JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 19, 2020 OVERVIEW, IMPLICATIONS AND LESSONS OF THE CASE OF BATU PUTEH ISLAND: SOVEREIGNTY VIRTUE OF A COUNTRY AT STAKE KHAIRUL AZMAN SUHAIMY1, NURUL AIMI RAZALI2, ABDUL SHAKOR BORHAM3, KHAIROL ANUAR KAMRI4, SHAH RUL ANUAR NORDIN5, NAJAH RAMLAN6, HANI SURAYA AZIZ7 1,3,4,5Centre of General Studies and Co-Curricular, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, Johor. 2 Faculty of Applied Science and Technology, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, Johor. 6,7Centre of Languages Studies, Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia, Batu Pahat, Johor. Email- [email protected], Received: 14 March 2020 Revised and Accepted: 8 July 2020 ABSTRACT: Losing territory will undermine the sovereignty of a country. Sovereignty is a symbol of power to many countries. On May 23, 2008, Malaysia lost her sovereignty over Batu Puteh Island to Singapore as ruled by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) by 12 votes to 4. The corresponding letter by the Acting Secretary of Johor dated September 21, 1953 stated that Johor does not claim ownership of Batu Puteh Island or Pedra Branca. The ICJ claimed that the letter as a sign that Johor had handed over its sovereignty on Batu Puteh Island over to the British. This article aims to elucidate the overview of territorial dispute over Batu Puteh Island between Malaysia and Singapore and its implications on sovereignty as well as to explicate the lessons to be learnt from the event. This qualitative study employs content analysis and literature study methodology. Content analysis examines the documents and previous literatures related to the Batu Puteh Island dispute and sovereignty in exploring the background of the dispute and finding the lessons to be learnt from the dispute. This study finds that there are various questions arise regarding the letter. The questions that are yet to be answered and documentation is vital. Furthermore, this study discusses lessons to be learnt from the event as such learn from history; learn from the administrative weaknesses and individual mistakes, be careful when making any decisions, inattention led a country in losing the island‟s sovereignty to other nation and remember that history repeats itself in the future. The mistakes cost Malaysia to lose an island which was originally her for centuries. The social implications of this article are such it provides the general about the overview of the dispute, which may not have the whole idea about this event. Also, it enlightens on the implication of the event to the involved parties as well as the lessons to be learnt from the event which closely relate to the sovereignty of a country and the importance to learn from history. KEYWORDS: Batu Puteh Island; Pedra Branca, sovereignty; history; Malaysia-Singapore Relations I. INTRODUCTION In the territorial dispute between Malaysia and Singapore over Batu Puteh Island, sovereignty of a country is the main issue that involved and concerned by the two countries. Although the International Court of Justice (ICJ) has ruled out the result on the dispute, which noted that Singapore is the owner of Batu Puteh Island and both countries have accepted the result with open heart, nevertheless there are important lessons learnt from the event. This is because according to historical evidences, the Sultanate of Johor rightfully owned Batu Puteh Island before it was given to the British to manage and control the lighthouse in the island (Mutalib & Dahari, 2017). However, due to the negligence of the then authority and the lack of efforts to maintain and exercise the right on the island by the later Malaysian government after the independent, compared to efforts made by Singapore hence Malaysia has lost to Singapore in this dispute (Okano, 2010). This event is one of the important events in Malaysia history and lessons should be learnt by the government and the people in order to prevent the same occurrence that involved sovereignty of the country to be happening again in the future. This article aims to elucidate the overview of territorial dispute over Batu Puteh Island between Malaysia and Singapore and its implications on sovereignty as well as to explicate the lessons to be learnt from the event. 2107 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 19, 2020 II. LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Batu Puteh Island and the Dispute Batu Puteh Island or was known as Pedra Branca has a total area of 0.2 hectares. It is about 12.8 km from Pengerang, Johor and 46 km from Singapore. At the onset, the Sultanate of Johor had the rights over Batu Puteh Island but tendered it over to the British to handle Horsburgh Light-house since the mid 19th century (Sumner, 2003). There are two coral reef areas; the first one is known as the Middle Rocks, located 1.1 km south of Batu Puteh Island, and the second one is known as the South Ledge which was naturally formed rocks which is visible only during low tide in a distance of 3 km from the Middle Rocks and 4 km to the south Batu Puteh Island. The claim of Middle Rocks and South Ledge were made by Singapore in 1993, 13 years after the claim on Batu Puteh Island was made. According to Salleh, Razali & Jusoff (2009), on February 14, 1980, through a diplomatic note, Singapore objected over the insertion of Batu Puteh Island as fragment of Malaysia‟s territory claimed in Peta Baru. Due to the objection, Malaysian and Singaporean Foreign Ministry held a meeting to undertake the dispute consensually through bilateral negotiation. As the first negotiation met unending decision, the then prime ministers of both countries, Mahathir Mohamad and Lee Kuan Yew decided in principle to defer the case to the ICJ in September 1994. The ICJ was chosen to be the third party resolution by Mahathir Mohamad because the failure of bilateral negotiation to settle the dispute, although he was against the idea in the first place. Malaysia and Singapore later involved in several meetings from 1995 to 1996 in finalising the procedures for the submission of the case to the ICJ. After a thorough preparation on submission by both parties, Hamid Albar and S. Jayakumar, Malaysian and Singaporean Foreign Ministers signed the conciliation to settle the disputes through the ICJ on February 6, 2003 in Putrajaya, Malaysia. In the span of 5 years, the ICJ ruled that the sovereignty over Pulau Batu Puteh belonged to Singapore with 12 votes to 4, on May 23, 2008 (Idrus, Nor, Ismail, 2014). 2.2 Sovereignty Sovereignty acts as a symbol of power to all independent countries worldwide. It is important to defend the independence and supremacy of a country to prevent any forms of colonisation (Bodin, 1992). Sovereignty also implies an imperative role in protecting the country‟s security and stability, in fighting against external threats as well as being respected by others. In the context of Malaysia, despite its strategic location that serves as active maritime economy, the geographical condition of Malaysia embodies numbers of boundary problems usually experienced by coastal countries particularly Southeast Asian countries. According to Salleh, Razali and Jusoff (2009), Malaysia entangled in intersecting maritime claims and territorial disputes with practically all its neighbours. The claims and disputes outspread from the Celebes Sea, the Sulu Sea, the South China Sea, the Straits of Singapore, the Straits of Melaka, the Andaman Sea and to the Gulf of Thailand (Salleh, Razali, & Jusoff, 2009). National security in particular is an important aspect on sovereignty of a country. The role of government and people in protecting the sovereignty of the country is vital to permit the steadfast obedience as to safeguard national security (Agnew, 2005). Moreover, it is imperative in the determination to take along a more solid concept of unity towards building a resilient nation. As an important aspect of a country, sovereignty is not easy to be abused, however, the negligence and failure of state leaders or the relevant parties to conduct effective negotiations in the event of any disputes such as the demands of two or more other countries over a territory can threaten sovereignty. This not only causes the country to lose its sovereignty over the country or a particular region but also affects other beneficial issues involving the economic, political and social aspects of the country. Therefore, it is important for all citizens and leaders to learn and apply the lessons or history of an event to be more cautious in dealing with any situation affecting the country‟s future sovereignty (Onuf, 1991). This is also important to do for the good of the nation and the citizens in the future. Jean Bodin, a French scholar, in his book „Six Books of the Commenwealth‟, first presented the idea of sovereignty. Before the introduction of sovereignty, kings had the utter authority of ruling the nation or known as supreme power. The context then improved to „statehood‟ and far ahead deliberately changed towards a greater notch of power or „sovereignty‟. The physiognomies of sovereignty bestowing to Bodin can be summarised as follows (Bodin & Jean, 1992): i. Original, not tendered by any other power whether from inside or outside of the country, ii. The utmost, there is no other greater authority that can bound its power, 2108 JOURNAL OF CRITICAL REVIEWS ISSN- 2394-5125 VOL 7, ISSUE 19, 2020 iii. Permanent, the authority of the state goes on uninterruptedly devoid of interference even when the administration, the frontrunners and the direction of the state change, iv. Undividable, there is merely one supreme authority, v. Nontransferable to another party, in either the form of tender or discharge.