public discourse. But the hope of different interest groups, including
the National Assembly, to have the Federal Government appeal the
ceding of Bakassi to Cameroon was dashed less than 24 hours to the
expiration of the 10-year period given for appeal.
The International Court of Justice in the Hague, Netherlands had on
Oct. 10, 2002 ruled that Nigeria should cede the oil-rich Bakassi
peninsula to Cameroon. The hope initially raised by President Goodluck
Jonathan by instituting a committee to look into the appeal about a
week before the deadline, was however dashed on Monday. This is
because the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Adoke, said
Nigeria would not apply for the review of the ICJ ruling which ceded
Bakassi to Cameroon.
In making a case for the FG's position, Adoke explained that the
argument canvassed by proponents of the review "is virtually bound to
fail" as "a failed application will be diplomatically damaging to
Nigeria."
But the government's decision had only provoked further controversy as
a section of Nigerians, who had campaigned for a review of the ICJ
judgement felt seriously disappointed.
However, another section of Nigerians agreed with the FG's position,
saying it was rather too late in the day to file an appeal. Yet
another group of pundits said the FG's final position did not come as
a surprise after all, considering the lukewarm attitude it had
exhibited towards the matter over the years.
Meanwhile, during a protest organised on Tuesday by members of the
Cross River State House of Assembly, who took to the streets over the
matter, the state government accused the AGF of trading falsehood and
misleading Nigerians on the FG's refusal to seek a review of the
judgement of the ICJ. Some of them called for the sacking of Adoke and
the impeachment of President Jonathan for not defending the
constitution as they had sworn to.
The Speaker of the assembly, Mr. Larry Odey, led the 25-member
procession to Governor Liyel Imoke's office in Calabar to express
their anger and bitterness.
He said Adoke's claim ran contrary to that of Jonathan, who identified
with the views of the majority of members of the National Assembly and
supported the move by setting up a committee to review the judgement.
A member representing Bakassi in the assembly, Mr. Saviour Nyong,
described himself as one of the displaced persons from the area and
said that the FG did not seek their consent before ceding them to
Cameroon.
Nyong said that no nation had ever ceded its portion to another
without a plebiscite, adding that the decision of the FG was an
international conspiracy against the people of Bakassi.
He noted that the Green Tree Agreement had not been ratified by the
National Assembly and that the people of Bakassi had the right to take
their destiny in their hands. Another member representing Abi
constituency in the Cross River State House of Assembly, Mr. John-Gaul
Lebo, said it was the ICJ's position to issue the statement not the
AGF.
However, a statement by the state Attorney General and Commissioner
for Justice, Mr. Attah Ochinke, pointed out that contrary to the
position of Adoke and the FG, Nigeria still had about seven grounds
upon which a review of the judgement could have been pursued.
He said, "The FG adduced several reasons for its decision, including
the claim that the committee set up by (President) Jonathan could not
get new information from the proponents for a review to warrant
seeking a review of the judgement.
"While Cross River should not be seen as taking issues with the FG, it
is however pertinent to state our own side of the story for the sake
of posterity.
"First, it must be emphasised that for us in Cross River, Bakassi is
not about oil; it is about the people. I regret to say that it is not
true that new facts were not made available to the committee that
would have compelled Nigeria to seek a review of the ICJ judgement.
If anything, the FG's decision is coming after several days of
frenzied activities towards applying for a review of the judgement.
While we concede that the FG has the prerogative not to apply for a
review, we find the reasons given for that decision most unfortunate.
"The claim that seeking a review will tarnish Nigeria's image in the
comity of nations is also very unfortunate. Several countries applied
for a review of similar judgements delivered against them without
losing credibility.
So the fact that Nigeria had complied with the judgement is the ground
that should qualify us to apply for a review and should not be the
reason why we should be ashamed to do what is necessary to protect
Nigerians."
Ochinke noted that the Cross River State claim came as a boost to many
observers, who had expected Nigeria to seek a review of the judgement.
A former Special Adviser to ex-President Olusegun Obasanjo on National
Assembly Matters, Senator Florence Ita-Giwa, said it was good the FG
did not waste money for an appeal.
In a protest rally organised on Monday by the natives of Bakassi in
her residence in Calabar, Ita-Giwa said that Nigeria lost Bakassi to
Cameroon 10 years ago through the ruling and finally four years ago
when the handing over was done.
She said that if there were things to be done to review the matter,
it should have been done four or five years ago, adding that though
Nigerians had shown great interest in the Bakassi issue belatedly, the
displaced Bakassi people were not counting down anything but calling
for their resettlement at Day Spring Island.
She said, "Today, we are still a displaced people and displaced people
are worse than refugees. For 10 years after the judgement, we have
cried, nobody listened to us. Today, we are surprised that two days to
the expiration people have gone to court. We appreciate efforts of
Cross River State Government, but what we want is shelter," she said.
No matter the protest, annoyance, explanations and excuses, Nigeria
has finally lost the chance to redeem Bakassi.
Should the Displaced people accept their fate? Well it's up to you Y !
Readers to Decide !! Thanks for Reading