From: Augustine Ndangam <ndangamsenior@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Why I Accept the Reunification of 1st Oct. 1961
To: ambasbay@googlegroups.com
Date: Wednesday, August 18, 2010, 4:42 PM
I sincerely plead with Dr Susungi to kindly post a scanned version of this secret document on the net. I make another request in paragraph 5 of this posting. Oliver Twistism perhaps? What's wrong with a hearty appetite?
1. That Document which Dr Susungi found does not Commit
The People of Southern Cameroons
When Dr. Nfor Susangi says that he found a document that now makes him believe that Reunification took place, we take it that he is entitled to his opinion and believe. When, however, he goes further to assert that what he found "refutes the theory that there was no legal Union " there is need to flash the red light and ask him to halt where he is.
Even if Foncha signed such a document, it does not commit the people of Southern Cameroons whatsoever.:No one should be allowed to promulgate a law before it is passed. Foncha had no business signing anything binding on the people of SC back in October 1960. before the people had voted and without the Administering Authority.Paragraph five of UN Resolution 1608 XV is crystal clear on the fact that the tripartite meeting set up by the UN GA was to use the agreed and declared policies of the parties concerned. If Foncha and Ahidjo had signed a document earlier and (as Dr. Susungi suggests) Foncha kept it secret it loses the binding validity by this UN (GA) directives to the three governments invited for the tripartite.
Finally it should be noted that Foncha and Ahidjo Agreed, declared and signed the statement at paragraph 2(b) of their Joint Communique that the transfer of Southern Cameroons Sovereignty would be to "an organization representing the future Fedreation". Yet in the morning of September 27th 1961 Britain ignored this bilateral agreement and transferred Southern Cameroons to LRC without even informing Foncha or his government. If Britain could ignore whatever arrangement Foncha and Ahidjo had signed and do what they did, the people of Southern Cameroons have stronger reasons to reject any commitment by Foncha that hinders progress towards their right to self determination.
2) Grave Misquote
Paragraph five of UN GA Resolution 1608 XV reads: "Invites the Administering Authority, the government of the Southern Cameroons and the Republic of Cameroun to initiate urgent discussions with a view to finalizing, before 1 October 1961, the arrangements by which the agreed and declared policies of the parties concerned will be implemented."
Here (in blue) is how Dr Susungi quotes the above paragraph
"Invites the Administering Authority, the government of the Southern Cameroons and the Republic of Cameroun to initiate urgent discussions with a view to finalizing before 1 October 1961, the arrangements by which the agreed policies of the parties will be implemented The phrase "agreed and declared" is not only important but crucial in understanding what Dr. Susungi is asking us to swallow. If Foncha and Ahidjo" reached agreement on whatever, but failed to declare it publicly then that document is on the strength of this UN directive in Resolution 1608 XV Para. 5 rendered completely null and void. However, Foncha and Ahidjo did , infact, declare what they had agreed upon and these were made public in THE TWO ALTERNATIVES. The one which Dr Susungi alleges that he found is not there in THE TWO ALTERNATIVES
3) The Focus of our struggle
When Dr. Nfor Susungi keeps harping on this silly idea that the passage of time has given reunification legitimacy, there is urgent need to bring our brother to a proper focus before he misleads other Southern Cameroonians . The central issue in this our struggle our main focus is Self-determination. Our right to self-determination was recognized in the Charter of the UN and a Trusteeship Agreement signed to ensure that it would be accomplished. Our right to self-determination is inalienable which means it cannot be rightfully taken away from us by any body – not even the passage of any duration of time can take or give away our right to self-determination. Let Dr Susungi join us in speaking the same language.
4) Buea House of Assembly Debate of 18th September 1961
Over and over we have said that the one document that should have legally bound the people and Territory of SC to LRC is a Treaty of Union signed by Foncha and Ahidjo , ratified by their respective Legislatures and registered at the UN Secretariat. There is no such document in existence. The one thing that we know happened after Fumban is S.T. Muna's motion in the House of Assembly debate of Monday 18th September 1961 thanking the President and Government of LRC for their co-operative and brotherly manner in which they conducted business in Fumban and approving the action of the SC leaders in the negotiation. What we fail to see on the business of the House for that day or any other day is a Bill of Ratification of a Treaty of Union between the State of Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun and if there is any such document anywhere we want to also know if it was registered at the UN Secretariat in accordance with Article 102 of the Charter. On Monday 18th September 1961 when Hon St. Muna moved his motion to approve the action of SC leaders, not even the amended Constitution from Fumban was there before the House and no one should jar on our nerves about a fictitious document which Foncha himself could not place before the House of Assembly for ratification and we should now be stupid enough to tie our fate to it.
5) "Reunification" Had its Waterloo after Plebiscite.
The francophone choose to characterize the event of 1st October 1961 as "Reunification" and we are surprise that Dr Susungi consistently speaks from this francophone standpoint. Because they see the event as Reunification they came up with the "mighty"/erroneous and misinformed theory of the mother-nation by which they regarded their country as the successor of German Kamerun and the event of 1st October 1961 as the return of part of their country (SC) having linguistic and other cultural differences from the mother- nation.
Southern Cameroons on the other hand call the event of 1st October 1961 "unification" and the nuance is important. Over and over againSouthern Cameroonians have told the people east of the Mungo this simple but irrefutable fact that at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 Germany was forced to renounce all its overseas colonies, including Kamerun. These territories became extinct and the purpose of the UN in 1961 was not to recreate German Kamerun which cannot be done without destabilizing the entire sub-region.
In any case, LRC's claim to be "mother-nation" met its waterloo with the ruling of the ICJ when after the plebiscite LRC went to the World Court to Challenge the result of the plebiscite in Northern Cameroons . Even if today francophone continue to talk of "Reunification" Southern Cameroonians should use words that harmonize with history.
6) Distinguishing the Two Susungis
In 1955 a 9-man delegation from Southern Cameroons filed a PETITION AGAINST THE ANNEXATION OF THE SOUTHERN CAMEROONS at the UN Secretariatin New York . The petition was signed on behalf of the SC ( take note) by three people: Sam Ekontang Elad, J.N Foncha and S.T. Muna. On their way back from London JN Foncha and the other members of the delegation signed THE LONDON COMMUNIQUE drafted by someone whom we have good reasons ( in the national interest) to withhold his name.
Is Dr. Nfor Susungi telling us now that JN Foncha signed a binding instrument on unificationin 1960 then turned around in 1995 and signed a petition Against the Annexation of the SC? If he is, let me refer him to a praise worthy article on how FONCHA AND MUNA DID NOT SIGN ANY DOCUMENT… that binds Southern Cameroons to Republique du Cameroun. The author of this Article states in his clear and lucid style that it was important to place on Record the fact that Foncha and Muna did not sign any document that binds us to LRC and (so the author of that article argues) no one in future should produce any fictitious document to assert the contrary. The author of this praiseworthy article is non-other than Dr. Nfor Susungi.
My second plea to him is to again post that article of his on the internet to refresh our minds. So it turns out that with his present posting we seem to be standing as it were face to face with identical twins both called Dr. Nfor Susungi. Our problem is what scar on their exposed limbs will help us distinguish the two? I propose that we call one Nfor Susungi (LRC) and the other Nfor Susungi. (Action Group)
A.F. Ndangam
From: Angwi Fon <anye@shaw.ca>
To: ambasbay@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, 17 August, 2010 21:43:24
Subject: Re: Why I Accept the Reunification of 1st Oct. 1961
Dr Susungi you write;
"But because I don't feel good about what has happened to us in 50 years, I now have to figure out another way to extricate myself from the pit into which we now find ourselves. That is the essence of my position."
We are anxiously waiting for you to find this way out of the pit and share with us, why didn't you just find this way first, it would have restored tremendous respect
to you instead of going about it the way you did, causing us to take our eyes off our immediate projects. In future, I suggest you look at a problem, solve it or make
it a project for other brilliant minds to solve. I don't know if you consulted with other members who believed that reunification never took place before provoking such anger and waste of time.
No comments:
Post a Comment