Maitre Tumasang,
Most of us are not lawyers but most things lawyers write are meant to be read, understood and then interpreted by the ordinary people to the best of their abilities. There is a lot of contradictory statements in your response.
"I President Paul Biya of the Republic of Cameroun, in a bid to provide lasting peace in the Bakassi conflict do commit myself and my government to respect the territorial boundaries of my country as obtained at its independence."
First, it is clearly stated that the country mentioned by Mr Biya is La Republique du Cameroon.. Could there be any ambiguity in that? So would any court refuse to accept what is written down in the document and instead try to guess what the writer meant? Then anybody would have reason to guess whatever he/she wants. That does not make sense. It does not matter here what Mr Biya means. The signed document sufficiently elaborates on everything he means. What the court should consider is what is written on the document he signed. and not what he meant. But I think you are absolutely right in doubting the existence of any such signed document because why should it be kept away from the public if it really exists? If it does then its a very important and damaging document against whatever claims La Republique du Cameroon has over Southern Cameroons.
First, it is clearly stated that the country mentioned by Mr Biya is La Republique du Cameroon.. Could there be any ambiguity in that? So would any court refuse to accept what is written down in the document and instead try to guess what the writer meant? Then anybody would have reason to guess whatever he/she wants. That does not make sense. It does not matter here what Mr Biya means. The signed document sufficiently elaborates on everything he means. What the court should consider is what is written on the document he signed. and not what he meant. But I think you are absolutely right in doubting the existence of any such signed document because why should it be kept away from the public if it really exists? If it does then its a very important and damaging document against whatever claims La Republique du Cameroon has over Southern Cameroons.
Most importantly though, la Republique du Cameroon did not obtain independence with Southern Cameroons as part of its territory in 1960! Why should there be any confusion in that except we want to create one? The Southern Cameroons was a very distinct and autonomous territory, whose boundaries are recognized by the UN as such and had no links with La Republique du Cameroon. I think if this involved Nigeria some merit, albeit a very weak one could be given to that argument about what Mr Biya could have meant in signing the document. The name change in 1984 only goes further to buttress the Ambazonian argument in the sense that it helps to remind the court that there was a territory called La Republique du Cameroon that had independence in 1960 - a time in which the territory called Southern Cameroons had just separated from Nigeria and was an autonomous entity and not even remotely related to La Republique du Cameroon in any way. So therefore anything supposedly meant by Mr Biya has no merit because one cannot be meaning anything that never existed.
I will not hesitate however to agree with you that all of us need to see the document on which Mr Biya appended his signature as alledged by Lawyer(Fon) Gorji Dinka. I believe it exists but it needs to be seen all the same.
Lastly you said "Even if the document was signed, it is only an agreement and not a court order" I agree but what court will accept falsehood in a gentleman agreement to help obtain a favourite judgment from another subsequent court order?
FEN
From: "Martin Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com [camnetwork]" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
To: "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>; "ambasbay@googlegroups.com" <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>; "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2014 7:09 AM
Subject: [camnetwork] Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization Ordinance
Pa Fru,
I am trying to keep some dignified silence and you draw me out to put me in the middle of a potential tempest?.
1) The ordinance or decree or whatsoever you might call it creates an NGO i.e. a non governmental Bailiff Organization. There is nothing wrong or special about this. NGOs are created and dissolved daily so on that score, there is nothing to comment.
2) On the purportedly signed document, the Ordinance did not annex a copy, I have not seen such a document signed by Biya and Mr Koffi Annan so I cannot properly comment on a document I have not seen and almost all my readers have not seen. I have heard severally that such a document was signed, put in a diplomatic bag and sent ahead and Koffi Annan was searched by security operatives in Nsimaleng airport, etc. Such stuff sounds more like James Bond movie stuff hence I need to see the signed document to properly comment.
3) Even if the document was signed, Biya said ""I President Paul Biya of the Republic of Cameroun, in a bid to provide lasting peace in the Bakassi conflict do commit myself and my government to respect the territorial boundaries of my country as obtained at its independence." It is not a given that the Republic of Cameroun mentioned here does not include Southern Cameroons as per the purported name change in 1984. This still has to be proven and this brings us back to the Southern Cameroons-La Republique du Cameroun problem which is the starting point anyway.
4) If the UN meant La Republique du Cameroun excluding Southern Cameroons and Biya meant La Republique du Cameroun including Southern Cameroons, then there is the issue of whether there is even a meeting of minds to make the agreement binding in the first place, or alternatively an interpretation has to be given to the La Republique du Cameroon referred to based on the context of the agreement. Was the issue in question that of Bakassi at the time or that of the whole of Southern Cameroons?. Definitely, Biya was thinking of the whole of Cameroun including Southern Cameroons. The only question remaining is what was the UN thinking?. Is it a unilateral document signed by by Biya or did Koffi Annan also sign?.
5) Respecting "the boundaries of my country as obtained at its independence". Does this mean that if I respect my boundaries I cannot legally add to my property by agreement, bilateral or multilateral, with my neighbour?. I respect my boundaries and confirm them as they were on 01 January 1960 but claim that by a UN sanctioned, and neighbour agreed joining, such boundaries have shifted, Biya would say.
6) "Respect of boundaries" does it mean withdrawal to such boundaries?. If it means withdrawal, does it mean military withdrawal to maintain the peace or military and civilian withdrawal?. If it means military and civilian withdrawal, then what happens to the territories when Nigerian and Cameroon withdraw all their military and civilian administration?. Was the UN contemplating an interim UN administration of the territories, or was it designed for third parties to the agreement such as Southern Cameroons or any soldier of fortune to move in and start administering the territories to their benefit, provided they bring peace in the region?.
7) Even if the document was signed, it is only an agreement and not a court order. The NGO created by the Ordinance still has to get a court judgment on the agreement and in this regard, the issue of forum comes into play again. Is it to be a municipal forum or an international forum?. This brings to play the issue of locus standi i.e. does the NGO created as a third party (albeit a beneficiary) to the agreement have the locus standi to make any claim on the agreement, and if so where?. Remember such NGOs generally do not have locus standi at the ICJ in such adversarial cases.
Summary
The creation of the Non Governmental Bailiff Organization is a right first step in the right direction but again it is only a first step. The issue of whether the agreement exists, what it means, converting the agreement into a court order, and then implementing such a court order still has to be considered.
Tumasang
To: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com; ambasbay@googlegroups.com
From: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 20:08:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] Fwd: Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization Ordinance
From: "Julius Acham achamj07@gmail.com [cameroon_politics]" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
To: ambasbay <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>; "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>; cameroon_politics <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 11:01 PM
Subject: [cameroon_politics] Fwd: [FREE AMBAZONIANS] Fwd: [AmbasZone] Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization Ordinance
Begin forwarded message:
I am trying to keep some dignified silence and you draw me out to put me in the middle of a potential tempest?.
1) The ordinance or decree or whatsoever you might call it creates an NGO i.e. a non governmental Bailiff Organization. There is nothing wrong or special about this. NGOs are created and dissolved daily so on that score, there is nothing to comment.
2) On the purportedly signed document, the Ordinance did not annex a copy, I have not seen such a document signed by Biya and Mr Koffi Annan so I cannot properly comment on a document I have not seen and almost all my readers have not seen. I have heard severally that such a document was signed, put in a diplomatic bag and sent ahead and Koffi Annan was searched by security operatives in Nsimaleng airport, etc. Such stuff sounds more like James Bond movie stuff hence I need to see the signed document to properly comment.
3) Even if the document was signed, Biya said ""I President Paul Biya of the Republic of Cameroun, in a bid to provide lasting peace in the Bakassi conflict do commit myself and my government to respect the territorial boundaries of my country as obtained at its independence." It is not a given that the Republic of Cameroun mentioned here does not include Southern Cameroons as per the purported name change in 1984. This still has to be proven and this brings us back to the Southern Cameroons-La Republique du Cameroun problem which is the starting point anyway.
4) If the UN meant La Republique du Cameroun excluding Southern Cameroons and Biya meant La Republique du Cameroun including Southern Cameroons, then there is the issue of whether there is even a meeting of minds to make the agreement binding in the first place, or alternatively an interpretation has to be given to the La Republique du Cameroon referred to based on the context of the agreement. Was the issue in question that of Bakassi at the time or that of the whole of Southern Cameroons?. Definitely, Biya was thinking of the whole of Cameroun including Southern Cameroons. The only question remaining is what was the UN thinking?. Is it a unilateral document signed by by Biya or did Koffi Annan also sign?.
5) Respecting "the boundaries of my country as obtained at its independence". Does this mean that if I respect my boundaries I cannot legally add to my property by agreement, bilateral or multilateral, with my neighbour?. I respect my boundaries and confirm them as they were on 01 January 1960 but claim that by a UN sanctioned, and neighbour agreed joining, such boundaries have shifted, Biya would say.
6) "Respect of boundaries" does it mean withdrawal to such boundaries?. If it means withdrawal, does it mean military withdrawal to maintain the peace or military and civilian withdrawal?. If it means military and civilian withdrawal, then what happens to the territories when Nigerian and Cameroon withdraw all their military and civilian administration?. Was the UN contemplating an interim UN administration of the territories, or was it designed for third parties to the agreement such as Southern Cameroons or any soldier of fortune to move in and start administering the territories to their benefit, provided they bring peace in the region?.
7) Even if the document was signed, it is only an agreement and not a court order. The NGO created by the Ordinance still has to get a court judgment on the agreement and in this regard, the issue of forum comes into play again. Is it to be a municipal forum or an international forum?. This brings to play the issue of locus standi i.e. does the NGO created as a third party (albeit a beneficiary) to the agreement have the locus standi to make any claim on the agreement, and if so where?. Remember such NGOs generally do not have locus standi at the ICJ in such adversarial cases.
Summary
The creation of the Non Governmental Bailiff Organization is a right first step in the right direction but again it is only a first step. The issue of whether the agreement exists, what it means, converting the agreement into a court order, and then implementing such a court order still has to be considered.
Tumasang
To: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com; ambasbay@googlegroups.com
From: cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 20:08:40 -0700
Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] Fwd: Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization Ordinance
Martin Tumasang of the Law Profession:
Your comments please.
Blessed Be Cameroon
Pa Fru Ndeh
Pa Fru Ndeh
From: "Julius Acham achamj07@gmail.com [cameroon_politics]" <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
To: ambasbay <ambasbay@googlegroups.com>; "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>; cameroon_politics <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2014 11:01 PM
Subject: [cameroon_politics] Fwd: [FREE AMBAZONIANS] Fwd: [AmbasZone] Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization Ordinance
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Teacher T tanyinoh@yahoo.com [ambasbay]" <ambasbay@yahoogroups.com>
Date: October 28, 2014 at 5:05:15 PM EDT
To: ambasbay@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [AmbasZone] Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization Ordinance
Reply-To: ambasbay@yahoogroups.com
I Fon Fongum Gorji-Dinka, Head of State, in exercise of the powers vested in me by the Ambazonian constitution do hereby make the following ordinance.Citation: This ordinance may be cited as Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization ordinance.In view of the United Nations Bakassi Accord (UNBA) terminating Cameroun occupation of Ambazonia which Cameroun President Paul Biya signed on 31 January 2005 saying: "I President Paul Biya of the Republic of Cameroun, in a bid to provide lasting peace in the Bakassi conflict do commit myself and my government to respect the territorial boundaries of my country as obtained at its independence."And In view of the need for an Independent Bailiff Non-Governmental Organization to execute the said UNBA;Article 1 There is hereby created an Ambazonian Independent Bailiff Non Governmental Organization (AIBANGO) charged with conceiving, planning, launching and fully implementing the United Nations Bakassi Accord which terminates Cameroun occupation of Ambazonia.Article 2 To this end the AIBANGO may seek the assistance of foreign partners in terms of cash, logistics, expertise, and the Ambazonian Government shall be charged with paying for such assistance with crude petroleum and gas or any agricultural or mineral product of mutual interest to the foreign partners and Ambazonia.Article 3 To this effect an appropriate Agreement or Memorandum of Understanding may be concluded between the Ambazonian Government and such partners.Issued under my hand this 10th day of August 2014Fongum Gorji-DinkaHead of StateSource:
__._,_.___
Posted by: Martin Tumasang <tumasangm@hotmail.com>
| Reply via web post | • | Reply to sender | • | Reply to group | • | Start a New Topic | • | Messages in this topic (1) |
Camnetwork is the premier Cameroon/Cameroun forum since 1997.
.
__,_._,___
0 comments:
Post a Comment