The history of man, dates back when people has no established system. This evolves into civilized manner and thus a system of understanding is developed. People in the olden days erect a mark or monument to prove that they agree in one thing; this has developed further when writing was developed. Education start to flourish when man has started to write and record even without writing medium; they draw in the form of hierogliphiics and pictures where they live to denote the culture, their tradition and way of life. Later, a written method was developed and kingdom of nations used the Decree to create laws to follow;  the system of writing further evolves among men , later made agreements  in writings when they want to convey anything. At the start of 15th centurty, people and country agree and bind their agreement with "Treaty"; this serves as the distinctive mark that an agreement has reached by two parties even to an individual people or countries.

Since the institution of the modern world, the only way to bind any mutual consent is by writing an agreement. This written agreement has evolved further and defined into many purpose called "Contract". The contract specifies the conditions of both party to the contract and finally signed it with a witness. This is now the basis of legal framework of the whole civilized man on earth. The contract serves a definite and specific conditions of which both party agree. The Contract stipulates present condition and rectify further any events that may affect the contract in the provisions of the articles.

Countries evolve and diminished through the colonization process of implementing war to the weaker nation. This has done by almost all European countries followed by the West. Asian countries have no widespread history of colonization. China and India has undergone internal turmoils but never have they come out of Asia to colonize another country. The only country in Asia who has attempted to expand their territory is Japan due to economic pressure from the West. Treaty of Paris explicitly defined that only countries defeated in war can be included in their territory under the old principle of the spoils of war.

Sabah did not acquire by the British Empire by war. It was owned by the Royal Sultanate of Sulu Kingdom. It was contractually leased to a private British Company. Now, the 'Leased Contract of 1878" has a very clear stipulations clause that in no way it can be transferred to another company or country. The contract says it will take effect until the end of time. It does not matter if it is now, 2010. The contract is effective till today. The "TRANSFER" to the British Government is outright “ILLEGAL". The "TRANSFER" to Malaysia when they got their independence is also "ILLEGAL". This is double jeopardy in the rule of Law. How Malaysia can reason to the whole world as such and manipulate Sabah as if that is their own? They were even reminded many times by America and Britain upon realizing when they return Turtle Islands that Sabah belongs to the Royal Sultanate of Sulu Kingdom and hence it was called Royal Sultanate of Sulu and North Borneo Kingdom. It is not an empty claim; there are legal documents of 'Lease Contract'. There is a  ‘Letter of Administration from the High Court of North Borneo’. No Court in the world will allow anybody to administer a piece of private land that was owned by someone of whom that does not belong to the person that administer, the chance is he is the owner of the land. Unless, the appointment body is a government itself who own the land and chooses someone. What the Royal Sulu and North Borneo traditional kingdom needed is a dynamic partner to develop their land and definitely, if it is not Malaysia, it must be someone who has the guts to say to Malaysia to give way if not to kick Malaysia out of their rented land. It is indeed  questionable if Malaysia is real and a legal lessee even if they are paying the original lease of USD$ 1,500.00 dollars only for the last 47 years, being "NOT " a party to the "Lease Contract of 1878".