Descendants of the Sultanate have pursued compensation and damages from Malaysia, leading to international arbitration awards and protracted legal battles. Recent developments have introduced a new layer of intrigue with the involvement of Omar, a controversial figure whose connections to the Kiram clan are unverified. His role has added complexity to an already intricate case.

Omar’s Role in the Sulu Claim

Omar, an Australian-Filipino citizen who reportedly passed away recently, styled himself as a "Crown Prince" of the Sultanate of Sulu. He adopted the Kiram surname through a private agreement with Sultan Fuad. According to this arrangement, Omar provided financial support and endorsed Fuad’s ascension to the Sultanate’s throne in exchange for being named Crown Prince and granted the right to use the Kiram name.

Despite his claimed title, Omar had no ancestral ties to the Kiram family, the historical rulers of the Sultanate of Sulu. His connection to the claim was forged solely through this private agreement.

Omar is believed to have facilitated the introduction of Sultan Fuad to a legal team and financial backers involved in pursuing the claim. Although there is no evidence that he directly funded the early stages of the case, Omar reportedly played a pivotal role in establishing relationships and orchestrating the involvement of external parties. His financial contributions, if any, appear to have been minimal, limited to preliminary efforts that were later reimbursed by litigation funding.

Malaysia’s Legal Counteroffensive

In response to the arbitration initiated by the heirs of the Sultanate, the Malaysian government has launched a robust international legal counteroffensive. Central to this effort are two discovery requests filed in U.S. courts—one in the Southern District of New York and another in the District Court of Delaware. These legal mechanisms aim to uncover financial transfers and communications between the litigation funding entity Therium and the legal representatives of the Sulu plaintiffs.

The discovery process is designed to gather evidence for potential civil and criminal actions in Spanish courts. Malaysia’s ultimate objective is to pursue legal action against the arbitrator, Gonzalo Stampa, as well as the law firm Cremades and Associates, which represented the heirs of the Sultanate of Sulu. Other targets include Therium and lawyers Paul Cohen and Elisabeth Mason, who acted as representatives for the heirs.

Malaysia has enlisted the services of Baker & Hostetler LLP, a prominent law firm known for handling high-profile cases, including the recovery of $14.5 billion in the global liquidation of Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities. The firm’s expertise underscores Malaysia’s commitment to challenging the arbitration’s legitimacy and holding involved parties accountable.

Implications of the Discovery Process

The discovery process in U.S. courts is expected to shed light on the financial and strategic dynamics underlying the Sulu claim. By exposing the motivations and relationships among the claim’s backers, the evidence could undermine the credibility of the heirs and their representatives. Omar’s limited role, coupled with the reliance on external funding, underscores the weaknesses in the claim’s foundation.

Moreover, Malaysia’s efforts to litigate in Spanish courts and defend against asset seizures in Luxembourg highlight the international dimensions of the dispute. The case has significant implications for state sovereignty and the use of arbitration mechanisms to challenge historical claims.

As the discovery process unfolds, the revelations are likely to bolster Malaysia’s legal and historical position. Transparency in these proceedings may ultimately weaken the heirs’ case, reinforcing the view that their claims lack both legitimacy and credibility.