Cameroon :Going Back To School

By Tazoacha Asonganyi

The end of the year exams have come and gone; now is time to go back to school. How the exhilarating years pass in a twinkle of an eye, interspersed with exciting holidays!

For sure, much time was spent during the holidays watching television. And so, in spite of our best efforts, the hidden "enemy" lurking in television sets got into the vulnerable children without their knowledge. Small wonder that most of them going back to school are likely to be like Socrates’ Athenian youths with "... bad manners, contempt for authority, disrespect for older people ..." and who "... no longer rise when their elders enter their room ... contradict their parents, chatter before company, gobble their food and tyrannise their teachers..."

Many of them upon return to school will engage in the offensive hobby of bullying the young "juniors". In this, the boys tend to be more open, hitting out or taking something from the "junior", so the authorities can see it happen and intervene. But girls are more subtle with their covert and elusive bullying, engaging in systematic and hurtful spreading of nasty stories and social exclusion, which are harder to identify and therefore harder to deal with. No doubt the watchful authorities know all these tricks.

The children are going back to all sorts of schools, good and bad; nursery, primary, secondary or high schools. Those that are high up on leagues like GCE or BAC are by definition good schools where not only the teaching but also the organisation, the discipline, the leadership, the staff and the pupils are likely to be good. At best, the league can identify some of the best schools, but not all of them.

In any case, the best predictor of success in life is not so much the IQ, the number of GCE passes, success in BAC or academic qualifications; it is the emotional intelligence of the child. It is the ability to empathise with others – to share their emotions, thoughts and feelings – to connect with them, so to say. In the final analysis, this is the main determinant of all success: of becoming good parents, good spouses, good citizens. Schools should promote programmes that produce active, responsible and successful citizens instead of obedient, passive and "successful" ones.

A good school trains the entire person, not just the brain. The entire person is what we call character; it is everything. It defines how you act, dictates what you do, and lays your life out for you. Viewed from this perspective, it is schools that fail, not children.

No economic policy can compensate for poor schools because knowledge and skills have always made the difference between national wealth and poverty. Science is useful because it keeps a country competitive. Some societies emphasise the technological side, others like ours the basic sciences, and the wise ones emphasise both. In any case, most societal advances have come from the application of well-established scientific principles; from fundamental sciences rather than the search for specific applications.

Indeed, it was not the entertainment industry in search of new ways of marketing pop music that discovered the transistor; scientists working in different domains of physics did. In science, the greatest achievements cannot be planned and predicted; they result from the unique creativity of particular minds. This is why basic sciences, scientific innovation and application should always be encouraged in our schools through massive funding. The brightest and best scientists should always be identified and aided.

Like for science, artistic talent and genius can also be unplanned, unpredictable and individual. Such talent and genius should be nurtured in our schools through the ingenuity of teachers, club life and other activities common in good schools, and aided too.

All this stress of talent, genius and creativity is not meant to play down the importance of perspiration - sweat, hard work, determination - which is the main factor in all success! Whether it is science, art or technology, the essence is their total mastery. In the end, all the talents and skills and genius gained in school, whatever they are, form a web needed by all successful societies that enjoy life fully.

When I look back at my 5 years in St Joseph College,Sasse-Buea that seem to have marked my life for ever, I remember the heroic efforts of our teachers to get us to understand the several subjects we learned, the discipline they imposed on our youthful spirits, the models they represented for us, their attitudes and behaviours that helped to shape ours. As we look forward as parents to the new school year, this is the least we expect from every school, public or private.

Buea WCPDM Donates Writing Materials to 300 Pupils

By Christopher Ambe Shu

As schools prepare to resume on September 8, the Women’s wing of the ruling Cameroon’s People Democratic Movement, CPDM, in Buea has donated exercise books, and pens and rulers to 300 deserving school children in Buea subdivision.

The donation ceremony which took place on 28 August 2008 at Buea Youth Empowerment Centre was presided over by Hannah Etonde Mbua(Pictured talking to Reporters) president of Buea WCPDM and witnessed by a cross section of the local public.

The gesture has been commended by many observers, conscious that due to poverty many parents find it very difficult to supply their children all basic school needs.
The writing materials included 3800 exercise books, 3000 pens, 300 pencils and 300 rulers .Of the 300 beneficiaries, 10 each came from the 30 subsections that make up the Buea WCPDM Constituency.

“This gesture is one of the priority projects that members of the WCPDM Fako III (Buea) section have on their five-year plan of action. It is intended to assist people of goodwill who are taking care of the school needs of orphans and other needy children”,Etonde Mbua said. “By this we intend to support these persons in ensuring that such children also attend school.

She noted that the gesture was in consonance with the policy of free education for all which the government has put in place.
“A needy child who is enrolled in school can through this gesture do all nine months without buying an exercise book or pen,”Etonde Mbua, who is also the principal of a Government High School, Bokwango-Buea remarked

The August 28 donation was the second by the Buea WCPDM section. The first time was in 2007 and more than 1500 children benefited from the gesture
Etonde Mbua praised those who assisted the WCPM to buy the writing materials.

She particularly appealed to the recipients “to consider the donation a challenge and work very hard and your efforts shall be crowned with success”
(Picture:Pupils and Buea WCPDM women pose for the Camera)

She further told them, “remember that we have not given you these items because we have too much but because we are mothers and want our children to satr and end the current school year happily”
The beneficiaries were very thankful. “I am very happy that I already have all my exercise books,” said one kid with a broad smile.

Enforcing Court Decisions

By Tazoacha Asonganyi in Yaounde.

More often than not, social interactions in every society breed conflicts. It is the role of the court to resolve such conflicts. The court system uses intelligence and the moral sense to contain and regulate the beast in members of society, to contain the emotions that give rise to these conflicts.

At the end of the drama that usually marks conflict resolution in court comes the court decision. Following such a decision, it is not the court that enforces its own decision; it is the executive branch, the government that ensures its enforcement

.Sometimes this set-up seems to lead to arbitrariness, to leave the perception that the system serves to regulate the affairs of those who have power to the detriment of the powerless. Such perceptions are only reinforced by the unfolding drama of the Kohtem murder case; they are only reinforced by the thousands of faceless cases in courts in Cameroon behind which litigants sweat for years without seeing the end of the tunnel; they are only reinforced by the usual delays in the evacuation of conflicts related to elections.

In any case, the courts are supposed to uphold the rule of law and control the misuse of power by the powerful, whether they are individuals or whole countries. Conflicts between countries are judged by the International Court of Justice (the World Court or ICJ). The ICJ is the primary judicial organ of the United Nations (UN) that is based in the Peace Palace in The Hague, Netherlands.

The ICJ was established in 1945 by the UN Charter, and began work in 1946. Decisions of the court are binding on UN member countries, and are enforced by the UN Security Council, although this can be made tricky by the veto power of the five permanent members of the Council.

It is now history that the Bakassi case that pitted Nigeria against Cameroon was judged by the ICJ. Because of the realpolitiks of the five members of the Security Council for whom self-interest usually overrides the interests of other members, it would have been complicated to leave the enforcement of the decision of the ICJ on Bakassi on the table of the Security Council. Instead, the Secretary General of the UN together with the parties crafted an enforcement instrument known as the Greentree Accord. This allowed the successful enforcement on 14 August 2008 of the ICJ decision.

It is usually when we lose or win an important football match that the important role of a neutral referee comes to light, and temporarily turns our minds to the importance of such neutral refereeing in an equally emotion-packed competition like elections.

Similarly, it is proper after the court victory of Cameroon over Bakassi to focus our thoughts on the important issue of the impartiality of a law court and the rigorous enforcement of its decisions.

Everybody is talking about the need to emulate the Bakassi example in Africa. But we should not stop at viewing Bakassi with the lenses of conflicts between nations. It will be more helpful to view it simply as the resolution of a conflict by a court of law and the subsequent enforcement of the court decision. Viewed in this light, we would be highlighting the role court decisions and their enforcement play not only to shape the economic success of a community but also to maintain peace and harmony between its members.

As we celebrate the successful enforcement of the decision of ICJ on Bakassi that marks the triumph of the "weak" over the "strong", we should reflect on the usual manipulation of courts and the sloppy enforcement of some court decisions in Cameroon that usually leave the impression that the law belongs to the rich, the privileged or the powerful.

Cameroon's Corrupt Police: Isn’t It Time For Repentance?

By Christopher Ambe 

Picture:Cameroon's Police Boss,Edgar Alain Mebe Ngo'o(in Suit) decorating Police Commissioner Dahirou Hayatou with medal,for duty-consciousness

Returning from Cameroon’s Economic capital, Douala, to the town of Buea, in the evening of August 18, 2008 gave me an opportunity to see how determined and shameless some Cameroon policemen can be when it comes to bribe-taking.

Some police men here appear to fear nothing when extorting from individuals or when committing other professional sins.
Riding with a friend in his five-seat car, we were suddenly stopped by four French-speaking policemen around Bekoko. They had no name-tags. They harshly asked to see the vehicle’s documents. One of them collected the documents and rather walked away, about ten meters with them pretentiously to check them.

My friend who was driving hesitantly followed him, leaving me and two others in the car. The policemen did not ask us for our individual identification papers.

After about 30 minutes, he came back empty-handed, looking angry and cursing.
"They have refused to return my driving license and the other documents claiming that when they stopped me somebody jumped out from the car and ran away into the nearby bush. They claimed it was a criminal who ran .They have also charged me among others with trying to escape control by not stopping where they showed me to," he explained, showing us a police summons which carried five charges on it.

"In fact, they are asking me to pay 5000 Fcfa for all the charges if I must be free. I am not ready to lose a dime to them because I know I have not committed any crime,"he fumed. "These police men are only interested in collecting money and don’t want to listen to me"

I listened keenly to him talk and I felt sorry for him especially as I knew that the policemen cooked-up the charge that someone had vamoosed from our car. Disappointed, I decided to accompany him back to the police men. There, I introduced my self as a journalist and pleaded his case. It was then that the leader of the police group shamelessly asked that, to cut a long story short, we should give 3000 Fcfa and recover the car documents. He insisted on the amount
. Unfortunately, my driver-friend did not have the requested amount. He had just used the small money on him to fuel the car. He pleaded with 1000Fcfa to no avail.
To save precious time being lost, he borrowed 2000 Fcfa from me, went and "settled" them before regaining his documents. Even my presence as a journalist did not scar the police men. They almost descended on me when I asked to know the name of one of them. I cautiously stayed quiet to avoid the unknown.

We had spent an hour or so trying to bring the police to reason.Ofcourse, they refused to reason.
The above narration is a clear representation of the behavior of some Cameroonian Policemen
Cameroon has been rated twice as the most corrupt nation in the world by Transparency International, a Berlin- based good governance watch dog.

The police corps is one of the services where corruption is so rife. It is easy to see policemen on control mission on the roads collecting small amount of money (500-2000Fcfa) from defaulting drivers so to let them go. Transporters here know how money- minded police men are, so much so that immediately they are stopped by the police, they just pull out a few coins for settlement. They are different illegal methods the police use to extort money from the public shamelessly.
But Cameroon President Paul Biya, who is also the Supreme Commander of the country’s police

force, is worried about the battered image of the police.

He has not only cited the police in his speech as too corrupt but has of late been dismissing some corrupt senior police officials from their posts and even suspending their salaries for months. The president even created a special force, called La police de Police, to check crime within the police force. The fight against corruption in the police is still alive, yet corruption is common.
Although the police are supposed to promote human rights, protect lives and property, some Cameroonian policemen have instead been associated with the loss of lives and property and other human rights abuses

As from 21 August 2008 Police Commissioner Tocko Andre Theophile, 53, became the new Provincial Delegate of National Security for the South West of Cameroon. He took over from Police Commissioner Dahirou Hayatou, who on the day of the handing over ceremony, was publicly decorated with the medal of Officer of National Order of Valour, for efficiency and duty-consciousness.
No doubt, there are many policemen who are worth the salt like Commissioner Dahirou Hayatou . There are also many who are corrupt to the bone.
Installing him in to his new functions, Edgar Alain Mebe Ngo'o ,Cameroon’s Delegate-General for National Security particularly requested Commissioner Tocko to be duty-conscious and strict.
"I call on you to spare no effort in fighting indiscipline, corruption and all other types of dishonest acts which are a thorn on our corps and which tarnish the image of National Security,"Mebe Ngo,looking stern, said. "This is a call for you (Commissioner Tocko) to rigorously handle your elements"

The Delegate –General regretted that, despite the presence of the police in the Southwest province crime rate was still high.

"Security-wise, the Southwest province for some months now has experienced an upsurge in criminality …manifested notably through: armed robberies, hold-up in homes and touristic sites, murders and various forms of trafficking"

If for one or several reasons the Cameroon Police Force have forgotten its mission and duties, they should be reminded that it is incumbent on them –in the words of the Delegate –General Edgar Alain Mebe Ngo "to ensure the maintenance of law and order, peace and security of the population by a judicious and optimal mobilization of resources put at your disposal to eradicate criminality in all its forms".

The Police as law enforcement agents must not be identified with law-breaking.
A policeman must be someone of high moral and intellectual rectitude as well as duty-conscious, in order to command respect.

With the image of the Cameroon Police largely battered, isn’t it time they turned over a new leaf and regain the confidence of the public?

The Lost Territory of British Cameroons and The Haunting Problem of Bakassi

By Mola NJOH LITUMBE, Senior Cameroonian Citizen, Politician & Opinion Leader

On 13 December 1946 Her Majesty’s Government of Great Britain executed a Trust Agreement over a clearly defined territory known as British Cameroons. A similar Agreement was executed with France over the neighbouring territory of French Cameroun. The terms of the trust agreements were similar, for the Administering Authorities (viz Britain and France) contracted to prepare the respective trust territories and their inhabitants to self-government or independence pursuant to Art 76b of the UN Charter which states as follows:

“76b. to promote the political, economic, social and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned, and as may be provided by the terms of each trusteeship agreement.”

2. In conformity with the UN Trust Agreement over French Cameroun, France granted independence to French Cameroun on 1 January, 1960 under the baptismal name of La Republique du Cameroun (LRC). Consistent with international law, the boundaries of the new corporate state of La Republique du Cameroun were those inherited from France, and as specified in the trust Agreement of December 1946 with the UN.

3. It is an incontestable fact that no portion of the trust territory of British Cameroons was part of French Cameroun when the latter was granted independence on 1^st January 1960. Therefore, subsequent to its independence, for LRC to enlarge its territorial boundaries to incorporate any portion of British Cameroons, it could only do so in accordance with international law, viz. by the prescriptions of the UN Charter to which it was subject from the moment it was admitted a member of the UN on 20 Sept. 1960.

Art. 102 of the UN Charter is the governing authority on the matter and it states thus:

“(1) Every Treaty and every international agreement entered into by any member of the United Nations after the present Charter comes into force shall as soon as possible be registered with the secretariat {of the UN} and published by it.”

“(2) No party to any such treaty or international agreement which has not been registered in accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Article may invoke that treaty or agreement before any organ of the United Nations.”

4. Clearly, therefore, LRC cannot validly claim sovereignty over any part of Br Cameroons in the absence of a Union Treaty with Southern Cameroons duly filed at the Secretariat of the United Nations. Worse, as the International Court of Justice is an organ of the United Nations, the case against Nigeria over Bakassi that is located in Southern Cameroons should never have been entertained by the ICJ, in the absence of a Union Treaty (between LRC and Southern Cameroons), duly filed at the Secretariat of the UN. Such a treaty does not in fact exist, so the proceedings before the ICJ were patently misconceived, thus making void all consequential decisions based on a clear violation of the UN Charter, including the obnoxious Greentree Accord.

5. At its 160^th plenary meeting on 18 November 1948, (viz. subsequent to the execution of the Trusteeship Agreements in December 1946) by Res. 224(III), the UN General Assembly resolved inter alia:

“Noting that the Trusteeship Agreements for some of these territories authorize the Administering Authority concerned to constitute the Territory into a customs, fiscal or administrative union or federation with adjacent territories under its sovereignty or control and to establish common services between the Trust Territory and such adjacent territories, where such measures are not inconsistent with the basic objectives of the Trusteeship System and with the terms of the Trusteeship Agreement, .....

“Recalling that the General Assembly approved these Agreements upon the assurance of the Administering Powers that they do not consider the terms of the relevant articles in the Trusteeship Agreements as giving powers to the Administering Authority to establish any form of political association between the Trust Territories respectively administered by them and adjacent territories which would involve annexation of the of the Trust Territories in any sense or would have the effect of extinguishing their status as Trust Territories .....

“Recommends accordingly that the Trusteeship Council should:

(c) Request whenever appropriate, an advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice as to whether such unions are within the scope of and compatible with the stipulations of the Charter and terms of the Trusteeship Agreements as approved by the General Assembly …..”

6. From the foregoing resolution, Britain was authorized to administer the UN trust territory of British Cameroons from its adjacent colony or protectorate of Nigeria, and to divide the trust territory to suit its administrative convenience, but if it came to ceding any portion of the trust territory permanently to Nigeria, the opinion of the International Court of Justice was to be sought as to whether this was within the scope of and compatible with the UN Charter and the terms of the Trusteeship Agreement. (As it later transpired, inspite of this restriction, Britain, the Administering Authority, permanently converted its administrative divisions into permanent demarcations of the one trust territory, and would appear to have misled the UN in this regard).

7. By 1960 the United Nations was determined to eradicate colonialism in all its facets, so by Resolution 1514 of 12 December 1960, it stipulated as follows in parts:

“#3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.

“#5. Immediate steps shall be taken in trust territories, non-self governing territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories without any conditions or reservations in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire without any distinction as to race, creed or color, in order to enable them enjoy complete independence and freedom.”

“#6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.”

8. From the foregoing Resolution, independence was to be granted unconditionally to the non-self-governing territory and people of Br Cameroons, in much the same way as for French Cameroun (which at the material time of its independence was engaged in a bloody civil war), without the pretext of inadequacy of financial resources as Britain claimed. However three days later, on 15 December 1960, the United Nations passed Resolution 1541((XV) to take care of such an objection. The Resolution clearly stated that short of gaining outright independence, a non-self-governing territory could attain a full measure of self-government by voluntarily associating or integrating (on terms) with an already independent state, thus:

“A Non-Self-Governing Territory can be said to have reached a full measure of self-government by:

1. Emergence as a sovereign independent State;
2. Free association with an independent State; or
3. Integration with an independent State.”

9. All three key players, viz. Britain the Administering Authority, Nigeria and LRC, as members of the United Nations, participated in the passing of the above resolution, so they all understood that since Br Cameroons was denied outright independence, it could aspire to a full measure of self-government only by free association or integration with an independent state (not states). As the founding fathers in Br Cameroons acceded to having their full measure of self-government that way, rather than demand outright independence which they could have insisted upon, and actually participated in a plebiscite to ascertain whether they wished to attain independence by joining either Nigeria or LRC, I am driven to the conclusion that, although the founding fathers were obviously coerced by the Administering Authority, they nevertheless thereby exercised their right of self-determination.

10. Based on the above understanding with the founding fathers of Br Cameroons, a plebiscite was conducted throughout the national territory on 11/12 February 1961. The inhabitants were given two alternatives of voting to achieve independence (a full measure of self-government) either by joining Nigeria or LRC. Following are the official results of the plebiscite:

Votes Cast in For joining Nigeria For joining LRC

Northern Cameroons 146,296 97,659

Southern Cameroons 97,741 233,571

--------- ----------

244,037 331,230

====== ======

42.42% 57.58%

It is obvious from the above result that the majority of the inhabitants of Br Cameroons opted to join LRC at independence. However their democratic decision was aborted, thereby making it impossible for the trust territory as a whole to exercise the option of joining either Nigeria or LRC as stated in the two alternatives, and as required by UN Res. 1514(#6).

11. It is difficult to comprehend how the democratic intention of the inhabitants of the territory entrusted to Britain could express themselves democratically in any political consultation, without tallying the votes of the voting population in the whole territory. Br Cameroons was one trust territory that had defined international boundaries, while its division into Northern and Southern Cameroons was a domestic arrangement to suit the convenience of the Administering Authority that governed the territory from different parts of its colony of Nigeria. As far as I have been able to ascertain, there is no UN Resolution splitting the territory into two, to have justified the results of the plebiscite being separately proclaimed for different parts of the same territory covered by one trust Agreement. Where there was doubt, the matter should have been referred to the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion, pursuant to UN Resolution 224(III) of 18 November 1948 mentioned in para 4 above. This was never done.

12. The plebiscite result was no more than a declaration of intent, but the political Union had to be consummated by going through the statutory modalities contained in Art. 102 of the UN Charter. In the particular case of Southern Cameroons, the UN prescribed the following specific procedures in para 5 of Res. 1608(XV) of 21 Apr 1961 which was to constitute the Certificate evidencing the political wedlock of LRC to Southern Cameroons, and of course file a copy of the Agreement at the UN Secretariat:

.

“5. Invites the Administering Authority, the Government of the Southern Cameroons and Republic of Cameroun to initiate urgent discussions with a view to finalizing, before 1 October 1961, the arrangements by which the agreed and declared policies of the parties concerned will be implemented.”

13. In the absence of a Union Treaty and with the indecent haste with which the Administering Authority, at the terminal stage of its trust mandate, deserted Br Cameroons, LRC simply moved in its forces and annexed the territory of Southern Cameroons, and for close to half a century LRC has made no attempt to respect the special status of the joining UN trust territory of Southern Cameroons, as prescribed by UN Resolution 1541(XV) which laid down the terms under which a non-self-governing territory could be associated or integrated with an already sovereign state, and notwithstanding that the relevant UN Resolution was passed with LRC participating. The conclusion to be drawn is that it is LRC that needs to amend its ways, and not Southern Cameroonians who are seeking their legitimate fundamental entrenched rights.

14. For there to be a divorce, the parties concerned have first to be married, otherwise the association of the parties cannot be referred to as a marriage. Lately, it has been reported that same sex couples have come out of their closets in some countries after many years of co-habitation and jubilantly celebrated marriage as soon as the law allowed them to do so, meaning that they accept that their relationship until then, was not legal. The situation of LRC with Southern Cameroons is a similar closet relationship that cannot be legally countenanced under the UN Charter. To the extent to which Southern Cameroons was not part of corporate LRC at the latter’s accession to independence on 1 January 1960, any notion of secession is misconceived, in the absence of a Union Treaty. The situation is similar to one of the parties in a co-habitation arrangement suing for “divorce” when the other partner decides to leave. To call the separation a divorce, the party so saying must be able to produce a marriage certificate. In the instant case, there is no such evidence between LRC and Southern Cameroons.

15. The onus is upon LRC to respect the provisions of UN Res. 1541(XV) which it participated in passing, otherwise it must accept full responsibility upon Southern Cameroons deciding to opt out of a political co-habitation that has been discriminatory and a total disaster. Southern Cameroonians had been lured to believe that the union was to be a two-state federation of equal status, consistent with integration as defined in UN Res. 1541(XV) option (c). LRC on the other hand understood that it was taking back a portion of its “former” territory. There was no consensus ad idem between the parties, so there is no contract that justifies the misplaced notion of secession which implies seeking to break away from the territory of corporate La Republique du Cameroun as internationally constituted on 1^st January, 1960.

16. Annexation of Southern Cameroons by LRC is further proved by the so-called Constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon, which is the instrument which purported to unite the Republic of Cameroon with Southern Cameroons as from 1^st October, 1961. A close examination of this statute shows that it was debated and passed in the Parliament of La Republique du Cameroon, and promulgated into law by President Ahmadou Ahidjo, President of La Republique du Cameroun (LRC) on 1^st September 1961. At this material date Southern Cameroons was still a UN trust territory, took no part in the debate of the bill, and in any event it was the British Administering Authority’s resident Commissioner in Buea who held executive power to commit the UN trust territory of Southern Cameroons.

17. With there being no valid treaty of Union between LRC and Southern Cameroons, the change of name in the Parliament of LRC from La Republique du Cameroon to Republique Federale du Cameroun was purely a cosmetic change of name of the same country and had no bearing whatsoever to the neighbouring UN trust territory of Southern Cameroons, but was a smokescreen to pave the way for the annexation of Southern Cameroons on 1^st October 1961 when the British Administering Authority left Southern Cameroons unceremoniously without first yielding the instruments of power to the Government of Southern Cameroons. The current situation is that the UN trust territory of Southern Cameroons, endowed with enshrined international prerogatives on the terms of joining a sovereign state as spelt out in UN Res. 1541(XV), has instead been annexed and assimilated by LRC, wiped out from the world map, and reduced to two of LRC’s ten provinces. The international community resisted Iraq’s attempt to annex Kuwait, and is hereby invited to do the same in this case. Either La Republique du Cameroun respects its obligations under the UN Charter in so far as Southern Cameroons is concerned, or it must peacefully let the people of Southern Cameroons go their separate way.

Conclusion

18. Recent upheavals in Bakassi are a pointer that the turmoil there should be speedily resolved by a judicious settlement of the Southern Cameroons problem. The matter is not one which could be settled by a municipal court, so to avoid a situation which might disturb regional and world peace, only a member of the UN that has locus at the International Court of Justice, particularly Britain, Nigeria, LRC or even the Trusteeship Council, should seize the International Court of Justice for an advisory opinion as to whether or not the UN trust territory of British Cameroons, or any part thereof, attained independence in accordance with Art 76b of the UN Charter, or otherwise pursuant to UN General Assembly Resolution 1541(XV). There is precedent in this regard when the ICJ was seized by Liberia and Ethiopia for an opinion as to whether the governance of South-West Africa, another former German territory, by the then Apartheid South Africa, was in accordance with international law. The opinion of the ICJ helped propel the independence process of Namibia.

19. France has recently indicated it would lend support to La Republique du Cameroun to defend its foothold in Bakassi, but the truth of the matter is that the territory of Bakassi does not belong to either Nigeria or La Republique du Cameroun. It is Southern Cameroons territory, and the recent statement by France is troubling, as it might lead to a senseless war.

20. It is entirely possible to resolve this matter peacefully via the International Court of Justice, and so save the needless loss of lives we are now experiencing due to imperialistic greed for Bakassi oil and its other natural resources.

21. My humble plea to any state that has locus at the International Court of Justice, is to summon courage and seek the Court’s advisory opinion, and so save us from another disaster in Africa, for ominous clouds are gathering in the political landscape over Bakassi.
Buea, 30^th July, 2008

Cameroon in Full Control of Bakassi Peninsula!

Will Nigerian ‘Rebels’ Permit Hitch-Free Administration?

By Christopher Ambe Shu


Top picture-President Paul Biya of Cameroon
Middle picture -Bakassi map(courtesy:Sun News Publishing)
Bottom picture-President Umaru Musa Yar'Adua of Nigeria

Bakassi peninsula, which projects in to the Gulf of Guinea and is believed to contain up to 10% of the world’s oil and gas reserves, is now under the full control of Cameroon, with effect from August 14, 2008- the day Nigeria finally ceded the disputed Peninsula to this Central African country.

Up to 300,000 people reside in the Bakassi area, out of which over 85% of the total population are Nigerian fishermen.

Cameroon and Nigeria disputed over the legal ownership of the peninsula for years.

But conscious that Bakassi belongs to Cameroon, President Paul Biya (of Cameroon) finally brought the matter before the International Court of Justice, ICJ, which is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations.

In October 2002, the ICJ, drawing wisdom and strength from a March 11, 1913 colonial agreement between Britain and Germany, ruled in favor of Cameroon. The Court ruled that the sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula lies with Cameroon
The Court judgment was final, without appeal, and binding for both parties-Cameroon and Nigeria

Surprisingly, a defeated Nigeria, raising various concerns, challenged the ICJ verdict.
But it took high-level diplomacy and peace negotiation for Nigeria to eventually come to reason; thus the signing on June 12, 2006 of the UN-brokered Green Tree Accord by Cameroon and Nigeria on the implementation procedures and schedules of the ICJ ruling on the Bakassi peninsula.

And so, on August 14, 2008, Nigeria handed over the Bakassi peninsula to Cameroon to end a 15-year dispute over the oil- and gas- rich territory .The handing over ceremony, which was initially to take place in the Bakassi area, was moved to Calabar in Nigeria over security concerns.

Bloody clashes in the Bakassi area, in past several months, between Cameroon Army and alleged Nigerian Rebels/Pirates (Niger Delta Defense and Security Council, NDDSC) left about 50 people dead, the majority being Cameroonians

The handing over document, in line with the ruling of ICJ, was signed by Nigeria's Justice Minister Michael Aondoakaa and by his Cameroonian counterpart Minister-Delegate in the Ministry of Justice Professor Maurice Kanto, in the presence of the Special Representative of the UN Secretary-General and representatives of Britain, France, Germany and the US, among others.

"(Cameroonian) President Paul Biya ... looks forward to new, reliable and mutually beneficial relationship between Cameroon and Nigeria," Kanto said just before the handover, according to AFP.
"It is a day of triumph for the rule of law, which lies at the very core of the values of the UN," said UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, in a message read out at the ceremony

For his part, Said Djinnit, UN Secretary General's Special Representative for West Africa, wished that the handover “should serve as a model in the many places in Africa where borders are under dispute".

"As painful as it is, we have a responsibility to keep our commitment to the international community to advance international peace and cooperation ... and advance the cause of African brotherhood and good neighborliness’," AFP quoted Nigeria’s Aondoakaa, as saying.

Although, Nigeria has officially ceded Bakassi to Cameroon, there are still fears that Nigerians including armed groups, lawyers, politicians and senators-who oppose the handover may try to give hard times to Cameroon authorities who have taken over the administration of the region.

Just weeks before the August 14 handover, a little –known armed Nigerian group called Niger Delta Defense and Security Council, NDDSC, bitterly opposed to the handover arrangement ,attacked Cameroonian soldiers, but was unfortunate that 10 of its gunmen were killed and its speedboat seized by the latter. It was not the first time the NDDSC attacked Cameroonians. The armed group is responsible for previous attacks on Cameroon army and administration in the Bakassi area, as it claimed.

"The (Nigerian) government has abandoned its duties," said Kayode Fasitere, the lawyer acting for some displaced from Bakassi who sought to have the handover delayed, according to BBC news

According to Nigerian newspaper, the Daily Sun, in a letter dated August 1, to Nigerian President Umaru Musa Yar’Adua titled, Bakassi: Before You Handover, Senator Bassey Ewa-Henshaw, representing Cross River South Senatorial District, to which the people of Bakassi belong, stated that the entire issue surrounding Bakassi have turned out to be an intense struggle between truth and falsehood.

“In the letter, Senator Ewa-Henshaw, stated that the fact remains that Nigeria has a responsibility to comply with the provisions of Section 12(1) of the 1999 Constitution by not rubber stamping the Green Tree Agreement as an independent sovereign state.

He writes: “Mr. President, our Constitution is our internal law of fundamental importance and was not complied with at the time the Green Tree Agreement was signed. The signing of that agreement violated several sections of the constitution, principally sections 12 and 14. These violations can and should be remedied without interfering with our compliance with the judgment of the ICJ… ”
However, Cameroonians are very happy to have recovered the Bakassi peninsula from the grip of Nigeria. The Cameroon Government has been in the past several years been allocating huge sums of money to improve infrastructure and social facilities in the area to fascinate its administration.

President Paul Biya too has just created ten police posts in the area to help address security concerns.

Cameroon:Jacobinism in Yaounde.

ByTazoacha Asonganyi in Yaounde.


It is to the credit of good journalism that we know that at a recent meeting with Diplomats of EU countries in Yaounde, the Minister of External Relations made the following declaration: "I would like you to note that in Cameroon it is the president and not the constitution that is the guarantor of state institutions. The president is responsible for what he does and he knows what he is doing..."

Further, we also know that at another instance the Yaounde Government Delegate Gilbert Tsimi Evouna made the following statement in response to a journalist’s question: "Ça me fait rire. Finalement c’est chacun qui va dire ceci ou cela. Dans un pays il y a un seul centre de pouvoir. Qu’est ce que vous voulez ? On verra bien qui aura le dernier mot. Tout patriarche qu’il est, on verra..." [That makes me laugh. Finally everyone will say this or that. In a country there is only one centre of power. What do you want? We will see who has the last word. The patriarch will see...]
The German philosopher and sociologist Jürgen Habermas described two schools of natural law: The Anglo-Saxon and the Continental. The Anglo-Saxon school is optimistic: that which is natural is good; good/natural society can be "corrupted" or "deformed" by an external intervention. The task of politics is to restore society to its natural freedom – a freedom that society itself is best placed to administer.

By the tenets of this school, to solve a problem in society, it has to undergo political analysis that identifies the social problem that calls for political action; the political action in turn prepares the social terrain to accept the measures that follow. In other words, the political determines the actions of the social.

In contrast to the above, the Continental (French) school of natural law begins from the premise of a corrupted society which must be guided by a state. It does not hesitate to construct a state capable of imposing itself upon "disorganised" society. Power therefore is a reality and has the capacity to influence society in a "positive" or "corrective" manner.

The Jacobins were a club of violent republicans during the French Revolution. Their actions were guided by the principles of Continental natural law. They saw revolution as the rational transformation of society by the state.

Constitutions directed by Jacobinism provide a central place for power which is exercised to achieve state-led initiatives. This contrasts with constitutions in which the place of power remains unoccupied, with checks and balances ensuring that strong institutions of power control and complete each other.

The belated effort to give Yaounde a face-lift may be laudable, but it is marred by the brutality and haughtiness of a power-wielding state that seeks to impose social action on a supposedly inert, recalcitrant society. This home-bred Jacobinism blocks the political reflection needed to preserve the freedom that guarantees the distinction of the social from the political. It leads to carelessness, abuse, bullying and suffering, instead of understanding, cooperation and adoption by society of the on-going changes.

Like Marx used to say, we have to use what men are already in fact doing, to teach them through critical questions and actions. This requires that a society reflects – acts - upon itself; that members of society define continually, in words and deeds, the kind of society they are and want to be. This approach is made impossible by the Yaounde version of Jacobinism that is characterised by the existence of only one centre of power with one man as the guarantor of state institutions!

We have to refuse actions that in the guise of cleaning up Yaounde, destroy the very preconditions of politics. Gilbert Tsimi Evouna has to rethink his actions. He has admitted that it is the fault of the Yaounde City Council that inhabitants settled where they were not supposed to settle. Whatever excuses he may have, it is immoral and indecent to continue to render thousands of families homeless without providing any land for their resettlement.