Batu Puteh: a response to the AGC’s statement

 

From Rafique Rashid Ali

In a press statement today, the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) stated, inter alia:

“Based on the Cabinet decision dated Jan 11, 2023, the government is of the view that the decision to withdraw both the application for revision of the decision of the case concerning the sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks/Batuan Tengah and South Ledge/Tubir Selatan (Malaysia/Singapura) and the request for interpretation of the decision in the said case was not in order and improper.”

The AGC is studying the recommendations made by the special task force, including the issue relating to tort of misfeasance in public office, and will take appropriate action to carry out the decision of the Cabinet.

The AGC then states clearly that the government of Malaysia respects the International Court of Justice’s decision dated May 23, 2008:

“Nevertheless, the government respects the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the case concerning sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks/Batuan Tengah and South Ledge/Tubir Selatan (Malaysia/Singapore) dated May 23, 2008.”

It is rather perplexing that on the one hand, the current government is of the view that the withdrawal of the two applications was improper (wholly denied) but, in the same vein, states it respects the ICJ’s decision.

Respecting the ICJ is the primary basis for the decision of the previous government in 2018.

The following points are of relevance:

Ads by Kiosked

• Former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad had at the very outset firmly stated that the head of the special task force, Apandi Ali, was biased and in a clear position of conflict of interest as it was his initiative to recommend the review of the ICJ decision in the first place.
• Mahathir was, and still is, ever willing to assist in any investigation so long as issues of conflict of interest, bias and/or breach of natural justice are resolved.
• Surely, this current government, which believes in justice and reform, would want to revisit the issue of bias and conflict of interest of the special task force. It is key in this whole episode in coming to the truth of the matter.
• The decision to discontinue the two applications was made after extensive consideration of the advice and opinion of lawyer Brendan Plant and two local lawyers. The said lawyers were the same lawyers appointed by Apandi to his team in 2016. Legal advice was also taken from the then solicitor-general in the absence of an attorney-general at that time.
• All of these opinions and viewpoints prompted Mahathir to discontinue the two applications. The same was collectively supported by the then PH Cabinet.

It is baffling that the Batu Puteh saga is still being relentlessly pursued despite the myriad of explanations, evidence and justifications that have been repeatedly made. - FMT

Rafique Rashid Ali is a lawyer and an FMT reader.

The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect those of MMKtT.