Fresh facts have emerged, showing that the disputed Bakassi peninsula which the
International Court of Justice, ICJ, ceded to Cameroon actually belongs to
Nigeria.
Vanguard gathered that the jurists at ICJ might have been
misled by the legal teams of Cameroon and Nigeria, who did not show vital
information that clearly placed Bakassi
as a territory within the geographical, political and administrative
jurisdiction and control of Nigeria, contrary to the October 10, 2002, verdict
which awarded the sovereignty of the peninsula to Cameroon.
International relations experts, renowned historians,
researchers and politicians told Vanguard in Lagos, last week, that contrary to
the claims by the Cameroon and Nigerian legal teams that the first legal treaty
on the Land and Maritime borders between Nigerian and Cameroon was the 1913 Anglo-German
treaty, it was discovered that the limits of the Land and maritime boundaries
between both countries went as far back as 1811 when the British made the
treaty that went from the Lake Chad region down to the Atlantic ocean through
the Rio Del Rey Estuary.
The Great Fraud
1. There are evidence to show that in 1994 when a dispute erupted between Nigeria and
Cameroon, Nigeria asked the British government to attest to the true status of
Bakassi Peninsula, the British government replied to assert that the Peninsula
belongs to Nigeria.
2. This was when Alhaji Babagana Kingibe was Nigeria’s
Minister of External Affairs but curiously that document was not tendered at
the ICJ trial.
3. There are fresh evidence to show that in the March 18,
1961 plebiscite in Southern Cameroon, to determine areas that either wanted to
stay in Cameroon or join Nigeria, Bakassi Penisular was not among the areas
that participated in the exercise because it was given that it was not part of
Cameroun.
According to Southern Cameroon gazette, Volume 7 no.
14, the areas that were asked to
determine where they wanted to belong included Mamfe, Bamenda, Kumba, and
Victoria. Also, the people of Bakassi have voted in Nigerian elections and
the Nigerian Customs has been in control of the territorial waters since 1811.
4. The 1913 Anglo-German treaty which Cameroon rested its
claim was not signed by both countries before the outbreak of the First World
War in 1914.
5. Germany renounced all its terrirorial claims at the end
of the war in 1919 and all the former territrories controlled by Germany came
under the mandate of the League of Nations.
6. There were clear cases of ethnic cleansing in Bakassi
peninsula in the past 10 years in violation of the Green Tree Agreement.
According to Prof. Walter Ofonagoro, a historian and former
Nigerian Information Minister, who did
his Ph.d thesis on Southern Oil protectorate, “fresh facts have emerged
to show that the Cameroonian legal team deceived the ICJ into believing that
before the Anglo-German treaty of 1913 upon which it rested its case, there
were no other treaties that delineated the
land and maritime boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon, which is a
fraudulent claim”. Prof. Ofonagoro said that he has in his possession, 1822
documents which vested ownership of the Bakassi Peninsula to the Old Calabar
Chiefs, by extension to Nigeria, and debunked claims that the 1913 Anglo-German
treaty was the first recognised treaty on the land and maritime boundary
between Nigeria and Cameroon. Said Prof. Ofonagoro: “This is not true because as far back as
1811, the British had already established a strong sphere of influence over the
territories that eventually became Nigeria in 1914. The Anglo- German treaty upon which Cameroon
built its case was contestible because after the First World war ended in 1919,
all the territories controlled by Germany were taken away from them and given to the League of Nations.
He said: “There were
other treaties between Nigeria and Cameroon on the Land and Maritime
boundaries, which were entered into in 1884, 1885 and 1886, all of which
clearly demarcated the land and maritime border between Nigeria and Cameroon
from the Lake Chad region down to the Akwa Yafe River, which was the land
border from Akwa Yafe to Rio Del Rey estuary to the Atlantic ocean.
He said: “When the Germans got to Akwa Yafe River, they
discovered that they could not gain a direct access to the sea because going
toward West of Akwa Yafe River will take them straight to the Calabar Sea Port.
The Calabar Sea Port was clearly outlined in the treaty. This was the main port of entry for the
British merchants, and later missionaries, who were the first to establish
sphere of influence in Nigeria.” He said there was no way the British would
have granted the Germans a boundary access that would have constrained their
access to the Calabar power.
The British were fully in control of the Calabar Sea Port.
The Germans went East of Akwa Yafe River, which took them to the Rio Del Rey
estuary to the sea. This ensured that the Bakassi Peninsula was on the West,
which put the Peninsula on the Nigerian territory. The predominant population
on the Peninsula then were the Efiks and Efuts, who were of Efik kingdom which
stretched up to Khumba, Victoria and Bamenda.
Grounds for Appeal for review
Although the Federal Government has been reluctant to listen
to the calls from the National Assembly, the Judiciary, the Nigerian Bar
Association to appeal for a review, Prof.
Ofonagoro said “Nigeria has very strong ground to ask the ICJ for a
review of its decision because there were concrete material facts and
documentary evidence that were not before the ICJ in 2002, which would have
helped to guide the world jurists in their decision”.
According to him, the Cameroonians concealed other vital
treaties during the trial and told the court that the treaties were for mere
adminstrative convenience, but more suprising is the fact that the Nigerian
team did not do their home work to debunk the claims of Cameroon; rather they
went there to resurrect a dead treaty in their attempt to justify the 1975
Maroua Declaration which was also an illegal treaty.
He said: “If the ICJ
should allow a judgment that was obtained by fraud and concealment of fact to
stand, grave in justice would have been done to the people of Bakassi. The
reputation of ICJ would have been
tarnished because the whole world expects it to do justice at all time”.
Ofonagora said the Nigerian defence team went to the Hague
to agree with the Cameroonians that before 1913, there were no other treaties
between the two colonial powers, which is false. But more fallacious is the
fact that the Cameroon of 1919, was not the Cameroon of 1913, because after the
end of the First World War, Germany was forced to give up all its territories
in Africa, which came under the mandate of
League of Nations.
Germany renounced all its claims to territories and all the
treaties it entered into which gave it
control of territories, became a nullity. The League of Nations consisting of
Britain, France and Italy, the territory of Cameroon was carved up by France
which took the Northern part.
Senator Ewah Bassey Henshaw, in his reaction said: “We have
evidence from the memoir of the German Ambassador in 1913, who negotiated the
so-called 1913 Anglo-German treaty”. He said the treaty was not signed because
of the distrust between Britain and Germany at that time and the conflict
between the envoy and some officials of his own country.
“In 1961, when a referendum was conducted in Southern
Cameroon to determine on which part of it wishes to belong to Nigeria or
Cameroon, after the British ended its colonial rule, Bakassi Peninsula was not
included because it was regarded as part and parcel of Nigeria. In the areas
such as Issangale that were included in the referendum, they voted to be in
Nigeria”.
Speaking at the Vanguard Conference Hall in Lagos, Senator Henshaw said the ICJ has a duty to
review its judgment wich gave the sovereignty of Bakassi to Cameroon because it
was obtained by fraud and deceits.
He said: “We are not asking for too much for the ICJ to take
a second look at the fresh facts and our action is covered by Artcle 61 of ICJ
which empowers people to come back for a review of their judgment if there were
fresh facts that surfaced after the decision was made, which have substantially
affected the judgement.
The president who has sworn on oath to defend the
territorial integrity of Nigeria and the constitution should assist the people
of Bakassi by asking the AGF to appeal for a review of the ICJ verdict.”
No comments:
Post a Comment