The ongoing civil crisis in the area called Sothern Cameroons, a former British trust territory, can be traced back in 1961 when the British failed to grant Southern Cameroons the right to be independent and rather gave them an option in a plebiscite to join Nigeria or La Republic du Cameroun. This travesty of justice of the right of a people to self-determination has had a tremendous impact over the years till now. The people of Southern Cameroons might be described as victims of an imperfect decolonisation which started with the decision to refuse them self autonomy by the British.

Consequently, there has been a consistent and systematic governing machinery in place which ensures that the former British Southern Cameroons remain subjected under La Republique du Cameroun as opposed to sharing equal status as federated states in power relations. This was evident in 1972 when the first President, Ahmadou Ahidjo changed the name of the country from The Federal Republic of Cameroon to The United Republic of Cameroon. When his predecessor, Paul Biya took over in 1982, he also unilaterally changed the name to the Republic of Cameroon. These worrying patterns of gross violation of the constitution binding La Republique du Cameroun and the British Southern Cameroons show complete disregard of the people’s wishes.

The Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC) was created from the
backdrop of such disgruntlements and after all failed attempts to get La Republique du Cameroun to reconsider their moves in undermining the constitutional position of the British Southern Cameroons as equal patterns in the political affairs of the country.

The SCNC has consistently stood for the independence of the former British Southern Cameroons through public activities such as peaceful protest and demonstrations. Over the years members of the SCNC have been subjected to wanton arrest and human rights violations. In 2021, Amnesty International Report on Cameroon found that security forces continue to disrupt SCNC activities.
This flagrant disregard for basic human rights is an ongoing happening in Cameroon particularly seen in 2016 when Teachers and Lawyers went on the street to protest the use of French in English Schools and Courts. They were met with humiliation, harassment, torture, detention and persecution.

The outlawing of the SCNC and the Cameroon Civil Society members of the
consortium is an apt example of a society that denies its citizens the right to freedom of speech, life and movement. An example is the case of Fabian Fomuki, a US citizen detained in Cameroon for more than three months. His support for the restoration of Southern Cameroons independence whilst residing in Canton, USA is the reason for his arrest according to his family. He arrived in Cameroon via the Douala international airport and was arrested at his hotel when a group of
masked men armed with guns abducted him, threw a bag over his head, and loaded him into a car.

This worry pattern of arbitrary arrest, harassment, and detention of SCNC supporters is entirely at odds with international human right law and standards.
The ongoing crisis has created a humanitarian crisis particularly as British Southern Cameroonians have had to seek refuge in neighbouring Nigeria and are in dire need of necessities such as food, shelter, and healthcare. The mental well-being of the British Southern Cameroonians in exile are in jeopardy and their existence is hanging in the balance as they wonder when they will return home again.

We call on the UK government to mediate with other international bodies to find lasting solutions to the ongoing genocide and unrest in the British Sothern Cameroons. We wish to plead our course for the complete restoration of the independence of the British Southern Cameroons. As SCNC members, we will continue to advocate our rights to freedom and restoration of that which had denied us in 1961. Although we are a people as Achille Mbembe describes made
up of an ‘entanglement with multiple elsewhere[s]… that has produced different outcomes,’  we assert that we are on a long journey to freedom, of becoming an independent country and we look forward to reaching Buea.

Written By: Emilia Efeti Agey

The Legitimate Rights of Southern Cameroons Independence, (The Republic of Ambazonia).

By CASIMIR ETOE NGOME,

SCNC UK

Above is the official map of Southern Cameroons and the official flag of Ambazonia (former British Southern Cameroons which today is illegally recognised as the North West and South West regions of La Republique du Cameroun).

Achieving goals and dreams usually requires some level of sacrifice. It might mean putting everything in life on the hold in favour of working towards your dreams, investing all of your savings, or giving up a few hours of sleep each night. Many people proclaim they want to achieve their goals, yet are unwilling to pay the price it takes to make their dreams a reality.

However, before you can ever choose to pay the price, you must know what the price is. If you don’t know what will truly be required to make your dreams a reality, investigate what it will take to achieve your desired goals. Research the causes of your discontent, the cost you might be required to pay and the costs other people have had to pay to achieve dreams similar to yours.

But if the price is something you are willing to pay, commit yourself to achieving your dream, no matter what it takes. The willingness therefore to do whatever is required is the magic ingredient that helps you persevere in the face of the challenges, setbacks, pain, and even personal injury.

Total independence for Southern Cameroons is my ultimate dream, if your dream is alike, then we have to fight for it till the end, in fact till the last man standing.

The way to independence for Southern Cameroons, is in the hands of the United Nations, Britain, and the people of Southern Cameroonians themselves. The UN should pursue the same path it took to grant independence to other UN trust territories. It must be highlighted here that Southern Cameroons is a unique UN trust territory that was and is still annexed by La Republique du Cameroun and France through an orthodox means by granting it independence with union within La Republique du Cameroun in 1961.

The UN should implement the UNGA Resolution 1514 – (XIV) of 14 December 1960 on the granting of independence to colonial territories and peoples, in which Southern Cameroons is a colonial territory within the UN.

History is one thing that must be referred to in order to avoid a repeat of a costly mistake in the future. It is in the light of the above that La Republique du Cameroun government failed to correct these mistakes more than 5 decades ago by totally assimilating, subjugating and annexation of Southern Cameroons.

To therefore correct these mistakes committed by La Republique du Cameroun, in 2016, lawyers went on a strike in an effort to force the government to stop appointing francophone magistrates who have no mastery of the English language and had no training in English Common Law to preside over courts in Southern Cameroons. Thus, during peaceful demonstrations in the cities of Buea and Bamenda, the lawyers were roughly manhandled by government forces.

Teachers too on their part, came out in support of the lawyers. They wanted the government to stop posting and transferring francophone teachers who have no mastery of the English language to teach subjects other than French in Anglophone schools. The government responded by banning the trade unions, many members-some of whom were engaged in negotiations with the government were arrested, and jailed on charges of terrorism and attempts to change the form of state.

As people across other professions sympathise with the teachers and lawyers, who instituted ‘ghosts towns’ in Southern Cameroon cities, everywhere on certain days of the week as part of a large scale boycott, the government again responded by shutting down the internet for 91 days.

As a result, the Southern Cameroonians took the matter in their own hands, and became more determined than ever before for a restoration of the independence of their statehood (Ambazonia).

Southern Cameroons must therefore be strong, resilient, focused, united and remember that there is no freedom served to any one person or people on a plate of gold. We will fight till one man remain standing, noting that there is no turning back. We will stop at nothing until we get what rightly belongs to us and our generations to come which is INDEPENDENCE.

By

Mathew N. M. Ngime

SCNC UK

Introduction

The premeditated marriage between the British Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun has become what could finally be termed a “barren tree” that has not only refused to bear fruits but hunting down its proponents. Fifty years of epic failures of the reunification have vanished, but the saga of the union that was orchestrated by La Republique du Cameroun continues in a rather appalling transformational cinema(Awasom, 2000). After decades of failed attempts to subvert the ideologies of anglophonism, and to francophonise the British Southern Cameroonians through what could be termed an “internal annexation agenda”, it has come of age for the central government to look at itself in the “federation mirror” and “mind the gap” that exists between the two territories in all ramifications(Nzume, 2004).In light of “minding the gap”, the Southern Cameroon National Council (SCNC) set the pace in 1995 for self-determination towards a peacefully negotiated independence, upon realizing that the union was a historical mistake that culminated ina wedding song dedicated to a couple in the mirror. The liberation of the British Southern Cameroons from outright marginalisation and torture(Yundze, 2017)cannot be syphoned off in favour of what can be considered first-class “cultural erosion”.This cultural erosion looms particularly with the recent passing of the bilingualism bill. It is today logical to settle on the fact that among the different schools of thought regarding the future of the British Southern Cameroons that emerged, credit is to be given to P.M. Kale of the KUP, Chief Nyenti of CCC,Fon V.S. Galega II,and F. N. Ajebe Sone of the KNC, and the “voice of the traditional rulers”,FonAchiribi II, who advocated for complete secession and independent state(Akara, 2015).

Since 2016, the “Etudi Palace” has been met with increasing ferocious commotion from the two English-speaking regions in Cameroon: the British Southern Cameroons, who believe secession is the only solution to be freed from the wanton political experience. This follows brutality, torture, intimidation, imprisonment, and indiscriminate killingdeployed by the central government as the only vectors to stop the civil insurrection and restore peace. The pandemonium which escalated in late 2016 when Anglophone lawyers took the streets and subsequently by teachers and students has led to many being victimised, abused, tortured, internally displaced, and killed. More than 3,000 have been killed with over 500,000 internally displaced and over 50,000 as refugees(Hendricks and Kiven, 2019; Fearnley and Silverman, 2020). The Anglophone problem can be attributed to 4 main causes including (1) shared colonialism, (2) constitutional problems, (3) internal annexation agenda, and (4) self-proclamation of independence.

Shared Colonialism: The missing Condominium

Cameroon is a bilingual country as a result of its dual colonisation by Britain and France. Cameroon’s tri-colonial period can be divided into the German protectorate (1884 – 1919),Mandate (1922 – 1945), and the Trusteeship (1945 – 1961) periods. The unequal partitioning of the territory, which subsequently became subject to foreign rule could be considered as the genesis of what is today known as the Anglophone problem(Konings and Nyamnjoh, 1997; Piet Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2003; Njung, 2019; Awasom, 2020; Agwanda and Asal, 2021). Cameroon was annexed in 1884 and remained under German rule until they were defeated in Europe during the First World War (WW1) in 1914 and subsequently in Cameroon by the British and French on March 17, 1916. The defeat in Cameroon led to an unequivocal partitioning of Kamerun (as it was called during the German rule) on June 28, 1919, following the Treaty of Versailles led by the “Big Four” (United States, Britain, France, and Italy)(Foreign Relations of the United States, no date; Neilson, 1999; History.com Editors, 2009; United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 2016),with France taking about 80% of the territory. This sowed the seed for future discontent. This partitioning was formalised by the League of Nations (created during the Versailles Treaty) on July 20, 1922, when Cameroon became a mandated territory and later as a UN trust territory in 1945, administered as separate territories by Britain and France(Mbuh, no date). British Southern Cameroons was administered from the Eastern Region of Enugu State in Nigeria. By October 1, 1954, British Southern Cameroonshad started a government and became a fully self-administered region by 1959. On January 1, 1960, French Cameroon baptised as “La Republique du Cameroun” (as distinct from the present-day Republic of Cameroon)became independent, followed by Nigeria on October 1, 1960 (Federal Republic of Nigeria), leaving British Cameroons at crossroads. Through a UN organised Plebiscite on February 11, 1961, the Northern and Southern British Cameroons were given only 2 options to get independence, to vote either to join (1) the Federal Republic of Nigeria or (2) La Republique du Cameroun(Fearnley and Silverman, 2020; Agwanda and Asal, 2021).

The fact that Britain lobbied for British Cameroons to join Nigeria did not only hamper the achievement of their independence but for British Southern Cameroons to be given fair treatment during the federation. This will later be seen in their neutrality and boycott of the Fouban constitutional talks. While British Northern Cameroons voted to join Nigeria, British Southern Cameroons on a “no-third-choice” basis voted (70%) to join La Republique du Cameroun, to become the Federal Republic of Cameroon. Following this, the UN passed a resolution (Resolution 1608)(UN, no date), outlining how the transition from the trusteeship was to be ensured before October 1, 1961. The lack of a condominium during this decolonisation process will later play negatively on the English-speaking minority and pave the way for the loss of the much desired sovereignty as a result of constitutional conspiracy. There is evidence that time was not taken to explain the implications of the different choices to the British Southern Cameroons who ignorantly cast their votes(Hansard, 1961).

Constitutional Conspiracy Dynamics

The British Southern Cameroons led by John NguFoncha and the Republic of Cameroon led by President AhmadouAhidjo met at the Foumban conference for a draft constitution on how the federation was to be run. The constitution which was to ensure federalism instead ensured a process from external annexation to internal annexation(Anyangwe, 2019). Articles 15 and 47 of the constitution gave excessive powers to the president including revising the constitution(Ebolo, 2014).It is also important to note here that the Foumban conference only came to compound the mistake that was already done by the KNDP and Kamerun Society (KS) that advocated for reunification with French Cameroon and rejected the option of an independent state during the London Constitutional Conference (LCC) of 1957(Akara, 2015). This was a perfect opportunity to correct the historical mistake. The Mamfe Plebiscite Conference of August 1959 that ended in a fiasco could not correct the mistake either. The price of failure to address the concerns of the British Southern Cameroons during these two conferences later manifested in the restriction of the UN Plebiscite options to just two. The omission of the third option of an independent British Southern Cameroon was also seen as a good argument for security against possible terrorist attacks from the maquisards of the then banned UPC in French Cameroon led by Roland Moumie, Abel Kingue and Ernest Oaundie(Nfi, 2011), as well as a good manoeuvre to win over the British Southern Cameroons in voting to join the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

Eleven years (May 20, 1972), after the constitution was reluctantly signed by Premier Foncha, President AhmadouAhidjo changed the constitution through a referendum, moving the country from the Federal Republic of Cameroon to the United Republic of Cameroon. It is believed that this came briefly after the discovery of oil in British Southern Cameroon’s Victoria(Tembon, 2016) now known as Limbe. Twelve years later (February 4, 1984), President Paul Biya (who took power in 1982)passed a decree changing the name from the United Republic of Cameroon to the Republic of Cameroon with the implication that the double-star flag that represented the federation now became a single star flag. Added to that, the position of vice president was abolished and that of the prime minister was created. What this meant was that the position of Anglophones in Cameroon now shifted from the 2^nd to the 5^th personality, starting with the President, Senate president, speaker of the National Assembly, chairman of the Economic and Social Council, and the Prime Minister. The intention to completely assimilate and overwrite the identity of the British Southern Cameroons then became evident.

The change of the political landscape into multipartism launched in 1990 gave birth to a series of mechanisms, organisations, and channels through which the British Southern Cameroons could express their grievances. The Southern Cameroon National Council (SCNC) created in 1995 and led by Justice Frederick AlobwedeEbongwith the assistance of NforNgalaNfor, assumed the role of the executive council of all Anglophone movements(Piet. Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2003). The SCNC aims at a gradual nonviolent negotiation towards independence of a Federal Republic of Southern Cameroons (FRSC) underpinned by its motto, “the force of argument and not the argument of force”. The SCNC was banned in 2001(Agwanda and Asal, 2021) in an attempt to hide the truth from the public, part of the reason for which the true version of Cameroon history was never taught in schools. This led to the creation of the Anglophone Civil Society Consortium, whose banning also led to the creation of the Southern Cameroon Ambazonia Consortium United Front (SCACUF)(Depart of Foreign Affairs, 2018).

Internal Annexation Agenda

The internal annexation agenda was enshrined in the central government’s plan to constantly change the constitution till the deal is done. The wiping of anglophonism from the public space in Cameroon looms as tensions continue to build up with the recent passing of the bilingualism bill. The central government will not stop at anything in completing the internal annexation process of the British Southern Cameroons that was simply formalized during the Foumban conference(Achankeng, 2015). It is alleged that top officials of La Republic who attended the “primary school conference” in Fouban referred to as the “sham conference” elsewhere(Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2019) already knew that the Foumban Conference was the formal start of the annexation agenda of the British Southern Cameroons(Anyangwe, 2009). It is reported that before the Foumban Conference, the UN organised Plebicite was characterised by manic political propaganda and deceit to deter Southern Cameroonians from the popular opinion of an independent entity.This was further compounded by Foncha’s growing interest in reunification(Kam Kah, 2016) following a series of meetings with President AmadouAhidjo. It is also worth noting that the referendum was organised in french Cameroon and it is therefore not surprising that the president received an overwhelming landslide vote in favour of a unitary state.The current president who was the Prime Minister under President Ahidjo, prior to his rise to power following Law No.79/2 of 29 June 1979, must have had a grasp of the annexation agenda and as such simply expedited it.  Like to say that the plan put forth by President Ahidjo was too slow, President Paul Biyawill not call for a referendum but simply pass a decree for the country’s change of name. In summary, the UN Plebiscite “sowed” the seed of internal annexation, President AhmadouAhidjo “watered”, and President Paul Biya “sealed” the deal

The persistence of the Anglophone movements organized under the SCNC amid all odds including the Southern Cameroon Youth League (SCYL), Cameroon Anglophone Movement that became the Southern Cameroon Restoration Movement (SCARM), Sothern Cameroon People’s Organisation (SCPO), Ambazonia Movement, Coalition for Dialogue and Negotiation (CDN), among others, has largely been due to the neglect and complete refusal by the central government to give ear to the plight of the Anglophones or even acknowledge that there is anything as the “Anglophone problem”(Nkongho and Shepherd, 2017). This is particularly so because giving ear to the Anglophones will be contrary to the original plan to completely erode the identity of British Southern Cameroons(Fonchingong, 2013). This is no news as it must be noted here that the annexationof the central government dates as far back as the French colonial period. While Britain’s policy was based on “divide and rule”,evident in the partitioning of its territory into Northern and Southern British Cameroons, it should not be forgotten that France implemented the policy of “assimilation” in all its colonies whereby locals are subjected to a complete cultural transformation and change of identity. It would have therefore been foolish to think that la Republic du Cameroun will respect the terms of the federation had it been this was still the case, that is to say, the least.  Going by this, it will be wise to believe that federalism will not even be on the agenda of a national dialogue, that is if there ever happens to be one, in the absence of the international community. Accusing fingers have been pointed at the UN, Britain, and Nigeria for conspiracy over expediting the annexation of the British Southern Cameroons by “La Republic du Cameroun”(Edward, 2018; Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2019). This is evident in the continued decline of British interest in the British Southern Cameroons with the advent of reunification(Willis et al., 2020).

The military indiscriminately kills civilians under the pretext of searching for “freedom fighters”, with the ultimate aim to completely wipe out the notion of Anglophonism from the public space. The Ngabuh village incident of February 14, 2020(Craig, 2020), the Muambong raid of April 22 in the same year(CNA, 2020)alongside many other documented cases(Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, 2021; HRW, 2022) are a clear testimony. The central government has further tightened its grip on the British Southern Cameroons through the passing of the bilingualism bill. This did not just sound like a real blow in the teeth after all the wrangling over marginalisation but like the last straw as well. The onus is upon the SCNC to engage the international community in bringing efforts up-to-speed in stopping the brutality, torture, calumny, imprisonment, and killings that have become the main vectors of pushing forward the annexation agenda.

Self-proclamation of Independence

In order to get an understanding of the foundations of separatism and self-proclamation of independence, it is worth shedding lighton the past. Separatism is not a word that emerged out of the cloud in the historiography of Cameroon.The idea of separatism and independence which was indigenous to the British Southern Cameroons started with the Mamfe Conference of June 1948 that culminated in the unanimous approval and petition for a separate entity(Budi, 2019). This desire was formalised through the merging of Endeley’sKamerun National Federation (KNF) and Dibongue’sKamerun United National Congress (KUNC), to form the Kamerun National Congress (KNC) in 1953. This was led by 3 activists including Solomon TandengMuna, Emanuel MbelaLifafeEndeley, and John NguFoncha. The KNC had as sole aim to fight for the independence of the British Southern Cameroons. This is what led to the creation of a legislative house: House of Assembly in Buea by Britain (Council of Order of 1954) with an executive council and Dr Emanuel MbelaLifafeEndeley as the leader, giving the British Southern Cameroons partial autonomy from the Nigerian Federation. In 1955, John NguFoncha and Solomon TendengMuna left the KNC to form the Kamerun National Democratic Party (KNDP), following the change of the political opinion of Dr. E.M.L Endeley who instead advocated for integration with Nigeria. Among those who advocated for secession from Nigeria and independent state were P.M. Kale of the KUP, Chief Nyenti of CCC, Fon V.S. Galega II and F. N. Ajebe Sone of the KNC, and the “voice of the traditional rulers” FonAchiribi II(Akara, 2015).

The UN resolution 1064 of 26 February 1957(UN General Assembly, no date a; UN GA (11th Session:1956-1957), 1957) and 1207 of December 13, 1957(UN General Assembly, no date b) requested for the fast-tracking of procedures for all trust territories to attain independence. This in addition to mounting pressures gave British Southern Cameroons autonomy and the status of a fully self-managed region. Dr. E. M. L. Endeley emerged as the first Prime Minister after free and fair elections between KNC and KNDP. It was the need for independence from Nigeria that led to the replacement of Dr. E. M. L. Endeley with John NguFonchawhose ideologies were more acceptable to the people. This was a clear indication that the people choose the leader they want and not the leader choosing the people he/she wants to secure his position in power.

Prior to the escalation of the Anglophone problem, it must be recalled that the British Southern Cameroons issued a number of warnings upon realising that the federation was not fit for purpose and that it was merely an agenda to annexation and assimilation. It is equally pertinent to logically think that the emergence of SCNC was as a result of the inability of the central government to heed to the concerns raised during the All Anglophones Conference of Buea in 1993 and subsequently in Bamenda in 1994, which culminated into the “Buea Declaration”(Ngoh, 1999) and the “Bamenda Declaration” respectively, with the latter serving a warning to the government to restore the federation without which there will be a self-proclamation of independence. On December 31, 1999, members of the SCNC took over the Buea Radio Station and proclaimed independence read by Judge Frederick AlobwedeEbong. On October 11, 2016, Anglophone lawyers took the streets to raise concerns about the common law which is constantly being undermined and gradually being replaced with civil law. This was particularly concerning because under the common law, one is innocent until proven guilty, whereas, under civil law, the same is guilty until he/she proves contrary. The government response was brutal, with many arrested and imprisoned. This was followed by teachers on November 21, 2016, complaining of French teachers constantly being deployed to teach in Anglophone schools. The response was the same and perhaps worse. University students followed suit but the response was characterised by torture, rape, and arrests. This indicated that the government was not ready to condone anything having to do with Anglophone nationalism.

On October 1, 2017, Anglophone movements championed by the SCACUF self-proclaimed independence in the Southern Cameroon territory, into a new state known as the Federal Republic of Ambazionia(Depart of Foreign Affairs, 2018). This escalated into armed conflicts between civilians and the military, leading to many being killed (more than 3,000), internally displaced (more than 500,000), with the greater majority (about 50,000) fleeing into Nigeria as refugees(Hendricks and Kiven, 2019). In an attempt to see into the plight of the many internally displaced and seeking humanitarian assistance, the leaders of the SCACUF including the president, SisikuAyukTabe, and other elites met at the Nera Hotel in Abuja in Nigeria. They were arrested on January 5, 2018, by the Nigerian Department of State Security, extradited to Cameroon on January 23, 2018, and handed to the Cameroon government. Since then, there have been serial unrest in the two English speaking regions leading to innocent killings and unspeakable violation of human rights(Willis et al., 2019; Cameroon 2020, 2020; US Department of State, 2021).

SCNC and the Anglophone Nationalism

Evidence suggests that the reason for the failed independence of British Southern Cameroons in the past was because the slogan of reunification was given more attention over the need for independence(Njeuma, 1995). Besides, it could be argued that while British Southern Cameroons perceived reunification as the unconditional means to obtain independence, but with culturally distinct identities and equivocal powers, La Republique du Cameroun saw it as an opportunity for assimilation avant-garde(Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2021) and equated it to a surrender of sovereignty(Agwanda and Asal, 2021). It is alleged that President Charles de Gaulle’s perception of British Southern Cameroons was that of the Queen’s gift to France(Milen, 1999), and this is the treatment that the region has received since then. Notwithstanding the calumny regarding the SCNC’s efforts to end the struggle, it is incumbent on the SCNC to bring together its sister organizations and engage the international community if the struggle must forge ahead.The SCNC has made several attempts in raising awareness about the plight of the Anglophones. Apart from indiscriminate killings and human rights abuses most diffused through social media, it is thanks to the SCNC’s continued human right abiding approach that the problem has received international recognition.Aligning this with history, it must be noted that peaceful negotiations have always received international recognition as the gold standard. That is why the Union des Populations Camerounaises (UPC) fought for the separate independence of both Cameroons(Ngoh, 1979) but it was granted to Union Camerounaise (UC) that went for peaceful negotiation(Jone, 1998) with France. Some remarkable efforts of the SCNC include the nine-man delegation to the UN on May 19, 1995,a mission statement to the UN,  numerous petitions against the annexation of British Southern Cameroons, the two-man delegation to the Commonwealth summit in Auckland in November 1995 to note that Cameroon did not meet the criteriafor admission into Commonwealth, the formation of the Southern Cameroons Peoples Organisation (SCAPO) and its role in the ruling of the Nigerian Federal High Court restraining the Nigerian government from treating the people of British Southern Cameroons as an integral part of La Republique du Cameroun, a complaint against La Republiquedu Cameroon to the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR)(Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2019), its membership with the Unrepresented Nations and People’s Organisation (UNPO)(The Star, 2011), and the organisation of public demos, just to name a few.

The SCNC as the flag bearer(Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, no date; Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada, 2018)that considers that today’s British Southern Cameroons are victims of imperfect decolonization and internal annexation by La Republique du Cameroun(About Scnc – Southern Cameroon National Council UK, no date; SCNC, 2006)has a pivotal role in the realisation of the dreams of the British Southern Cameroonians. The banning of the SCNC in 2001 in an attempt to subdue the ranks of its influence(IRIN, 2007), ravaged and shifted its momentum to the diaspora with the most active arms in the UK and the US.There is the need for a renewed sense of hope and purpose among the British Southern Cameroonians to assume a continuum.Albeit having the ultimate task of bringing together all the pressure groups and promoting a strong sense of unity and patriotism, it must observe that this is done with care as there are reports of fake movements within the movement itself setup by the government.  For instance, it is reported that there is a government-created SCNC with the sole aim of downplaying the credibility of the SCNC(Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC), no date).The SCNC should recognise rebuilding the unity which is gradually fading away(Konings and Nyamnjoh, 2019) and risks putting international commitment to the course at crossroads, as being primordial.

At crossroads and pressing is the question of humanitarian support for those who have been imprisoned incommunicado, internally displaced, and in refugee camps. There is an urgent need to explore funding avenues to support the many reported to be affected(Department for International Development and Baldwin, 2018; Norwegian Refugee Council, 2021) by the conflict. UNICEF UK estimates that USD20 million are needed by UNICEF to meet its commitment in supporting children in difficulties in the British Southern Cameroons(Unicef UK Media Team, 2019). In response to this call, the SCNC may either append its efforts to those of UNICEF UK or act as a case-finding facilitator. A secondary data review has assessed the risks and needs of those affected by the crisis(Global Protection Cluster, 2019).

Conclusion

The need and struggle for independence of the British Southern Cameroons has left many British Southern Cameronians in limbo and it is not clear when this perplexing and sickening situation will come to an end. The account in this commentary indicates that West Cameroon was politically maneuvered and brainwashed by the so-called “Fouban Federal Constitution” which meant different things to both parties(Agwanda and Asal, 2021). While the federation was seen by West Cameroon as an escape corridor from Nigeria(Ngoh, 1979)but also as a safety net to maintaining cultural, political, economic, and educational integrity(Achankeng, 2015), to the East “wing”, it was the start of the annexation process of the English counterparts as British Southern Cameroons was simply invited to adopt a draft constitution. As such, the terms of the constitution of a federal republic were unilaterally decided. This can be evident in the central government’s crackdown of any opposition directed to this end. It is logical to think that the banning of the SCNC that believes in the peaceful resolution of the Anglophone problem led to the proliferation of more violent pressure groups. This has led to divided attention among the British Southern Cameroonians: a major bone of contention to deal with. Leaders of the different pressure groups need to get their heads straight.

The Anglophone problem despite being complex is one that can,further to a failed federal system, be attributed to the central government’s continued effort to annex and assimilate English speaking Cameroon and completely eradicate the ideology of anglophonism. It is customary to think that a complete eradication and replacement of the ideology of anglophonism should be the final bus stop of the central government and it will not hesitate to use radical measures in the process(Holmdahl and Buckee, 2020). It cannot, therefore, be surprising that the central government declared war against British Southern Cameroonians instead of sustainably seeking to address the issues that were raised. It is also not surprising why the decentralization promised a long time ago is hard to come by, neither should it be surprising why the Swiss process and the Yaoundé talks of September 30, 2019, framed as “national dialogue”came to nothing. The ubiquitous nature of French officials in the British Southern Cameroon institutions is simply a revelation of this annexation agenda. It can be said that the Anglophone problem sumsto the resilience to assimilation and the internal annexation agenda of the central government. Any peace talks that will fall short of the involvement of the United Nations will simply be a repetition of the same mistakes of the Foumban Conference. It is imperative, for British Southern Camerooniansto put aside their differences, for fear that the question of who is who? in the struggle becomes even more important than the negotiation process itself(Bone, 2020). It is also important to think that the internal conflicts among the British Southern Cameroonians themselves demonstrate a lack of maturity(Bone, 2021) and may tend to give reason to the international community to believe that they did not make a mistake in limiting the UN Plebiscite question options to two. Besides, within the political landscape of Cameroon itself, addressing the Anglophone problem may not be a priority to the central government that is preoccupied with wrangling over who becomes the next president(Jeune Afrique, 2020).

(Commonwealth Day SCNC protest of March 9, 2020 at Wesminster Abbey, London)

Mathew N. M. Ngime

References

About Scnc – Southern Cameroon National Council UK (no date) SCNC UK. Available at: https://scnc-uk.com/about-scnc/ (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

Achankeng, F. (2015) ‘The Foumban” Constitutional” Talks and Prior Intentions of Negotiating: A Historico-Theoretical Analysis of a False Negotiation and the Ramifications for Political Developments in Cameroon’, Journal of Global Initiatives: Policy, Pedagogy, Perspective, 9(2), p. 11. Available at: https://digitalcommons.kennesaw.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1178&context=jgi (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Agwanda, B. and Asal, U. Y. (2021) The Anglophone problem in Cameroon: The change from crisis to conflict, and a possible way forward to resolution, ACCORD. Available at: https://www.accord.org.za/ajcr-issues/the-anglophone-problem-in-cameroon-the-change-from-crisis-to-conflict-and-a-possible-way-forward-to-resolution/ (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Akara, D. T. (2015) ‘The Kamerun society: A missing link in the independence struggle in the British Southern Cameroons, 195661’, African Journal of History and Culture. Academic Journals, 7(4), pp. 91–99. doi: 10.5897/ajhc2014.0238.

Anyangwe, C. (2009) Betrayal of too trusting a people: The UN, the UK and the trust territory of the Southern Cameroons, Betrayal of Too Trusting a People: The UN, the UK and the Trust Territory of the Southern Cameroons. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/book/16790 (Accessed: 14 March 2022).

Anyangwe, C. (2019) UN Res. 1608 (XV): Problem or Answer to Southern Cameroons Independence?, AmbaNews24. Available at: https://ambanews24.com/analysis-opinion-on-unga-res-1608-xv-of-21-april-1961/ (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Awasom, N. F. (2000) ‘The reunification question in Cameroon history: Was the bride an enthusiastic or a reluctant one?’, Africa Today, pp. 90–119. doi: 10.2979/AFT.2000.47.2.90.

Awasom, N. F. (2020) ‘The anglophone problem in Cameroon yesterday and today in search of a definition’, Journal of the African Literature Association. Routledge, 14(2), pp. 264–291. doi: 10.1080/21674736.2020.1717124.

Bone, R. M. (2020) Ahead of peace talks, a who’s who of Cameroon’s separatist movements, The New Humanitarian. Available at: https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/analysis/2020/07/08/Cameroon-Ambazonia-conflict-peace-whos-who (Accessed: 17 February 2022).

Bone, R. M. (2021) Cameroon’s elusive peace: Rivals, rifts, and secret talks, The New Humanitarian. Available at: https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/analysis/2021/3/29/cameroons-elusive-peace-rivals-rifts-and-secret-talks (Accessed: 17 February 2022).

Budi, R. N. (2019) ‘Colonial Administrative Integration of African Territories: Identity and Resistance in Nigeria’s Southern Cameroons, 1922–1961’, IAFOR Journal of Arts & Humanities. The International Academic Forum (IAFOR), 6(1), pp. 109–122. doi: 10.22492/ijah.6.1.09.

Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights,  and L. (2021) 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Cameroon, US Department of State. Available at: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/CAMEROON-2020-HUMAN-RIGHTS-REPORT.pdf (Accessed: 8 February 2022).

Cameroon 2020 (2020) Amnesty International Amnesty International. Available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/location/africa/west-and-central-africa/cameroon/report-cameroon/ (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Canada: Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (no date) Cameroon: The Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC) and the Southern Cameroons Youth League (SCYL); organizational structures; leaders; activities; membership cards; treatment of their members by government authorities (2010-February 2014), 11 March , Refworld. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/5373373d6.html (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

CNA (2020) Report: CHRDA Blames Government Forces For Killing Civilians In Muambong, Cameroon News Agency. Available at: https://cameroonnewsagency.com/report-chrda-blames-government-forces-for-killing-civilians-in-muambong/ (Accessed: 8 February 2022).

Craig, J. (2020) How an ‘execution-style’ massacre unfolded in Cameroon, The New Humanitarian. Available at: https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/analysis/2020/03/03/Cameroon-Ambazonia-Ngarbuh-massacre (Accessed: 8 February 2022).

Depart of Foreign Affairs (2018) Ambazonia: Journey to Independence and Ongoing Genocide by Cameroon Government. Available at: https://www.ambazoniagov.org/images/docs/AMBAZONIA-JOURNEY-TO-INDEPENDENCE-AND-ONGOINGGENOCIDE-BY-CAMEROON-GOVERNMENT.pdf (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Department for International Development and Baldwin, H. (2018) Press release: UK aid for children caught up in Cameroon conflict, GOV.UK. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/uk-aid-for-children-caught-up-in-cameroon-conflict (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

Ebolo, E. E. (2014) ‘Sovereignty in the Making : The Case of Anglophone Cameroon’, ResearchGate, (December 2012), pp. 0–27. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/269575409_Sovereignty_in_the_Making_The_Case_of_Anglophone_Cameroon (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Edward, H. (2018) ‘The Force of Argumentt and the Fight for an Anglophone Identity in Cameroon’, SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.2529021.

Fearnley, J. and Silverman, A. (2020) The Global Campaign for Peace and Justice in Cameroon-Written evidence (ZAF0028). Available at: https://committees.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/768/pdf/ (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Fonchingong, T. (2013) ‘The quest for autonomy: The case of Anglophone Cameroon’, African Journal of Political Science and International Relations, 7(5), pp. 224–236. doi: 10.5897/ajpsir10.033.

Foreign Relations of the United States (no date) Milestones: 1914–1920: The Paris Peace Conference and the Treaty of Versailles, Office of the Historian. Available at: https://history.state.gov/milestones/1914-1920/paris-peace (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

Global Protection Cluster (2019) Risks and Needs for Child Protection in Cameroon-North West and South West Crisis, Reliefweb.int. Available at: https://www.humanitarianresponse.info/sites/www.humanitarianresponse.info/files/documents/files/swnw_cameroon_sdr_2019_final_.pdf (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

Hansard, T. C. (1961) Commons Sitting of 20 February 1961: The Cameroons (vol 635), UK Parliament. Available at: https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1961/feb/20/the-cameroons (Accessed: 19 March 2022).

Hendricks, C. and Kiven, G. N. (2019) Why Cameroon must move beyond dialogue to solve its Anglophone crisis, The Conversation. Available at: https://theconversation.com/why-cameroon-must-move-beyond-dialogue-to-solve-its-anglophone-crisis-125241 (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

History.com Editors (2009) Treaty of Versailles – Definition, Terms & WWI – HISTORY, A&E Television Networks. Available at: https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-i/treaty-of-versailles-1 (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

Holmdahl, I. and Buckee, C. (2020) ‘Wrong but Useful — What Covid-19 Epidemiologic Models Can and Cannot Tell Us’, New England Journal of Medicine. Massachusetts Medical Society, 383(4), pp. 303–305. doi: 10.1056/nejmp2016822.

HRW (2022) Cameroon: Soldiers on Rampage in North-West Region, Human Rights Watch. Available at: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/02/03/cameroon-soldiers-rampage-north-west-region (Accessed: 8 February 2022).

Immigration and Refugee Board of Canada (2018) Responses to Information Requests: The Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC), IRB, Canada. Available at: https://irb.gc.ca/en/country-information/rir/Pages/index.aspx?doc=457518 (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

IRIN (2007) Secessionist minority Anglophone group silenced, The New Humanitarian. Available at: https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2007/02/19/secessionist-minority-anglophone-group-silenced (Accessed: 14 March 2022).

Jeune Afrique (2020) Cameroon’s Anglophone crisis: Rivalries hamper peace talks, The African Report. Available at: https://www.theafricareport.com/37187/cameroons-anglophone-crisis-rivalries-hamper-peace-talks/ (Accessed: 17 February 2022).

Jone, J. (1998) African History Timeline: Independent Cameroon, Web.archive.org. Available at: https://web.archive.org/web/20090508145621/http://courses.wcupa.edu/jones/his311/timeline/t-camer.htm (Accessed: 16 March 2022).

Kam Kah, H. (2016) ‘Impact of Independence of the Republic of Cameroun on the Future Independence and Reunification of British Southern Cameroons’, Social Science Review, 2(2). Available at: http://ssr-net.com/issues/Vol_2_No_2_December_2016/1.pdf (Accessed: 14 March 2022).

Konings, P. and Nyamnjoh, F. B. (1997) ‘The anglophone problem in Cameroon’, Journal of Modern African Studies, 35(2), pp. 207–229. doi: 10.1017/S0022278X97002401.

Konings, Piet. and Nyamnjoh, F. B. (2003) Negotiating an Anglophone identity : a study of the politics of recognition and representation in Cameroon. Boston: Brill. Available at: https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/Negotiating_an_Anglophone_Identity/0u9bWHQzDnIC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=Justice+Frederick+Alobwede+Ebong&pg=PA105&printsec=frontcover (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Konings, Piet and Nyamnjoh, F. B. (2003) ‘President Paul Biya and the “Anglophone Problem” in Cameroon’, in The Leadership Challenge in Africa: Cameroon Under Paul Biya, pp. 191–234.

Konings, P. and Nyamnjoh, F. B. (2019) ‘Anglophone Secessionist Movements in Cameroon’, Secessionism in African Politics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham, pp. 59–89. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-90206-7_3.

Konings, P. and Nyamnjoh, F. B. (2021) ‘Southern Cameroons on the Road to Reunification and Federation’, in Negotiating an Anglophone Identity. Brill, pp. 22–50. doi: 10.1163/9789047402640_005.

Mbuh, M. (no date) Breach of International Obligation: A Legal Diagnistic of United Nations Resolution 1608, of April 21, 1961, Ambazonia.org. Available at: https://www.ambazonia.org/media/pdfs/Breach of International Obligations.pdf (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Milen, M. (1999) No telephone to heaven : from apex to nadir – colonial service in Nigeria, Aden, the Cameroons and the Gold Coast , 1938-61. Meon Hill Press.

Neilson, K. (1999) ‘The Treaty of Versailles. A Reassessment after 75 Years , edited by Manfred F. Boemeke, Gerald D. Feldman, and Elisabeth Glaser’, Canadian Journal of History. University of Saskatchewan, 34(3), pp. 460–463. doi: 10.3138/cjh.34.3.460.

Nfi, J. (2011) ‘The question of insecurity in the Southern Cameroons reunification debate’, African Studies Review, pp. 53–66. Available at: https://lucas.leeds.ac.uk/article/insecurity-southern-cameroons-reunification-debate-joseph-nfi/ (Accessed: 5 March 2022).

Ngoh, V. J. (1979) ‘The Political Evolution of Cameroon, 1884-1961’, Dissertations and Theses. Portland, OR, pp. 1884–1961. doi: 10.15760/etd.2924.

Ngoh, V. J. (1999) The origin of the marginalization of former Southern Cameroons (Anglophones), 1961-1966: AN historical analysis, Source: Journal of Third World Studies , SPRING. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/45193813 (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

Njeuma, M. Z. (1995) ‘Reunification and Political Opportunism in the Making of Cameroon’s Independence’, Paideuma: Mitteilungen zur Kulturkunde, 41, pp. 27–37. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/40341690 (Accessed: 5 March 2022).

Njung, G. N. (2019) ‘The British Cameroons Mandate Regime: The Roots of the Twenty-First-Century Political Crisis in Cameroon’, American Historical Review. Oxford Academic, pp. 1715–1722. doi: 10.1093/ahr/rhz1025.

Nkongho, F. A. B. and Shepherd, B. (2017) ‘The Cameroon Anglophone Crisis: Examining Escalation and Seeking Solutions’, Chatham House. Available at: www.chathamhouse.org/research/africa. (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Norwegian Refugee Council (2021) Violence impacts over 700,000 children due to school closures in Cameroon, NRC. Available at: https://www.nrc.no/news/2021/november/violence-impacts-700000-children-in-cameroon/ (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

Nzume, A. N. (2004) British and French Administration pf the peoples of southern Borderlands of Cameroon, School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). Available at: https://eprints.soas.ac.uk/29199/1/10731294.pdf (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

SCNC (2006) Southern Cameroons National Council: Message of Congratulations, UN archives. Available at: https://search.archives.un.org/uploads/r/united-nations-archives/8/b/b/8bb40cb9c34a8ae13b06f1aa5211f4ce8540d2f6d50693b4f331f0fda5185d0d/S-1951-0008-0004-00004.PDF (Accessed: 14 March 2022).

Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC) (no date) gobalsecurity.org. Available at: https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/scnc.htm (Accessed: 14 March 2022).

Tembon, E. W. (2016) Crisis in the Republic of the Cameroon: An Overview of the Anglophone Crisis 2016-2018, Cameroon Association for Bible Translation and Literacy.

The Star (2011) UNPO: South Cameroons: SCNC Forms Common Front in America for Celebrating Independence Date. Available at: https://unpo.org/article/12822 (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

UN (no date) Resolution 1608 (XV) of April 21, 1961 of the UN Generaal Assembly, United Nations. Available at: https://undocs.org/en/A/RES/1608(XV) (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

UN GA (11th Session:1956-1957) (1957) Attainment of self-government or independence by Trust Territories., UN Digital Library. Available at: https://digitallibrary.un.org/record/207901 (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

UN General Assembly (no date a) Resolutions adopted by the General Assembly from 12 November 1956 to 8 March 1957 during its eleventh session, United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/disarmament/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/A-3572-resolutions.pdf (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

UN General Assembly (no date b) Resolutions adopted by the General Assemby during its 12th Session from 17 September to 14 December 1957, United Nations. Available at: https://www.un.org/disarmament/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/A-3805-Resolutions.pdf (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

Unicef UK Media Team (2019) Geneva Palais briefing note on the situation for children in the North-West and South-West regions of Cameroon, UNICEF UK. Available at: https://www.unicef.org.uk/press-releases/anglophone-crisis-in-cameroon-causes-closure-of-80-per-cent-of-schools-in-the-region-denying-more-than-600000-children-access-to-education/ (Accessed: 15 March 2022).

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2016) Treaty of Versailles, The Holocaust Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/treaty-of-versailles (Accessed: 6 February 2022).

US Department of State (2021) 2020 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Cameroon. Available at: https://www.state.gov/reports/2020-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/cameroon/ (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Willis, R. et al. (2019) A Report on the Cameroon Anglophone Crisis Human Rights Abuses in the Cameroon Anglophone Crisis A Submission of Evidence to UK Parliament. Available at: https://www.rightofassembly.info/assets/downloads/Cameroon_Anglophone_Crisis_Report.pdf (Accessed: 25 October 2021).

Willis, R. et al. (2020) ‘“We Remain Their Slaves”: Voices from the Cameroon Conflict’, SSRN Electronic Journal. doi: 10.2139/ssrn.3576732.

Yundze, G. (2017) Cameroon’s Anglophones call for secession or federalism, Anadolu Agency. Available at: https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/analysis-cameroon-s-anglophones-call-for-secession-or-federalism/785179 (Accessed: 4 February 2022).

SC Workshop – Bamenda

11 February 2005

Presented by Germanus Dounge

This article was first presented at a Southern Cameroons workshop in Bamenda,Cameroon. Published by Federation of the Free States of Africa.

Email: africa.federation@gmail.com www.africafederation.net.

We republish the article here  because of the strong arguments the author makes for the benefit of all southern Cameroonians and readers.

Introduction:

“An annexed people is always for a king or an Emperor a matter of complex problems for his own people are always divided on the annexation like the annexed people themselves: he always has sleepless nights over them until the annexed people free themselves by sword or by negotiation, for the ashes of annexation are never completely cold”
Michiavelo Machiaveli

The problem which has been existing between the Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun since 1961 has been given many improper names:
i. Marginalization (political, economic, social, cultural, and linguistic);
ii. Lack of democracy in the domain of elections;
iii. Bad governance;
iv. Non-accommodation of Anglo-French bilingualism on the grounds of the
French domino theory;
v. Dictatorship;
vi. Lack or imbalance of Affectio societatis between Southern Cameroonians and camerounais;
vii. Annexation

The last name, annexation, is the appropriate name: the first six have been in use since 1972; but annexation has been in use only since the peoples of the Southern Cameroons started their struggle for liberation in 1982 with the meetings of elites of the North-West and South-West provinces in Douala. These meetings served as the nucleus of what was to later to become the CAMEROON ANGLOPHONE MOVEMENT (CAM) in December 1991.

CAM later transmuted to the SOUTHERN CAMEROONS RESTORATION MOVEMENT (SCARM) in July 1996. CAM popularized the name, annexation, in its information bulletin called CAM Forum No. 2. Annexation is the appropriate name because it is justified in international law. The other names can be justified only in domestic law, that is, within the framework of a national constitution.

To justify the current struggle for independence for the Southern Cameroons and win the sympathy of the international community, SCARM all along has been focusing on the international status of the Southern Cameroons by exposing, explaining and upholding the struggle within the framework of international law. This has been done in four sections:

Section 1 – The physical and legal birth of the Southern Cameroons under international law;
Section 2 – The international legal existence of the Southern Cameroons from 1919 to 1946 under the Leagus of Nations;
Section 3 – The international legal existence of the Southern Cameroons from 13 December 1946 to 1961 under United Nations Trusteeship;
Section 4 – The international legal existence of the Southern Cameroons from its annexation on 1st October 1961 to the expected independence.

THE LEGAL ARGUMENT IN INTERNATIONAL LAW FOR INDEPENDENCE FOR THE SOUTHERN CAMEROONS.

SECTION 1

The Physical and Legal Birth of the Southern Cameroons under International Law.

The German colony of KAMERUN was lying between the British colony of NIGERIA and the French colonies of Tchad, Oubangui-chari, Congo and Gabon. At the outbreak of the First World War in 1914 the British West African Frontier Forces from The Gambia, Sierra- Leone, Ghana (the Gold Coast) and Nigeria gathered at Ikom in Nigeria under the command of General CHARLES C. DOBELL. These British colonial troops entered the German colony of Kamerun and fought their first battle with German colonial troops commanded by Colonel Zimmermann at SANAKANG. The French colonial troops from Tchad, Oubangui-Chari, Congo and Gabon, under the command of General Joseph AYMERICH, entered KAMERUN to fight the German troops. The war lasted from 1914 till 1918 with the defeat of the German troops in Kamerun.

The British troops from the west and the French troops from the east had penetrated right inside the colony by 1916. The British Secretary for the Colonies, Alfred MILNER and the French Minister for the Colonies and Navy, Henri SIMON, realizing that their combined troops were about to capture German KAMERUN, drew a line in 1916 to partition the German colony between Britain and France. As the war progressed, Alfred MILNER and Henri SIMON signed an agreement to confirm the line in 1917: the agreement became known as the SIMON – MILNER AGREEMENT which shared the German colony of KAMERUN into two sectors for Britain in the West and for France in the East.

When the map of the partition was sent from London to General Charles C. Dobell, he unexpectedly rejected the map, sent it back to London in protest on grounds that the partition of the land from the sea – Tiko through Misselele to Muyuka – is the area where he lost many of his men, and that land had been put in the French Sector according to the map; so he could never accept it; that that piece of land must be in the British Sector.

London rejected Dobell’s argument and refused to modify the map: Dobell threatened to fight the French troops which were already camping in the disputed area. Realising the seriousness of Dobell’s threat, London gave in and modified the map to include the disputed area in the British Sector as requested by Dobell. Dobell was later accused by the British of rebellion and insubordination and sent on punitive transfer to Rawalpindi in India (Rawalpindi is today in Pakistan).

The war ended in 1918 with the defeat of Germany and the partition of the German colony of KAMERUN. Britain and France set up administrations in their respective sectors. In 1919 Britain, France and Germany signed the Versailles Peace Treaty at LE PALAIS DES GALERIES DES GLACES (Versailles – France) on 28 July 1919. This treaty confirmed the Simon – Milner Agreement of 1916: and this was the physical and Legal Birth of the Southern Cameroons in international law binding Britain, France and Germany, and eye-witnessed by the United States.

It should be noted that during the war, the United States which had refused to fight alongside France and Britain when contacted, sold war materials to Britain and France according to the “Buy and Carry Act” passed by the US Congress as a diplomatic way of assisting Britain. “Buy and Carry Act” meant you buy them in cash. According to President Woodrow Wilson “we sell arms to you and you carry them away at once in one shipment to where you want and to do what you want”.

When contacted to sign the Versailles Peace Treaty as a big power, Woodrow Wilson refused on the grounds that “we have not been defeated nor have we won in a war we have only heard of; but we should seat at Versailles as an observer”. The Versailles Peace Treaty, an international treaty, made the Simon – Milne Agreement boundary the permanent international boundary between the Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun du premier janvier 1960.

SECTION 2

The First Specific International Status of the Southern Cameroons within International Boundaries.

Before the formation of the League of Nations, the international boundary of the Southern Cameroons on its eastern border was the one recognised by the Versailles Peace Treaty: on its western border, the international boundary was the one recognised by the Anglo – German Treaty of 1913. The League of Nations was founded as an international organisation to promote, maintain and keep peace around the world. As manager of international peace, the League of Nations put all the territories of German colonies captured during the war under a system of Mandatory Administration to mandated powers. Britain – France – Belgium became Mandatory Powers respectively for British Cameroons, Tanganyika, Papua New Guinea, British Togoland; French Cameroun, French Togo; Rwanda – Burundi.

The Southern Cameroons was given an international status in 1922 as a League of Nations Mandated Territory under British Administration. In 1931, the League of Nations requested Britain and France to landmark the international boundary between the British Cameroons and French Cameroun.

So on 9 January 1931, the “Cameroons boundary Commission” met in London. Under the supervision of the League of Nations. Administrators of the British Cameroons and those of French Cameroun landmarked the international boundary by building concrete cement pillar marks along the boundary: each landmark was the object of a specific topographic document which was co-signed by the Administrators of both countries.

SECTION 3

The Illegitimate and Illegal claim of Sovereignty over the Territory of the Southern Cameroons by La Republique du Cameroun on the grounds that the German colony of Kamerun ( Camereroes) became a German colony in 1884 by a Treaty signed between the German Consul GUSTAV NAGHTIGAL and the Kings of Douala.

That German colony comprised the current territory of La Republique du Cameroun and the British Cameroons; but the territory of German Kamerun has gone through a number of changes of its original boundaries over time. It is known that Germany, under Chancellor Von Bismark went out later for colonies because Von Bismark had in the past told the Reishtag (Parliament): “I do not need colonies”. But Bismark, pressured by Von Papin, decided later to get colonies especially in Africa. So Germany wanted the area from Tangiers to Casablanca in the northern part of Morocco, a French colony.

The military governor of Morocco, General Lyanty, bitterly opposed the German request. France and Germany quarreled over Tangiers – Casablanca; and in order to settle the dispute, France preferred to offer land to Germany in the heart of Africa where France had many large colonies: Gabon, Congo, Oubangui – Chari, Tchad. France’s move was probably due to the fact that those four colonies were governed by civilian governors who, of course, were more amenable than a military governor like General Lyanty in Morocco, Biaut –Willaumez in Gabon, Saborgnan de Brazzo (an Italian) in Congo, Captain Lomy in Oubangui – Chari, and Reverend Father Foureau in Tchad. Germany accepted France’s offer first by a treaty on 4 November 1911.

A portion of Tchad and a portion of Congo were joined to the German colony. By a treaty on 1st October 1912, a portion of Northern Gabon was joined to Kamerun. On 1st February 1913, a very large portion of western Oubangui – Chari was joined to Kamerun. So France expanded the territory of German Kamerun by 275,000 square kilometers before the outbreak of the war in 1914. By the effect of war, the expanded German Kamerun was shared between Britain and France.

France and the Returned Lands from the expanded German Kamerun.

Two factors were at play:

1. The Mandate of the League of Nations;
2. The bitter protests of the populations of the portions of French colonies which were attached to the original German Kamerun less than five years earlier.

France took over its portion of the divided German Kamerun in a very brutal manner, especially by forcefully suppressing the German language. The French-speaking populations who were joined to German Kamerun soon tabled two complaints: first, that war was never fought in the areas they inhabited as it was in the German-speaking area; that they did not yet speak German well; secondly, that they were not colonized by the Germans; that they willingly collaborated with the French troops against German troops. So, considering all those complaints, France returned to its colonies their respective portions of territory she ceded to Germany by treaties. So the Mandate given to France was applied on its original portion of German Kamerun, that is, the current territory of La Republique du Cameroun since 1916.

La Republique du Cameroun cannot legally claim the territory of the Southern Cameroons; La Republique du Cameroun has been claiming it as part of German Kamerun. How can a war booty believe that it is the father or mother of a twin war booty? The Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun are both monozygotic twins (from one egg) of the First World War. ( c/f: London – Cameroons Boundaries Commission – State Treaties Series No. CMD / 3639 / 03 – 9 January 1931).

SECTION 4

The International Legal Existence of Southern Cameroons from 13 December 1946 till 1st October 1961.

After the Yalta Conference in 1944 – (Stalin (Soviet Union)– Franklin Delano Roosevelt (USA) – Orlando (Italy) – Winston Churchill (Britain) – the U.N.O. was formed on 24 October 1945 at San Francisco to replace the League of Nations. On 13 December 1946, the U.N.O. created its Trusteeship Council by UNGAR 63-111 to replace the Mandates System of the defunct League of Nations. By the same Resolution 63-111 of 13 December 1946, the UN appointed Britain – France – Belgium – Australia – New Zealand Administering Authorities for the same territories over which there had been mandated powers of the defunct League of Nations. The same day, 13 December 1946, the U.N.O. signed Trusteeship Agreements with each Administering Authority for the former Mandated Territories. By these Agreements the former Mandated Territories became known as UN Trust Territories under the Administration of the Administering Authority.

The UN and Britain signed the Trusteeship Agreement No Document A / 152 / REV2 for the British Cameroons; and No. Document A / 155 / REV2 for La Republique du Cameroun

The Southern Cameroons then had its second specific international legal status as a UN Trust Territory. From 13 December 1946 the Southern Cameroons enjoyed its new international legal status through numerous UNGA Resolutions till 1st October 1961. The most important UN Resolutions on the Southern Cameroons in chronological order are:

* Resolution 338 – XI banning public corporal punishment within the territory: from this resolution, the popular 25 lashes were henceforth given as punishment inside a house, no more in the public view.
• Resolution 224 – 111 on the Administrative Union between adjacent UN Trust Territories under the same Administering Authority (see Nigeria and the Southern Cameroons as part of the Eastern Region of Nigeria till 1959 with Dr. E.M.L. Endeley as Prime Minister).
• Resolution 1282 – X111 of 13 July 1958 with British Report T./ 93 on the progress towards independence.
* Resolution 1350 – XIV on the principle of a plebiscite in the Southern Cameroons.
• Resolution 1352 – XIV of 16 October 1959 organizing the plebiscite in both Northern and Southern British Cameroons.
• Resolution 1608 – XV of 21 April 1961 on the independence and union with La Republique du Cameroun.

SECTION 5

The Plebiscites of 11 and 12 February 1961

Definition of plebiscite:

It is a vote to confirm a decision which has already been taken: in case of a YES vote, the decision is maintained; in case of a NO vote, the decision should be called off and the process may be re-launched. But the Southern Cameroons plebiscite was not a de jure confirmation of the two questions put at the plebiscite. Any YES vote was a mere wish for union; it was due to have any legal effect only as it was later specified by Resolution 1608 –XV of 21 April 1961. So the YES vote for union with La Republique du Cameroun was not legally binding.

Already Resolution 1352 – XIV categorically stated in its paragraph 6:
“the Administering Authority should take steps to separate the Administration of the Southern Cameroons from that of Nigeria not later than 1st October 1960”.
This paragraph put La Republique du Cameroun and Nigeria on an equal footing so that on 1st October 1960, the day fixed by the UN for independence for Nigeria, L a Republique du Cameroun and Nigeria had no legal link with the Southern Cameroons. This put a legal end to the Administrative union according to Resolution 224.
By contrast, a referendum is a vote to authorize to take a decision to do something: the two procedures are not substitutive. The 1961 plebiscite was a vote on a projected legal union whose legal treaty was due to be worked out as prescribed by Resolution 1608.

SECTION 6

The Debate on Resolution 1608 – XV at the UNGA on 21st April 1961

The Draft Resolution was proposed by India (IYA JAIPAL and Chrishna MENON)
-Chairman 14th General Assembly: Lambertin Dinar (Indonesia)
-Chairman of the Southern Cameroons item 13 and 41: Adnan PACHASI (Iraq)
-Vice – Chairman: Miss Silvia Shelton Villalien (Cuba)
-Djabal Abdo (Iran), Plebiscite Commissioner (seating with consultative status).

Take note that the vote was in three stages:

Round 1: Termination of the Trusteeship Agreement for the Southern Cameroons.

Round 2: Independence and its date.

Round 3: The Treaty and form of union between the Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun.

The chairman opened the Debate by putting to vote the entire Resolution 1608 as drafted by the team chaired by M. Stravoulopos; and it was accepted by acclamation..
The chairman then put to vote the Rounds with the following results:-

– Round 1: 50 YES votes, 6 NO votes, 12 abstentions;

– Round 3: Union in the form of a United Federal Republic of Cameroons [Cameroons in the plural (2 Cameroons: La Republique du Cameroun and the Southern Cameroons)]: 50 YES votes, 21 NO votes, 6 abstentions as specified in paragraph B.

THE TREATY OF UNION:

A constitutional conference to be held to draft or workout an international Legal Treaty for the projected union with the assistance of Britain, the Southern Cameroons, La Republique du Cameroun, three experts in Constitutional and Administrative law. This Treaty of Union could legally validate the YES vote retroactively. According to the Law on Treaties (that is their legal system), the draft constitution must be approved by both parliaments of La Republique du Cameroun and the Southern Cameroons by a Vote of Acceptance after first and second readings to the House by the Speaker; readings during which probable questions on the sensitive points would be asked and answered as well as the psychological, semantics and syntaxes in the draft.
If it is rejected, the work on these points must be done again satisfactorily. If it is accepted, it can be debated on its legal implications. After the debate, it can be ratified, meaning that it is good. Then a length of time is set for reflection on it; then after that time, it can be signed, making it internationally binding in international law.

SECTION 7

Federation:

There two kinds of federation: aggregative and segregative

A Segregative Federation is a mode of governance by a sovereign state to resolve political, economic or cultural problems within the state – it is not recognized in international law – its members are generally called autonomous regions, provinces or districts: they are not states as defined by the international law. And in international law they cannot quit the federation because they are an integral part of the national territory.

An Aggregative Federation is the form of federation the Southern Cameroons voted for in the 1961 plebiscite – it is formed by sovereign states which have internationally recognised boundaries. Although the Southern Cameroons was not a sovereign and independent state, at the time of the plebiscite, it had its international legal status as a UN Trust Territory which allowed the Southern Cameroons to form an aggregative federation with La Republique du Cameroun. That was the reason why the UN could not simply ask the Southern Cameroons at the plebiscite to integrate itself into La Republique du Cameroun.

It was on this legal ground that the UN envisioned the workout of a Treaty of Union for the projected federation according to the international law on Treaties. So one wonders why La Republique du Cameroun calls the Southern Cameroons a province of its territory. Members of an aggregative federation are called Federated States: each of them has the right to quit the federation. Examples of aggregative federations are: Federation of the Federated States of Micronesia in the South Pacific, Senegal / Gambia. The majority of federations around the world are segregative federations: Brazil, India, Nigeria, Argentina, Australia, Germany, etc.

SECTION 8

The Foumban Conference: How it took place (c/f la Duperie du Foumban).

“As the Anglophones were given only three days to study the constitution that sealed their fate” .

Foumban is a calm, sunny and beautiful town, where Ahmadou Ahidjo used to go to for relaxation because of his twin friendship between Sultan Seidou and Arouna Njoya. According to eye-witnesses at the time, Foumban was an island of peace in a environment where terror reigned in the midst of an armed rebellion. Despite the enormous means in men and materials put at the disposal of the regular army, it was not easy for it to crush the rebellion led by the National Liberation Army of Cameroun, the armed wing of the UPC.

In the two weeks leading up to the Foumban Conference, it was reported that more than one hundred people had been killed by terrorists in Loum, Bafang, Ndom and Douala. The echoes of these killings rapidly spread across the Mungo and seriously worried a large number of unification advocates there. On several occasions, Foncha had to publicly express his worries; on July 3, 1961 in Douala he made the following appeal: “Those who are killing should return to legality and work for the greatness of this country”.

In that climate of high insecurity in the country, Ahidjo was very much worried about how to reassure the leaders of the Southern Cameroons; so in deciding on the choice of Foumban as venue for the conference, Ahidjo thereby wanted to prove to those leaders that he was the master of peace. But Ahidjo’s choice was not completely without risks. Indeed Sultan Seidou and the traditional council of the Bamoun people have always been on the side of legality; but it should be remembered that Felix-Roland Moumie, a son of the soil, was one of the front leaders of the UPC, and as such , he had won many hearts over to the UPC cause; and he had even succeeded in introducing the doctrine of the UPC into the Sultan’s palace through one Mekou Samuel who was not only a friend but also the private secretary to the Sultan. Mekou Samuel had joined the UPC in the early days of its launching.

Even though the Koutaba military camp was there to reassure whoever, “the terrorists” of ANLK had proven that they mastered the field and could carry out any audacious attack wherever as was confirmed by the recent killing of the SDO, Albert Khong, through the complicity of DO Samuel Njouma.

In order to curb the infiltration of terrorists into Bamoun country, the authorities had tightened preventive security measures: after a short period of relative calm, a curfew was reinforced in all the administrative units around Foumban effective from the beginning of July. A stern communiqué issued by the prefet of Mbouda on July 3, 1961 to the populations that were used to violating the curfew warned that nobody should be found outdoors from 10pm to 5am in the Mbouda urban area, and from 7pm to 10pm in the assembling campus in the area of Bamboutos (camps commando); that from 6.30pm, only the vehicles of the administrative authorities, army and police were allowed to move. These same measures were taken in bafang, Bangante and Dschang.

On July 6, 1961 at the end of his tour in “Bamileke country”, the minister of justice pledged to the administrative authorities that “ he will inform the head of state about the encouraging feeling of the population about the very efficient fight against terrorism by the authorities”. The much publicised tranquillity and serenity and the paradisaical locality of Foumban was all fake. Of the date of 16 July 1961, only the people of the inner circle, like the minister of interior, Arouna njoya, knew that Foumban was nothing but an entrenched camp.

Introductions on preparations for the Conference

By all indications, one can believe that the principle to hold the constitutional conference in Foumban was adopted in the aftermath of the plebiscite of 11-12 February 1961 in the Southern Cameroons. Watch out! The Sultan of Foumban, Seidou Njoya, was one of the very few dignitaries who were at the Yaounde airport on March 3, 1961 to welcome Foncha who had come to brief Ahidjo on the outcome of the plebiscite. Five weeks later, precisely between 11 and 13 APRIL 1961, Ahidjo received in his palace, one after another, Njoya Arouna, and the nephew of the latter, Sultan Seidou Njoya of Foumban – since then, these three personalities, even before all of them died, people have always been tight lipped about the agenda of their meeting; but one may guess that the guidelines of the proposed constitutional conference were discussed during the underground meetings of the trio – Ahidjo – Seidou – Arouna. In fact, soon after that meeting, Yaounde (Ahidjo) sent strict instructions to the administrative authorities in the Bamoun country about the big projected event.

Without boasting his double capacity as eye-witness and as sous prefet of Foumban at that time, Emmanuel Njoya recounts the story as if it took place just two days ago. Let us listen to Emmanuel Njoya, now 92 years old, who was the sous-prefet of Foumban in 1961; hear him:

“ I became an administrative authority in 1955 as assistant DO of Foumban; from 1959 to 1963, I was the sous-prefet of the same town. Two months before the opening of the conference, the prefet, Jean-Marcel Mengueme, and myself were instructed and trusted with the organisation of the conference.

So while waiting for the politicians to come in for business, the prefet and the sous-prefet had to resolve the tedious problem of accommodation, feeding and transport of delegates as well as the animation of Foumban during the six days of the conference; decent houses hosting functionaries were requested; big farmers likeLaurent Guerpillon, Andre Blanc, Trolier et Charles Ock Dopher were solicited and contributed by putting at our disposal either a vehicle or a beautiful house; this local contribution was meagre compared to the huge means that were sent from Yaounde. As I must speak the truth, we cajoled, lured and enticed the Anglophones by our way of welcoming them; we were given so many things to prepare for the conference—– with all these things at our disposal, we lured the Anglophones.

Ahidjo and Foncha were accommodated in the Sultan’s palace where the Sultan himself took care of them. As concerns the others, we were given a special assignment to blindfold them: so each delegate had a refrigerator in his room, which was always full of champagnes and other assorted drinks; each big one among them had two refrigerators in his room, had a well-made bed with the most beautiful and expensive mattress and beddings. In addition, there were two beautiful girls who were assigned to permanently take care of him. These are the things which normally should not be told- these girls were instructed to permanently take care of our guests–that was real corruption-corruption has always existed- it has not started today..but at that time, it was not corruption for selfish interests as it is today..at the time it was good corruption to build the country.

As for the agenda of the activities, it included ballroom dances every evening throughout the week; cocktails followed by ballroom dances in Auberge de Foumban, prefet’s residence, sous-prefet’s residence, Dr. Herve’s residence; these were the logistics put in place when the delegations set foot on the soil of Foumban on July 16, 1961.

Arrival of delegations

First to arrive was the delegation of La republique du Cameroun du premier janvier 1960, headed by Ahmadou Ahidjo: it comprised Charles Assale (premier minister), Charles Okala (minister des affaires etrangeres), Josue Tetang (Secretaire d’Etat a l’Information), Christian Tobie Kuoh (Secretaire general du minister des Affaires etrangeres), the Guinea-Conakry-born Cheick Kekou Sissoko (chef du Secretariat particulierd’Ahmadou Ahidjo). Arouna Njoya(, Minister of interior, had been come ahead of the delegation to supervise the preparations for the conference.

The delegation of the Southern Cameroons left Tiko by a twin engine plane on the same 16 July 1961 and landed at Koutaba; as soon as it landed, the delegation left for Foumban by road where they arrived in the afternoon in the midst of an immense and enthusiastic crowd. It was made up of John Ngu Foncha, Emmanuel Liffaffe Endeley, Augustine Ngom Jua, Solomon Tandeng Muna, Nerius Namasso Mbile, John Bokwe, Bernard Fonlon; ten KNDP members, five CPNC members and two Ok members, and traditional rulers. At night fall, the delegation, still very tired after the long tedious journey from Tiko to Foumban, found solace for their tiredness by joining the immense crowd in singing and drinking; the ceremony was animated by Orchestre Irenee and Victor Priso band at the Auberge de Foumban.

The next day, 17 July 1961, the delegates, highly spirited, moved into the premises of the Cours complementaire (Teachers Training college). Consecutive speeches from Ahidjo, Foncha and Endeley lauded the singular opportunity for the come together. Endeley, leader of the opposition who had threatened to raise one hundred thousand men to break away and join Nigeria during the plebiscite campaigns, had already forgotten about that threat.

Opening the Conference by Ahidjo on July 17, 1961

Ahidjo, standing by the edge of a very long table covered with a green cloth, opened the constitutional conference that brought together the delegates of la Republique du Cameroun and those of the Southern Cameroons which was still a UN Trust Territory evolving towards the termination of the Trusteeship Agreement and independence. Ahidjo said: “The Bamoun country which I have chosen to host this conference, and whose chief, Sultan Seidou, is our friend whom I warmly thank for welcoming us so heartily, is a country where one would like to go for rest and relaxation”. This is how Ahidjo justified his choice of Foumban as the venue for the conference.

Soon after the speeches, the trust and confidence of the Southern Cameroons delegation was rudely shattered by Ahidjo: to the surprise of the Southern Cameroons delegates, Ahidjo rudely requested them to make their observations on the Draft constitution. “Which constitution?” Southern Cameroons delegates shouted! They had thought that they had come to Foumban together with Ahidjo’s delegation in order to jointly draft a constitution for the future federal united state. They were very embarrassed to learn that the drtaft constitution had been handed to Foncha for screening and studying long ago; but Foncha kept the Document secret.

The All Party Conference that held in Bamenda a month earlier had been the occasion to screen and debate the Ahidjo draft constitution. Mbile said: “ We have the feeling that we have waisted our time coming to Foumban for the draft to be tabled to us for our observations in this way. This is in total contradiction to our expectations; instead of a draft confederal constitution, we are being requested to make observations on a draft highly centralised constitution with unlimited powers; members of the CPNC delegation can now understand what Foncha meant when he said in the Akwa meeting hall in Douala on 13 July 1961: “the goals of the struggle have been completely achieved”.

Ngom Jua’s angry surprise seemed to indicate that even within the KNDP everybody was not aware of the handing of the draft constitution to Foncha. Bitter protests erupted from all round: the protesting Southern Cameroons delegation demanded that they should be given three more weeks to study the draft. They recalled the constitutional conferences of London in 1953, 1957, and 1958, each of them having lasted for at least three weeks.

Endeley warned: ”Too much haste would have far-reaching consequencies on the people of the Cameroons”.

Ngom Jua screamed: “I have never seen people expected to write a constitution in two days!”

The tense atmosphere of unhappiness and protests caused one journalist to write: “ political observers are wondering if it is really here in Foumban in this rowdy atmosphere that the guidelines of a federal constitution are going to be effectively drawn”.

Finally, just after the mid-day meal, the Southern Cameroons delegation sat down to work in studying the Ahidjo draft constitution. The atmosphere was kafkaienne: counting on their experience gained during the constitutional conferences in London and Lagos (Lugard, MacPherson, Littleton constitutions) the Southern Cameroons delegates worked really hard on the Draft brought to them from Yaounde. While they were working in anger, distrust and suspicion, the francophones were relaxing calmly as they had spent months to draft the constitution with the assistance of French experts in constitutional law.

The atmosphere of the workshop was often rowdy; from time to time delegates shouted in protest and in anger. According to Namasso Mbile, Foncha, feeling guilty for having deprived his colleagues of the opportunity to study the draft at the All Party Conference in Bamenda, adapted a low profile throughout the working session.

On Thursday night, the Southern Cameroons delegation handed the report of their work to the francophone side: the report contained amendments demanded by the Foncha delegation on the following points:

1. The Flag.
2. National Anthem.
3. Motto
4. Federal Capital to be in Douala.
5. Electoral maturity at 21.
6. Secret ballot.
7. Powers and attributions of the federal president.
8. Presidential mandates limited to two.
9. A federal assembly made up of a national assembly and a senate.
10. Double nationality.
11. Primary and Higher education system.
12. Cancellation of the word INDIVISIBLE from the constitution.

Unification

The next day, Friday, July 21, 1961, the last plenary session was opened by Ahidjo with fanfare and festivities as many traditional dance groups from all over Bamoun country had been converging at Njinka since dawn , and the festivities went on till 4pm.

At 4pm Foncha took the floor and congratulated everyone for the team spirit and fraternity that prevailed during the working session.
Endeley took the floor after Foncha and warmly thanked Sultan Seidou for the lavish welcome given to them and expressed his high satisfaction for the success of the work; he concluded as follows:
“Mr. President, we shall always be completely loyal to you whenever you should request our collaboration for the larger interests of Cameroon”.

At 4.30pm, Ahidjo took the floor to address the plenary session; he swiftly and rudely gave answers to the demands of the Southern Cameroons delegation for amendments to the draft constitution. A second shock awaited the Southern Cameroons delegation: Ahidjo, in a rather dictatorial manner, brushed aside all the demands tabled by the Southern Cameroons delegation.
He said: “The word indivisible will be cancelled, but a clause guaranteeing the integrity of the federation and preventing any possibility of secession shall be introduced. For lack of big financial means, there is no room for a bicameral parliament; the House of Chiefs will be maintained; Yaounde must remain the federal capital. -There is no room for double nationality; -The president and the vice-president shall be elected by universal suffrage. -While waiting for the setting up of new institutions, the functions of the federal president and federal vice-president shall be performed by the president of la republique du Cameroun and the prime minister of the Southern Cameroons”

The Foumban conference did not satisfy the prescription of UN GA Resolution 1608 (XV) of 21 April 1961, neither in form nor in substance.

SECTION 9

The Independence of La Republique du Cameroun du premier Janvier 1960

The United Nations, by UNGAR 1349 – XIV of 13 March 1959 decided to grant independence to le Territoire soustutelle l’ONU du Cameroun sous administration francaise on 1st January 1960. The Territory did achieve independence on 1st January 1960. The British permanent representative at the UN, Sir Andrew Cohen, represented Britain at the independence ceremony.

A Constitutional referendum was held on 12 February 1960. On 4 March 1960, the constitution as approved by the referendum was promulgated.
– On 10 April 1960, presidential elections took place: the president was elected by the Depute’s at the National Assembly. There could not be elections by universal suffrage because there was an insurrection ravaging the country. Ahidjo had only one opponent, Abel Eyinga, who was not residing in Cameroun but in Algeria as a lecturer in the Faculty of Law in Algiers and France.

– On 28 January 1960, the newly independent La Republique du Cameroun applied for UN membership.
– On 20 September 1960, by UNGA Resolution 1476 – XIV La Republique du Cameroun was granted UN membership.
– On 6 August 1961, the National Assembly amended the constitution of 4 March 1960 by 88 YES votes, zero NO votes, and 6 abstentions.
– On 1st September 1961, the amended constitution was promulgated as the federal constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon. This was done in total violation of the strict and specific prescriptions of the UNGA Resolution 1608 –XV of 21 April 1961 on the projected union between La Republic du Cameroun and the Southern Cameroons as the outcome of the UN-sponsored plebiscite of 11 and 12 February 1961 in the British Cameroons. The federal constitution of 1st September 1961 was signed by the president of La Republique du Cameroun, Ahmadou Ahidjo, alone; never by John Ngu Foncha, the Prime Minister of the Southern Cameroons.

SECTION 10

La Republique du Cameroun and the Southern Cameroons were not a Franco – British Condominium:

A condominium is a Latin word meaning a house jointly managed by two equal masters. So a condominium is a territory jointly ruled by two powers according to a treaty they signed in international law. Examples of condominiums are: the present island of St. Martin in the West Indies = Netherlands West Indies, Aruba – Bonaire – Curacao – Saba – St. Martin – St. Eustache. St. Martin is jointly ruled by France and The Netherlands. The New Hebrides (today Vanuatu) was a Franco – British condominium; it was a bilingual French – English condominium. But take note that a condominium is not necessarily a matter of languages: the language factor is incidental. So a condominium could be monolingual. What is important is its international legal status.

In the case of New Hebrides, four months before Britain and France granted independence, a senior citizen of the English Sector, Stephen Maleku, unilaterally proclaimed a separate independence for the English Sector. (He wanted the territory to achieve independence, then become a confederation of two states. As Stephen put Britain and France before a fait accompli, while Britain was still reflecting on the issue, France hurriedly sent 400 gendarmes from La Nouvelle – Caledonie, a nearby French colony, to occupy Port – Vila, the capital of New Hebrides and forcefully stopped Stephen’s move. Britain bitterly complained to France, saying that by opting unilaterally for a military solution for the condominium’s problem, France had instead complicated the situation as Moleku’s move for separate independence was based on the brutality of the French administration.

La Republique du Cameroun cannot even pass through a legal status of a condominium to annex the Southern Cameroons since such locus standi does not exist. La Republique du Cameroun has been arguing verbally and very emotionally on a non – existing condominium. The 1961 plebiscite and the fake bilingualism crudely imposed on both La Republique du Cameroun and the Southern Cameroons do not make the two countries a condominium because condominium is a matter of international law.

And not that of Anglo-Saxon + Greco – Latin linguistics. La Republique du Cameroun has been brandishing its de facto bilingual condominium at home but at the same time brandishing itself as a monolingual francophone unitary state at the international level. On one hand La Republique du Cameroun is imposing a de facto Anglo – French condominium on two neighbouring former UN Trust Territories with separate Trusteeship Agreements, and on the other hand imposing a unitary state on an illegal defunct two-state federation. This is blatant dubious contradiction!

SECTION 11

The Administration of La Republique du Cameroun in the Southern Cameroons since 1st October 1961

According to La Republique du Cameroun, the constitutional amendment made on 6 August 1961 on la constitution de la Republique du Cameroun du premier janvier 1960, was meant to accommodate the Southern Cameroons as the western part of German Kamerun. We now know all about the German colony of Kamerun from the preceding legal analyses. The Constitutional Amendment of Yves Bie’ville, the French jurist who drafted the constitution of 4 March 1960, was a mockery of international law, the international community, and the United Nations. The amended constitution could in no way become a Treaty of Union in international law as prescribed by UNGAR 1608 (XV) of 21 April 1961.

On the grounds of the amended constitution, la Republique du Cameroun moved its troops and administration into the Southern Cameroons on 1st October 1961 and has since been ruling the Southern Cameroons in the same brutal manner in which France ruled its portion of the divided German Kamerun. The administration of la Republique du Cameroun in the Southern Cameroons is null and void ab initio: it is illegitimate and illegal. It is a civil – cum military administration. The cardinal legal principle, tantum appelatum, quantum revelatum, meaning that the judge of the Appeal Court cannot have the right in a civil matter to grant more than it was requested by the Magistrate Court.

The principle does not apply between the Southern Cameroons and la Republique du Cameroun because la Republique du Cameroun has no right to belittle the Southern Cameroons as its province, as if la Republique du Cameroun is the alter ego of the Southern Cameroons. This is because the international status of the Southern Cameroons under the League of Nations, then under the U.N.O., cannot be changed.

La Republique du Cameroun has no right to judge positively or negatively the results of the 1961 plebiscite and use that to annex the Southern Cameroons because nemo crime sine legi – there is no crime (offence) without a text of law which defines and punishes the incriminating act. So by voting, and voting YES in the plebiscite, the Southern Cameroons did not commit an offence punishable by La Republique du Cameroun by annexation as penal punishment.

La Republique du Cameroun has been benefiting enormously from the annexation of the Southern Cameroons in violation of the Latin legal principle nemo nudutur propriam turpitudi – nobody should benefit in any way whatsoever from a crime he has committed. La Republique du Cameroun has been arguing that the Southern Cameroons has no utis possedetis juris on 1st October 1961; that the Southern Cameroons was an empty piece of land that La Republique du Cameroun annexed to civilise and develop.

The argument has no legal basis because the Southern Cameroons had utis possedetis juris – international legal status publicly recognised. As a UN Trust Territory the Southern Cameroons had utis possedetis juris by the Mandate of the League of Nations, and by the UN Trusteeship Agreement.
In addition, the Southern Cameroons was jointly administered with the Eastern Region of Nigeria within the international legal framework of UNGA Resolution 224 – 111 on the Administrative Union between adjacent territories under the same Administering Authority. There is no modification of international boundaries between States by domestic or internal law. The constitution of a state being a fundamental internal law, la Republique du Cameroun cannot legally justify how it modified its international boundaries, as we have demonstrated earlier, with the Southern Cameroons for its own benefits.

The peoples of the Southern Cameroons, in their daily life, accept all acts of constitutional law, civil law, criminal law, and administrative law imposed on them by La Republique du Cameroun as Actes of bienseance, that means, Acts which one does not like, but toterates them in order to survive.

SECTION 12

The International Legal Status of the Southern Cameroons since 1st October 1961 to date

La Republique du Cameroun started to govern the Southern Cameroons from 1st October 1961 when the Treaty of Union had not yet been worked out as prescribed by UNGA Resolution 1608 –(XV) of 21 April 1961. The international legal situation in the Southern Cameroons on 1st October 1961 was that, without a Treaty of Union, the Southern Cameroons smoothly moved backwards from the status of a UN Trust Territory it had from 12 December 1946 till 1st October 1961, to the status of a UN Territory the Southern Cameroons had on 11 December 1946. In between the adoption of the UN Resolution 63 – 111 that created the UN Trusteeship Council, and subsequently appointed Britain as the Administering Authority for the Southern Cameroons, and the signing of the Trusteeship Agreement No Document A / 152 / REV2 for the Southern Cameroons between the UN and Britain on that same date 13 December 1946.

The formation of the UN Trusteeship Council having abrogated the Mandates System of the League of Nations of 1922 (and) the Trusteeship Agreement for the Southern Cameroons therefore replaced the Mandate Britain had on the Southern Cameroons from 1922 till 13 December 1946. The situation, simplified, is that on 1st October 1961, the Southern Cameroons had not been granted any independence, neither according to Article 47 paragraph B of the Charter of the United Nations, nor according to UNGA Resolution 1608 –(XV) in the 994th plenary session on 21 April 1961 which granted independence by joining whose international legal Treaty for the projected Union had not been worked out on the date fixed for independence (1st October 1961).

So, through a cool-minded legal analysis, one can understand that since 1st October 1961, La Republique du Cameroun has been forcefully occupying and governing a UN Territory. The difference between a UN Trust Territory and a UN Territory is that a UN Trust Territory is governed by an independent and sovereign State according to a contract or mandate signed between the country and the UN; whereas a UN Territory is directly governed by the UN through its permanent representative it appoints to the Territory. The UN representative should in no way be a native of that territory: He / she is called, the UN Administrator, governor. As the Administering Authority, the UN Administrator governs the territory in preparation for independence.

SECTION 13

The Way to Independence for the Southern Cameroons

1) The way to Independence for the Southern Cameroons is in the hands of the UN. The UN should follow the same path it took to grant independence to other UN territories. It must be noted that the Southern Cameroons is a particular UN Territory as it had been annexed by La Republique du Cameroun and France through an orthodox independence-by-joining that the UN granted the Southern Cameroons in 1961.

The Southern Cameroons today is in the same situation as the three Baltic States (Estonia – Lestonia – Lithuania). Let it be recalled that the latter three states were granted independence by the League of Nations, and the independence was later suppressed by the Soviet Union which then annexed them on the grounds that as small neighbouring states, it was their weakness that allowed the German troops to crush them very easily and then crossed their international boundary with the Soviet Union into St. Petersburg. But with Glassnok and perestroika brought by Mikail Gorbatchov, the latter states regained their lost independence through the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation (UNPO) and the UN.

2) Another way out for the Southern Cameroons is that the UN may simply implement the UNGA Resolution 1514 – (XIV) of 14 December 1960 on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Territories and Peoples.

My dear SCNC UK family it is with melancholy and disillusionment that I come to you at this difficult moment coupled with a very heavy heart to announce the passing to glory of HRH Prince Philip the Duke of Edinburgh who passed away peacefully this morning at Windsor Castle.

HRH Queen Elizabeth announces to the people of the United Kingdom and the world at large the demise of her beloved husband Prince Philip to whom they have been married for 73 years.

Prince Philip passed away this morning at the age of 99+ and two months away from his 100th birthday.

He served the crown with selfless devotion and integrity and was the man of the people.

He epitomised the British spirit of always helping those in need and caring for the environment.

He was the image of the Royal family through his humanity, eccentricity and selflessness.

His passion for nature made the world a more harmonious place to live in.

He was a devoted husband and a father of 4 who made the Queen a microcosm of a macrocosm with regard to her exceptional skills in leadership.

Today Prince Philip has succumbed to the call of nature and he is no more as we will look back in amazement and pride for all he has done for the United Kingdom and the entire world.

On behalf of SCNC UK and the people from the former British Southern Cameroons we offer our deepest condolences to the Queen, the Royal family and the people of the United Kingdom on this very sad news.

May his legacy live for ever and may his departed soul find solace in the bosom of the Lord. Adieu great one till we come to meet again.

Done this day 09/04/2021 by Robert Tamanji for SCNC UK.

Greetings comrades

Hope we all are doing well.Just to inform everyone that due the ongoing pandemic;covic19 our usual 1st of October demonstrations and celebrations of our independence Day Anniversary will no longer take place this year compounded by the new government guidelines.

We have spoken to the Police for permission to organise our demo as indicated above but the Police told us that if we intern to do so then we must follow the government new guidelines which says people must be in groups not more than six and from the same household.

Failure to comply with these rules and many more we will be a fine of
£10 ,000 by the government.

The Police told us we should think carefully if we wish to go ahead and organise the demo.

We the executive have therefore concluded that we cannot defy the laws of the land as the penalty will be very severe.We therefore regret to inform the movement that we will not be having our usual 1st October this year and hopefully by next year things will be back to normal for us to have our demo.
Thanks for understanding and do contact any member of the exco should you have any questions or concerns.

PRO
SCNC UK

WE WILL FOR EVER REMEMBER HIM ;

MOLA NJOH LITUMBE.

He came, he saw, he conquered and he gave his blood, tears and sweat for our homeland the Southern Cameroons.

For over the years our mentor, our hero, our inspiratlor, our father dedicated his entire life and fortune for the inevitable, irrevocable and irreversible restoration of the independence of our land of birth without fear or prejudice. This he did with pride and patriotism.

His eccentricity and tenacity in our God ordained struggle for such a very long time made him the Maradona or better still the Mandela of his generation.

As a baobab and an iroko tree, he was very didactic and a huge source of knowledge about our homeland, a macrocosm of a microcosm and a man par excellence when it came to the history of our homeland. This man was no other than his emeritus Mola Njoh Litumbe.

During his era, when he articulates the history of our country with such mastery and precision, you would always think this was a match made in Heaven.Indeed he was my people.

Pa Mola Njoh Litumbe you have fought a good fight and you have left an indelible mark on the consciences of most Southern Cameroonians that will never be erased from their inner minds for ever.

Our Malcolm X, our Dr Martin Luther king has paid the ultimate price like most of his peers have done for our freedom but sadly they have inevitably succumbed to the inevitable hour, the hour that no man on planet earth will ever overcome no matter your grandeur and prowess.

Fellow comrades, I remember very vividly and succinctly the last time I spoke with Pa. I told him that I pray that he will be part of history, that he will live to see his awesome dream come true by being part of the euphoric celebrations that will take place in Buea following the liberation and restoration of our independence. Pa was very ecstatic in affirmation.

But my people God had other ideas as our dream will never be fulfilled as death has taken the centre and focus of our being and aspirations as things have fallen apart.

So it is true that Mola Njoh is no more and this is the bitter reality we have to live with till we come to cross river Jordan.

In my mind’s eye and posthumously, our departed icon will be talked of with much enthusiasm and pride as the Sir Captain Thomas Moore of his generation.

Farewell to eternity our great one and as you meet our ancestors, tell them that our android generation has made a monumental decision to continue the fight from where you guys left.

That we will rise up as one people endowed by one destiny and fight with bravery and selfless sacrifice until Buea come calling.

That we have made a promise not to betray you people by pursuing the right to self determination for our people and country as enshrined in the Charter of the UN.

Papa Mola Njoh as you travel to the world beyond, when you arrive say hello to Dr Frederick Alobwede and co and tell them that the fight is on and Buea is just around the corner.

May your legacy live on ; till we come to meet again. Bye Bye great one.

Robert Tamanji

On behalf of SCNC UK executive.

Pa. Ngala Nfor Nfor writes.

Dr Rev. Success Nkongho Betrayal: Not The First Of It’s Kind.

1. The struggle for the restoration of the sovereign statehood of Southern Cameroons (Ambazonia) has been a victim of betrayal before. Each time, like a sportsman taking a bend with zeal to double his speed on the straight lane, this act of betrayal comes up to slow down. Indeed, betrayal is like a hurdle or a pit into which the struggle falls. But each time it bounces back to the embarassment of the traitor and the mentor, la Republique du Cameroun.
   It all started early. The first frontline actor was Rev. Ayuk. He created real sensation at AAC1 in Buea, 1993 which was highly applauded.
   Firstly, he brought in a Choir which sang and entertained the huge audience.
   Secondly, his prayer was like the long awaited sweet palm wine for a thirsty audience.
   But this “man of God” who moved the hungry for freedom and sovereign statehood into tears with his prayers came to be used by the very enemy he prayed God to punish and free the subjugated people. His efforts slowed down in that the spirit generated and the momentum ignited by AAC 11 Bamenda Proclamation in 1994, the Nine Man Delegation to the UN in 1995, and the nation wide signature referendum of 1995, which overwhelmingly favoured peaceful separation and restoration of Southern Cameroons sovereignty were not implemented as expected.
   This notwithstanding, what Rev Ayuk the traitor gained was a post in the Prime Minister’s office. Though the struggle slowed down and there was malfunctioning, treachery never killed the struggle as intended by agents of the dark world.
   The second act of betrayal came when a pro-action oriented leadership was in the saddle as from 2000.
   End of the second millennium witnessed the declaration of the restoration of Southern Cameroons Independent Statehood over Radio Buea by Justice Frederick A. Ebong (late) and the holding of Constituent Assembly in Bamenda in April 2000 at which State symbols, state system and structure were debated and approved. Though Ebong and eight others were in Kondengui Prison, a plan of action was adopted to carry out national mobilisation and aggressive diplomatic offensive for actualisation of the restoration of Southern Cameroons sovereignty.
   On October 1st, 2001 the celebration of Southern Cameroons(Ambazonia) Independence took place all over the national territory for the first time and the tree of liberty was watered by the blood of the martyrs killed by la Republique du Cameroun occupation forces.
   The Yaounde annexation regime mindful of the pace we were moving had to change tactics to counter. The legal victory over Nigeria in the Abuja Federal High Court in 2002 recognized the distinct identity of Southern Cameroons and it’s inherent right to self-determination under the UN Charter and international law. Nigeria was similarly called upon to table this at the UN and ICJ and pursue to a logical end.
   This not implemented, the SCNC/SCAPO leadership sued la Republique du Cameroun at the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR), Banjul, The Gambia, Communication 266/2003.
   The second act betrayal had to be handled by team to counter Southern Cameroons at a Pan African Tribunal. As revealed by a letter to the then Minister of Justice, Ahmadu Ali with whom the deal was sealed the team was led by Chief Isaac Oben and assisted by a certain Dr Tita and Mr Leke Theodore. While Chief Isaac Oben and Mr Leke Theodore were SCNC officials, the fake Dr Tita was a very hungry party leader ready for any crumbs to survive.
   Their mission was to withdraw the case filed by the SCNC/SCAPO against la Republique du Cameroun at the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) in Banjul, The Gambia. Promised a huge sum of money, they were to withdraw the case in the name of the Southern Cameroonian people on grounds that the Biya Regime was having dialogue with the people as called for by the Bamenda Proclamation of 1994. With Minister Dion Ngute leading the 8man la Republique legal team, the Chief Isaac Oben team which travelled in same flights and lodged in same hotels with the Ngute team was well fortified. This notwithstanding, the SCNC/SCAPO Delegation stood it’s grounds and the team of Judases was never at anytime admitted into the Court Sessions. When they didn’t succeed, the huge amount promised was not paid so Theodore Leke had to petition Minister Ahmadu Ali calling on him to honour the contract.
   Though the Banjul case dragged on from 2003 to 2009, at the end judgement was given in favour of the Southern Cameroons. This Ruling which was further approved by the AU Summit of Sirte, Libya in July 2009 called for “Constructive Dialogue under the Good Offices of the African Commission” within “180 days”.
   Here again the traitors and their mentor, la Republique du Cameroun, were hugely, hugely disgraced at the international domain.
   The third round treacherous efforts by Dr. Rev. Success Nkongho will not be anything different. His late 2019 efforts to betray the cause and claim of having inside knowledge thanks to his involvement during SCACUF meetings is nothing new. Chief Isaac Oben for instance, in borrowed robes posed both as a Traditional Ruler and Chairman of the SCNC. Yet even with Minister Dion Ngute and able legal team he and his team could not be listened to in spite of the number of sessions attended and efforts made. Traitors must be reminded of received wisdom which holds that no one wins a war against his own people. Under the SCNC banner, l long declared, which has been quoted several times, that the Restoration of the sovereign statehood of Southern Cameroons(Ambazonia) has been ordained in the high heavens by the Almighty Creator God who, in His infinite wisdom gave us this land on planet earth as our eternal heritage.
   While we take due cognizance of these traitors, it must be understood that la Republique du Cameroun is desperately involved in recruiting traitors from among us because she can’t stand and defend her claim of sovereign rights over Southern Cameroons(Ambazonia) in any international fora. As the Southern Cameroons team was one and indivisible in Banjul, defending the one Nation, one People, one Destiny, and came out victorious against la Republique du Cameroun, so must we today and tomorrow do. The sooner we overcome self interest and self aggrandizement, focus on the big picture and heal the wounds of divisionism and be pressed on flushing out the enemy, the road to Buea will be shortened.
   We must seek to understand why the spies Great Liberator Moses of the Bible, sent to explore the promised Land, took such less time but when they returned and there was division and rebellion, the journey took many years, going down south, then east to come back west!
   In this struggle it is self-evident that, the cancer of divisionism and self interest makes the perpetrators no less Dr Rev Nkongho Success for the consequences are same, delay liberation giving room to the slaughter of our people like diseased cows by la Republique du Cameroun terrorist gangs. God in the Holy Book assures us that once a people are united in their legitimate quest, nothing will stop them from achieving it.
   I salute the single-minded patriotism of the RF on GZ who are whole heartedly focused on the enemy and the enemy only. They are the biblical Gideons and true heroes and heroines of the New Dawn. By this while calling on all patriots to pay due attention on GZ, let us bury whatever differences exist and support the efforts on GZ and put the struggle on the fast track. Let us make 2020 our year of FREEDOM!
   Short live the struggle;
   Long live the people’s inherent right to self-determination and freedom.
   Long live the sovereign rights of all nations, large and small.
   NFOR N NFOR
   PPY
   Jan.8, 2020 Read More “Dr Rev. Success Nkongho Betrayal: Not The First Of It’s Kind”

JUSTICE4NERA10: TRIBUTES  TO ALL PRISONERS OF CONSCIENCE