Sultan of Sulu, who is the true and legitimate?

Sultan Muhammad Fuad A. Kiram I (The last son of HM Sultan Esmail E. Kiram I - Sultan of Sulu 1947 to 1973) or Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram (son of  Sultan Moh. Mahakuttah A. Kiram - 34th Sultan of Sulu 1974 - 1986)
 
Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram 35th Sultan of Sulu Son of  Sultan Moh. Mahakuttah A. Kiram 34th Sultan of Sulu (1974 - 1986)

Sultan of Sulu - Sultan Jamalul Kiram II (1894-1936).

 

Sultan of Sulu, Al-marhum Sultan Moh. Jamalul Kiram II (1893-1936) was recognized worldwide. During his long reign he signed several treaties with different nations.  

 Sultan of Sulu, Al-marhum Sultan Moh. Jamalul Kiram II

Unfortunately he has no offspring of his own. He passed on his authority to his youngest brother Al-marhum Sultan Mawallil Wasit Kiram (1936).

Al-marhum Sultan Mawallil Wasit Kiram was Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram's great grandfather and Al-marhum Sultan Moh. Jamalul Kiram II was his great grand uncle.

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram is the grandson of the 33rd Sultan of Sulu, Al-marhum Sultan Moh. Esmail E. Kiram I (1950-1973)

  

Al-marhum Sultan Moh. Esmail E. Kiram I has granted authority to Philippine government under the administration of President Diosdado Macapagal on 12th of September 1962 and of President Ferdinand Marcos in 1969.

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram's mother Dayang-Dayang Farida Tan-Kiram was the first wife of his father. Half tausug and half Chinese, she was commonly known as the Princess of Sulu.

His father's second wife is Dayang-Dayang Merriam Tanglao-Kiram, commonly known as the Princess of the South.
 

Al-marhum Sultan Moh. Mahakuttah A. Kiram, 34th Sultan of Sulu had seven children:

1. Dayang-Dayang Zuharra T.Kiram
2. Dayang-Dayang Dinwasa T. Kiram Delos Santos
3. Raja Muda Muedzul Lail Tan Kiram
4. Datu Yldon Tan Kiram
5. Dayang-Dayang Nur Mahal T. Kiram
6. Dayang-Dayang Ayesha T. Kiram
7. Dayang-Dayang Tanya Rowena T. Kiram -Tahil
 

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram is married with H.M. Dayang-Dayang Mellany S. Kiram. They have seven children.

1. Raja Muda Moh. Ehsn S. Kiram
2. Datu Nizamuddin S. Kiram
3. Dayang-Dayang Rahela S. Kiram
4. Datu Jihad S. Kiram
5. Datu Mujahid S. Kiram
6. Dayang-Dayang Redha S. Kiram
7. Datu Mahakuttah S. Kiram
 

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram studied Islam in Lahore, Pakistan (1995-1996). He got a Bachelor of Arts (BA) degree from AE College, Zamboanga. He also served the local community as a government official. At present he is involved as a civil society leader in the Province of Sulu which opposes the US-RP Balikatan Exercises of the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).
 

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram was born in Jolo. Jolo was once the capital of a maritime empire that traded with the great  Empire of China and with other kingdoms in Southeast Asia. 

As Raja Muda of Sulu, the Sultanate is Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram birthright. There is a sacred bond between the Sultan and his people, the Rayaat, that is handed down from generation to generation between the royal family and trusted people who live in Sabah and in the Sulu Archipelago.

The Sulu Archipelago includes Palawan, Sabah, Zamboanga Peninsula, Basilan, Tawi-Tawi, the Sprately islands and the Balambagan group of islands.  Historically it was part of  Nusantara. According to oral history and traditions, Sulu has been independent and sovereign centuries before the birth of the Republic of Philippines. Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram's ancestors contracted treaties with powerful nations and defended Sulu rights to freedom in traditional way of life against invaders.

But from the start of the Philippine Republic which lumped Sulu with the rest of the islands under the name Philippine Archipelago, Sulu has experienced devastation, death and downfall.

The Macaski Judgment over the Sabah issue in 1939 was a blow to the Sulu Sultanate. Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram's grandfather, Sultan Moh. Esmail E. Kiram I was one of the recipients of that judgment. The Macaski settlement divided Sulu into divisions

Sabah became a private property and the heirs of the Sultan were divided among themselves. One group wanted Sabah for sale while another group wanted to take it back.

When Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram's  grandfather, Sultan Moh. Esmail E. Kiram I, granted authority to the Philippine government through Pres. Diosdado Macapagal and Pres. Ferdinand Marcos, it was with the hope that the Philippine government would become a caretaker of the domain of the Sulu Sultanate to help the Muslims in this archipelago. This transfer of sovereign authority carried with these obligations and agreements.

As Sulu political power is declined, the unity of the Tausug people in the whole archipelago also has weakened. The economic life of the whole region was brought to the lowest level. Then came the Muslim rebellion and the civil war in 1974 that devastated the whole Sulu. Hundreds of thousands innocent people died.
 

In 1974 Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram's  father was installed as the Sultan of Sulu. His father's twelve year reign started the slow but steady recovery of Sulu people. 

However after his death (February 16, 1986) there were several claimants made by pretenders (royals and non-royals) to the title of Sultan.

During the coronation process of Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram as the 35th Sultan of Sulu

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram, 35th Sultan of Sulu, together with 
Mellany S. Kiram and Crown Prince Moh. Ehsn S. Kiram.

Sultan Muedzul-Lail Tan Kiram has waited  twenty-two years for the official recognition to succeed his father.

Source :  Royal Sultanate of Sulu Facebook
(Joined Facebook on 12th May 2011)

**********************************************************

Sultan Muhammad Fuad A. Kiram I 

The 35th Reigning Sultan of Sulu 

 The last son of HM Sultan Esmail E. Kiram I 

(Sultan of Sulu 1947 to 1973)

Sultan Muhammad Fuad A. Kiram I 

Indonesia Minister of Religious Affairs granted the rank and tittle of hereditary knighthood 

by Sultan Fuad A. Kiram I

(2nd December 2011)

Chancellor of Al Zaytun granted the rank and tittle of hereditary knighthood 

by Sultan Fuad A. Kiram I

(Al Zaytun is the biggest Islamic boarding school in Indonesia)

  ( 27th November 2011)

Source :  

The Royal Hashemite Sultanate of Sulu & Sabah Facebook
 (joined Facebook on 7th May 2011)

Related posts:

Sulu history and the Chinese 

The former Sulu Sultanate, a foreign problem in history 

The Sultan of Sulu reclaims eastern Sabah, MNLF ... 

Stop paying quit rent to Sultan of Sulu, it's time to close   

Sabah's invaders only flog a dead horse!

Related articles:

Lahad Datu: 'Datuk Seri' sought by cops over Sulu incursion turns himself in 

Lahad Datu: Ridhwan said to have been running NGO for eight years
Tourists returning to Sabah 

Lahad Datu: Eight more suspects charged over intrusion
Insurance firms waiting for green light to cover tourists in Sabah

Will the lessons be learnt from the financial crisis in Cyprus?

This time, it is Cyprus’ turn to face a bitter financial crisis as bank depositors get hit and capital controls are imposed. 

Demonstrators in Athens. The roots of the eurozone crisis lie in its unwillingness to uphold fiscal discipline. Photograph: Louisa Gouliamaki/AFP/Getty Images

THE financial crisis in Cyprus has again shown that over-dependence on the financial sector and an unregulated and liberalised financial system can cause havoc to an economy.

The particular manner in which a financial crisis manifests itself may be different from country to country, depending on the ways the country became financially over-reliant or over-liberalised, and also on how ever-changing external conditions affect the country.

For the past two weeks, Cyprus hit the headlines because of the rapid twists and turns of its crisis, the terms of the bailout it negotiated with its European and IMF creditors, the hit that bank depositors are forced to take, and finally the “capital controls” that the government has imposed to prevent bank runs and capital flight out of the country.

Depositors with more than 100,000 (RM396,000) could lose more than half their savings.

Bank customers can only withdraw 300 (RM1,189) daily; cashing of cheques is prohibited; transfers of funds to accounts held abroad or in other credit institutions are prohibited; transfers due to trade transactions above 5,000 (RM19,832) a day require central bank permission; the use of credit cards overseas is restricted to 5,000 (RM19,832) per account a month; and travellers can only take out 1,000 (RM3,960) or equivalent in foreign currency per trip.

These capital controls, announced on March 28, were highlighted in the media as the first to be imposed by a country belonging to the European Union.

It was like the slaying of a “sacred cow”, because the freedom to move funds out of and into the European countries had been treated almost like a human right.

But it is this total freedom for the flow of funds that has contributed or even been ultimately responsible for so many financial crises in so many countries in the past few decades.

This liberalised system of capital flows enables residents to place their funds abroad or to purchase foreign assets like bonds and shares.

It also enables foreigners to bring in funds either for short-term speculation and investment or longer-term investment and savings.

After the Second World War, capital controls were the rule: flows of funds to and from abroad were mainly restricted to activities linked to the real economy of trade, direct investments and travel.

From the mid-1970s, the liberalisation of capital flows took place in the rich economies and gradually spread to many developing countries.

The finance ministers of Brazil and of other developing countries have been protesting against the easy-money policies in rich countries that have had adverse effects on emerging economies.

When the internal or external situation changes and investor perception changes with it, the inflow of funds turns into its opposite.

The sudden outflow of funds, and depreciation of the currency, can then cause an even more devastating effect on the economy.

In the 1997-99 crisis, East Asian countries that had over-liberalised their financial system found that local banks and companies had borrowed heavily in US dollars.

When their currencies depreciated, many of the borrowers could not service their loans.

The countries’ foreign reserves dropped to danger levels, forcing them to go to the IMF for bailout loans.

Malaysia fortunately had some control over the amount local companies could borrow from abroad, which prevented it from falling into an external debt crisis.

The imposition of capital controls over outflows in September 1998 enabled Malaysia to avoid a financial crisis requiring an IMF bailout.

The immediate response from the IMF and the Western establishment was that the capital controls would destroy the Malaysian economy.

Today, the economic orthodoxy has changed, and most analysts including at the IMF give credit to Malaysia for the capital controls.

The Malaysian controls included a temporary ban on foreigners transferring their ringgit denominated funds (for example in the stock market) abroad, a limit to the funds local travellers could take out of the country, and limits to overseas investments by local companies and individuals.

Today, the IMF itself has changed its position, saying that capital controls in certain situations are not only legitimate but may also be necessary.

It has partially recognised that unregulated capital flows can cause financial instability and economic damage.

In the case of Cyprus, analysts now conclude that its growth model was flawed because it was too reliant on a bloated financial sector, having become a haven for foreign savers, especially from Russia.

But a major factor in its recent crisis was that the country’s biggest banks invested in Greek government bonds.

In October 2011, a bailout package was arranged for Greece by the European Union and the IMF.

Part of the bailout terms was that holders of Greek government bonds would take a “haircut” or loss of about 50%.

This Greek debt restructuring meant a loss of 4bil (RM15.9bil) for banks in Cyprus, a huge amount in a country whose GNP is only 18bil (RM71.4bil).

Now, it is Cyprus’ turn to be reconfigured and re-created as part of a 10bil (RM39.7bil) bailout scheme. The two biggest banks, Bank of Cyprus and Laiki Bank are to be drastically restructured, with the latter to be closed.

The biggest innovation designed by the European Union and IMF creditors is that the bank depositors will have to take losses. Deposits less than 100,000 (RM396,000) are to be spared, after an original plan to also “tax” them by 6.75% was cancelled after a huge outcry and the fear of contagion, with bank runs in many European countries.

The final plan is for deposits over 100,000 (RM396,000) in the two banks to take losses not by the originally planned 9.9% but by much more.

The new European policy of getting bank depositors to take a big hit in bailouts of banks will have big ramifications for public confidence in banks.

The new perception is that money put as savings in banks is no longer safe.

The question remains: will the policymakers learn the real lessons from these crises?

GLOBALTRENDS BY MARTIN KHOR 

Related posts:

Financial crises a result of governance failures

Why call US tech giant rotten Apple?

Play Video
 

Apple products have gained huge popularity in China over recent years. Iphones and ipads are the "must-have" accessory, particularly in urban areas while the company’s stores are often overflowing with customers trying out the latest gadgets.

But there’s now a scandal brewing over Apple’s warranty and repair policy, and concern that Chinese consumers are being given a rough ride.

In a recent interview, Apple CEO Tim Cook said China will soon become Apple’s biggest market.

For Apple, business must stay business

Apple Inc has been having a hard time in China since China Central Television (CCTV) revealed on March 15 that the technology giant allegedly applies a different service policy to Chinese consumers than in other countries and regions. A wave of onslaught has surged in Chinese State media in the past few days, with Chinese authorities ordering the company to change its policies or face punishment according to Chinese regulations.

However, many Chinese fans have shown their loyalty toward Apple, allying with some foreign media outlets in saying that this is a "well-coordinated" campaign led by the Chinese government to pinch the US company. It is also said that Apple is merely the victim of China's vengeance against the US government's treatment of Chinese telecom giants. China's Huawei and ZTE have long been restricted in the US markets under security and other accusations.

The drama began as a typical business incident, as CCTV did not only point its finger at Apple in its March 15 exposé. It is no good for either side that the issue is gradually turning political.

Generally speaking, CCTV's annual showcase program on World Consumer Rights Day has played a positive role in digging out business scandals. It is also the reason why the program has remained influential among Chinese viewers for a long time.

Had Apple been more sincere in its response to the criticism, the result could have been different. The statement Apple made right after the CCTV exposé was very different with that of other multinational companies who were also reported to have consumer rights issues. With the sheer weight of the company behind it, Apple's detached tone could easily be seen as proof of arrogance.

Apple has won respect from Chinese consumers with its perseverance in developing leading technologies and styles. But the company is not impeccable. Like its continuing stride in exploring for technological breakthroughs, the company also needs to keep working hard to raise its service quality.

Apple should not follow the media speculation and consider itself the target of political persecution. As for its fans in China, if they do love this brand, they should let the truth emerge instead of joining the speculations.

If the issue developed into a head-on confrontation between Apple and the Chinese authorities, the US company will never be a winner, nor will China necessarily do well. Of course, Apple will suffer the most, as its products are already facing increasing competition in China.

It will be wise for Apple not to entangle itself into political debates. For Apple, it is still a matter of business. - Global Times

Why call US tech giant rotten Apple?

State broadcaster Central China Television (CCTV) took the first bite. The People's Daily followed, and now others like Guangming Daily and The Global Times have joined the fray.

China's state media has been piling the pressure on Apple since the American tech giant was criticised during CCTV's annual show on March 15 to mark World Consumer Day.

This week alone, the People's Daily has run articles four days in a row to lash out at Apple for allegedly discriminating against its customers in China.

"Why is it that Apple is so incredibly brazen and arrogant in China when it doesn't dare to be so in the United States and other countries?" asked a commentator in the People's Daily, the mouthpiece of the Communist Party. It also likened Apple to a wolf pretending to be innocent.

Many observers are wondering about the real reasons behind the coordinated media attacks.

Could China be retaliating against the difficulties faced by its tech behemoth Huawei in the US? Or is it Apple's lack of advertisements in the state media?

"I wish I knew," Bill Bishop, a Beijing-based analyst and founder of The Sinocism China Newsletter, told The Straits Times.

There are some who say there is nothing more to it than Apple behaving badly.

"When it comes to China, a market with great potential, Apple has taken advantage of its fans' crazy enthusiasm by using incredulous sales tactics," wrote blogger Shu Shusi, a frequent commentator on consumer issues.

Not only are iPhones released later and sold at a higher price in China than elsewhere, their after- sales service is bad too, he added.

Apple might also have violated Chinese regulations, noted others. CCTV on Wednesday said consumers had complained that Apple offered only a one-year warranty for its MacBook Air in China, when the country's rules mandate a two-year warranty for the main laptop parts.

Then there is the sense that Apple needed to be taught a lesson for not being contrite enough.

"Errant companies" featured on CCTV's 315 Evening Gala, like Chinese net firm Netease, had been quick to apologise and make peace. But Apple insisted that its China customers enjoy the highest service standards.

Some wonder whether the attacks are just a case of tit-for-tat.

A US Congressional report last October accused Huawei of being a security threat.

"Just as the US attacked Huawei, China is taking it out on Apple in revenge," claimed "Blank Neo" on his Sina Weibo microblog.

Another possible explanation could be Beijing's unease with the wide usage of iPhones in China.

"There is a serious official desire for an indigenous mobile operating system," noted Bishop.

Also, the iPhone's operating system may be seen as a foreign security threat as it is a closed one and not easily monitored. The Android operating system, in contrast, is open and thus less of a threat, say observers.

The attacks could be a way of attracting eyeballs, suggested a consumer rights advocate.

"Apple has a huge customer base in China. Its news value is high," Wang Hai said.

What can Apple do to stop the rash of attacks?

Said Bishop: "I expect Apple to have to change its policies, express public contrition, and then this particular storm will blow over.

"They may also need to buy some ads on CCTV, as (search engine) Baidu and many other Chinese firms who have been on the receiving end did."

By Ho Ai Li

The Straits Times

Related posts:
  Apple's rot starts with its Samsung lawsuit win
Apple patent claims stifling innovation; Japan court rules