'Sulu army leader Azzimudie a Malaysian'

PKR has claimed that the alleged ‘Raja Muda Sulu’ Agbimudin @ Azzimudie Kiram is a Malaysian and was even a former assistant district officer in Kudat, Sabah.

PKR director of strategy Rafizi Ramli (right) said that, since the conflict started last month, there have been rumours as to who Azzimudie really is, because Sabahans claim to know him.

"A search by PKR deputy secretary-general Darrel Iking at the national archives on the list of Civil Servants 1975 revealed the name 'Datu Agbimudin Kiram' stated there as an asisstant district officer," he said.

"I want Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak to explain whether (Azzimudie) is truly a Malaysian who was naturalised under 'Project IC', and whether he is an Umno member as most Sulu people in Sabah are."

The PKR director of strategy said this is one big question over the background of the armed terrorists in Sabah, although they are proclaimed as foreigners representing the self-styled Sulu sultan.

He noted that there are a lot of speculations since then, that some of the leaders of the group are Malaysians.

Rafizi stressed that an explanation is needed on the matter, as the attack could be the after-effects of the 'Project IC' which is related to former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad and up to now, certain aspects have been verified in the on-going royal commission of inquiry.

"This affirms the uneasiness of the people over the awarding of citizenship for political reasons without going through the valid vetting process. And their presence could be a danger to the national security," he claimed.

"Following the Lahad Datu incursion, PKR has conducted several meetings with local residents and obtained information on the backgrounds of some of the leaders, including Agbimuddin @ Azzimuddie," he said, adding that Agbimuddin was born in 1941, so this makes him 72 years old this year.

'Najib must explain'

Rafizi said that Najib must explain further, as he cannot deny or hide from the public's concerns on the country's national security.

The PKR director of strategy said Najib cannot merely avoid the questions in the people's minds, may of whom are asking how many of the armed intruders are Malaysians who originate from the Philippines, how many of them are Umno members, and why hasn't the PM told the truth that the leader of the group is a Filipino who had been given an identity card (IC).

"The discovery gives a new dimension to the intrusion episode and its relationship with the 'Project IC'."

To a question on how certain he is that the person who is stated in the Civil Servants' roll is the same person leading the terrorists, Rafizi replied that this is based on the talk of people in the Kudat town who know Agbimudin or Azzimudie.

"A lot of people in Kudat know Agbimudin, and this is consistent because if you talk to people, they will recall him," he claimed.

"I do not know whether he is now in Lahad Datu, but he is the leading figure of the armed group," he stressed.

Rafizi and Darrel also want Sabah chief minister Musa Aman (right) to explain and verify on whether Agbimudin had truly worked as an assistant district officer there.

He said if Agbimudin is 72, he may have retired in the late 1990s and may have gone back to the Philippines before coming back here to initiate the intrusion.

With this revelation, Rafizi wants Najib and Musa to come clean on the circumstances surrounding Agbimudin.


Source : http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/224375

Malaysia fears World Court solution over Sabah claim, says columnist

KUALA LUMPUR, March 8 — Proof showing that Sabah “clearly” belongs to the Sultanate of Sulu has caused Malaysia to be fearful of bringing the dispute to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to the table for talks, a columnist for a Manila-based paper has claimed.

In an opinion piece titled “Irony: Malaysian-trained Sulu fighters”, Neal H. Cruz said both the Philippine and Malaysian governments could “persuade” the Filipino Muslim rebels in Sabah to leave the state that is part of Malaysia, by either entering into negotiations or going to the ICJ.

“That is for Malaysia to either agree to take the Sultanate of Sulu’s claim to Sabah to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) or to negotiate with the Philippine government and the sultanate, with a definite date for the talks to start,” he wrote yesterday.

But he said Malaysia was fearful of taking either option, adding that the country was holding on to Sabah by “sheer force of arms”, possibly referring to Malaysia’s show of military muscle with its all-out strike on Tuesday against the estimated 200-odd Sulu gunmen who had intruded Sabah’s east coast over three weeks ago to press the Sultanate of Sulu’s claim on the state.

“Why is Malaysia afraid to do either? Because historical and documentary evidence clearly prove that Sabah belongs to the Sultanate of Sulu.

Sabah claim: A tale of two versions

Sulu Sultan Jamalul Kiram III’s defiance against calls for his army in Lahad Datu to surrender despite having lost his soldiers in a shootout with Malaysian security forces and his men’s decision to “die in Lahad Datu” has stoked the curiosityof Sabahans.

His daring modus operandi in claiming Sabah as his rightful homeland has awakened the curiosity of many here who are in the dark or have only a vague knowledge about the historical background of Jamalul’s Sabah claim.

Why did Jamalul make his move now? In his own words he can no longer “trust” the Philippine government to justly pursue his claim on Sabah.

The fact is the Philippine government has been inconsistent in its claim and on its recognition of the Sulu sultanate.

Many parties in the Philippines, including the pretenders who claim the throne of Sulu, have been speaking up more out of political expediency than of historical realities.

Can Malaysia defend itself?

QUESTION TIME The way the entire Lahad Datu intrusion/ insurgency/invasion - or whatever else one may want to call it - has been handled raises grave doubts over Malaysia's ability to defend itself without fear or favour against anyone who infringes upon its territorial integrity and sovereignty.

That it has allowed itself to be lulled into such a state of complacency and lack of urgency, and seems to have totally underestimated the enemy is quite astonishing. And when it moved in after much foot-dragging it had nothing but embarrassment to show for it.

How could the authorities responsible for security have allowed the situation to balloon into such a serious violation of Malaysia?
And how could Malaysia have continued to allow a claim on part of its territory to go on for such a long time, even appearing to cuddle up to those making those claims?

Remember, this is the country, perhaps the first in the world, to have successfully contained and eventually beaten back the sustained armed communist insurrection and then faced down a confrontation from its big-brother neighbour Indonesia in 1965.