisdiction, CONSENT of the state is necessary. My question for you, if you are the prime minister of malaysia, will you submit the case to the ICJ?
Last edited by Tj_abs; March 17th, 2013 at 01:13 AM.
-
-
March 17th, 2013 01:01 AM #359
-
March 17th, 2013 09:01 AM #360
Well, now we're at the bottom of it, thank you for supplying the conclusion.
If during that time our officials could not institute a case directly precisely because the consent of the disputing states is required for jurisdiction, the same reasoning can also be applied to the present.
Again, take the reasoning of the ICJ in that case in context. The matter under dispute IS NOT SABAH but a different territory being disputed by Indonesia and Malaysia. Recognizing a valid and legal claim by an intervening state is one thing. Categorically stating that the PH has title and right to exercise sovereignty over Sabah is another.
If your proposal, however, is for the PH to follow up its claim over SABAH by a display of authority, you are inviting military conflict by advocating acts which may be considered as aggression towards another state.Last edited by Altis6453; March 17th, 2013 at 09:22 AM.
Babala! Sarado at Ginagawa mga south bound overpass along c5. Medyo mabagal Ang daloy kanina Ng...
Traffic!