Last week, the Sabah issue stirred controversy once again due to an unfortunate remark by Presidential Communications Office (PCO) Secretary Jay Ruiz at the House tri-committee (tri-comm) hearing last March 21 that tackled online fake news and disinformation. His statement, “we lost Sabah,” was not only a diplomatic faux pas but also a reckless assertion. The Philippine government has never officially dropped its claim to Sabah, making Ruiz’s comment both misleading and damaging.
Senator Robin Padilla was quick to call out this blunder, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding our national interests. In his statement, Padilla remarked, “Nakakadismaya na ang isang pahayag na walang basehan ay manggagaling pa sa isang opisyal ng Malacañang na nangakong lalaban sa pagkalat ng ‘fake news’ at maling impormasyon. Dagdag pa rito na ang maling pahayag ay binitawan sa mismong pagdinig na naglalayong lumaban sa maling impormasyon.
“Taliwas sa sinabi ng kalihim, hindi nawala sa atin ang Sabah dahil buhay na buhay pa po ang ating pag-angkin o claim sa Sabah sa pamamagitan ng Seksyon 2 ng Republic Act 5446. Malinaw na nakasaad dito na ang North Borneo — na ngayon ay Sabah — ay kinikilalang teritoryo ng Pilipinas,” he added.
The senator also referred to Memorandum Circular No. 162, s. 2008, which was reaffirmed in August 2024 through an Executive Secretary memorandum. This document prohibits any government department, agency, or official from making statements or actions that imply recognition of another country’s sovereignty over North Borneo (Sabah) or reject the Philippines’ legal and historical claim to it. It also requires that any official activity or statement about Sabah must be coordinated with the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA).
The recent incident at the House hearing brings to mind a pivotal moment in Philippine-Malaysian relations, which I detailed in my 2022 book “Behind the Red Pen.” During the late President Fidel V. Ramos’s state visit to Kuala Lumpur in January 1993, a significant diplomatic breakthrough was achieved. The icy relations that existed for decades between the Philippines and Malaysia began to thaw—thanks to FVR’s pragmatic approach and his genuine rapport with then-Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.
That visit marked a turning point in our bilateral relations. It will be recalled that the Philippines broke diplomatic relations with Malaysia when the latter didn’t recognize the government’s claim on Sabah after it was annexed to the Malaysian Federation in 1963. Relations resumed later, broken again in 1968 and restored again on the same year but remained cold until FVR’s state visit.
In January 1993, both leaders agreed to set aside the contentious Sabah claim, placing it on the back burner to focus on improving bilateral relations. This strategic move paved the way for a period of cooperation and mutual respect, a testament to FVR’s diplomatic acumen. Among the key outcomes of this visit was the establishment of the Brunei Darussalam-Indonesia-Malaysia-Philippines East ASEAN Growth Area (BIMP-EAGA), a subregional economic cooperation initiative aimed at fostering development in less-developed areas of the member countries.
The BIMP-EAGA has since become a platform for economic collaboration, focusing on sectors such as tourism, agriculture, and connectivity. While progress has been uneven, the initiative remains a testament to the enduring legacy of the Ramos diplomacy. Recent efforts have sought to revitalize the BIMP-EAGA, with member countries reaffirming their commitment to its goals.
Fast forward to July 2023, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. and First Lady Liza Araneta-Marcos visited Malaysia, marking another chapter in Philippine-Malaysian relations. During this state visit, discussions centered on strengthening bilateral trade and investment opportunities, as well as exploring new avenues for cooperation. The visit underscored the importance of maintaining and building upon the diplomatic foundations laid by leaders like FVR.
Secretary Ruiz’s uncalled-for statement risks undoing decades of careful diplomacy. Such remarks not only undermine our historical stance but also jeopardize the trust and goodwill painstakingly built over the years. Public officials must choose their words with precision and tact, for they carry the power to shape perceptions and policies.
