not force your brothers and sisters of Bakassi origin into an untoward slavery in the Cameroons. Where is the plebiscite of their intention to abscond from Nigeria and move over to Cameroon? August 14th 2008 is fast approaching and the presidency is threatening to carry through their so call Green Tea agreement with the Cameroon and yield Bakassi to them. All world's precedents are opposed to the position of Aso Rock and why force someone who wants to stay in the nation out of the nation; whereas Nigeria resisted the desire by Biafra to go their own way? Is it double standards or what? Why is nobody mentioning the pact between Gowon's government and Cameroon to help them during the Biafran -Nigerian civil war to blockade Biafra into submission? In exchange Cameroon was offered Bakassi as a gift for their conspiratory collaboration. Why has no pundit or writer ever discussed the impact or lack thereof of the minority judgment of Honorable Abdul Koroma, the African Judge on the bench of ICJ from Senegal? Why can't Aso Rock tell the world that the action is against 
public opinion of the Nigerian people? Such ICJ's judgment can be shut down by a willing patriotic Nigerian president based on the feelings of the Nigerian people. According to the referenced Judge Abdul Koroma minority decision, the conclusion reached by the Court with respect to the 1884 Treaty between Great Britain and the Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar regarding the Bakassi Peninsula is tantamount to a recognition of political reality rather than to an application of the treaty and the relevant legal principles. In my view, it is not the function of the Court to recognize or consecrate political reality but rather to apply the law in ruling on disputes before it. In my view, the approaches taken by the Court to reach its conclusions on these two issues are both fundamentally flawed.The main purpose of applying the law is to do justice and where the law is not correctly applied it could lead to an injustice. It is principally because of my disagreement with the conclusions and findings of the Court regarding these two issues that 1 have decided to exercise the faculty to enter this dissenting opinion as provided for by the Statute.
There is, therefore, no legal basis on which to hold, as the Court has done in this case, that the protector State was entitled to cede territory without the consent and in breach of the protective agreement, by stating that "fr
om the outset Britain regarded itself as administering the territories comprised in the 1884 Treaty, and not just protecting them" (para. 207) or that under the law prevalent at the time (in 1913) Great Britain was entitled "to determine its boundaries" (para. 209), even when this affected the territory of a protected State without its consent and inconsistent with the provisions of the relevant Treaty.
There is, therefore, no legal basis on which to hold, as the Court has done in this case, that the protector State was entitled to cede territory without the consent and in breach of the protective agreement, by stating that "fr
om the outset Britain regarded itself as administering the territories comprised in the 1884 Treaty, and not just protecting them" (para. 207) or that under the law prevalent at the time (in 1913) Great Britain was entitled "to determine its boundaries" (para. 209), even when this affected the territory of a protected State without its consent and inconsistent with the provisions of the relevant Treaty.Icheoku says that Aso Rock should have a change of mind and consider what is in the best interest of Nigeria and not sacrifice her territorial integrity on the alter of appeasing the international community.
This E-mail This
ReplyDeleteFresh Outcry By Bakassi Indigenes Ahead August 14 Handover
By Ofonime Umanah, Bureau Chief, Port Harcourt and Bassey Inyang, Correspondent, Calabar
Grief-stricken people of Bakassi whose native homes will be up for grab by Cameroun this week are lamenting afresh their plight ahead of the August 14 handover date even as they blame their woes on former president Olusegun Obasanjo for his role in ceding the Peninsula.
The people have also expressed anger with their representatives in the National Assembly for failing to stand up to fight when there were hopes that the damage done by Obasanjo could still be redeemed.
They said in separate interviews that they were giving up hopes and were now depending on the Almighty to give them the direction, since their leaders had failed them.
Paramount ruler of Bakassi Local Government Area, Etinyin Etim Okon Edet said although last week's judgement of an Abuja Court vindicated him, the judgment itself was belated.
"The high court decision is the work of God. It has vindicated me. I told them right from the outset that it was wicked and selfish to handover Bakassi to Cameroun. But it is too late because as I speak to you, Northern Bakassi is gone.
" Archibong Town, Usakedet and other fishing settlements inhabited right from time by the Efik have been given to Cameroun. Our lawmakers have failed us and indeed I am surprised they are just waking up from sleep," he said.
A native of Obutong village in Bakassi said: "The planned handover of our ancestral land is the biggest sacrilege the federal government can ever commit on a people. In fact, if we have our way we would resist any move by government to go ahead with the handover.
"The so called new location for our resettlement is not acceptable. We are fishermen, not farmers, therefore bringing our people who are used to the creeks to an upland place like Ekpri Ikang totally defeats sound reasoning," he said.
Benjamin Cobham, native of Atabong community, whose area is among those penciled down by the federal government to be handed over to Cameroun deplored the insensitivity and wickedness of the Obasanjo's administration which went ahead to give Bakassi to Cameroon.
He said Bakassi people and their unborn children would be told the story of how one man with the connivance the former Cross River governor, Mr. Donald Duke and some so-called eminent persons from the area sold their land.
Cobham told Sunday Independent that the Bakassi people reject the new site for their relocation and questioned the practicability of the current resettlement efforts of the government. He said the people of Bakassi have lost confidence in the ability of the Nigerian government to protect them.
"Which government that has the interest of its people would willingly cede its land and by extension, its people to another country, let alone Cameroun? Cameroun as we all know is not interested in us. It is interested in the resources there.
"Just look at the way Nigeria pulled away her army, thereby living us at the mercy of Camerounian gendarmes who treat us as second class citizens in our own land. Right now, we have decided to protect ourselves in whatever way.
"Our government has failed us and I can assure that the planned handover of our land to Cameroun will fail. Our gods will fight for us. Our ancestors who are buried in all those places ceded to Cameroun would arise that day and disrupt their evil plan," Cobham said.
Some of the women spoken to by Sunday Independent at Ikang waterside said they have never known any other home other than Bakassi.
For instance, Eka Kokomma said: "We are Efik, some of us are from the neighbouring Akwa Ibom State. In fact, the entire Niger Delta is represented in the Bakassi area. Most of us are peace-loving fishermen. We women are into the business of selling fish. We live in the creeks not on land, so the idea of saying you want to relocate us to dry land is stupid and let me tell you, it will not work."
One of the Bakassi refugees who gave his name as Okon Ekanem said: "The International Court of Justice at The Hague has taken a decision based on facts and figures presented before it and we cannot help the matter and Bakassi is now here."
Ekanem said since they cannot reverse the decision of the World Court, the only option available was to commence the actual process of integration between the Bakassi people and their host community, Akpabuyo.
He argued that the Bakassi people have always shared the same traditional, language and historical affinity with the Akpabuyo people, which implies that the integration process would be very easy.
Meanwhile, Kingmakers (Etuboms)in Efik kingdom have called on the Federal Government not to renege on its plans to hand over the remaining parts of Bakassi on August 14 as agreed by both countries pursuant to the implementation of the contents of the Green Tree Agreement, which followed the Judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ)which declared on October 10, 2002 that the territory does not belong to Nigeria.
The kingmakers said any action to the contrary from Nigeria, as canvassed by some persons, could lead to war between both countries.
They said the entire Nigerians should support Yar'Adua in the handover process so as to enable a smooth implementation of the Green Tree Agreement and the ICJ judgment.
The kingmakers said since more than 80 per cent of Bakassi is in Cameroun "to prevent the unification of Bakassi now, is to ask for a fight."
They said the security interest of the nation would better be protected if the entire territory is handed over to Cameroon and not "the course of dangerous antagonism that is being advocated by an increasing number of people."
The kingmakers made their position on the matter known through a statement they issued in Calabar, at the weekend through their umbrella body, the Etubom Traditional Council of Efik Nation.
The statement tagged: "Dangerous Game Over Bakassi," was signed by the Chairman of the Etubom Traditional Council (ETC), Etubom Ayi E. Edem; Chiarman Obong's Council; HRH Etubom Dr. John Henry Bassey; and the Secretary of the Etubom Traditional Council , Etubom Dr. Alex Ekeng.
It read in part: "Nigeria and Cameroun cannot afford to go to war, because war would be intractable, bloody, wasteful; and profitable only to a handful of persons who would be defence contractors on both sides.
"The Nigerian / Cameroun war of 1914 proved this fact; we do not need a modern, high - tech version of that destructive moment of our mutual history.
"Both are very large countries (Nigeria, 335,000 square miles, Cameroun 300,000 square miles)with the border that is about 1,000 miles long, running from the coast of the Atlantic Ocean to Lake Chad. War between the two would indeed be very messy.
"We have repeatedly said that we shall not allow the Efik Kingdom which is both in Nigeria and Cameroun, to become a theatre of intractable war. Those who feel concerned should help us, either by preaching peace, or by keeping quiet."
Dwelling further on the issue, the kingmakers said: "First of all we are totally and honestly in support of President Umaru Yar'Adua, as he moves to complete the return of Abana and Atabong to Camerounian sovereignty. Accordingly, we call on all our subjects in the affected communities to continue to conduct themselves peaceably; and to stand against the antics of people working to dislodge them from their ancestral home, to a resettlement scheme in Akpabuyo, from which they (the organisers)are reaping quantum of unearned incomes.
"We, as their traditional protectors, shall work very hard to secure for them, the best possible material condition of life, in the Republic of Cameroun.
"Those that have fled their homes, their communities, to the refugee camp in Ikang will soon be able to return, once we are able to put in place, adequate security arrangements to conduce their safety."
Bakassi: CAN Berates Obasanjo
ReplyDeletePrint Friendly
Fayil Friday.
Less than a week to the formal handover of the disputed Bakassi Peninsula by the Nigerian government to Cameroon in line with the World Court judgement, the secretary general of the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), Engr. Samuel Salifu, has berated ex-president Olusegun Obasanjo for betraying the nation, describing his action as "foolish".
Engineer Salifu, in an exclusive interview with Leadership Sunday said "Obasanjo should not have taken the matter to the World Court in the first place without wide consultations with Nigerians or "without a water-tight legal team".
He posited that if the former president had consulted with Nigerians, then he would have received ideas on how to solve the problem amicably.
"Even if the matter eventually went to court, he would have gone there with a water-tight legal team that would have argued our case well instead of going there ill-prepared and betraying our kith and kin," he added.
The CAN scribe said that with the judgement in favour of Cameroon, there was nothing President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua, whom he described as a straight-forward person, could do rather than to comply.
He said, "To me personally, mind you, not CAN, I will say without mincing words that what ex-president Obasanjo did was not only unwise but foolish. Members of the National Assembly are complaining that they were not carried along in the process that led to the ceding of Bakassi to Cameroon; the military too. So Obasanjo was the only wise man. Is that possible? Nothing is done like that anywhere in the world. I mean the people there should choose where they want to belong. A president does not just sit down and cede a position of a nation without consultation.
"But he has done it and put President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua in trouble. The World Court has ruled and Yar’Adua must handover the land and people to Cameroon. What can do?" Salifu queried.
He decried the call by some Nigerians that President Umaru Musa Yar’adua is slow in action, saying: "I know some people are already calling him (Yar’Adua) Mr. Go-slow. It depends on one’s mentally. I have my own sympathy for him. I have said several times without mincing words that Yar’Adua is an honest fellow."
He enjoined Nigerians not to have sleepless nights over the demotion of former EFCC boss Nuhu Ribadu, as he described him as a ‘good man but allowed former president Obasanjo to ridicule him’.
August 14: Part Of Nigeria Goes To Cameroon
ReplyDeletePrint Friendly
Fayil Friday.
FG Set To Displace 30, 000 People
We Are Not Happy Handing Over Our Land -- C/River SSG
Barring a last-minute change of heart by the federal government, over 30, 000 Nigerians living in the Bakassi peninsula would be rendered homeless in the next four days. The federal government led by President Umaru Yar’Adua is set to hand over the disputed area of Cross River State to the Cameroonian authorities on Thursday, despite loud protests and a recent high court injunction restraining government from taking the action. The ceding of the land seems to be a done deal.
Senator Bassey Ewa Henshaw, from Cross River South Senatorial District, told LEADERSHIP SUNDAY that the state government had provided only 100 housing units for the people that would be rendered homeless. According to him, "the 2006 census revealed that there are over 30,000 Nigerians in Bakassi. But the secretary to the relocation committee in Cross River State says they are building only 100 housing units."
He also pointed out that, since 2006, more children have been born to these people, which makes the earlier census figure tentative. "In fact, if you go to Ikang there are about 2,000 to 3,000 refugees holed up in primary schools. The women would have given births since they moved in there," said Henshaw.
Things seem to have fallen into a spin for the federal government, the relocation committee and the state government. LEADERSHIP SUNDAY learnt that there will be a meeting of all parties involved in the handover tomorrow. "We are meeting to resolve all outstanding issues on the handover," said Senator Florence Ita-Giwa. When LEADERSHIP SUNDAY managed to reach her on the phone, she was already on her way out of Abuja to Calabar for the all-important meeting. Also confirming the meeting was Johnson Ebokpo, the secretary to the Cross River State government (SSG). Though he sounded strained when he spoke on the handover, he explained that the state government was only collaborating with the federal government on the matter. "The truth is we are not happy handing over our land, or will you be happy handing over a part of your room to strangers?" he asked. But he insisted that contrary to the belief that the state was not prepared for the handover, only an on-the-spot assessment of the measures already put in place to accommodate those who will leave Bakassi can serve to convince the world. "It is not fair to say that we have not prepared well enough," he said.
On the controversy over the high court ruling purportedly restraining the federal government, the Cross River SSG said that only the attorney-general of the federation and minister of justice, Michael Aaondoakaa, and the ministry of foreign affairs can answer the question as to whether the handover will take place.
But going by the federal government's position early last week, there would be no going back on the handover of Bakassi. Recent comments of Aaondoakaa suggest the thinking in government circle over the Abuja High Court ruling obtained by indigenes of the disputed land. The minister of justice insisted that the ruling in no way bars the federal government from handing over Bakassi on August 14. The people of Bakassi are back in court, in what might lead to a contempt charge against Aaondoakaa. According to the indigenes, the court ruling of July 31 is clear enough and should not be disobeyed. Through their counsel, Kayode Fasitire, a Form 48 (Notice of Consequence of Disobedience of Order of Court) has since been filed. On July 31, a federal high court sitting in Abuja ruled that the status quo on Bakassi be maintained. But the minister of justice said that what the court statement meant to him is that the initial International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling be carried out, a reason why the federal government insists on going on with the handover.
Speaking further, Aaondoakaa said that no Nigerian would be displaced. He said that the indigenes could still choose to live in Bakassi but as Cameroonians. But the indigenes insist that they are Nigerians and that if they have to live in Nigeria as Nigerians, the country must make adequate provisions for them. That was why they went to court in the first place.
Loss of Bakassi painful, says Yar'Adua
ReplyDeleteFrom Madu Onuorah, Mohammed Abubakar, Kelechi Okoronkwo (Abuja), Anietie Akpan (Calabar) and Willie Etim (Yenagoa)
THERE is nothing to celebrate about the handover of the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroun tomorrow because the loss of the oil-rich area is "painful," President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua said yesterday.
He also sounded as if the cession was a fait accompli.
And as the debate on the handover rages, Nigerian troops moved into the formerly disputed territory yesterday to secure it for the ceremony.
Describing the handover of the territory as "very painful to all", the President, nonetheless, said "it is a commitment we have made to the international community. And we have a responsibility to keep it."
The handing over of the area is to be formalised by Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Michael Aondokaa.
The President also said that the welfare of the indigenous people of Nigeria that would be affected was a top priority of his administration, and assured them that efforts would be made to ensure that those displaced got the maximum comfort.
Special Adviser to the President (Communications), Olusegun Adeniyi, told journalists that "what has been of concern to the President and will be a priority to him is the welfare of the people of Bakassi as bonafide citizens of Nigeria who have found themselves in a territory legally given to another country."
He also noted that to date, about N3 billion had been released by the Federal Government for their resettlement while another N1 billion was given out for those in Borno State who lost territories to Chad in the same International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling that led to the loss of Bakassi to Cameroun.
Adeniyi stressed that the hand-over would be done as the government was not encumbered by a recent Nigerian court ruling, which restrained it from going ahead with the exercise.
"With respect to Bakassi, fortunately, there are no legal encumbrances as many imagine," he said.
He also noted that in handing over the territory, the Minister of Justice would rely on the March 19, 2004 ruling of the Federal High Court delivered by Justice S.J Adah.
Adah had ruled that since the issue had been determined by the ICJ, the decision binds all sovereign countries that are members of the United Nations and no forum domesticum of member-states can assume jurisdiction to review again what has been decided by the World Court.
Relying on the certified true copy of Adah's ruling, Adeniyi said the Nigerian legal system has made provision for this kind of situation where courts of concurrent jurisdiction would give different rulings on the same issue.
The certified true copy of Justice Adah's ruling reads in part: "From the further affidavits of the plaintiffs, it is clear that there was a dispute over the boundaries between Nigeria and Cameroun and the International Court of Justice (ICJ) delivered judgment dated October 10, 2002. The part of the territory these plaintiffs have brought before this court was involved in the area litigated upon at the ICJ. Since the issue had been determined at that level, the decision binds all sovereign states that are members of United Nations and no forum domesticum of member-states can assume jurisdiction to review again what has been decided by the ICJ."
Nigerian soldiers have moved into the creeks of Bakassi Peninsula as the UN and both countries put finishing touches on the August 14, 2008 historic hand-over.
Large numbers of the soldiers were noticed on Monday and yesterday moving towards Ikang and at the Ikang beach, the jetty leading to Abana in Bakassi.
The Guardian learnt that the soldiers were in the Peninsula to ensure safety and safe passage for the officials that are set to handover the rest of Bakassi, an area vacated two years ago to Cameroun, following the Green Tree Agreement (GTA).
The Public Relations Officer of the 13 Motorised Infantry Brigade, Captain Ebri Eteng, confirmed the movement of troops but said they were on normal security surveillance.
According to him, "this has nothing to do with Bakassi, it is just normal routine patrol of the Operation MESA" , a code name for the joint security outfit in Cross River State.
"You know recently there have been increased activities by militants in the peninsula and we are providing our own security measures."
Meanwhile, the people of Bakassi still maintain that they have not been informed of any handing over in Abana and that they are going about their normal lives."
Sources in Ikang told The Guardian that militants are battle ready to forestall any handing over.
"As far as we are concerned, the National Assembly has not ratified the treaty Gowon signed with Ahidjo (the late Camerounian President) hence Bakassi remains our land and territory," a source said.
"We are warning the UN and others to stay clear of the peninsula or else they will regret their actions. How can the Nigerian government be so cowardly to hand over a territory that the entire nation through the National Assembly has not given its blessings?"
At the Eastern Naval Command, top officers declined comments on the matter but a source there said: "As far as the Navy in Calabar is concerned, we are not aware of any movement of naval vessels to the Peninsula and there has been no signal from the headquarters to that effect."
But a statement by the Secretary to the State Government, Mr. Fidelis Ugbo, said: "Thursday, August 14, 2008, Cross River State Government will be playing host to officials from the Presidency and the international community at Abana during the official handing over ceremony of the Bakassi Peninsula to the Republic of Cameroun.
"As a government that believes in the rule of law, we want to appeal to the displaced people of Bakassi and other ethnic nationalities residing in the area and in the new Bakassi resettlement camp to remain calm and co-operate with the Federal and state governments to ensure a smooth and memorable handing over ceremony."
"Let me assure the Bakassi people of the desire of the Cross River State government to integrate all Nigerian citizens in Bakassi into the economy of the state by providing ample opportunity for those willing to promote enterprise, learn one trade or the other to do so."
Also, a youth activist, Mr. Nsoh Offong, has accused the Movement for the Emancipation of the Niger Delta (MEND) and the Joint Revolutionary Council (JRC), as being sectional in the struggle for self-determination in the South South geo-political zone of the country.
Offong who spoke with The Guardian in Yenagoa, the Bayelsa State Capital, alleged that if Bakassi was to be an Ijaw community, either Rivers or Bayelsa State, MEND and JRC would have threatened to bring down the country over the handover.
According to the activist who hails from Oron local council of Akwa Ibom State, a whole area comprising the Efik and Oron people, is billed to be handed over to Cameroun and nobody in the Niger Delta has shown serious sympathy for them.
"These people are also from the Niger Delta. They share in suffering and struggle of the entire Niger Delta cause, and yet they are left to carry their cross on their own," he said.
He said even though the World Court at The Hague had ruled in favour of Cameroun, the entire process that led to the final ruling would have been delayed or reversed if the entire Niger Delta had stood up as a people to reject the move and sought redress at the ICJ.
"It is a pity that in this season of shared struggle, some tribes within the Niger Delta feel more Niger Deltan than others," he lamented.
The youth explained that the Bakassi indigenes were basically riverine people, who have suffered the same environmental predicament just like any other deltaic tribe in the area and the bigger components of the region should see them as their brother and stand by them in times of need.
He, however, advised that the resettlement process should be handled with outmost care as some greedy individuals would want to make quick money from the process.
He said instead of building beautiful houses for them in the cities an area within the creeks in the country's territory should be cleared and developed for them so that they will still feel the essence of their natural habitat as well as carry on with their fishing.
But MEND has called for the displaced people of Bakassi to be rehabilitated in proper satellite towns and compensated adequately.
The militant group's spokesman, Mr. Jomo Gbomo, in an online interview with The Guardian yesterday said although it empathised with the people of Bakassi, however, before the decision to cede the island was reached, "we are sure that a lot was considered and what was considered to be fair was done."
His words: "It is important that we adhere to the rule of law. It is for this typical habit of ours to renege on a promise or agreement that MEND will not enter into any agreement without the involvement of the international mediator. The best that can be done in this instance is for the displaced people to be rehabilitated in proper satellite towns and compensated adequately."
MEND said a truly united Nigeria that was fair and just and which applies fiscal federalism was a win-win for every tribe. The group noted that in the absence of this, it feared that very soon the country would break up.
He said the Niger Delta which deserved more than it was getting at present would be transformed in a flash the same way the barren desert that was once Abuja was transformed if Nigeria commenced the practice of true fiscal federalism.
He added: "Many Nigerians from other parts of the country are not seeing the benefits of true federalism. If practised, it will make the country as a whole really great where we will witness innovations and development of various natural and human resources including tourism which is still lip service because the states just wait cap in hand to receive oil proceeds to be shared at the end of the month. The current trend has stopped many of us thinking and bred acute lazy people all over the federation."
Nigerians should not cry over transfer – Gowon
ReplyDeleteBy Jude Owuamanam, Jos
Published: Thursday, 14 Aug 2008
As Nigeria gets set to hand over the Bakassi peninsula to Cameroun on Thursday (today), a former Head of State, Gen Yakubu Gowon, has said that the ceded territory never belonged to Nigeria.
He also denied accusations that he handed Bakassi over to Cameroun because of its support for Nigeria during the Biafran war.
Gowon, who spoke in a telephone interview with our correspondent on Wednesday, said that the International Court of Justice at The Hague, which gave the ruling ceding the peninsula to Cameroun, was right.
He added that Nigerians living in that part had the choice of living there under Camerounian laws or agreeing to be resettled in Nigeria.
He said the misconception about the ownership of the peninsula arose when Nigeria was administering the western part of Cameroun as part of the United Nations mandate.
Gowon explained that when a plebiscite was undertaken, the people of Western Cameroun decided to go to Cameroun whereas the northern part decided to be in Nigeria.
He recalled that it took the ingenuity of the then Premier of Northern Nigeria, Alhaji Ahmadu Bello, to convince the northern part of Cameroun to be in Nigeria while the Nnamdi Azikiwe-led National Council of Nigeria and the Camerouns (as it then was) did little to convince the western part of Cameroun to to remain part of Nigeria.
The former head of state said that the ICJ in its ruling, took into cognisance, the Anglo/German Treaties of 1885 and 1914, adding that at the dawn of independence, all African countries agreed to abide by the international boundaries agreed by the occupying powers.
Meanwhile, a professor of History of International Relations, University of Lagos, Yomi Akinyeye, said, “The handover is in order. The place called Bakassi never belonged to Nigeria in the first place. The issues and the ownership are so clear.
“We were only misled by so-called experts who were misguided and who deceived us into going to the International Court of Justice. We never stood a chance.
“The documents with which the ICJ reached the inevitable decision are in the public archives, we in Nigeria have them, others have them in their own archives.
“They are based mainly on Anglo-German Treaty of 1913 and at Independence in 1960. It was obvious that other agreements would have to be made but based on the original legal documents signed between the two colonial powers of Germany and Britain.”
‘US, France, Britain conspired against Nigeria’
ReplyDeleteBy Ibanga Isine, Port Harcourt
Published: Thursday, 14 Aug 2008
AS the Federal Government hands over the oil rich Bakassi Peninsula on Thursday (today), a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Chief Chuks Muoka, has accused three world powers of conspiracy in the ruling of the International Court of Justice which gave the area to Cameroun.
They are the United States, France and Britain.
He told our correspondent in Port Harcourt that the world powers worked against Nigeria’s interest while the case was pending at The Hague.
He said, “There was an international conspiracy against Nigeria. That conspiracy affected the judgment of the IJC.
“For instance, France was against us, the United States was against us and at that instance, Britain had no option than tow the line of its former colonial partner.”
He faulted the ruling of the world’s court, saying that a plebiscite should have been conducted to enable the people choose where to belong before the ruling was given on the case.
Muoma also called on the Federal Government to prosecute the former President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, for the wrong decision he took at the time.
Mouka said the former president should be punished for signing the Green Tree Agreement without the consent of the National Assembly.
The Port Harcourt-based lawyer said the action of the former president was not only wrong but also scandalous.
He said, “Obasanjo and his co-travellers have to tell Nigerians what they have gained by ceding Bakassi to Cameroun because Nigeria has not gained anything from that action,” he said.
“It was surprising that Obasanjo went to Washington to sign the GTA without recourse to the National Assembly.
“Who told Obasanjo that he could cede any part of Nigeria ’s sovereign territory to another country without the approval of the National Assembly.”
He argued that Nigeria should have adopted a military option to resolve the ownership question on the peninsula instead of implementing the decision of the ICJ.
He contended that Nigeria’s constitution had operated for several years on the peninsula which has representation at the Senate and the House of Representatives.
He noted that President Umaru Yar’Adua should not have been hasty in handing over the disputed peninsula since the lives of thousands of Nigerians would be affected by the action