Bakassi: C-River challenges Adoke, Says ‘we presented new facts’ On October 10, 2012 · In Headlines 12:00 am.. By Our Reporters LAGOS — THE Cross River State Government, yesterday challenged the Federal Government over claims that there were no fresh evidence to challenge the International Court of Justice, ICJ, judgment of 2002 ceding Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon. In a statement, it said it was not true that no fresh facts were presented to the presidential committee. Political stakeholders in Cross River State and some of the committee members were also peeved by the declaration by the AGF that the government would not be appealing the decision. Emotion overflowed in the Cross River State House of Assembly, yesterday, as members called for the impeachment of President Goodluck Jonathan should he not countermand the AGF at the end of today. In Abuja, however, emotion was more subdued as stakeholders from within and around the region expressed mixed feelings on the declaration of the AGF that Nigeria would not be appealing the judgment. Adoke, it was learnt, successfully pushed his case that there was no material evidence to retrieve Bakassi from Cameroon despite a presidential directive for the country to appeal the judgment of the International Court of Justice, ICJ, which awarded the disputed territory to Cameroon 10 years ago, today. A man petting his daughter who was crying for attention as Bakassi Peninsula indigenes awaited solution of their problems at the Ikang Resettlement Camp, Akpabuyo Local Government Area, Cross River State, yesterday. Following consultations with the National Assembly leadership and other stakeholders last Wednesday, President Goodluck Jonathan had directed a committee comprising stakeholders from the National Assembly, the National Boundary Commission, among others, to prepare the grounds for an urgent appeal to the ICJ. Resolving the problem At the meeting in the Presidential Villa, the President of the Senate, Senator David Mark, had reportedly summarised what emerged were three options by the National Assembly on how to resolve the problem. The options were to go to war, do nothing or seek a review of the judgment. Senator Mark, it also emerged, inclined himself towards the third option with nearly all present at the meeting agreeing that it was best for Nigeria to uphold its interests primarily ahead of whatever is the opinion of the international community. At the end of the meeting that Wednesday, an eight-man committee comprising select legislators from Cross River State including Senators Victor Ndoma Egba, SAN, Senator Bassey Otu who represented what was until today Bakassi in the Senate, Chairman of the House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs, Rep. Nnena Ukeje,among others was mandated by the president to prepare the grounds for an immediate appeal. However, when the committee members gathered at the residence of Senator Ndoma-Egba for a meeting, animosity immediately developed as members of the committee were angered by what they claimed was a dilution of the assignment given the committee by the president. Adoke, it was learnt, told the committee members that the mandate of the committee was to pursue a review of the human rights contents of the judgment and not to appeal the territorial handover of Bakassi to Cameroon. Faced with a deadlock, it was suggested that the committee members revert to their principals, that is Senator Mark for the legislators and President Jonathan for Adoke for a confirmation of the mandate of the committee. It was learnt that both President Jonathan and Senator Mark agreed that the mandate of the committee was for a review of the judgment but the body language of the presidency officers according to committee members was that a review would not go ahead. FG lied, says CRS govt Countering assertions by the AGF that there was no evidence to demand a review and assertions of lack of time, the Cross River State Government in a statement issued by its Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Mr. Attah Ochinke said: 1. Last night the Federal Government through the Attorney General of the Federation, Mohammed Adoke announced its decision not to seek a review of the ICJ judgment on Bakassi despite a preponderance of oppinions to the contrary. 2. The Federal Government adduced severally reasons for its decision, including the claim that the Committee set up by President Goodluck Jonathan could not get new information from the proponents for a review to warrant seeking a review of the judgment. 3. While Cross River should not be seen as joining issues with the Federation Government, it is however, pertinent to state our own side of the story for the sake of posterity. 4. First, it must be emphasised that for us in Cross River Bakassi is not about oil; it is about the people. 5. Having said that, 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 judgment. If anything, the Federal Government decision is coming after several days of frenzied activity towards applying for a review of the judgment. While we concede that the Federal Government has the prerogative not to apply for a review, we find the reasons given for that decision most unfortunate in the least. 6. A lot of work was done on this and about seven grounds were raised upon which the government could have based a review. And these were well documented, copies of which we have for any further scrutiny. 7. To say that there were no fresh facts to apply for review is to insist that the Nigerian Bar Association, the Institute of International Affairs, the several professional bodies and the National Assembly that called for the review acted in total ignorance. 8. It must be stated that since Bakassi was a Nigerian territory, the Federal Government also had the responsibility of looking for new information that would warrant a review. It is therefore, baffling when it said proponents of a review failed to furnish it with new information. 9. To convince the Federal Government that facts exist upon which the application could have been made, an international law firm based in London was briefed to examine the case and advice. The firm did this and advised that there are sufficient facts upon which a review may be based; more importantly the firm prepared the papers for Nigeria to file at the ICJ. All the Federal Government needed to do was to simply dispatch the papers for filing. 10. The claim that seeking a review will tarnish Nigeria’s image in the committee of nations is also very unfortunate. 11. Several countries applied for a review of similar judgments delivered against them without losing credibility. El Salvador against Honduras in 2002 applied for a review of a judgment given almost ten years earlier on September 11, 1992. The application for review of the judgment in Yugoslavia and Bosnia and Herzegovina case was presented in 2001 for a judgment delivered in July, 1996. The ICJ statute provides that an application for a review cannot be entertained unless the party applying first complies with the judgment prior to submitting the application for a review. So the fact that Nigeria had complied with the judgment 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.” Another member of the committee also rebuffed suggestions of shortness of time given by the presidency team, saying that the superiority of the fresh facts would have expressly reverted the peninsula to Nigeria. “We had facts Senator Bassey Ewa-Henshaw showed to us including that although the British signed the 1913 Anglo-German treaty, the German ambassador to Britain, Prince Lichnowsky stated that his country did not sign the treaty before the first world war broke out which rendered it inchoate, meaning that Cameroon and Nigeria were citing an illegal document. “It was unknown to both Nigeria and Cameroon that the treaty was inchoate and was not recongised in the 1919 treaty. There were also revelations by Prof. Walter Ofanogoro that the April 1893 boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon was valid and they were internationally recognised.” C-River House members protest Speaker of the Cross River State House of Assembly, Chief Larry Odey, at the end of the session of the House led members on a protest march to Governor Liyel Imoke at the Government House. He said that the reports in the newspapers, yesterday, were contrary to the directive of Mr. President that the eight-man committee should pursue the review of the judgment. Receiving the lawmakers, Imoke said he had no confirmation as at the time of the protest that any appeal had been sent to the ICJ from the Federal Government for a review of the judgment and that the only thing he knew was that the window of opportunity to appeal would expire by mid night today which should be the last chance. He, however, appealed that the issue should be carefully managed and should not be politicized even as he told them that the state lacked the locus to file any action at the ICJ, adding that the consequence of the judgment on the people was significant and that to the best of his knowledge, not much had been done over the matter. The governor advised them to be calm and also understand that there were processes and procedures to follow such a matter, adding that though one end of the matter may have been reached, there were still other opportunities that could be followed. Call for impeachment Some Hopuse of Representatives members before the protest march, had called for the impeachment of President Jonathan over alleged breach of the oath of office which he swore to uphold and protect. One of the initiators of the call, Joseph Bassey, representing Calabar South Local Government Area, said there was no need to allow the president to remain in office for his alleged treason to the country and that Nigerians should, by the action of the president, not allow him to hold any other position in the country. He said: “We have lost confidence in the presidency. The president himself has failed. We have also proposed to the National Assembly that by tomorrow (today) if he does not file any appeal to the ICJ, the National Assembly should commence an impeachment against him, because he has betrayed his people he swore to protect. Bassey who said he was an Efik son, but has Bakassi as his ancestral home, further said: “I feel so sad and I always make this known to the people. The issue of Bakassi I knew will not be resolved because of the interest involved. Bakassi was sold out by the stakeholders of Nigeria especially former President Olusegun Obasanjo, Donald Duke and a former senator. “They sold out Bakassi for their personal interest and the president of Nigeria today, Goodluck Jonathan, does not want to have a loggerhead with all these big wigs. They are still playing politics with Cross Riverians, playing politics with our inheritance, playing politics with our own origin; it is something that was very sad. “Now that we have lost Bakassi, what is the way forward? I will like to say that Bakassi is not gone, the ICJ appeal might go, Bakassi is not gone, this is peoples inheritance, we will always go back to Bakassi. By tomorrow we in the Cross River State House of Assembly have already proposed, we do not have much to say, most of us are ready to sacrifice to go on hunger strike and pray. it shows that the neck of the woman is bent. I think the mistake was done ten years ago by the then government, so I absolve the present government.” Reacting to the development yesterday, Senator Ewa-Henshaw described the situation as regrettable noting that it appeared that some persons had made up their minds to cede Bakassi believing that nobody will challenge their action. Henshaw said: “I think it is very regrettable the position our government has taken. It looks like there are people that have determined that Bakassi must be sold out by all means and there is nothing they believe anybody can do about it. Nigerians have not heard the last “The president set up a committee on Wednesday night last week in which we understand that the mandate was for them to obtain the necessary papers and prepare documents to file, then suddenly we heard that there was not going to be any filing. We as a people, we are determined that this will not be the end. Nigerians have not heard the last on the issue concerning Bakassi “We also in the Bakassi Support Group have consulted solicitors and the solicitors had produced papers for us that we could have filed if government officials were not able to do that. All they needed to do was to ask for the papers so that they could go and file. The papers had been prepared and we are going to publish it to the world and Nigerians in particular to see and let Nigerians ask the government why they have refused to file the appeal, what the problem is, what kind of promise did we make to the Cameroons, to the international community, to the International Court of Justice. “If by the wisdom of those that drew this statute that sometimes it will be necessary for litigant to come and produce evidence of fundamental nature, what is wrong with Nigeria taking advantage of it. Let them ask Nigerians what commitment was made and to whom. Was it so strong that the fate and well-being of Nigerians must be sacrificed to honour commitment?” Rep Nkoyo Toyo in her reaction told Vanguard yesterday that her people would not give up the fight for justice. She said: “Much as we are not happy that the Federal Government did not use the option of engaging the International Court of Justice (ICJ), as a basis for further addressing the problems of the Bakassi people, our belief is that the proposal which was mentioned in the statement of the Attorney-General yesterday morning has opened up a new vista for engaging even the ICJ and many other United Nations bodies including the Secretary General. “This, therefore, means that we have to go back and organize ourselves and take many other things into account. This is because it is obvious to us from what has happened so far that the Federal Government would not go out on its own to protect the interest of the Bakassi people. We have to protect our people’s interest and then come to present it to the Federal Government. “You would have expected that it is the Federal Government that should seek to find out if there is a problem and then consider what to do about it. But this is not the case now since the Federal Government is too busy to address problems concerning its citizens. As a result of this, the ordinary citizens of Bakassi have to go and find out new facts which they can present to the ICJ. This is how the Nigerian Government operates now. “So we have to go and search for those affected who would then come and tell us their stories and present the fresh facts that are needed. “My only worry is that the Attorney-General spoke about not wanting to create diplomatic problems for the nation. I do not know what those diplomatic problems are. He has also said that what we have talked about so far do not constitute fresh facts; I do not know what kind of facts we shall present before he would become convinced that we have fresh facts to warrant asking for a review of our case before ICJ. “At this stage we are appealing that the failures of the Green Tree Agreement which would expire by August 2013, should be addressed. “We are hereby giving them a one year notice and they should not say that the people of Bakassi came late”. FG has failed Cross River people — Monarch The Paramount Ruler of Efut nation, Muri Munene Effiong Mbukpa, said it was unfortunate that the Federal Government had failed the people of Bakassi and indeed the people of Cross River State over the decision to cede their ancestral land to Cameroon. Mbukpa said everybody had hoped and relied on the Federal Government to start the process of filing documents for the review of the ICJ ruling which did not consider human beings and the right to self determination before giving its judgment. The monarch said even if the Nigerian government would abandon the people, there was the belief that God will not abandon them and commended the Cross River State government for taking the pains all the time with the meager resources to take care of the displaced people. Call for the resignation and trial of Adoke Meanwhile some members of the Cross River State House of Assembly yesterday called for the resignation of the Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice, Bello Adoke, for allegedly misinforming the nation that there were no fresh facts that would warrant appealing against the ICJ judgment. Read more here