The Role Of International Court Of Justice In The Resolution Of Bakasi Conflict

The Role Of International Court Of Justice In The Resolution Of Bakasi Conflict

Chapter One

Preface

Background Of The Study

For some decades now, relations between neigbouring Nigeria and Cameroon have been strained over issues relating to 1,600 kilometer boundary, extending from the Lake Chad to the Bakassi Peninsula, and maritime boundary into the Gulf of Guinea. Among issues involved are rights over the oil painting rich land and ocean reserves and the fate of original populations. For case, as Lake Chad dried up due to desertification, original populations counting on the Lake for their livelihood have followed the retreating waters, further blurring the boundary lines. Pressures between the two countries escalated into military battle at the end of 1993 with the deployment of Nigeria service to the 1,000 square kilometer Bakassi(www.bbc.co.uk) Boundary controversies are generally dicey especially inpost-colonial Africa where their literal origin and geographical position further compounded the problem. Reflecting on the emergence of numerous new autonomous countries in contemporary Africa, Davidson( 196722) observed

“ Their history begins a new. They reappear moment in the sad evening of the world of nation- countries; yet their own tradition, one may note was infrequently one of narrow nation. Their genius was for integration- integration by subjection as the times specified, but also by an ever partful mongling and migration. They were noway patient of exclusive borders Nineteenth century imperialism cut across boundaries and peoples and left; for a after Africa, the problem of redrawing borders on a rational plan. As independence widens across these coming times, will this plan stop short with the timber of nation- countries copying European illustration?. It remains to be seen ”.

It was in recognition of this peril that the Organization of African Unity( OAU) wasted no time in passing the 1964 resolution. By this resolution, the members pledge to admire as sacrosanct social boundaries as inherited at independence in line with the principle of “ Uti possidetis juris ”. nonetheless, indeed with the agreement, there has been no similar agreement on the exact position of numerousinter-state boundaries in Africa especially between Nigeria and Cameroon.

The delineation of Nigeria ‟ s transnational borders, according to Asobie( 1998), was best by query. The eastern boundary was delineated in bits over a long period and involved several social powers, the United Kingdom and Germany and the United Kingdom and France at different times. And the British that inherited the Nigerian side of the boundary noway feel in a hurry to duly define them on the ground. piecemeal from the problem of query, the sheer length of the boundaries posed it ‟ s own difficulty, with a total land border of 4,234 kilometers.

By entering into series of bilateral co-operation agreements in 1963, Nigeria and Cameroon obviously tried towards a further harmonious actuality as neighbours with a view to resolving the border controversies but that failed thereby pouring the occasional clashes that passed along Nigeria Cameroon border( Agbemelo and Ibhasebor 2006). In 1994, Cameroon took the case to the International Court of Justice( ICJ) in Hague.

The ICJ is the star judicial organ of the United Nations to which all member countries are parties. It was established in 1946 by the United Nations( enactment of the International Court of Justice( ICJ enactment)), June 26, 1945. ICJ replaced the former Permanent Court of International Justice( PCIJ), which had operated within the Hague, Netherland since 1922. Like its precursor, the headquarters of ICJ is also located in Hague.

The function of the ICJ is to resolve controversies between autonomous countries. controversies may be placed before the court by parties upon conditions specified by the UN Security Council. No state, still, may be subject to the governance of the court without the state ‟ s concurrence. concurrence may be given by express agreement at the time the disagreement is presented to the court, by previous agreement to accept the governance of the court in particular orders of cases, or by convention vittles with respect to controversies arising from matters covered by thetreaty.Article36{ 2} of the court enactment, known as the Optional Clause, allows countries to make a unilateral protestation feting “ as mandatory ipso facto and without special agreement, in relation to any other state accepting the same obligation, the governance of the court in all legal controversies ”( Umozurike 1992191).

For case, according to the Report of the International Court of Justice( ICJ)( document A/59/4) presented at fifty- ninth General Assembly Plenary in 2008, 191 countries were now parties to the enactment of the court, while 65 of them had deposited with the clerk General a protestation of acceptance of the court is mandatory governance in agreement with its enactment. Further, some 300 bilateral or multinational covenants give for the court to have governance in the resolution of controversies arising out of their operation or interpretation.

numerous countries have accepted the courts governance under the voluntary clause. A many countries have done so with certain restrictions. According to( Ogbu 2008), the United Nation for case has invoked the tone- judging reservation or connally reservation. This reservation allows countries to avoid the courts governance preliminarily accepted under the voluntary clause if they decide not to respond to a particularsuit.However, another state may also bring this reservation against that state, and therefore a suit against the alternate state would be dismissed, If a state invokes selfjudging reservation. This is called the rule of reciprocity, and stands for the principle that a state has to respond to a suit brought against it before the ICJ only if the state bringing the suit has also accepted the courts governance. Under the ICJ enactment, the ICJ in deciding cases must applyi. Any transnational conventions and covenants; ii. transnational custom; iii. General principles honored as law by cultivated nations; and iv. Judicial opinions and the training of largely good publicists of the colorful nations.

The judgment of the ICJ is binding and( technically) can not be appealed(Arts. 59,60) once the parties have acceded to its governance and the court has rendered a decision. still, a state ‟ s failure to misbehave with the judgment violatesU.N Charter, composition 94( 2). Resistance can be appealed to theU.N Security Council, which may either make recommendations or authorize other measures by which the judgment shall be executed. A decision by the Security Council to apply compliance with a judgement rendered by the court is subject to the proscription power of endless members, and therefore depends on the members ‟ amenability not only to resort to enforcement measures but also to support the original document.

On October 10,, 2002, the ICJ citing agreements between United Kingdom and Germany on March 11th 1913, issued its irrevocable judgment on the entire land and maritime boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria. The decision ruled confirmed sovereignty over portions of the home in question to Cameroon and delineated the border. Nigeria also made certain land earnings according to the ruling( Asobie 2007). In order to grease the handing over of the area to Cameroon, the “ Green Tree Agreement ” was inked in 2006 by chairman Obasanjo of Nigeria and Paul Biya of Cameroon.

There were principally two sets of principles intertwined in the territorial disagreement between Nigeria and Cameroon. The first set consists of transnational legal principles that support the reason of state. They’re similar traditional principles as

– Uti possidetis( as you retain, so will continue to retain)

– Pacta sunt servanda( agreement/ obligation reached must be adhered )

– Rebus sic stantibus.( agreement is valid only if the same conditions prevailing at time of constricting continue to live at the time of performance)

The alternate set of principles comprises mortal sight morals which pertains to the worth and quality of the mortal person. The alternate set of principles is abecedarian for it’s rested on the supposition that “ the foundation of freedom, peace and justice in the world ” can only be laid with the recognition of the quality,( as well as) the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the mortal family ” Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948 Preamble( cited in Asobie 2007209). Linking these two sets of principles is the doctrine of tone- determination. It’s both a legal principle and a mortal rights doctrine. It’s in the light of the above that this study seeks to ascertain the part of ICJ in the Nigeria- Cameroon boundary disagreement, especially as it concerns the adjudication, the difficulties in the perpetration of the Green Tree Agreement as well as the part of external powers in the adjudication and perpetration of the ICJ ruling.

Statement Of The Problem

African countries don’t embrace a common history and a common culture; they’re indeed the arbitrary creations of colonialist. The manner, in which European nations descended on Africa during the ending times of the 19th century in their scramble for home, was bound to leave a heritage of instinctively controlled border lines, which now define the imperative African countries.( Agbemelo and Ibhasebor 2006).

The battle over Bakassi peninsula was majorly propelled by external powers, whereby France tried to cover the interest of Cameroonians and Britain seeking to cover the interest of Nigerians. Also, the dynamics of the internal politics in both countries( Nigeria and Cameroon) with respects to Bakassi disagreement banged the embers of the extremity. A record has it those most military administrations in Nigeria especially that of Babangida, Abacha and Buhari( to some extent) aggressively expanded Nigeria ‟ s borders in the Bakassi region( Akinteriwa 2002).

In 1992- 1993, the Cameroonian government openly killed some Nigerian civilians in Cameroon, stemming from multiparty popular government and growing militarism for Anglophone autonomy. Other Nigerians were forced out of Cameroon during draining duty- drives. This was in response to a Cameroonian public radio news report which states that a Nigerian military command army among other effects violated Cameroon ‟ s home by insinuating the promontory( as for as the Rio del Ray) and opened fire on the Cameroon army( ICE Case Studies 2005,).

The Bakassi disagreement boosted with two or further serious incidents that provoked further firing, casualties and deaths of dogfaces in both countries. In 1994 and from January- May 1996, there were border clashes between Cameroon and Nigeria among military labor force. As of May 6, 1996, diplomats reported that over fifty Nigerian dogfaces had been killed and a number taken as captures( New York Times, June 6, 1996). There was no information available for Cameroonian antecedents.

Consequent upon the below scripts, the also Secretary General, Kofi Annan led the United Nations sweats to help resolve the stalements over the promontory that has been the subject of violent controversies between the two countries for times. Despite this trouble, the disagreement was still claiming victims. On 5th September 2002, Mr Anan met in Paris with the two chairpersons( Obasanjo and Biya) who both promised to admire and apply whatever decision the ICJ might give on the case. slightly a week latterly, had the court basically awarded Cameroon rights to the oil painting rich promontory.

After about ten( 10) times of this ruling, numerous issues have remained undetermined; the perpetration of the Green Tree Agreement; the living conditions of several Nigerian townlets who have been abiding in Bakassi and indeed have a original government; their mortal right of tone- determination among others. Hence, we pose these questions

l Does ICJ adjudication on the Bakassi Peninsula constitute the denial of the mortal right of Bakassi citizens?

l Is the difficulty in the perpetration of the ICJ ruling on Nigeria- Cameroon boundary disagreement resolved by the vittles of the Green Tree Agreement?

l Did interests of external powers affect the adjudication and perpetration of the ICJ ruling on the Nigeria- Cameroon boundary disagreement?

Objects Of The Study

The broad ideal of this study is to examine the part of International Court of Justice( ICJ) in the Nigeria- Cameroon boundary controversies. Specifically, the study aims to demonstrate that

l The adjudication of ICJ on the Bakassi Peninsula constituted the denial of mortal rights of Bakassi citizens.

l The difficulty in the perpetration of the ICJ ruling on Nigeria- Cameroon boundary disagreement is resolved by the vittles of the Green Tree Agreement.

l The interests of external powers affected the adjudication and perpetration of the ICJ ruling.

Significance Of The Study

This study will be of enormous theoretical and practical significance. virtually, it’ll add to extant literature which serves as a frame for understanding the politics of the International Court of Justice ruling over the Nigeria- Cameroon boundary controversies. Drawing from transnational judicial priority( rate decidendi), this study is significant in that it presents an accurate picture of the character of transnational politics, and how it impinges on the transnational legal principles, especially on the principles pertaining the raison d ‟ etre of a state; dealing with matters of territorial integrity. It’ll also, stimulate more scholarly exploration on the subject of this study. Also, it’ll serve as a companion to both statesmen and transnational diplomats interested in disagreement resolution, especially territorial grounded one. It’ll also give foreign policy guideline to the Nigerian government since it notice the places played by both mercenary and military governments. Theoretically, the study caught on the part of ICJ in the Nigeria- Cameroon boundary disagreement, with specific focus on the Bakassi Peninsula. therefore, it set up out that the adjudication of ICJ constitutes denial of mortal rights to Bakassi citizens; that the Green Tree Agreement vittles resolved the difficulties in the perpetration of ICJ ruling and that interests of external powers affect the adjudication and perpetration of the ICJ ruling.