CONTEMPORARY EURASIA VOLUME VIII (1) ContemporaryEurasia81 | Page 80

STRATEGIES ON TERRITORIAL ACQUISITION- A CASE STUDY ON THE PEDRA …
premiers of both countries agreed and initiated formal meetings on the
dispute. Singapore and Malaysia held several negotiations on the disputed
islets. However, they could not reach a final agreement after years of efforts.
Then a special agreement regarding submitting the dispute to the Court was
made and the arbitration process was initiated in 2003.
Malaysia mainly remained silent during the first stage. The only
mutual contact between Malaysia and Singapore took place in 1981, when
the prime ministers of both countries agreed on resolving the dispute
bilaterally. 10 Thereafter Singapore kept contacting Malaysia and calling for
the latter’s response unilaterally for about 10 years. In fact, lacking strong
evidence limited Malaysia’s reaction to Singapore’s request after the Pedra
Branca dispute was crystallized. Compared to its obvious long-term peaceful
control of the disputed islands in the Sipadan and Ligitan case, Malaysia
could not provide strong evidence of showing similarly effective conduct on
Pedra Branca. 11 On the other hand, Malaysia’s request of the Court for
revision on the Pedra Branca judgment in 2017 indicates that it lacks
sufficient proof while even relying on its opponent’s newly decoded archives
regarding this disputed island. 12 As a result, it is rational that Malaysia
remained silent and waited patiently for new evidence.
However, there were two factors that forced Malaysia to respond to
Singapore’s request for bilateral negotiations on this dispute. The first factor
was that Pedra Branca was officially marked as Singaporean territory, which
immediately pushed the Malaysian central government to respond.
Singapore introduced Pedra Branca as one of its territories in its official
publication “Singapore Facts and Pictures” in January 1992. 13 Then the
dispute was revived to some extent by Malaysia’s protest. The second factor
was that two indirect events drew the Malaysian central government’s
attention to the dispute. The first event was Singapore’s first unilateral
proposal in 1989 suggesting that the dispute should be submitted to the
Court. The second event was that in a public statement, a United Malays
10
Case Concerning Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and
South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Memorial of Singapore, International Court of Justice,
2004, 25. [hereinafter Memorial of Singapore]
11
See Case Concerning Sovereignty over Pulau Ligitan and Pulau Sipadan
(Indonesia/Malaysia), Judgement, I.C.J. reports 2002.
12
In fact, Malaysia’s premier Tun Hussein Onn admitted “Malaysia is not clear about the
sovereignty over Pedra Branca” in a mutual meeting between premiers of Singapore and
Malaysia. This news was firstly reported by Singapore’s Channel Newsasia in November
2007, but it was withdrawn later. However, the article was reprinted by another media, see
Property Highlights of Singapore, “S'pore Says Malaysia Has No Evidence To Show It Owns
Pedra Branca”, Nov. 7, 2007, http://propertyhighlights.blogspot.com/2007/11/spore-says-
malaysia-has-no-evidence-to.html.
13
Case Concerning Sovereignty over Pedra Branca/Pulau Batu Puteh, Middle Rocks and
South Ledge (Malaysia/Singapore), Memorial of Malaysia. International Court of Justice,
2004, pp. 102-103. [hereinafter Memorial of Malaysia]
80