Bakassi: Nigeria’s territorial integrity under threat —Imoke on OCTOBER 2, 2012 · in NEWS 1:27 am 0 By Johnbosco Agbakwuru
CALABAR—GOV-ERNOR Liyel Imoke of Cross River State has called on Nigerians to unite so as to protect the labours of the founding fathers of the country, saying that the Bakassi Peninsula challenge posed a great threat to the territorial integrity of the country.
Governor Imoke, in his 52nd Independence Day address, said: “On this day every year, we are compelled by pride in our nation and a true sense of citizenship, to celebrate October 1, as arguably the most important day in our national history.
“We commemorate this unique day in the annals of our history with great respect and reverence for the sacrifice and struggles of our founding fathers, which marked the end of colonialism and the commencement of our enlightenment as a people and a nation.
“We celebrate the day of our independence and self-determination, not just with symbolic pageantry and ceremony, but also with great expectation and an even greater desire to ensure that we all contribute to the development of this blessed nation. It is important that this day serves as a constant reminder of this fact.”
Nigerians across the geographical divIde have all spoken on this Bakassi issue. The Senate, Reps and Judiciary have passed a resolution on dis Bakassi issue. The people of Bakassi have all spoke on dis issue. GEJ is just one man and the Executive is one arm of Govenment.
GEJ should look to Egypt and Libya to see wat the power of the people can accomplish once their mind is set. GEJ was elected to do wat Nigerians want and not the Internationalist imperialist. GEJ is answerable to Nigerians and should give Nigerians wat we have requested. Simply send capable people back to the ICJ.
The Senate upped the ante last week with litrarily a marching order on President Goodluck Jonathan to appeal the judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which ceded Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon. UCHENNA AWOM writes that the resolution left many questions unanswered. Also Labaran Maku begged for not controlling his tongue.
Manifest anger, emotion and subtle blame pervaded the senate chambers last week Wednesday over the Bakassi Peninsula.
They laid the contention and troubled Bakassi ruling issue for debate and at the end, their resolution was more of an indictment of the previous government and the burning zeal to reopen the wound by appealing the judgment.
Bakassi Peninsula was ceded to Republic of Cameroun courtesy of the World Court ruling about in June 2002. It was a ruling that Nigerian government then did not resist and curiously the government under former President Olusegun Obasanjo not only accepted the ruling wholly, but commenced implementation almost immediately.
It was a riddle too hard to crack, but the people who were left with no other option than to cooperate with powers packed out grudgingly from their ancestral home.
Today, the chicken has come to roost, the reality has properly sank and the people are now demanding to go back to their historically-recognized home. The implication is that the ruling is being called to question and ofcourse the preponderance of opinion is that Nigeria must either appeal the judgment or at best ignore it and halt further implementation of the ‘Green Tree Agreement’. It is a message that has trickled down and have literarilly energized some authorities.
Against the backdrop an emotion-laden Senate asked President Goodluck Jonathan to appeal the judgment of International Court of Justice which ceded Bakassi to the Republic of Cameroun.
The senators also declared that the ICJ judgment in the first place was null and void, because it was not ratified by the Senate.
Consequently, the lawmakers mandated the Senate President to write a personal letter on the matter to President Goodluck Jonathan,in which he should emphasize the exigency and urgency of the matter.
It could be recalled that the ICJ in a controversial ruling in 2002 ceded Bakassi peninsula, located in Cross River state of Nigeria to the Cameroon, with a 10-year window gap for appeal which expires on the 9th of October, 2012.
The resolution of the Senate was sequel to a motion sponsored by the deputy leader, Senator Abdul Ningi and 16 others.
Sen. Ningi (PDP, Bauchi) said there is “the lack of faithful implementation of the “Green Tree Agreement” signed by both the Cameroun and Nigeria; thereby violating the basis of the implementation of the court judgement. Articles 3(1) and 2 (a) of the green Tree Agreement”, which stipulate that, after the transfer of the territory to cameroun, the cameroonians should guarantee the Nigerian nationals living in the Bakassi peninsula the exercise of their fundamental human rights and other relevant provisions of the international law.”
Sen. Ningi, who said new facts have emerged after the ruling that were not available before the first trial coupled with the absence of a Nigeria legal representation also said the article of the Vienna convention provides that every judgment of the ICJ is seen as a treaty and must be domesticated by the National Assembly.
“This legislature has not domesticated the judgment so it is not binding on Nigeria. No treaty shall have the force of law until it is recognized by the constitution. Our Constitution has Bakassi peninsula as a part and parcel of Nigeria.
“We as parliament must speak with one voice and never make it history other wise it will continue to repeat itself.
He noted that “We must avoid People who have been given the authority to abuse it
He said he has never seen any history where a territory is ceded without a referendum.
“People kept quite because it was occupied by minority of the minority. If they were from a majority they would not have been treated the way they were. Because they don’t speak Igbo or Hausa we say let them go.”
Sen Ningi while emphasizing the need for urgency in appealing the cessation said “the dateline of the judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the international boundaries between Nigeria and Cameroun including Bakassi that cedes Bakassi Island from the federal Republic of Nigeria to the Republic of Cameroun would expire by October 9th, 2012 and the territory would belong to Republic of Cameroun forever.”
“We are ready to appeal. Let the federal government appeal. We are ready to fund the legal processes. If the problem is money we will fund it.” Ningi said.
To underscore the urgency of the matter, President of the Senate, Senator David Mark, described the decision of not appealing the cessation of bakassi as a bad one.
Mark noted that Bakassi cannot be ceded to Cameroon, adding that he would write to President Jonathan to immediately begin the appeal process which expires in nine days time.
According to him, “The resolution that we need to make is that Bakassi should not be ceded to Cameroons. I think that is the final objective of our decision.
“If we do not go to an appeal at all while we have subjected ourselves to the international court, I think that will be a grievous mistake. There is room for us to appeal, going on an appeal is a line of action that we should not reject, if that is what is available through the court, we should utilize it. I think that is the most appropriate thing to now, the most we should do now is to quickly rush an appeal in spite what the President said at the UN.
“We have obeyed the international court to this point, but we still do not accept it. It is not that we accept it we have simply obeyed their decision. We have not accepted it, there is a lot of pressure at home here and I think it is the belief of every Nigerians that we should not cede Bakassi, not the way it has happened. I think that is really where the problem is.”
Mark assured that the Senate would go ahead with all legislative processes to ensure that the judgment is over turned in favour of Nigeria.
“There is a host of other things, letters written to National Assembly are actually here and we on our part have not done anything. We have neither rejected it or said anything. They just came and went like that.
Speaking also, an emotional laden leader of the Senate, Sen. Victor Ndoma Egba, said “ I was in this senate when the process of cedeing bakassi commenced in the 6th senate, he said despite three motions by then Senator representing Bakassi, Sen. Ewa Henshaw, asking the federal government to tarry a while and consult the partliament they went ahead with it.
“Bakassi was ceded inspite of the people who kept protest but nobody listened because they were minority of the minorities. At the time of ceding bakassi, Cross River State had not governor because his election was annuled at the time. I cried myself hoarse that it will come with security challenges. What was the hurry? The issue of Bakassi will go down in the guiness books of world record as the fastest treaty done. There are Treaties done since 1930’s still pending so what is the hurry? Why were the people of Bakassi and the Senate not important in this decision.
“We must take this process to constitution amendment to demand for a review of the treaty. We must be part of the treaty to avoid these issues.
I have been loyal to this country, I have been a patriotic Nigerian, and so have my people. I believe my people have paid very high price for the unity of this country at least put us back where we were.
On his part, Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe asked “in which part of this world that a country willingly give away its territory? You cannot say that because they are a small minority then they don’t matter. It is a father that is weak that does not go into a fight and accepts that the child is an aggressor”
He added that experts, on the history of that region were never consulted by the Nigerian legal team during the litigation of the case in the ICJ.
The fear is high and ofcourse there could be more to what is unfolding. The question is and still remain; what was Obasanjo’s role in all this? It is an interesting narrative.
Maku Apologises but...
The Senate drew a red line on the sand last week and threatened to sack any Federal Minister who talks carelessly; this was even as the President of the Senate, Senator Mark specifically warned the Minister of Information, Mr Labaran Maku, over his careless talk wherein he said resolutions by the National Assembly are not binding on the executive.
However, Maku who appeared before the Senator Enyinnaya Abaribe-led Senate Committee on Information, Media and Public Affairs, tendered an unreserved apology over the comments, which attracted wider condemnation across the country.
The Minister of Information was practically humbled by the Senate Information Committee, who pummelled him with questions as the importance of National Assembly resolution forcing Maku to admit that he became a Minister of the Federal Republic courtesy of senate resolution.
He profusely apologised saying he has no reason personally or individually to denigrate the authority of the highest law-making body in the land.
“I have no reason to denigrate the authority of the highest legislative body. The Senate being the highest legislative body has played a very constructive role in the stabilization of Nigeria’s democracy.”I have no reason personally or individually to disparage the Senate. If that comment has been misinterpreted to mean that the Federal Government does not respect resolution of Senate, I tender my apology.
Nigerians across the geographical divIde have all spoken on this Bakassi issue. The Senate, Reps and Judiciary have passed a resolution on dis Bakassi issue. The people of Bakassi have all spoke on dis issue. GEJ is just one man and the Executive is one arm of Govenment.
GEJ should look to Egypt and Libya to see wat the power of the people can accomplish once their mind is set. GEJ was elected to do wat Nigerians want and not the Internationalist imperialist. GEJ is answerable to Nigerians and should give Nigerians wat we have requested. Simply send capable people back to the ICJ.
Nigeria: Bakassi - Pressure Reaches Fever Pitch As Deadline Nears Tagged: Cameroon, Central Africa, External Relations, International Organisations, Land and Rural Issues, Legal Affairs, Nigeria, West Africa BY DAVIDSON IRIEKPEN, 30 SEPTEMBER 2012 Comment As the October 10 deadline for the review of the judgement of the International Court of Justice ceding the Bakassi Peninsula to the Republic of Cameroon draws nearer, the preponderance of opinion among Nigerians is that the federal government should seek a review of the case. Davidson Iriekpen writes
In the last few weeks, a cross section of Nigerians has mounted pressure on the federal government to revisit the International Court of Justice judgement ceding the Bakassi Peninsula to the Republic of Cameroon.
The judgement, which was delivered on October 10, 2002, stipulated that by the terms of the June 12, 2006 Green Tree Agreement (GTA), Nigeria should by October 2012, complete the handover of Bakassi to Cameroon.
Apparently, in anticipation of the final phase of the handover, a group, Bakassi Self-Determination Front (BSDF), had recently declared independence of Bakassi and hoisted its blue, white and red flag with 11 stars on the blue colour as well as set up a radio station, Dayspring Radio, which began transmission on 4.2MHz and 5.2MHz band since August 6.
Mounting Pressure
But the federal government continues to face pressure, in what some have described as "act now or forever remain silent" situation.
On Wednesday, Senate President David Mark voiced the collective resolve of the upper chamber to reject the ICJ judgement and seek a review. The Senate resolved to formally write President Goodluck Jonathan to appeal the judgement.
Speaking on a motion sponsored by Senator Abdul Ningi, representing Bauchi Central, Mark said: "I think appeal is a line of action that should not be neglected because that is legal, since Nigeria subjected itself to the court.
"If that is what is available through the court, we should also utilise it. I think that is the most appropriate thing to do at this point in time."
The Senate president said: "We urge the federal government to go on appeal. We on our part will revisit the letters and see what we can do, may be quickly again come up with a debate on the letters and then resend it to buttress our points and resolution that was arrived at today."
Ningi added, "The lack of faithful implementation of the Green Tree Agreement signed by both countries thereby violates the basis of the implementation of the court judgement."
New Concerns
Many analysts have been putting forward arguments and reasons why the federal government should review the judgement. Chief among the reasons are the security and economic implications of the judgement.
Some analysts have based their rejection of the ICJ ruling on alleged shoddy preparation of the case by Nigeria and the fact that the country was not represented during the trial by international law treaty experts. They also posit that those who represented the country did not put forward enough evidence which a lot of Nigerians are aware of. They term it as unpatriotic and incompetent on the part of the government to lose its the territory to Cameroon.
One area where a lot of analysts felt the federal government and ICJ failed the people of Bakassi was the failure to conduct a plebiscite to enable the people of the peninsula to determine their future. They therefore feel that rather than resort to the ICJ, the United Nations should promptly organise a plebiscite in the area, to enable the people decide whether to stay in Nigeria or go to Cameroon or assume a separate sovereign identity.
Leading the pack of eminent Nigerians pushing the new arguments is the former Minister of Information, ProfessorWalter Ofonagoro, who said he has in his possession 1822 documents which vested ownership of the Bakassi Peninsula to the Old Calabar Chiefs, by extension to Nigeria. He debunked claims that the 1913 Anglo-German treaty was the first recognised treaty on the land and maritime boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon.
According to Ofonagoro, a historian who did his Ph.D thesis on Southern Oil Protectorate, Nigeria has very strong grounds 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.
Ofonagoro said Cameroonians concealed other vital treaties during the trial and told the court that the treaties were for mere administrative convenience, stressing that more surprising is the fact that the Nigerian team did not do their home work to debunk the claims of Cameroon. Rather, Ofonagoro said, they went there to resurrect a dead treaty in their attempt to justify the 1975 Maroua Declaration which was also an illegal treaty.
He argued that if the ICJ should allow a judgement that was obtained by fraud and concealment of fact to stand, grave injustice would have been done to the people of Bakassi.
To Ofonagoro, 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.
The academic said, "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.
"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.
"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 contestable 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.
"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.
"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."
'Now or Never'
The Nigerian Bar Association, at its 52nd annual conference that ended in Abuja recently, also called on the federal government to seek a review of the ICJ judgement.
In a communiqué signed by its immediate past president, Joseph Daudu (SAN), the NBA said the country must make use of the window that gives it up to October 9 to ask for a review of the judgement. The body said it was aware that there were grounds upon which the government could legitimately apply for a revision of the ICJ judgement.
"If nothing is done by October, then nothing can ever be done concerning the issue. There is nothing wrong in asking for a review of the judgement as far as there are new facts to prove that the facts upon which the judgement was delivered were not complete or were wrong and there is a provision for that in the ICJ Act," Daudu said.
At a lecture recently to mark the 79th birthday of elder statesman, Dr. Tunji Braithwaite, organised by "Women Arise" in Lagos, Nobel laureate, Professor Wole Soyinka, advised the federal government to revisit the ICJ ruling.
Soyinka noted that the deficit of views and wishes of the Bakassi indigenes before the decision by the Obasanjo administration to cede the area raised questions about the rights of the minorities.
He asked, "Were the representatives of the indigent members of the community invited to The Hague before the government accepted the ruling? The answer is no. The wishes of the people of Bakassi were never considered and that puts to the fore the issue about the rights of the minorities."
Penultimate week, the Cross River Elders Forum rose from a meeting in Calabar with a request that the federal government should revisit the judgement. The group in a communiqué signed by Col. Pam Ogar (rtd), Senator Joseph Oqua Ansa, Dr. Ambrose Akpanika, Ukandi Gabriel Ogar, Ntufam Mathew Ojong, Mrs. Grace Ekanem, and Professor Roland Ndoma-Egba, said it had become imperative to revisit that judgement on account of new evidences that have surfaced.
As a first step in that regard, the group wants the appropriate federal government agency to "immediately ask for extension of the 10-year period for the completion of the handing over process of Bakassi beyond October 2012."
Emeritus Professor of Law Adedokun Adeyemi has also called on the federal government to diligently pursue the review of the ICJ judgement. Adeyemi, a former Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Lagos, said Nigeria's permanent submission to the ICJ's jurisdiction had negative consequences on the country.
The professor of public law deplored the arbitrary signing of treaties and conventions without knowing the implications on the country and the people.
According to Adeyemi, "We had in the 60s 'foolishly' submitted to the jurisdiction of the court and it was obligatory that we appear before it in the Cameroon suit on Bakassi Peninsula. The concept of sovereignty provides that one cannot just bring a case against a state except the country consents to the jurisdiction of the court. Some industrialised states like the U.S. and UK have not submitted permanently to the jurisdiction of the court and are circumspect in the conventions and treaties they sign.
"Nigeria should study the implication of any treaty or convention before we ratify it. If you sign a treaty and you do not ratify it, you are not under any obligation to submit to it.
"After 50 years of independence, Nigeria should be regarded as a mature country and this should be demonstrated in international circles and reflect in how we fashion our foreign policies. The security and interest of the people should be the primary focus of government as enshrined in Section 14 of the 1999 constitution."
The House of Representatives is not left out in the quest for review. The House has called on the federal government to commence the process for the review of the ICJ judgement
In a motion on the floor of the House of Representatives, which was unanimously adopted without debate, Essien Ayi (PDP-Cross River), said that Article 61 of the Statute of ICJ provided for application for the revision of a judgement only when some facts that are decisive factors, were unknown to the court and the party seeking revision.
He cited instances of countries like El Savador, Yugoslavia and Tunisia, which applied for review of judgements by the ICJ, saying the people of Bakassi insist on having a United Nations supervised plebiscite, where their rights to self-determination would be exercised.
All Eyes on the Federal Government
It is not yet clear whether the federal government would succumb to pressure in the coming days and apply for a review of the ICJ judgement. The Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Mr. Mohammed Adoke (SAN), had declared that the federal government did not intend to reopen the matter.
Adoke noted that despite the high emotions the issue had generated, there were no fresh facts for the government to base an application for a review of the judgement.
"Go and check Article 60 and 61 of the ICJ rules, there is no room for appeal. What Nigeria can do, if at all we want to act, is to call for a review of the case.
"But from what most people are putting forward as reasons for us to go back to the ICJ, they are not tenable. We would only go there to embarrass ourselves," the minister said.
ICJ Statute
Article 60 of the ICJ Statute reads: "The judgement is final and without appeal. In the event of dispute as to the meaning or scope of the judgement, the Court shall construe it upon the request of any party."
Article 61 sub sections 1, 4 and 5, which states the conditions under which a review could be sought, reads: "An application for revision of a judgement may be made only when it is based upon the discovery of some facts of such a nature as to be a decisive factor, which fact was, when the judgement was given, unknown to the Court and also to the party claiming revision, always provided that such ignorance was not due to negligence.
"The application for revision must be made at latest within six months of the discovery of the new fact. No application for revision may be made after the lapse of ten years from the date of the judgement."
Foregone Conclusion
Adoke is not alone in this line of thought. Penultimate week, a former Attorney-General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Prince Bola Ajibola (SAN), declared that the ceding of Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon by Nigeria was a foregone conclusion. The eminent jurist said the federal government, then under former President, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, followed due process in the transfer of the oil-rich region to neighbouring Cameroon.
Ajibola, who was a judge of the ICJ when the judgement on Bakassi was given on October 10, 2002 in The Hague, Netherlands, advised that that activities that could breach the international agreement and peaceful co-existence of the two countries should be discouraged.
He said, "I am yet to understand what is really going on now. The due process has been taken by the government on this issue and it has concluded it with the Green Tree Agreement and that has already been taken up and concluded. Everything about the Bakassi is a foregone conclusion.
"Bakassi is not just the issue; it's only part of the issue of the Cameroon-Nigeria dispute. The maritime dispute is there, the land dispute is there and they weigh heavily on the matter. Bakassi is just a small place, a strip of a channel but the real issues are the land and the maritime."
Other experts in international law have also asked the federal government to ignore the calls for review of the ICJ judgement. Chairman of the National Human Rights Commission, Dr Chidi Odinkalu, and Mr Sebastian Hon, SAN, both described the call as belated.
Odinkalu said: "I think when Nigeria looks more closely at the applicable laws they may realise that such a resolution is entirely without basis in international law and could degrade the quality of our international standing."
For Hon, the call did not only come too late, it is also capable of causing Nigeria moral dents in the international community.
"The ICJ judgement has made both parties to the dispute to change their positions. Nigeria has also officially complied with the judgement. Any attempt to challenge or torpedo the status quo will wrought serious moral dents on our international image.
"Mind you that the judges that will sit on such appeal are also human beings and are also an important segment of the enlightened international community."
According to him, the resolution is belated chiefly because equity aids the vigilant. Hon said that the Bakassi debacle was not well handled and that Nigeria must learn to live with it.
"Even if the government of Nigeria is within time to appeal, delay in pursuing our appellate rights will definitely work against us," he added.
However, Odinkalu said that he had visited the peninsula many times recently and that the people living there were in dire need of help. He said: "I'm also not unmindful of the fact that we have not as a country served the best interests of the peoples of Bakassi in the implementation arrangements.
There is an incipient statelessness problem that was entirely foreseeable and should have been prevented. Livelihood is also dire among the communities. I hope that the political authorities will see wisdom in involving the National Human Rights Commission in a meaningful search for solutions."
Jonathan’s reluctance to challenge ceding of Bakassi, impeachable offence —Elechi Amadi
| Print | E-mail Written by Bolaji Ogundele, Port Harcourt Monday, 01 October 2012 Renowned writer and Nigerian Civil War veteran, Dr Elechi Amadi, has described President Goodluck Jonathan's reluctance to challenge the ceding of the Bakassi area of the country to the Cameroon as abdication of responsibility and an impeachable offence.
Amadi made the statement during a press briefing in his country home, Aluu in Ikwerre Local Government Area of Rivers State.
According to him, the nonchallant attitude so far displayed by the president to the plight of Nigerians in Bakassi is horrifying, especially after the National Assembly has passed a resolution on the matter.
He said Jonathan had no cogent reason not to act, adding that defending any part of Nigeria or any one Nigerian was neither an option for the Commander-in-Chief, nor a personal or arbitrary decision.
While noting that the president would have behaved differently if he were from Bakassi, Elechi argued that among other things, a president was elected to right the wrongs in a country.
He said it was a crazy thing that the Federal Government ceded Bakassi to Cameroun without giving the people of the area opportunity to decide where they want to belong.
“What if the president had come from Bakassi? Would he be so nonchallant about the ceding of Bakassi to Cameroun? Are the people of Bakassi second class citizens? Are they not covered by the UN charter on fundamental human rights? Whose interest is the president serving anyway?
“I cringe with sheer horror at the fact that the Federal Government can abandon without qualms a group of Nigerians, large enough to make up a local government area which is recognised in the constitution, that it can ignore the National Assembly set up by Nigerians on the excuse that their resolutions have no force of law, and that it can treat a weighty matter of this nature with such reprehensible levity.”
“The President should not merely order his Minister of Information to talk to us. The situation calls for a TV broadcast in which he will look us Nigerians in the face and tell us why he is abandoning our compatriots.” he said.
This story should not distract the Bakassi issue with deadline nearing. Anybody will tell u the deportation of Nigerians in Nigeria is a very foolish venture becos these people ultimately will return. Detaining of Nigerians for immigration offense in Nigeria is a violation of their human right, civil right, citizenship and criminal. It is equivalent to abduction and kidnapping.
There should be a curb on state taxation to prevent such wasteful spending of people hard earned cash by Fashola Lagos Government.
Fashola misplaced priority. Such a shame the man still needs to grow up on the issue of diversity in Lagos. Clearly not ready to lead a diverse nation as Nigeria.
Lagosians are suppose to be the most diverse and accommodating people in Nigeria. The most civilized and exposed. Such a shame.
Bakassi Peninsula: Some facts were not presented to the ICJ – Ita Enang With just a few days left to the expiration of time Nigeria has to seek a review on the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling which ceded Bakassi Pennisula to Cameroon, the Nigerian Senate has released some facts that were allegedly not tendered at the ICJ whilst the case lasted. The upper legislative arm is now compelling the executive to seek the review before the expiration on the 10th of October, 2012.
This was the view of the Chairman, Senate Committee on Rules and Business; Senator Ita Enang, who was interviewed from our Abuja studio on Sunrise Daily on Friday. He claimed that with the new facts emerging on the ownership of Bakassi Peninsula, the executive arm of government must be spurred to appeal the judgement.
According to the Senator, there are fresh facts which were not made available to the court at that time the judgement was passed.
He also argued that the judgement and the handing-over of Bakassi is imperfect because the Senate has not been ratified by the Green Tree Treaty that was agreed on by the leaders of the two countries in 2005, as dictated by the 1999 Constitution.
The Senator added that the terms of the Green Tree implementation has been severally violated by the Cameroonian authorities and that the supervising parties also did not do what is expected because the interest of the people of the Bakassi Peninsula was not sought.
I say desirable becos it provides Nigerians with an opportunity to externalize their suspicions and threat. Cameroon becomes the Enemy not Hausa, Fulani, Islam, Igbo or Yoruba but Cameroon. This war will unite Nigerians.
^Den GEJ will have two fronts of Nigerians to fight and kill, in the North and South, as Bakassi hand over to Cameroon will certainly cause militancy. At this point for self preservation, a war with Cameroon is much more desirable. Unless u want Nigeria dead as a country?
Development on flood plains are very risky. Onitsha is suppose to have flood plains for the over flow of River Nigerin high tides from time to time. Investment in further flooding defence mechanism necessary. Such River Onitsha Gate barrier.
It is time Nigerians invest in drainage for every street and local areas. Local and state govenment can help but residence should be major contributor to the project to ensure it gets done.
Finally, Immigration connection have been unmasked. Immigration and travel is central to the fight of terrorist. JTF should have an office at the airport, seaport and all relevant entry point into Nigeria.
Vet some hate preachers and terrorist coming in from the middle east or elsewhere and Nigerians going to the middle east or elsewhere.
The SSS should keep an eye on the activities of Nigerians over the internet becos many are indoctrinated over the internet.
Nigeria: Bakassi People Rally as Controversy Trails Elias, Wachuku Positions Tagged: Cameroon, Central Africa, Land and Rural Issues, Legal Affairs, Nigeria, West Africa BY HUGO ODIOGOR, 29 SEPTEMBER 2012 Comment Displaced indigenes of Bakassi Peninsula will hold rallies in different parts of the world today to highlight the injustice that has been visited on them by the ceding of their homeland by the Federal Government without their consent.
With less than 10 days for the Jonathan led administration to take a second look at the October 1 2002 ,International Court of Justice judgment that ceded the Peninsula to Cameroon where there is apprehension as the Central African country tightens its grip.
Saturday Vanguard was reliably informed that the indigenous Bakassi population would hold rallies in Lagos, Abuja, Calabar, London, Germany, France, The Hague among others.
They said that the foundation for the ceding of Bakassi by the Federal Government was laid by a clause in an advise given to the government by the former Attorney General and Minister of Justice, Chief Taslim Oluwole Elias, during the Yakubu Gowon's regime, that Nigeria should allow Cameroon take over the peninsula because of the country's assistance to it during the Nigeria- Biafran civil war, wondering why some indigenous communities would be donated to another country based on such flimsy excuses.
Elias, had in his advise entitled "Nigeria/ Cameroun Boundary Demarcation," dated September 3, 1970 stated, 'The principle of good faith in international relations demands that Nigeria should not disavow her word of honour," adding that "every effort should be exerted on our side to ensure that Nigeria does not show ingratitude to a sister country that stood by us during the civil war.
Accordingly, I strongly urge that these recommendations of the Nigerian - Cameroun's Joint Boundary Commission dated August 14, 1970 should be implemented expeditiously..."
The Jonathan administration seem not prepared to comply with Article 61 of the ICJ Charter by approaching the court to review the judgment obtained by concealment of vital facts from the world jurists by both Nigeria and Cameroon.
This is even as Cameroon is alleged to be massing troops in the borders just as the movement of indigenes of Bakassi into Nigeria is heavily monitored.
According to sources, Bakassi people are also cut off from streams of information while efforts have been intensified by Cameroon to force thousands of the natives to change their names and language to French and to leave the peninsula in violation of the Green Tree Agreement, GTA.
Mr. Ani Esin, a former local government Chairman for Bakassi Local Government told Saturday Vanguard that since the uproar in Nigeria, following the publications by the Vanguard Newspaper, the Cameroonian government has been emboldened by the reluctance of the Federal government to demand for a revisit of the ICJ rulings to send troops into the peninsula to expel the indigenous population; force them out of their territory and occupy their property.
He said "The people of Bakassi who had hoped that the Jonathan administration will revisit to issue have become dejected as it appears that those who gave away Bakassi would not want to be exposed for the injustice committed against us. This is why the Pirate confraternity has been mobilising the public for a mass rally while we explore the option of forming a government in exile to continue the struggle after October 10, 2012".
It was learnt that in Yaounde, the Cameroonian authorities are in panic following revelations that ICJ was misled into believing that the moribund 1913 Anglo-German treaty and the unsigned 1975 Maroua declarations were the only legal documents that set the Land and Maritime boundaries between Nigeria and the Cameroun.
The Legal Opinion of Justice T.O. Elias
Meanwhile, the last may not have been heard of the administrative and legal tardiness that were employed to mislead the ICJ to concede Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon.
Specifically, the legal opinion provided by Chief Elias and the Diplomatic Note written by Mr. Aja Wachuku as the External Affairs Minister have come up for scrutiny.
Some members of Nigerian defence team have continued to cite those documents as evidences that Bakassi Peninsula was part of Cameroon based on the 1913 Anglo German Treaty, which some claimed that Nigeria was obliged to uphold on attainment of independence on October 1,1960.
Prince Bola Ajibola SAN, who wrote a minority judgement at the Hague told Saturday Vanguard the Nigeria's case was weakened "because of what happened in the 1913 in the Anglo-German Agreement," pointing out that, "it was since then that we have this uphill task because it was Britain that ceded the whole of that Bakassi area, well described in Article 21 and 22 of that agreement, specifically to Germany."
However, it has been discovered the agreement dated March 11, 1913 was not signed until Germany was defeated during the First World War, hence it was deprived of the Bakassi Peninsula as Bakassi was ceded to France, which thereafter, gave independence to Cameroun that now got involved in the boundary dispute.
Both Senator Ewah Bassey- Henshaw and Prof. Walter Ofonagoro told Saturday Vanguard that the documents cited by the Nigerian defence team were "mischievously used to mislead those who are not familiar with the issues especially to achieve a predetermined goal."
Senator Henshaw said that until recently, most Nigerian government officials have regarded the 1913 Anglo-German Treaty as a living document but it was fundamentally flawed by the fact that it was not signed before the outbreak of the First World War after which Germany was stripped of all its colonial territories, making the treaty useless.
It was of no effect because all German territories were transferred to the League of Nations. Hensahaw further said, "those who have been citing the Aja Wachuku Diplomatic note and Dr. T.O Elias legal opinion have substantially relied on the belief that the Anglo- Nigeria Treaty was a living document, but this is not true."
Also, Nella Andem Rabana SAN who was part of Nigeria's team to the Hague said nations do not concede territories on exchange of diplomatic note or on legal opinion that are outside the stipulations of the parliament, which was one of the key institutions on Nigeria's attainment of independence in 1960. Bakassi Peninsula was recognised as part of the Nigerian territory in the 1963 Constitution and in the Cairo 1964 OUA summit, it was resolved that all colonial boundaries inherited at independence should be inviolated.
Furthermore, Prof. Ofonagoro said Nigeria and Cameroon decided to bind themselves with a document that was dead and had no force of law. He said "It is evident that Dr. Elias placed extra-ordinary weight on the work of the Nigeria/Cameroon Joint Commission which met at Yaoundé from August 12 to 14, 1970.
He said, "The major decisions taken at that meeting, after considerable discussion", was that the Joint Commission agreed to use the 1913 Anglo-German Treaty" as the basis for demarcating the boundary. It is obvious that this decision was made without seeking guidance from either the Attorney General, or the Honorable Minister of Transport through the office of the Head of State, otherwise, Dr. Elias would not be referring to decisions reached at the Yaoundé meeting of August 12-14, 1970.
The vital decision had been taken at that meeting of the Joint Commission, at which the most senior Nigerian official present was the Federal Director of Surveys. Once that decision had been taken, there was no escaping the implications of Article 20 of the Anglo-German Treaty of March 11, 1913, which stipulated that;
"Should the lower course of the Akwa Yafe so change its mouth as to transfer it to the Rio Del Rey, it is agreed that the area now known as the Bakassi peninsula shall remain German territory. In the said Legal Opinion, Dr. Elias further drew attention to "the exchange of notes between Nigeria and the United Kingdom on October 1, 1960 which binds Nigeria to honour obligations entered into on our behalf by the United Kingdom.
The implication of this statement is that the External Affairs Ministry considered the 1913 Agreement as one of the pre-independence treaties entered into by Britain on Nigeria's behalf. The diplomatic Note which was cited as evidence that the Bakassi peninsula was based on the above assumption. Dr. Elias did not, however, make any pronouncement on the legal validity of that treaty.
He only referred to decisions already taken by the Yaoundé meeting of the Nigerian-Cameroon border commission to adopt the 1913 Treaty as the basis for their boundary demarcation negotiations.
The commitment had already been made in August 12-14, of 1971 and he was of the opinion that Nigeria was bound by it.In fact, the Nigerian legal team at the ICJ had this to say about the legal validity of the Anglo-German Agreement of March 11, 1913:
In relation to the Treaty of Versailles, Nigeria points out that Article 289 thereof provided for "the revival of pre-war bi-lateral treaties concluded by Germany on notification to Germany by the other party." It contends that since Great Britain had taken no steps under Article 289 to revive the Agreement of March 11, 1913, it was accordingly abrogated.
"Former President Shehu Shagari was advised that the treaty was voidable by a Task Force that he appointed in 1981, to study the controversial 1913 Anglo-German Treaty. The committee concluded that the 1913 Agreement was voidable.
This was also the position reached by Professor Bassey Atte in a study of this subject saying that the 1913 Anglo-German Agreement "which purported to alter the status quo to Nigeria's disadvantage, is subject to great controversy as to its legality."
Prof. Ofonanagoro argued further that the opinion of Elias on the matter was limited by the fact that he was not at the Yaoundé Summit of the two Heads of State, on April 4, 1971, and that the famous Ngo/Coker, was first drawn to a 3-mile limit from the Akwa Yafe River, westwards to the channel of the Cross and Calabar Rivers, placing Bakassi on the Cameroonian side of this new boundary."
"If Dr. Elias knew about this boundary by September 3, 1970, eight months before Yaoundé Summit, where the Ngo/Coker line was agreed , then it means that at the highest level of the Nigerian Government, the level of the Attorney General, and presumably, his boss, the Head of State, the decision had already been taken at that time, to ignore the provision of Article 21 of the Anglo-German Treaty of March 11, 1913, and draw the boundary to the west of the Akwa Yafe River.
"In practice, the navigable channel of the Akwa Yafe was invariably forced to flow to the Bakassi north shore, and East to the Rio del Rey, and the British stated this fact in Article 20: which stated that, "Should the lower course of the Akwa Yafe so change its mouth as to transfer it to the Rio Del Rey, it is agreed that the area now known as Bakassi peninsula shall still remain German territory. Even by Article 20 of this Treaty, Bakassi is not ceded to German Cameroon; the article simply says that Bakassi shall still remain German territory.
This means that it was already "German territory" before the date of the drafting of Article 20 of that treaty. That being the case, Cameroon still has to produce the documentary basis of Bakassi becoming "German territory" in the first place.
There must be some documentary basis of Bakassi becoming German territory between April 14, 1893 and March 13, 1913, since the language of the Treaty says that Bakassi shall still remain German territory, even when by the flow of the boundary, following Akwa Yafe to Rio del Rey, it finds itself on the British side of the boundary. This is most strange to treaty law.
"In 1907, when the British and Germans had agreed that the Boundary should progress inland from the Thalweg of the Akwa Yafe, the Germans had requested for the frontier to be continued out to sea after reaching the mouth of the Akwa Yafe, all the way to the middle of the channel of the mouth of the old Calabar River.
However, according to minutes recorded by Mr. Strachey of the Foreign Office, Britain refused this request and told the Germans the "line should follow the shore of the Bakassi peninsula along the thalweg of the Akwa Yafe when the actual mouth of the river was reached.
It is therefore clear that as far back as 1907, it was generally known by both powers, that the navigable channel of the Akwa Yafe could never put Bakassi on the Cameroonian side of the border, since that channel must lie to the east of the Calabar and Cross River channels.
The heavier flow of these two bigger rivers would always force the Akwa Yafe east to Bakassi shore and the Rio Del Rey. Most often, the channel disappeared altogether, and was extremely difficult to find.
Nigeria: Bakassi - Again, House Urges FG Review of ICJ's Judgment Tagged: Cameroon, Central Africa, External Relations, International Organisations, Land and Rural Issues, Nigeria, West Africa BY ONWUKA NZESHI, 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Comment Barely 24 hours after the Senate urged the Federal Government to approach the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for a review of its 2002 judgment ceding Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroun, the House of Representatives Thursday equally renewed the pressure.
Adopting the report of its Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Justice and Special Duties on the issue, the House observed that Article 61 of the Statute of the ICJ has clearly defined the procedure for the review of the judgement of the court.
A joint committee of the House had last week met with stakeholders and experts to discuss the maritime boundaries of Nigeria and the future of Bakassi.
The report of that discourse recommended that the Federal Government should proceed immediately to file for a review of the judgement based on the fresh evidence available on the boundary dispute.
It however warned that the review must be filed before October 10, this year which will mark the tenth anniversary of the 2002 ruling.
According to the report, the Green Tree Agreement entered into by the governments of Nigeria and Cameroun following the ICJ ruling and which culminated in the ceding of Bakassi to Cameroun was a violation of Section 12(1) of the 1999 Constitution.
The section states that: "No treaty between the Federation and any other country shall have the force of law
Nigeria: Nollywood Stars Flock Ita Giwa's Red Ball Party Tagged: Entertainment, Nigeria, West Africa BY UCHE UDUMA, 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Comment It was indeed an array of celebrities, glitz and glamour at the Florence Ita Giwa's Foundation for Children of Bakassi Charity event tagged the Redball.
The event which was held at the Eko Hotel & Suites, Victoria Island, Lagos pulled a hand full of celebrities in the Nigeria entertainment industry who dressed stylishly in their exquisite red dresses in line with the theme "The Red Ball".
The event pulled super stars like Rita Dominic, veteran actress, Joke Silva, Funke Akindele-Oloyede and Iretiola Doyle who walked Ita Giwa's runway in their trendy red. Other celebrities who walked the runway in their beautiful Indian dresses include Annie Macaulay-Idibia, Shan George, Genevive Nnaji and Monalisa Chinda
The evening was lit up with sterling performances by 2face Idibia and Tiwa Savage, the Kelekele Love songstress. Other superstars who showed up for the grand event include comedians, Ali Baba and Basketmouth and music star, Timi Dakolo.http://allafrica.com/stories/201209280229.html
Nigeria: Bakassi - Again, House Urges FG Review of ICJ's Judgment Tagged: Cameroon, Central Africa, External Relations, International Organisations, Land and Rural Issues, Nigeria, West Africa BY ONWUKA NZESHI, 28 SEPTEMBER 2012 Comment Barely 24 hours after the Senate urged the Federal Government to approach the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for a review of its 2002 judgment ceding Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroun, the House of Representatives Thursday equally renewed the pressure.
Adopting the report of its Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Justice and Special Duties on the issue, the House observed that Article 61 of the Statute of the ICJ has clearly defined the procedure for the review of the judgement of the court.
A joint committee of the House had last week met with stakeholders and experts to discuss the maritime boundaries of Nigeria and the future of Bakassi.
The report of that discourse recommended that the Federal Government should proceed immediately to file for a review of the judgement based on the fresh evidence available on the boundary dispute.
It however warned that the review must be filed before October 10, this year which will mark the tenth anniversary of the 2002 ruling.
According to the report, the Green Tree Agreement entered into by the governments of Nigeria and Cameroun following the ICJ ruling and which culminated in the ceding of Bakassi to Cameroun was a violation of Section 12(1) of the 1999 Constitution.
The section states that: "No treaty between the Federation and any other country shall have the force of law.
Bakassi: If my people declare war on Nigeria, I’ll pray for them – Monarch on SEPTEMBER 28, 2012 · in NEWS 1:16 am 0 By Johnbosco Agbakwuru
CALABAR – CHAIRMAN, Council of Chiefs in Cross River State and paramount ruler of Bakassi Local Government Area of the state, Etinyin Etim Edet, has said he would support Bakassi people with prayers to achieve victory, if they chose to declare war on Nigeria over the Federal Government’s refusal to appeal against the International Court of Justice, ICJ, judgment that ceded their land to Cameroun.
Etinyin Edet, yesterday, on a phone-in radio programme on Nigeria Info 99.3 fm in Lagos, said he believed that against all odds, God will intervene in the Bakassi matter and save his people. This came on the heels of a call by the Senate to the Presidency to appeal against the October 10, 2012, ICJ judgment.
Nigeria: We Must Reverse ICJ Judgement On Bakassi - Mark Tagged: Cameroon, Central Africa, External Relations, International Organisations, Land and Rural Issues, Legal Affairs, Nigeria, West Africa BY UCHENNA AWOM AND CHIBUZO UKAIBE, 27 SEPTEMBER 2012 Comment The Presidency and the National Assembly are headed to a major showdown as an emotion-laden Senate yesterday asked President Goodluck Jonathan to appeal the judgement of International Court of Justice which ceded Bakassi to the Republic of Cameroon.
Their call was contrary to the posturing of the Presidency on the issue.
President Jonathan was said to have met the Secretary General of the United Nations, Mr. Ban Ki-moon, to discuss the way to implement the ICJ's judgement on Bakassi Peninsula, which by inference signals acceptance of the ruling.
But the senators unanimously declared that the ICJ judgement in the first place as null and void, because it was not ratified by the Senate.
Consequently, the lawmakers mandated the Senate President to write a personal letter on the matter to President Goodluck Jonathan, in which he should emphasize the exigency and urgency of the matter.
LEADERSHIP recalls that the ICJ, in a controversial ruling in 2002, ceded Bakassi Peninsula, located in Cross River State to the Cameroon, with a 10-year window gap for appeal which expires on October 9, 2012.
The resolution of the Senate was sequel to a motion sponsored by the deputy leader, Senator Abdul Ningi, and 16 others.
Senator Ningi (PDP, Bauchi) said there is "the lack of faithful implementation of the "Green Tree Agreement" signed by both the Cameroon and Nigeria, thereby violating the basis of the implementation of the court judgement.
He contended that Cameroon had breached Articles 3(1) and 2 (a) of the Green Tree Agreement, which stipulates that after the transfer of the territory to Cameroon, the Cameroonians should guarantee the Nigerian nationals living in the Bakassi peninsula the exercise of their fundamental human rights.
Politics › Bakassi: Nigeria’s Territorial Integrity Under Threat —imoke by Bliss4Lyfe(op): 2:23am On Oct 02, 2012
