₦airaland Forum

acidtalk: How Do Guys Cope With More Than One Partner?

I find it amazing when I hear or see guys who boast of having up to 3 girls friends at a time (not flings). As a guy this is something i have never bothered trying. Once I am in a relationship, I stick to that partner (Emotionally and financially). Not that I don't get to have steady flings from time to time, but keeping up to 3 girl friends at a go is killing.

I would be the type of guy that will be termed 'very responsible'. Meaning I cater for my woman's basic needs and a little excess when the money is available. Even if the lady is richer, older and more sophisticated. It has always been my way.

I treat her like a brother, father, friend and lover by sharing experiences and advicing her. So doing all this with two other girls will probably drive me nuts.

Guys please how have you managed to cope with 3 steady girl friends over a period of time?

Reading ur post turned my belly upside down. Although u meant well by what u posted but I wonder how u can differentiate having 3 gfs with what u accepted with ur own mouth, I mean u said "Not that I don't get to have steady flings from time to time". Have u had a lady hurt herself cos she found out u cheated, have u had a lady drink herself silly just cos of the same reason. I would have hailed and supported u but 4 this thing u posted. Look, women are not games 2 play with and in case u 4get, its an honour for one to agree 2 date u. Once u start respecting ur woman and our sisters, u´d be faithful without having ur side flings. Those side-flings are not healthy but can be dangerous cos ma broda AIDS is real. u shouldn´t try to belong or say that anyway guys do it so why shouldn´t I do so. Men, besides ask urself what a woman on the side can give u that ur woman can´t. Or ask urself what sex style she can give u that u can´t teach ur woman if she doesn´t know how to. Men should really learn keeping their pee-pees buttoned-up and not putting into any hole (shudders)

[quote author=mama-gee][color=deeppink]I won't marry a Nigerian man because they marry on cooking abilities and I can't cook. . .I'll rather marry a white man because they are more civilized.[/color][/quote]ur first mistake is generalizing. So I just pity u.

Pls someone shld ask this terrorist how the video concerns innocent Nigerians going about their day to activities in such a harsh economy...

berem: if Ojukwu is the first son,then she has every right to claim her husband's property! And what do u mean by personal property? Who is Ojukwu's niece to interfere in the matter? He has no right to give Bianca quit notice! A house she has been living before her husband's demise? Why didn't they chase her when her husband was still alive? She should fight for her right abeg!

U get it all wrong. Ojukwu is the first son for sure but he was not the only son. He has been sitting on their fathers properties all those years and the brothers did not complain or maybe there were silently grumbling but out of respect for him they kept silent. I am not surprised this will come up. It may get nasty latter, but I hope not bloody (well since we know tyrany runs in that family)

mukina2: The federal government has announced Monday, October 1, as public holiday to mark Nigeria’s 52nd independence anniversary, a statement from the Ministry of Interior has said.

The statement which was signed by the Ministry’s Permanent Secretary, Mrs. Daniel Nwaobia in Abuja, on behalf of the Minister, also wished all Nigerians a blissful independence anniversary celebration.

It quoted President Goodluck Ebele Jonathan as urging all Nigerians to continue to fervently pray for enduring peace and progress in the country, urging all and sundry to resolve to build a more united and virile nation that would be the pride of all Nigerians wherever they lived.

The Minister, further condemned what he termed the practice of absolute denial of Nigerian citizens the right to observe and enjoy work- free days by government of the federation some foreign agencies

http://leadership.ng/nga/articles/35933/2012/09/28/nigeria52_fg_declares_oct_1_public_holiday.html

Abeg make una help me ask this perm sec what enduring peace GEJ is talking about. Bomb blasts in Borno, Sokoto, Jos, Abuja, and recently in Zaria. The idea of peace with Boko apoki bombing the whole northen Nigeria is a facade.

allow them to be deceiving themselves and think they are deceiving us....

[quote author=Ji_sun_pack]If they like make dem come open nam for my house sef. wetin I go carry BB do when droid dey my hand?

Fucck BB.[/quote]O boi abeg ask them. What is BB Abeg make we hear word.

Caringhrtofmine: Pls i need sincere answers from the house. Did u have intimate relationship (sex) with your partner before marriage? If u dont, how did u prove your love to him without sex? Cos, men dont believe you love them untill u have sex. And as a man, how do u see your wife to be who does not want to have sex with you? Thank u for your sincere responds.

Hey God, NL. Please how is that ur business!!!

People are talking, this one is also following them to talk....abeg joo!!!
That is how u told us the other time that one jamo guy touch ur toto. I mean guys with me that day that saw ur thread almost died of laughter.

abeg,...let us hear word (leaves b4 anyone sees him)

Men u guys are horrible (laughs). That was yrs ago in primary school down memmory lane. I had a long list of them, from ada to evie to bunmi, The list was so long, I can even still rememeber all my blunders....

[quote author=Mynd_44]Then he has some explaining to do[/quote]did u say some explaining or a lot of explaining..

goodbobo: Female in my office ( all married women )find it very easy to touch me . today , when one of them was laughing her hand went as far as my ass lets say mistakenly .
But one thing is as a man u can never make such mistake of touching a woman like that if u dont want big wahala .

Guys do u something experience such in ur office .

I pity u, keep dreaming about married women and let ur fantasies give u Rhizopus. God would purnish u when their husband catch u.

ACM10: Iwuanyanwu is a well-known political jobber. He endorsed Obasanjo's third term bid. He gave a full-throated endorsement to Ohakim during his campaign for 2nd term. Even though he saw the handwriting on the wall that Imolites will definetly reject Ohakim. He was one of the prominent Abacha and Babangida jobbers in the east. His position on this issue should not be taken seriously since he has always found himself on the wrong side of history. His views should never be used to guage the view of common Igboman on the street. He is just another misguided out-of-touch plutocrat.

this words should be laminated in gold

pls someone should tell this fool (Ms. Mailafia) that their best is not good enough.

Femi Falana, San, in This Piece Examines the Legal Dimensions of Bakassi Peninsula Residents Self Determination Threat

THE contemporary boundary problems that exist between Nigeria and Cameroon particularly over the ownership and control of Bakassi Peninsula can be traced primarily to colonialism, the scramble for African territories and the creation of artificial boundaries in Africa.

In the scramble for Africa which started with the Berlin Conference of 1884-85 and was completed by the turn of the 20th century, the colonial masters arbitrarily created several latitudinal and longitudinal boundaries using physical borders such as rivers, hills, mountains, natural vegetation and human fiat to establish artificial nation-states without due regard to the wishes and aspirations of the local communities.

According to Alberto Alesina, William Easterly and Janina Matuszeski in their publication entitled Artificial States (2006), there are three ways in which those who drew borders created problems; "First they gave territories to one group ignoring the fact that another group had already claimed the same territory. Second, they drew boundary lines splitting ethnic (or religious or linguistic) groups into deferent countries, frustrating national ambitions of various groups and creating unrest in the countries formed.

"Third they combined into a single country groups that wanted independence". The scholars further posited that the results of artificial boundaries can be disastrous in that "Artificial borders increase the motivation to safeguard or advance nationalist agendas at the expense of economic and political development".

It is a fact that most African tribes are cut by political border lines and culturally homogenous ethnic groups are sometimes divided between different countries and some cases also ethnic groups that share no cultural on ethnocentric relationship are forced to form a single country. While it should be noted that this phenomenon is common in many parts of the world where artificial boundaries were created, Africa appeared to be the most affected and the resultant effect has been constant conflicts, legal challenges to boundary demarcation and several other cartography related clashes.

In Nigeria, the Southern and Northern protectorates were amalgamated in 14 by Lord Ludgard to form the federation of Nigeria with over 250 ethnic groups. Despite this, the ethnocentric survey of Nigerian international boundaries would reveal that several of these ethnic groups spilled over to Nigerian neighbouring states of Republic of Benin where you find a good presence of Yoruba in the southwest and Hausa in the northwest, Niger, Chad and Cameroon respectively..According to Dr. Wondwosen Teshome in "Colonial Boundaries of Africa: The Case of Ethiopia's Boundary with Sudan" quoting Loisel (2004: 4), citing Miles (1994: 68), these "borders were drawn essentially according to the geopolitical, economic and administrative interests of the colonial powers, often taken into account at a global scale. The most often cited example is that of the division of the Hausaland, between today's Niger and Nigeria. The Franco-British treaties of 1904 and 1906 redrew the border in favour of the French side, in exchange for France's renunciation of fishing rights off the coast of Newfoundland".

The case of the boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon in the eastern part of the country has a more complex dimension. After the treaty of Versailles in 1919, the German territory of Kamerun was divided between French and the British League of Nations mandate with the French taking a larger portion of the territory. The British mandate comprised Northern and Southern Cameroon and were ruled directly from Nigeria though they were not legally and politically speaking, territorial part of Nigeria.

At this juncture, I wish to submit that the treaty of 1919 like the Cession Treaty of Lagos of 1861 is illegal in every material particular. The natives whose landed property were seized or confiscated were not involved in the "negotiations" while the Kings who ceded them did not have the authority or consent of the owners. Under the doctrine of nemo dat quod not habet recognized in English and French laws, the transfer of the territories was illegal. In Amodu Tijani v. Secretary, Southern Provinces (1915) 3 NLR 24 the Plaintiffs successfully challenged the acquisition of their land in Lagos on the ground that King Docemo (Dosumu) had no right to alienate it under native law and custom.

The Privy Council held that "a mere change in sovereignty is not to be presumed as meant to disturb rights of private owners, and the general terms of a Cession are prima facie to be construed accordingly". See also Oduntan Osinowo v. Attorney-General (1912) 2 NLR 79. The illegality of the ceding of Bakassi Peninsula by the British colonial regime and the Yakubu Gowon military regime ought to have been questioned at the International Court of Justice. But Nigeria's defence was erroneously anchored on the legal validity of the treaty. The ruling of the Court could not have been otherwise in the circumstances.

By 1946 following the dissolution of the League of Nations, these territories were re-designated as trust territories. Thus, the British portion of the Cameroons was placed under the control of the British government by virtue of a Trusteeship agreement between the United Nations Trusteeship Council and Britain.

The reason why the territory was not given to Britain permanently to form part of Nigeria was because the United Nations envisaged that the territory would eventually become an independent state.

Following the 1953-54 constitutional conferences which eventually introduced federalism into Nigeria, they had representatives in the Eastern parliament even though, by that time also, the Southern Cameroon had began the agitation for autonomy from the Nigerian federation. In 1953, the British government granted their request as a result of which the Southern Cameroon became an autonomous region.

However, when Nigeria and Cameroon were preparing for their independence, the people of Southern Cameroon were faced with three posers: whether to join Cameroon, Nigeria or just to remain as an independent country all in a bid to properly determine where their interests would be best served.

It was against this background that the United Nations, in 1961 conducted a plebiscite where they put two alternatives in the ballot box-to be with Nigeria or Cameroon.

They were not given the option to form their own country and this could be attributed to the negative influence of Britain at the UN opposing such a move. Be that as it may, the Northern Cameroon voted to be united to Nigeria while the English speaking Southern Cameroon voted to be part of the French Cameroon.

The understanding of this political history of the Eastern territorial boundary of Nigeria is significant to this discussion taking into consideration the fact that Bakassi is arguably believed in some quarters to be part of the Southern Cameroon and there were insinuations that the people of Bakassi also participated in the plebiscite. Some people even argued that they also voted to be part of Cameroon.

For instance, Dr. Nowa Omoigui while reacting to an article entitled "Gowon, the Queen and the stolen bronze", by Reuben Abati posited inter alia that "during the Cameroon/Nigeria plebiscite of 1961, 21 polling stations were physically located in the Bakassi peninsula. UN records clearly show that approximately 73% of the people living there AT THAT TIME voted NOT to be administered under independent Nigeria.

This is fairly easy to confirm either from the UN itself or Ambassador BA Clark who was Deputy Permanent Secretary External Affairs in 1970/71. The precise number of polling booths and their exact locations is a matter of public record. It is fair to assume that the vote was binding on future generations in the area.

The question of whether it could have been different - as was the case with Northern Cameroons - is one of the more fascinating but unexamined aspects of Nigeria's history from that period. Whether the vote meant that the people of Southern Cameroons should form their own country or be fused with French Cameroun is another curious angle that has recently surfaced".

If that was the situation however, one wonders why the area was not immediately annexed to Cameroon at the time when the Southern Cameroon was joined with French Cameroon or could it have been that the United Nations did not Bakassi to form part of the French Cameroon at the time given the territory's cultural homogeneity with Nigeria? For instance, one of the legal problems that Gowon was confronted with was the grey area in the Anglo-German Treaty as it affected the Bakassi Peninsula; the dispute about the OFFSHORE border and precise delineation of the approach channel to the Calabar Port.

According to the treaty, the navigable portion of the channel was to lie wholly within Nigeria while the peninsula itself was to lie wholly within Cameroun.

Be that it may, when Gen. Yakubu Gowown was confronted with the issue off Ms- ascendancy to power, he could have done either of two things; first, call on the UN to conduct another plebiscite to determine the fate of the people of Bakassi or move to cede the territory to Cameroon in accordance with the 1961 plebiscite. He chose the latter for obvious reasons; the country had just survived a three year civil war in which his authority as head of State and Commander in Chief was very heavily battered thereby making it politically inexpedient to undertake another such a risk instead of healing the wounds of war , secondly, he relied on the opinions of legal scholars and experts including senior public officials from the office of the Federal Ministry of Works who were in charge of federal surveys and responsible for cartographic surveys of Nigeria and thirdly, even before, Gowon called for legal opinion on the status of Bakassi, there was also a suggestion that the United States government at the time also viewed the territory as belonging to Cameroon.

However, by far the most weighted consideration by Gowon was the legal opinion which was prepared in 1970 by Prof. Teslim Olawale Elias who argued amongst others that given the legal precedents and the role of Cameroon during the Civil war, Gowon should cede the territory to Cameroon. I also understand that Gowon was influenced to take the decision by a "well thought out formal brief from then Commissioner for External Affairs, Okoi Arikpo, (who was of South Eastern State origin), in which he clearly stated that Nigeria had no legal claim to the Bakassi peninsula".

Hence, given these circumstances, Gen Gowon ceded the territory to Cameroon and executed an agreement with President Ahidjo of Cameroon. Again, in the words of Dr. Omoigui, "the issue of Bakassi itself was sealed by the Ministry of Justice legal opinion, supported by Okoi Arikpo of External Affairs, based on decades of legal and political precedent.

If the people of the Bakassi peninsula had either boycotted the Cameroon plebiscite altogether or had voted along with the rest of Southern-Cameroons-to stay in Nigeria, the matter would have been much less complicated although it could still have been an internal border problem between states..... .General Gowon relied on experts from the Federal Survey Department in the Ministry of Works on what the offshore delineation of the approach channel to the Calabar Estuary should be - up to the 3-mile limit."

It is however, arguable whether Gen Gowon had power to sign such an agreement with Cameroon without the approval of tl}£;Su.preme Military Council.

The ownership of the territory continued to generate controversies between Nigeria and Cameroon for several years that followed until 1994 when Cameroon approached the International court of Justice on the dispute and requested for a ruling "relating essentially to the question of sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula", which Cameroon declared was under the control of Nigeria. Cameroon also asked the ICJ to settle the maritime boundary between the two countries.

At that time, Nigeria had an opportunity to decide whether or not to join issues with Cameroon in the World court but the leadership of the country took a rather fatalistic approach to the matter by not only surrendering to the jurisdiction of the Court, but also agreed to be bound by the decision of the ICJ.

Hence, it was therefore a fait accompli when On 10 October 2002, citing a 1913 agreement between Germany and the United Kingdom, as well as the Thornson-Marchland Declaration of 1929-1930, the ICJ decided to award sovereignty rights of the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon. In the opinion of a learned school of thought, Old Calabar, encompassing the Bakassi Peninsula, was, in 1913, a protectorate and not a colony of Great Britain.

Writing on the judgment, a legal scholar Chris Akiri commented that a "protectorate" signifies authority assumed by a strong state over a weak or underdeveloped one, without direct annexation, in contradistinction to a "colony", or a land settled by people from another country, to whose government it is, in some degree, subject. In view of this, according to this school of thought, Britain had no legal right to cede the Bakassi Peninsula to Germany in 1913, having regard to the time-worn legal maxim - nemo dat quod non habet (he who hath not cannot give)".

The decision, which generated a lot of sharp criticisms across the country and protests from the inhabitants of the peninsula who felt short changed by the Government of Nigeria's lack of consideration to their political and cultural ties to Nigeria, was followed by yet another agreement between Nigeria and Cameroon on the process of implementation of the judgment.

The treaty popularly known as the Green Tree Agreemnt was signed between the President of Cameroon and the then President of Nigeria, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo in 2006 to implement the judgment of the International Court of Justice. Article 1 of the Agreement states that : "Nigeria recognises the sovereignty of Cameroon over the Bakassi Peninsula in accordance with the judgment of the International Court of Justice of 10 October 2002 in the matter of land and maritime boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria.

Cameroon and Nigeria recognize the land and maritime boundary between the two countries as delineated by the Court and commit themselves to continuing the process of implementation already begun." With the Green Tree Agreement which President Obasanjo signed with Cameroon without involving the National Assembly in accordance with the Constitution of Nigeria for ratification of Treaties finally put to rest, any attempts to revamp any claims Nigeria or any part thereof may have over Bakassi. :;

Having said that however, it is important to note that the Green Tree agreements imposes obligations on both countries on the general welfare of the indigenes of Bakassi failing which the people of Bakassi will be at exercise their right to self determination in accordance with the African Charter on People and Human Rights and other international treaties and protocols for the protection and recognition of the rights of indigenous people to self determination.

A cursory review of the salient provisions of the Green Tree Agreement clearly shows that both countries have clearly defined and guaranteed responsibilities and obligations towards effectively providing for the welfare of the inhabitants.

The Agreement provides that " Nigeria must ensure that those citizens who opted to resettle in Nigeria are provided with the necessary means and measures to do so" while the obligations of Cameroon are clearly stated in Article 3 which without doubt is self explanatory. Article 3 of the GTA provides:

1. Cameroon, after the transfer of authority to it by Nigeria, guarantees to Nigerian nationals living in the Bakassi Peninsula the exercise of the fundamental rights and freedoms enshrined in international human rights la"w and in other relevant provisions of international law.

2. In particular, Cameroon shall:

(a) not force Nigerian nationals living in the Bakassi Peninsula to leave the Zone or to change their nationality;

(b) respect their culture, language and beliefs;

(c) respect their right to continue their agricultural and fishing activities;

(d) Protect their property and their customary land rights;

(e) not levy in any discriminatory manner any taxes and other dues on Nigerian nationals living in the Zone; and

(f) take every necessary measure to protect Nigerian nationals living in the Zone from any harassment or harm.

"Recognizing the necessity of a smooth transition of the administration of Bakassi from Nigeria to Cameroon", the GTA also establishes a "Follow up Committee" in Article 6 which provides:

1. A Follow-up Committee to monitor the implementation of this Agreement is hereby established. It shall be composed of representatives of Cameroon, Nigeria, the United Nations and the witness States. The Committee shall monitor the implementation of the Agreement by the Parties with the assistance of the United Nations observers of the Mixed Commission.

2. The Follow-up Committee shall settle any dispute regarding the interpretation and implementation of this Agreement.

Obviously as stated above, the Nigerian government is not interested any longer in reopening the case with Cameroon before the ICJ even though, tl^e Nigerian ^government has an opportunity to do so before the twilight of October 10, 2012 when the judgment will become final and irredeemable and Nigerians who opt to remain in Bakassi can only do so as foreigners.

However, if both countries fail to perform their obligations under the Green Tree Agreement by providing for the relocation and general well being and protection of the local inhabitants, the events after October 10, 2012, can open a new vista of renewed agitation for self determination and declaration of independence by the local settlers.

This is because, while the ICJ judgment may have awarded their land to Cameroon, the Court has not taken away their rights to be free from oppression and their inalienable rights for self determination in accordance with various international Treaties. Suffice it to say that at the moment, crucial issues and questions relating to orderly transition and economic empowerment and resettlement of the people of Bakassi, particularly those who have opted to return to Nigeria have not been adequately addressed by the Federal Government of Nigeria. •

Conclusion

The recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Attorney-General, Cross River State v. Attorney-General, Akwa Ibom State

which has declared that Cross River State is no longer a littoral state has reopened the controversy over the "ownership" of the Bakassi Peninsular. Having been abandoned by the Federal Government of Nigeria the people of Bakassi have declared their independence. Contrary to the pronouncement of the President of the Nigerian Bar Association, Mr. J.B. Daudu (SAN) that the action is treasonable I wish to submit, without any fear of contradiction, that the Bakassi people have "the unquestionable and inalienable right to self determination" under Article 20(1) of the African Charter on Human and Peoples Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004.

Instead of criminalizing the action of the frustrated Bakassi people the Federal Government may wish to enter into dialogue with the genuine representatives of the Bakassi people. More so, that the Green Tree Agreement has not been domesticated as required by Section 12(1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended which provides that "No treaty between the Federation and other country shall have the force of law except to the extent to which any such treaty has been enacted into law by the National Assembly."

hmm who is complaining. Let them do it jare. Atleast, I now know in d future my farmland will be a local government and one of my sons will be the LGA chairman

berem: I thought the Sultan said they should resist any attempt to be deported? Wetin come happen again? Dem no resist ni? I can see saudis don't give a fucck about nigerian muslims. Smh!

its all so boring. It would have been very interesting if the Sultan himself was deported. Let them 4get all this subtle acts of war and come fully out abeg. So we know where they stand..

PROFESSOR Anya Oko Anya, 75, pioneer chairman of the Nigeria Economic Summit Group (NESG) and 1992 National Merit Award winner is sad over Nigeria’s handling of the Bakassi Peninsula and insists that the International Court of Justice (ICJ) would reverse its 2002 judgment ceding the territory to Cameroon if the Nigeria appeals the verdict with prevailing facts and documents. (Vanguard Newspapers )

He wants former heads of state, retired Generals Yakubu Gowon and Olusegun Obasanjo, who signed off and ceded the territory respectively to Cameroon to take part in the recovery efforts because they might be charged with treason in future. Excerpts:

The Bakassi matter

Bakassi is a very unfortunate development for Nigeria. It is also not a very good advertisement for our leadership. Nations develop military power. The whole armed forces is established to protect the territorial integrity of the nation. Serious nations don’t cede their territory except in war; in peace time, no nation cedes its territory.

ICJ judgment can’t stand

There are three reasons why the International Court of Justice judgment on Bakassi cannot stand. The reasons are historical, international law and the concept of patriotism.


Obasanjo and Gowon (Vanguard Newspapers )
History -The Efiks are a major tribe in Nigeria and historically have been on the Atlantic Coast. Bakassi has always been part of the Efiks without a war. In 1884, the British entered into a treaty with the Efiks, which included Bakassi. There would not have been a treaty if there was no ownership.

International law

It does not make sense to cede any part of Nigeria. Arnold Smith, former Commonwealth secretary general is alleged to have said in his memoirs that he was surprised at the ease with which General Yakubu Gowon appeared ready to handover Bakassi to Cameroon. He was alleged to have raised the matter with Gowon, who told him that he wanted to make sure that Biafrans are denied access to the sea in case of a future war. That shows hoe serious he was about ending the war and reconciling Nigerians.

Gowon is said to have said it wasn’t true. Anyway, Gowon could have wished to cede Bakassi to Cameroon but he could not have effected it and he did not effect it for two reasons.

One, the matter of delineation of boundaries and ceding of territory must be bound by an agreement and a treaty. A treaty cannot be valid or binding on a nation unless it is approved or ratified by the sovereign authority, which in most cases is the Parliament. Under Gowon, no treaty was presented to the Supreme Military Council, SMC, which wielded executive and parliamentary powers at the time. So, there was nothing that could have been effected.

Then came President Olusegun Obasanjo, who signed the Bakassi Green Tree Agreement, GTA. His case was worse because it was during a civilian era and the National Assembly was in place. A Head of State can reach an agreement with a foreign power but that agreement has to be approved by the National Assembly, which has the sovereign authority.

Beyond that, subjecting yourself to the authority of the ICJ is by choice, it is not mandatory. That is why the US does not recognise the ICJ on any matter of national interest. So, why did Obasanjo agree to go to the ICJ? It was not necessary and mandatory.


Anya Oko Anya
There is an opinion that either now or in the future, Gowon and Obasanjo would be accused of and tried for treason because you don’t give away your territory.

Turkey came and seized part of Cyprus because it has not been recognised by anybody. The world cannot allow it or else the world would be an unstable place.

Another dimension to the treaty of 1884 between the Kings of Calabar and Great Britain is that it was concluded between two sovereign people and it pre-dated the Vienna Convention of 1885. So, the 1913 agreement with Germany has to return to the source, 1884, which does not support it. In international law, laws follow earlier laws, which set precedent.

So Bakassi has always been administered as part of Nigeria. The people of Bakassi took part in all election before and after independence. They were not treated as part of Cameroon as the 1913 agreement claimed. Even if it was in the trusteeship agreement, there is a clause that says you cannot change the trusteeship agreement without going to the people through a plebiscite or referendum to determine where they want to go. The right to self-determination still exists. You must consult the people of Bakassi and that has not happened. You can’t just remove them from their ancestral land and settle them elsewhere as if they are stones.

Lack of compassion

There is a surprising dimension to the whole issue. The dimension is that those of us, who claim to be Christians like Gowon and Obasanjo, should have compassion, an important character of a Christian is compassion. If you have compassion, you will ask: have been compassionate towards our brothers and sisters in Bakassi? The answer is no. It is not only Gowon and Obasanjo, even the press and other Nigerians are guilty because they have treated the matter as if it is not a matter of great interest.

That shows we have not learnt lessons from the civil war and because we have not recognised those lessons we are repeating them. We treat problems affecting other parts of the country as ‘it is their problem, it is not our problem.’ We cannot continue treating problems like that if we want remain as a united country. In a united country, a problem affecting one part is treated as a collective problem.

The press has not shown much interest. In the effort to evict Bakassi people from their ancestral home, Nigerians have not asked themselves what they would do if they were in Bakassi’s shoes.

We have to learn a lesson from the US, who are prepared to go to war over one American citizen. Even when an American commits a crime, they will fight that the American should be repatriated and tried at home under American law.

Bosnian war, America mobilised to Bosnian to rescue on American. If you have a country that is prepared to go to war because of you, why won’t you give your life for that country? We are talking about patriotism and reward of citizenship. By donating Bakassi, your territory to another, what are you telling Nigerians? You are telling Nigerians that no Nigerian is worth anything. How do you expect the citizen to be patriotic in that circumstance?

We must defend our territory and recover Bakassi. Looking at the map of Africa, we often say God has shaped Africa like a gun and Nigeria is the trigger and in Nigeria, the actual point where the trigger is, is Bakassi. It is important to recognise the significance of that. Bakassi is so strategically located that anybody who controls power there can control the Southern Atlantic.

Why is France, Britain and US so interested in Bakassi? Nigeria with the potential to develop into a major power will be in a position to control what happens in the Southern Atlantic, therefore

The solution

The Nigerian government must immediately respond to what has happened by inviting the ICJ to revisit the Bakassi issue. The bases for such requests are:

First, ICJ expects you to come back if you are not satisfied within 10 years of th judgment, which will expire in October.

Secondly, the decision of the ICJ was not even unanimous. Three dissenting judges -Madagascar, Senegal and Jordan, faulted the judgment of their colleagues. If it were a split decision then, you will win now if the ruling is appealed with facts and developments that were not available then.

We should approach the appeal with our A Team, a competent team to handle the case. With due respect to Chief Richard Akinjide, the issue of Bakassi were not issues he had first hand experience. Even if he had, he needed insight because the matter had legal, cultural, historical and strategic dimensions. So, the Nigerian team should have had the best that Nigeria has in those areas.

An authority in Nigeria and in the world on the history of Bakassi; the interactions of people of that area with the metropolitan authorities; interactions of traders that live in the area is Dr Walter Ofonagoro. His Ph.D Thesis at Colombian University dealt with the treaties in that area.

I understand that when the matter reared its head during late General Sani Abacha era, Abacha sent Ofonagoro to the United Nations with source documents to show that Cameroon had no leg in Bakassi and matter died until Obasanjo came. The question is, did anybody consult Walter before going to the World Court? I doubt.

Finally, one must say there is a huge political dimension to the problem, which the current Nigerian government must be aware of.

The political dimension is while it could be easy for Gowon and Obasanjo to take a decision relating to Eastern Nigeria in a whimsical and cavalier manner, politics will not favour President Goodluck Jonathan, to take that kind of decision because he is an easterner. An easterner cannot be at the helm to rubber stamp the donation of an eastern territory to a foreign country. It is a dilemma for Jonathan. Even if he fails, history will record that he tried.

Dealing with issues like this intellectual power. Nigerian governments don’t pay enough attention to harnessing the intellectual power of the nation. We must do so in this case because we don’t have an alternative to Bakassi.

We must appeal to Gowon and Obasanjo to be involved in the crusade for restoration of Bakassi to Nigeria. It is a matter of simple personal interest. It is beginning to happen where people, in other parts of the world, are called to account for what they did 20, 30 years after they left office. They can say, ‘I made mistake, how do we solve the Bakassi problem?’ The problem will not vanish, future generations will ask questions.( Vanguard Newspapers )

ANOTHER can of worms appears to have been opened in the management of oil subsidy as it emerged, at the weekend, that the Federal Government had paid the sum of N2.7 billion to an unregistered company.

The company given as Pinnacle Contractors Limited, got a total of N2.7 billion from the oil subsidy funds without supplying any litre of fuel and also without registration with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC).

Searches at the CAC indicated only Pinnacle Company Nigeria Limited, with Registration number RC. 8740, while no trace could be found of Pinnacle Contractors.

A search conducted on September 18 showed that only Pinnacle Company Nigeria Limited is registered on the CAC system.

The Federal Government had, in August, announced that Pinnacle Contractors Limited was one of the 25 companies that mismanaged different sums of the subsidy funds.

Details from the Ministry of Finance had showed that Pinnacle Contractors Limited got N1.2 billion for alleged importation of fuel into Nigeria, when the vessels said to have supplied the fuel was not at the location where it could actually do so.

The company also got another N1.5 billion for supplying fuel through a vessel that was no longer in operations at the time of the supply.

It was gathered from officials of CAC that Pinnacle Contractors Limited could not have been registered since Pinnacle Company Nigeria Limited had already been registered on the CAC website.

Searches on the CAC system indicated that Pinnacle Company Nigeria Limited was registered on September 18, 1981 with registration number RC. 8740. Its registered office is given as 12, Iwehen Street, Benin City, Edo State.

The directors are given as Samuel Okhorutomwen Uwadie and Samuel Omorodion Iwadie.

According to the data at the CAC, the company is registered as importers, exporters, manufacturers’ representatives, as well as sellers and distributors of general goods.

to read more: http://tribune.com.ng/index.php/lead-stories/48050-fg-pays-n27bn-subsidy-money-to-unregistered-company

CHESSBOARD: EWU you cant even spell IGBOS well and you are here asking Question your Ancestors cant even answer.
SMH , probably they told you IGBO related Threads in NL gets to Front Page and 50 pages. Anuofia

(shakes head)....Nngiwa bu Anuofia.

People, I had a colleague and a friend from the south west ask me a burning uncomfortable question yesterday. We spke about politics, this and that and he asked me "Presidency in 2015. What part will the Igbos play?". Will the Igbos come together this time to norminate someone? Or would it still be everyone for his own selfish interest?
I told him I don't know. I told him I was surprised he asked such a question cos he is from the south west. He said its just a question and that in his opinion he doesn't mind who wins be the person fron the north, west or east as long as a worthy person gets the job.
Lets pls 4get tribalism. In your own opinion, who do u think would get the job this time? I personally think GEJ would get a second term but if he doesn't........
Where would the president come from this time?
Guys feel free to norminate a well known Nigerian politician and tell us why u norminated the person.

For me I norminate ex senate president Chimaroke Namani. I luved how he instrumented the fraustration of OBJ's third term agenda. Feel free to say ur mind but pls no tribalism here. Its one luv and Nigeria remember.

[quote author=PROUD-IGBO]More of the lake....check out all the virgin land just screaming for investors in leisure and hotel management :[/quote]Abeg what lake is that....Do tell pls

now this is something to be applauded. This Nigerian mentality that the man is the stronger sex should be broken. Thumbs up for women in general and all the women who have to endure this kind of treatment from their spouses.

Jesus Christ! what hypocrisy. Look at this foolish military man. He is a few miles away from where the thing is happening and is screaming wolf. Pls GEJ, post this fool to the north let us see if he will still be blowing his mouth.

BENZINA: America refused to act when they got wind of the 9/11 attack "cos they had their plans,worse still,it(America) increased the devastation, in order, to creat an alibi to attack IRAQ and AFGHANISTAN for OIL and ISREAL.After so many events by Isreal and America to attack IRAN has not succeeded,now,surfaced blasphemy on Islam ,thereby, increasing pressure on the people of the world not to trust an Arab country like IRAN having nuclear capabilities.In this case,an attack against IRAN by Isreal and America is not inevitable,just a matter of time.

Yes, I believe the US will attack Iran but it may not be in Obama's time.

[quote author=c.fours]They are posting signs all over their public transportation buses with an advert that reads:

https://www.naxatranews.com/naxatra/pic/4185.jpg


Is the world coming to an end? [/quote]No the world is not coming to an end, but rather time is now changing cos civilized men are now thinking and have decided to take a stand against a world riddled with a mad religion. Any religion that supports the killing of innocents as a way to protect itself is mad

xtremeidea: [size=28pt]oh my gosh ! ! ![/size]

like say u like chicken suya. At least now u know what u have been eating all this while. I have been suspecting 4 long that there must be something wrong with those meats cos of how they smell but how tasty they can be,...hmm atleast now we know....

rubbish why not wait a few days and still buy the damm thing. its not like they'd buy it cheaper so why stress myself like that. Abeg, those people that thought they were the first, some people I know got d damm Iphone sent to them d day u people were waiting on d line (respect) .