Bakassi Plan Secession With Southern Cameroon
The Bakassi struggle is taking another twist, as Efik Kingdom is said to be making plans to join forces with Southern Cameroon to form an independent nation.
InFocus
-
Nigeria has given up its quest to reclaim the oil-rich Bakassi Peninsula, which it ceded to Cameroon in 2008,following the judgement of the International Court of Justice. Read more »
Comments Post a comment
Good move by the marginalized minority. All marginalized people in the world should vest support to this braveness initiative
People rejected must not reject themselves. This betrayal of Bakassi is a clear indication of how inferior the Efiks and Ibibios are regarded in Nigeria.
If San-Morino is a Republic inside Italy and Swaziland independent nation inside South-Africa, Gambia sovereign nation inside Senegal, why not Republic of Ambazonia between the 2 rogue nations of Camer-Niger
I stand with my friends in the Bakassi region of Nigeria in calling for a new and independent state of Ambazonia. I am from Ndian Division in Cameroon and from Mundemba to be precise. It takes me about ninety minutes to leave the Bulu beach in Mundemba to arrive at Ikang in Nigeria by speed boat. It takes me about three hours during the dry season and ten to a full day during the rainy season to get to kumba to get much needed provisions. Why ? Because the usurpers of power in Yaounde care very little and have decided as a matter of convenience to marginalize the people of Ndian in Particular and English speaking Cameroon in general. I am confident our people in Nigeria and Cameroon will be better served coming together to form a new nation that will serve their common needs, that are now being neglected by both Nigeria for the Nigerians in the peninsular and for Cameroonians of the North west and South West regions, that have been marginalized since re-unification of the two Cameroons.
This is a welcome move since Nigeria abrogated its responsibility to defend Bakassi citizens who are Nigerians. If Southern Camaroon could join forces with the Bakassi Peninsula to form a New Nation, I, personally would support their aspirations for nationhood. Nigeria, as a government has erred, for not supporting a re-evaluation of the ICJ decisions. It was wrong for President Jonathan to be dictated to by Chief Obasanjo whose main interest in the region is purely economic -----the Oil Blocks, along with Mr. Kofi Annan's vested economic interests as well. When the Bakassi people and most Nigerians at large reminisce about what Gen. Abacha would've done had he been alive, the central theme that seems to figure prominently is that Abacha would never have ceded any inch of Nigeria's land to anyone, and would've been prepared to go to war, if necessary. Unfortunately, Chief Olusegun Obasanjo and Mr. Kofi Annan concluded that their economic interests superceded the collective concerns of Nigerian citizens living in their ancestral homes, which had been in existence prior to the European incursions on the African landscape. The Efik Kingdoms had been in existence even while Europeans lived in caves in pre-historic times. Even prior to Mrs. Luggard coined the term Nigeria (being a name derived from the Niger River, and the tributories which the Europeans had difficulty penetrating, and out of sheer despiration decided to add the suffix {area} to the word Niger to create the nex lexicon called "Nigeria", the Efik peoples had been living here since the millannia. What both Gen. Obasanjo and Gen. Gowon did was wrong. Frankly, we Nigerians of the Niger Delta could careless about what the UN Security Council would've thought of since self-determination and the preservation of Fundamental Human Rights was one of the major tenets of the UN Resolutions. Furthermore, it was wrong for the Nigerian Supreme Court to quote the ICJ decisions in their case deliberations as being pprecedent setting. The truth is that the Nigerian National Assembly has NEVER ratified the Green Tea Agreement, and until then, the highest court in our nation cannot, and must not defer its rulings or decisions on the basis of a flawed ICJ decision. If the ICJ decisions were to be considered binding, even though the nations legislative body had not ratified and sanctioned such, then, it would mean that American military and citizens whose activiities around the world were found wanting, must then acquiesce to the demands by interpol for summary arrests. However, the US Supreme Court has taken a different view on these matters and have refused to obey decisions carried out by the ICJ, and therefore, all such decisions against American citizens were deemed non-binding. So, and I ask: Which Security Council decision would force and supercede the decisions of a "Sovereign State" like Nigeria? The State of Israel has never cared about UN Security Council decisions, and have refused to be so bound by whatever decisions are carried out by the ICJ. Israel is no more than 8-million people, compared to Nigeria's 160-million. Therefore, if South Cameroon and the Bakassi people should decide to seek self determination to strive for their sovereignty and independence, I would personally support their aspirations. The East Timorese did this under the watch of Mr. Kofi Annan while he was the UN Secretary-General, and this should not be any different.
See All Comments