kongsoh@yahoo.com
On Tuesday, May 31, 2016 10:29 AM, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron <nyangkweagien@gmail.com> wrote:
This is the core central argument for our cause as earlier sated by
senior Statesman Mola Njoh Litumbe;
"In other words, were the plebiscitary results ever ratified by the
United Nations itself so as to make them official? And, once Southern
Cameroons was "decolonized by joining East Cameroun" through the
plebiscite, what type of political arrangements did both sides make to
coexist. If, for example, a political arrangement was agreed upon by
both sides, did any external body like the United Nations bear witness
to it, and what were the terms?" Greg Takor
On 5/31/16, Ofege Ntemfac <ntemfacnchwete@gmail.com> wrote:
> UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC
> REACTS TO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATION
>
> In the Series of United Nation resolutions of the 9th of December 2015 that
> have sovereignty implication for the Southern Cameroon Struggle, we believe
> that the news of its coming was the basis of the rumour by the UNO State
> that their British Cameroons was going to be freed on that 9th of December
> 2015.
>
> Since the resolutions came out, there have been a lot of wrong comments
> from abroad and at home. But here in below, we publish an incisive analysis
> by the SCNC of what these resolutions really mean for the struggle of
> Southern Cameroon.
>
> We have studiously read the December 9th 2015 UN Resolutions on
> decolonization, as well as the reactions from many quarters particularly
> our members in the diaspora.
>
> The views expressed fall into two categories namely:
>
> Those that sincerely confess that they do not understand the relevance of
> those resolutions to our specific problem, and
>
> Those who try to interpret wrongly by referring to Resolution 1608 as dead,
> hence the Southern Cameroons could never be liberated.
>
> In this situation, the SCNC is duty-bound to herein below, scientifically
> explain the implications of these Resolutions for the benefit of all
> Southern Cameroons citizens.
>
> Generally speaking, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to
> re-affirm its commitment to the principle of self-determination as the
> Divine Right of all peoples.
>
> This re-assertion indicates that the World Body is fully aware and
> concerned about the different levels of human rights abuses, and certainly
> will eventually resolve our annexation problem.
>
> Specifically speaking, the list of the remaining colonial territories
> comprising American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands,
> Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos
> Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands, still in the possession of
> the United States, Britain, and France, does not include the Southern
> Cameroons.
>
> The meaning is that the Southern Cameroons was already de-colonized.
>
> Elsewhere the UN has published another list of 15 Territories, including
> the Southern Cameroons as former Trust Territories which were decolonized
> by 1994. (See UN website sources URL:
>
> http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/selfdet.shtml;
>
> The first essential message implied – by having not included our territory
> among those to be decolonized – is that we were already Independent as of
> 1st October 1961 even though most of our intellectual elite continue to be
> unaware.
>
> The second message is that our problem is annexation, which means the
> swallow-up of our state by another state. And its de-annexation requires an
> entirely different procedure.
>
> This analysis is especially important to some of our Nationalist Movements
> such as the UNO-State Group and the Southern Cameroons Lawyers Association.
> They have wrongly continued to insist that we need to be independent,
> whereas our quest at the present stage is for Sovereign Recognition since
> we are already independent as of 1st October 1961.
>
> It is also important to some of our compatriots who unfortunately are
> calling for an armed struggle, being ignorant that an Independent State
> does not articulate our annexation type of problem through armed struggle.
> It would, like in war-torn Syria, destroy our country before we return to
> the very peace table where we should have started.
>
> How we achieved Full Independence.
>
> By scientific analysis the SCNC has 72 proofs of our Separate Independence
> from that of the Francophone Republic of Cameroun. But suffice us to
> here-in below present you just a half dozen of the most elementary of them.
>
> 1. The Plebiscite "Yes" vote was a decision to achieve Independence, and
> not to "join" whom ever for two reasons.
>
> The Independence issue was prioritized by being given the first position in
> the Plebiscite Question of "Do You Wish to Achieve Independence by Joining
> Nigeria?" Or "Do You Wish To Achieve Independence By Joining the Republic
> of Cameroon?"
>
> The issue of Independence was the antecedent of the condition of "joining",
> meaning that it was indispensable, whereas the "joining", was merely
> secondary.
>
> A simple analogy is that in a similar question of "Do You Wish to Go to New
> York by Air or by Sea", the most important point is the decision to go to
> New York. It is not the means of transport.
>
> Furthermore, the UN endorsement vote of 19th April 1961 on the outcome of
> the Plebiscite was on our decision to achieve independence, and NOT on any
> "Joining".
>
> If the endorsement vote was for the "joining", the United Nations would not
> have called for the Post-Plebiscite International Conference whereat the
> conditions of "joining" were still to be discussed and its "modalities"
> worked out.
>
> The second reason is that throughout the 72-year history of the United
> Nations, the Organisation grants Independences. That is why it designated
> 1st October 1961 as the Independence Day of Southern Cameroons. Indeed, the
> World Body has never granted any "joining"
>
> 2. The UN-required post-Plebiscite international conference did not hold,
> so there was no occasion to have established any "joining" between us and
> the Francophone Republic of Cameroun through a Treaty which could only have
> resulted from an International Conference.
>
> It should be understood that the substituted Foumban conference did not
> meet the standard of an International Conference, to have worked out the
> required Treaty.
>
> It follows that "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon",
> ironically called by the county's entire virgin name at the suffix, as well
> as the multitude of other subsequent constitutions therefrom, do not have
> the weight of a Treaty.
>
> And being strictly the exclusive Fundamental Law of the Francophone
> Republic, it has no binding force on the statehood of Southern Cameroons.
>
> Worse still neither Britain nor the UN – which was to witness the occasion
> – informed the Southern Cameroons government that they would not attend the
> conference. Obviously the Southern Came-roons government would not have
> proceeded to the venue to be dominated by an overwhelming number of the
> francophone delegation.
>
> With this vacuum the Francophone Republic was able, through a mere revision
> of their virgin constitution to impose their name, flag, anthem, code of
> arms and national capital on the Southern Came-roons till date, as the
> insignia of a Federation which was never constituted.
>
> And the Southern Cameroons became a mere appendix.
>
> 3. It is further noteworthy that in the aftermath of the failure to convene
> the International Conference, the United Nations did not call-off, suspend,
> or cancel their grant of independence to Southern Cameroons.
>
> Similarly Britain, the Administering Authority, did not deny delivering the
> independence, which would have happened by continuing to maintain their
> Trusteeship presence in the Territory.
>
> Furthermore, the Republic of Cameroun, on their part, did not complain
> about the irregularity of federating with another independent state without
> a prior Treaty.
>
> As a result, the Southern Cameroons majestically moved forward and
> consummated her full Independence on the designated 1st October, 1961.
>
> The term consummated means the populations celebrated the event, which
> affixed their Permanent Seal on the Independence.
>
> It follows that, there was no longer any Independence "by joining" as such,
> meaning that we unconditionally achieved Full Independence inadvertently.
>
> This Sovereign Class of Independence is the very type that most African
> countries achieved, which our people were clamouring for as a "third
> option", but the British brushed aside.
>
> 4. There have been external confirmations to our independence. Aside from
> the UN excluding us from being either a colony or a Trust Territory, the
> Republic of Cameroun has itself repeatedly recognised our separate
> Independence.
>
> For instance, they placed the representative star of Southern Cameroons on
> their flag from 1961 to 1972 which symbolises that we were separately
> independent to have qualified for a star.
>
> 5. Another piece of evidence is that the Republic of Cameroun inserted the
> word "United" and the name of the country at some point became United
> Republic of Cameroon. Whenever the term "United" appears in the name of a
> country it shows that the states that formed the supposed federation were
> independent states.
>
> An example is the use of the terminology "United" to describe the 52 states
> of the USA which shows that the states were independent countries that came
> together as equals.
>
> The same applies to "United" in the name United Kingdom, which is also
> emphasising that Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England were
> independent kingdoms that united as equal partners.
>
> 6. Finally, on the 20th of February 2014 during a fake re-unification
> celebration in Buea (fake because re-unification does not exist where there
> was no prior unification in terms of a joint independence), Mr. Biya
> himself declared that the Southern Cameroons is an independent state. The
> population was clapping without understanding the message.
>
> In the speech a copy of which we have, for whoever may wish to verify, he
> said "history cannot forget that Buea was once the Headquarters of West
> Cameroon", and "history cannot also forget that Buea was once the Capital
> of Southern Cameroons"
>
> The meaning is that when our country was an un-independent territory Buea,
> the seat of government was a mere headquarters. But when we achieved
> independence, the very Buea transformed into a Capital.
>
> Conclusion
>
> Having proved that the Southern Cameroons is a fully independent State from
> whatever angle of analysis, the implied United Nations message to us
> through its recent Resolutions is not that we pursue our de-annexation by
> armed struggle.
>
> Rather, it is for us to proceed through pure democratic means, using
> established UN Institutions. The ideal procedure is for us to begin from
> litigation, the outcome of which would enable us rouse the international
> community to act. This is the way (path) the smaller Republic of Cameroun
> went (took) before redeeming the Bakassi Peninsular from the almighty
> Nigeria. Not even the Security Council can veto the decision of a court.
>
> This is the vision that, after 11 years of research and analysis, guided
> the SCNC to first sue the Republic of Cameroon in the local high Court in
> Bamenda, Southern Cameroons in September 2011.
>
> The dismissal verdict six months later coupled with two related arrests of
> Thomas NWACHAN, the primary researcher and filer of the case, helped open
> the door for the case to enter the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Committee.
>
> Our 72-page petition by reason of 400 synoptic arguments, jointly and
> severally indicting the Francophone Republic, Britain and the UN, was
> received by the court on April 9, 2014.
>
> Ladies and gentlemen, we are in regular contact with the court to which we
> have submitted further evidence on demand. But you know the court takes its
> time between three to five years to render its verdict.
>
> However, we are confident of a victorious outcome, considering the positive
> results of the previous personal cases of two of our citizens, Gorgi Dinka
> and Albert Mukong, against the Republic of Came-roun by this very court.
>
> It follows that we must watch out against repeating the errors of the past.
> As an Independent State we can no longer concede to the deceptive proposals
> of another referendum, constitutional reform, re-federation, and
> Vice-Presidency when there is no prior Treaty to anchor any of these
> reforms.
>
> This does not suggest that there is now room for a Treaty either. Not only
> is it impossible to reconvene the UN-prescribed post-Plebiscite
> International Conference, the parties to the Treaty no longer exist for the
> following reasons, as well.
>
> The Trusteeship Authority expired on 30th September 1961, with the downing
> of the British flag. So neither the UN nor Britain can return to the
> Southern Cameroons to work out the Treaty, on the basis of the Trusteeship
> Agreement. In addition, as an independent State only the Southern Cameroons
> can work out a Treaty between herself and whomever.
>
> Furthermore, the Republic of Cameroun tore away the democratically elected
> government of Southern Cameroons in 1972, so there is no legitimate
> government representing the Southern Cameroons with whom to work out any
> such Treaty today.
>
> Thus the Francophone Republic will finally be left alone to be licking its
> wounds. Since, in light of the foregoing arguments, the Southern Cameroons
> is bound to be restored its deserved sovereign-ty.
>
> Long Live the SCNC
>
> Long live the UN Right to Self Determination
>
> Long Live the Would-Be State of Southern Cameroons
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Immanuel TatahMentan inmentan@yahoo.com
> [cameroon_politics] <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> My Dear Enow Takor,
>> What is at issue is :
>> 1 . The Southern Cameroons was militarily occupied immediately after the
>> Plebiscite in pursuit of socalled fleeing "maquisards" from LRC
>> 2 . Annexation in September 1961 by Ahidjo ' s asymmetrical federalism
>> 3. Colonization and systematic development of economic underdevelopment
>> as
>> from October 1,1961.
>> 4. Annihilation,exclusion, secession by President Paul Biya ' s LRC and
>> marginalization of the colony by the 1984 Biya decree reenacting LRC at
>> independence from January 1,1960.
>> Historically, that is the trajectory. The butt lickers of whatver
>> persuasion may twist history.But, the brutal facts face us without
>> blinking.
>> Tatah mentan
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello bro,
>> I am assuming that what they mean by "Southern Cameroons is already
>> decolonized by joining East Cameroun" is through the United Nations
>> organized plebiscite of February 1961. If my assumption is right, the
>> question then becomes whether the results of that plebiscite were ever
>> consumated. In other words, were the plebiscitary results ever ratified
>> by
>> the United Nations itself so as to make them official? And, once Southern
>> Cameroons was "decolonized by joining East Cameroun" through the
>> plebiscite, what type of political arrangements did both sides make to
>> coexist. If, for example, a political arrangement was agreed upon by both
>> sides, did any external body like the United Nations bear witness to it,
>> and what were the terms? Since Southern Cameroons supposedly joined East
>> Cameroun by plebiscite, we have gone through federal and unitary systems,
>> and finally, the incorporation of Southern Cameroons into East Cameroon
>> to
>> become part of La Republique du Cameroun, which is what East Cameroun
>> used
>> to be called. The transition to the United Republc of Cameroon is for all
>> intent and purpose, illegal because it was foisted on Southern
>> Cameroonians
>> through Ahidjou's extraconstitutionality. It was a single ballot issue of
>> oui/yes without a non/no ballot.Above all else,the last straw that tore
>> apart the unofficial results of the plebisite by which Souhern Cameoons
>> is
>> assumed to have been decolonized by joining East Cameroun is Paul Biya's
>> administrative fiat(Presiential Decree) which juridically abolished the
>> United Republic of Cameroon, although, again, this system was itself
>> illegal, and single handedly replaced it with the former East Cameroun
>> appellation of La Republique du Cameroun. By this decree, Southern
>> Cameroons ceased being decolonized by supposedly joining East Cameroun
>> juridically and de jure. onequently, what we now have is the illegal
>> occupation and annexation of Southern Cameroons by La Republique du
>> Cameroun, in my view.
>>
>> ENOW TAKOR
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Mon, 5/30/16, Divine Rhyme hittback@yahoo.com [cameroon_politics] <
>> cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS ON
>> DE-COLONIZATION
>> To: "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>,
>> "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, "
>> bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com" <bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com>
>> Cc: "Edwin Ngang" <ednngang@yahoo.com>, "Edwin Ngang" <
>> ednngang@hotmail.com>, "yahoogroups" <colo_angl@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Monday, May 30, 2016, 4:40 PM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Below
>> is a cut and paste from a UN document where Southern
>> Cameroon is listed as already decolonized by joining East
>> Cameroon.Here
>> is where the matter becomes very unclear and it seems
>> different people interpret it differently.It is
>> clearly written here that decolonize by joining. We usually
>> say the devil is in the details. It
>> is clearly written here without any ambiguity thatNo
>> 1 Togoland (under British
>> administration)United with
>> the Gold Coast
>> (Colony and Protectorate), a Non-Self-Governing Territory
>> administered
>> by the United Kingdom, in 1957 to form
>> Ghana
>>
>> No.
>> II
>> Somaliland
>> (under Italian
>> administration)United
>> with British Somaliland Protectorate in 1960 to form
>> SomaliaNo.
>> III Tanganyika
>> (under British administration)Became
>> independent in 1961 (in
>> 1964, Tanganyika and the former protectorate of Zanzibar,
>> which had
>> become independent in 1963, united as a single State under the name of
>> the United Republic of
>> Tanzania)
>> No.
>> IV Cameroons
>> (under British administration) Northern
>> territory joined
>> Nigeria and Southern territory joined Cameroon
>> (1961)
>> No
>> V Ruanda-Urundi
>> (under Belgian administration)Voted
>> to
>> divide into the two
>> sovereign -States of Rwanda and Burundi in
>> 1962
>> Now
>> this is my problem
>> I
>> have just selected a few of the decolonized territories
>> listed in this UN publication, complete with their official
>> names as of the date of decolonization - either through
>> direct independence as single territories or as territories
>> which decided to form a new nation with others in
>> carefully defined status. The words UNITED and SELF GOVERNING in Free
>> Association with The USA...,(this in reference to The
>> Federated States of Micronesia) cannot be clearer.
>> In all these the descriptions are very
>> precise and unambiguous. But its only in the case of British
>> Cameroons where the word
>> JOINED is without any qualification - not even
>> an implied one.
>> . What could join
>> mean in this case?. United
>> definitely means two territories,
>> distinctly separate before, choose to come together by an
>> arrangement which has a definite process and requirements
>> known to the UN system and in international politics. United
>> usually entails having a single government, and
>> one international boundary. But territories can join with one another in
>> hundreds of
>> ways which the UN does not necessarily know about. And each
>> can still maintain their international boundaries. Most
>> territories have joined
>> and then united to form single states.
>> Therefore joining does not have a single meaning in
>> international politics. Logic tells me that joining does not necessarily
>> mean coming together as one but United
>> means exactly that except otherwise stated.
>> Has Southern Cameroons ever united
>> with French Cameroon? But then the
>> intriguing thing here is that in 1972 Ahidjo organized a
>> referendum to reunite
>> - meaning there had been a unification
>> before
>> - but when was that? Did he take
>> joining to mean uniting
>> giving him the reason to re-unite once
>> more?It seems this is one of the rare releases
>> from the struggle that has made sense to me without leaving
>> a bitter taste of doubt in my mind. This release does not
>> exaggerate its achievements so far but it sure gives real
>> hopes - but above all there is clarity in the approach.
>> Another interesting aspect is that unlike before, the writer
>> has stated his position on the matter without attempting to
>> vilify the approach from another front - in this case that
>> of Professor Chia. Professor Chia's approach too makes a
>> lot of sense but for the fact that he bases his argument
>> solely on the premise that Britain violated its trusteeship
>> mandate by splitting the territory in two and organizing
>> plebiscites separately to ask each part to choose either
>> to join
>> French Cameroon or The Federal Republic of
>> Nigeria. But if various arguments from lawyers
>> specialized in international law are correct, then
>> Professor Chia does not have much of a case because it seems
>> he has not bothered to make any arguments concerning the
>> various machinations by the regimes of Mr. Ahidjo and
>> presently Mr. Biya to violate the sovereignty of Southern
>> Cameroons. His problem is with Britain. But what I cannot
>> understand is what really stops all these Southern Cameroons
>> factions to come together and carry on the struggle from a
>> united platform. If that happens we might also come to
>> understand how is that Professor Chia is so convinced
>> about his approach. Why would he not believe these experts
>> on International law? There must be something wrong we seem
>> not to be seeing here. What might make some of us a little
>> bit skeptical about Professor Chia's approach is the
>> secrecy shrouding his entire enterprise. I personally
>> don't see the need for such secrecy. But common sense
>> does not allow me believe that he would not want to believe
>> in the expertise of international lawyers. There must be
>> something driving him forward.
>> FEN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Skip
>> to main navigation Skip
>> to content
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Welcome to the United
>> Nations. It's your world.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN
>> Search
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The
>> United Nations and Decolonization
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN
>> Home Main
>> Page Committee
>> of 24
>>
>> Regional
>> Seminars
>>
>> Fourth
>> Committee
>>
>> Documents
>>
>>
>> Press
>> Releases
>>
>> History
>>
>> International
>> Trusteeship System
>> Trust
>> and Non-Self-Governing Territories (1945-2002)
>> Trusteeship
>> Council
>> Trust
>> Territories that have achieved
>> self-determination
>>
>> Historical
>> Documents
>>
>> Resources
>>
>> Contact
>> Us
>>
>>
>> New
>> on the site
>>
>>
>>
>> Video:
>> PACC Tokelau: Vital Health
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Trust
>> Territories that have achieved self-determination
>>
>> Togoland
>> (under British administration)
>>
>> United
>> with the Gold Coast
>> (Colony and Protectorate), a Non-Self-Governing Territory
>> administered
>> by the United Kingdom, in 1957 to form Ghana
>>
>> Somaliland
>> (under Italian administration)
>> United
>> with British Somaliland Protectorate in 1960 to form
>> Somalia
>> Togoland
>> (under French administration)
>> Became
>> independent as Togo in 1960 etc.
>>
>> Cameroons
>> (under French administration)
>> Became
>> independent as Cameroon in 1960
>> Cameroons
>> (under British administration)
>> Northern
>> territory joined Nigeria and Southern territory joined
>> Cameroon (1961)
>> Tanganyika
>> (under British administration)
>> Became
>> independent in 1961 (in
>> 1964, Tanganyika and the former protectorate of Zanzibar,
>> which had
>> become independent in 1963, united as a single State under
>> the name of
>> the United Republic of Tanzania)
>> Ruanda-Urundi
>> (under Belgian administration)
>> Voted
>> to divide into the two sovereign States of Rwanda and
>> Burundi in 1962
>> Western
>> Samoa (under New Zealand administration)
>> Became
>> independent as Samoa in 1962
>> Nauru
>> (administered by Australia on behalf of Australia, New
>> Zealand and the United Kingdom)
>> Became
>> independent in 1968
>> New
>> Guinea (administered by Australia)
>> United
>> with the
>> Non-Self-Governing Territory of Papua, also administered by
>> Australia,
>> to become the independent State of Papua New Guinea in
>> 1975
>> Trust
>> Territory of the Pacific Islands:
>>
>>
>> Federated States of
>> Micronesia
>> Became fully self-governing in free
>> Association with the United States in 1990Republic of the
>> Marshall Islands
>>
>> Became fully self-governing in free
>> Association with the United States in 1990Commonwealth of the
>> Northern Mariana Islands
>>
>> Became fully self-governing as
>> Commonwealth of the United States in 1990Palau
>> Became fully self-governing in free
>> Association with the United States in 1994
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Copyright
>> | Terms
>> of Use | Privacy
>> Notice | Site
>> Index | Fraud
>> Alert | Contact Us
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Aaron Rezeh
>> rezehatm@yahoo.com [cameroon_politics]"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
>>
>> To:
>> "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
>> <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com"
>> <bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com>
>> Cc: Edwin Ngang
>> <ednngang@yahoo.com>; Edwin Ngang
>> <ednngang@hotmail.com>; yahoogroups
>> <colo_angl@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 30,
>> 2016 9:35 AM
>> Subject: Re:
>> [cameroon_politics] UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN
>> RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATION
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN
>> RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATIONposted
>> by Akene
>> Asobo May 24, 2016 Home
>> Just
>> reformatted version:*In
>> the Series of United Nation resolutions of the 9th of
>> December 2015 that have sovereignty implication for the
>> Southern Cameroon Struggle, we believe that the news of its
>> coming was the basis of the rumour by the UNO State that
>> their British Cameroon was going to be freed on that 9th of
>> December 2015 .Since
>> the resolutions came out, there have been a lot of wrong
>> comments from abroad and at home. But here in below, we
>> publish an incisive analysis by the SCNC of what these
>> resolutions really mean for the struggle of Southern
>> Cameroon.
>> We
>> have studiously read the December 9th 2015 UN Resolutions on
>> decolonization, as well as the reactions from many quarters
>> particularly our members in the diaspora.
>>
>> The
>> views expressed fall into two categories namely:Those
>> that sincerely confess that they do not understand the
>> relevance of those resolutions to our specific problem,
>> and
>> Those
>> who try to interpret wrongly by referring to Resolution 1608
>> as dead, hence the Southern Cameroons could never be
>> liberated.
>> In
>> this situation, the SCNC is duty-bound to herein below,
>> scientifically explain the implications of these Resolutions
>> for the benefit of all Southern Cameroons citizens.
>> Generally
>> speaking, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to
>> re-affirm its commitment to the principle of
>> self-determination as the Divine Right of all peoples.
>>
>> This re-assertion indicates
>> that the World Body is fully aware and concerned about the
>> different levels of human rights abuses, and certainly will
>> eventually resolve our annexation problem.
>> Specifically
>> speaking, the list of the remaining colonial territories
>> comprising American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda,
>> British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat,
>> Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the
>> United States Virgin Islands, still in the possession of the
>> United States, Britain, and France, does not include the
>> Southern Cameroons.
>> The meaning is that the
>> Southern Cameroons was already de-colonized. Elsewhere the UN has
>> published
>> another list of 15 Territories, including the Southern
>> Cameroons as former Trust Territories which were decolonized
>> by 1994. (See UN website sources URL:
>> http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/selfdet.shtml;The
>> first essential message implied – by having not included
>> our territory among those to be decolonized – is that we
>> were already Independent as of 1st October 1961 even though
>> most of our intellectual elite continue to be
>> unaware.
>>
>> The second message is that our
>> problem is annexation, which means the swallow-up of our
>> state by another state. And its de-annexation requires an
>> entirely different procedure.
>>
>> This analysis is especially
>> important to some of our Nationalist Movements such as the
>> UNO-State Group and the Southern Cameroons Lawyers
>> Association. They have wrongly continued to insist that we
>> need to be independent, whereas our quest at the present
>> stage is for Sovereign Recognition since we are already
>> independent as of 1st October 1961.
>> It is also important to some of
>> our compatriots who unfortunately are calling for an armed
>> struggle, being ignorant that an Independent State does not
>> articulate our annexation type of problem through armed
>> struggle. It would, like in war-torn Syria, destroy our
>> country before we return to the very peace table where we
>> should have started.
>>
>> How we achieved Full
>> Independence.
>> By scientific analysis
>> the SCNC has 72 proofs of our Separate Independence
>> from that of the Francophone Republic of Cameroun. But
>> suffice us to here-in below present you just a half dozen of
>> the most elementary of them.
>>
>>
>> 1.
>> The Plebiscite
>> "Yes" vote was a decision to achieve Independence, and
>> not to "join" whom ever for two reasons.
>> The Independence issue was
>> prioritized by being given the first position in the
>> Plebiscite Question of "Do You Wish to Achieve
>> Independence by Joining Nigeria?" Or "Do You Wish To
>> Achieve Independence By Joining the Republic of
>> Cameroon?"
>> The issue of Independence was
>> the antecedent of the condition of "joining", meaning
>> that it was indispensable, whereas the "joining", was merely
>> secondary.
>>
>> A simple analogy is that in a
>> similar question of "Do You Wish to Go to New York by Air
>> or by Sea", the most important point is the decision to go
>> to New York. It is not the means of transport.
>> Furthermore, the UN endorsement
>> vote of 19th April 1961 on the outcome of the Plebiscite was
>> on our decision to achieve independence, and NOT on any
>> "Joining".
>> If the endorsement vote was for
>> the "joining", the United Nations would not have called
>> for the Post-Plebiscite International Conference whereat the
>> conditions of "joining" were still to be discussed and
>> its "modalities" worked out.The second reason is that
>> throughout the 72-year history of the United Nations, the
>> Organisation grants Independences. That is why it designated
>> 1st
>> October 1961 as the Independence Day of
>> Southern Cameroons. Indeed, the World Body has
>> never granted any "joining"2. The UN-required
>> post-Plebiscite international conference did not hold, so
>> there was no occasion to have established any "joining"
>> between us and the Francophone Republic of Cameroun through
>> a Treaty which could only have resulted from an
>> International Conference.It
>> should be understood that the substituted Foumban conference
>> did not meet the standard of an International Conference, to
>> have worked out the required Treaty.It
>> follows that "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of
>> Cameroon", ironically called by the county's entire
>> virgin name at the suffix, as well as the multitude of other
>> subsequent constitutions therefrom, do not have the weight
>> of a Treaty.And
>> being strictly the exclusive Fundamental Law of the
>> Francophone Republic, it has no binding force on the
>> statehood of Southern Cameroons.Worse
>> still neither Britain nor the UN – which was to witness
>> the occasion – informed the Southern Cameroons government
>> that they would not attend the conference. Obviously the
>> Southern Cameroons government would not have proceeded to
>> the venue to be dominated by an overwhelming number of the
>> francophone delegation.With
>> this vacuum the Francophone Republic was able, through a
>> mere revision of their virgin constitution to impose their
>> name, flag, anthem, code of arms and national capital on the
>> Southern Cameroons till date, as the insignia of a
>> Federation which was never constituted.And
>> the Southern Cameroons became a mere appendix.3. It is further noteworthy
>> that
>> in the aftermath of the failure to convene the International
>> Conference, the United Nations did not call-off, suspend, or
>> cancel their grant of independence to Southern
>> Cameroons.Similarly
>> Britain, the Administering Authority, did not deny
>> delivering the independence, which would have happened by
>> continuing to maintain their Trusteeship presence in the
>> Territory.Furthermore,
>> the Republic of Cameroun, on their part, did not complain
>> about the irregularity of federating with another
>> independent state without a prior Treaty.As
>> a result, the Southern Cameroons majestically moved forward
>> and consummated her full Independence on the designated 1st
>> October, 1961.The
>> term consummated means the populations celebrated the event,
>> which affixed their Permanent Seal on the
>> Independence.It follows that, there was no
>> longer any Independence "by joining" as such, meaning that we
>> unconditionally achieved Full Independence
>> inadvertently.This
>> Sovereign Class of Independence is the very type that most
>> African countries achieved, which our people were clamouring
>> for as a "third option", but the British brushed
>> aside.4.
>> There have been
>> external confirmations to our independence. Aside from the
>> UN excluding us from being either a colony or a Trust
>> Territory, the Republic of Cameroun has itself repeatedly
>> recognised our separate Independence.For instance, they placed
>> the
>> representative star of Southern Cameroons on their flag from
>> 1961 to 1972 which symbolises that we were
>> separately independent to have qualified for a
>> star.5. Another piece of evidence is
>> that the Republic of Cameroun inserted the word "United"
>> and the name of the country at some point became United
>> Republic of Cameroon. Whenever the term "United" appears in the name of a
>> country it shows that the states that formed the supposed
>> federation were independent states.An example is the use of the
>> terminology "United" to describe the 52 states of the
>> USA which shows that the states were independent countries
>> that came together as equals.The same applies to
>> "United" in the name United Kingdom, which is also
>> emphasising that Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and
>> England were independent kingdoms that united as equal
>> partners.6.
>> Finally, on the 20th of
>> February 2014 during a fake re-unification celebration in
>> Buea (fake because re-unification does not exist where there
>> was no prior unification in terms of a joint independence),
>> Mr. Biya himself declared that the Southern Cameroons is an
>> independent state. The population was clapping without
>> understanding the message.In the speech a copy of which
>> we have, for whoever may wish to verify, he said "history
>> cannot forget that Buea
>> was
>> once the Headquarters of West Cameroon", and
>> "history cannot also forget that
>> Buea was
>> once the Capital of Southern
>> Cameroons"The
>> meaning is that when our country was an un-independent
>> territory Buea, the seat of government was a mere
>> headquarters. But when we achieved independence, the very
>> Buea transformed into a Capital.
>>
>>
>> Conclussion
>>
>> Having proved that the Southern
>> Cameroons is a fully independent State from whatever angle
>> of analysis, the implied United Nations message to us
>> through its recent Resolutions is not that we pursue our
>> de-annexation by armed struggle.
>> Rather, it is for us to proceed
>> through pure democratic means, using established UN
>> Institutions. The ideal procedure is for us to begin from
>> litigation, the outcome of which would enable us rouse the
>> international community to act. This is the way (path) the
>> smaller Republic of Cameroun went (took) before redeeming
>> the Bakassi Peninsular from the almighty Nigeria. Not even
>> the Security Council can veto the decision of a
>> court.
>>
>> This is the vision that, after
>> 11 years of research and analysis, guided the SCNC to first
>> sue the Republic of Cameroon in the local high Court in
>> Bamenda, Southern Cameroons in September 2011.
>> The dismissal verdict six
>> months later coupled with two related arrests of Thomas
>> NWACHAN, the primary researcher and filer of the case,
>> helped open the door for the case to enter the Geneva-based
>> UN Human Rights Committee.
>> Our 72-page petition by reason
>> of 400 synoptic arguments, jointly and severally indicting
>> the Francophone Republic, Britain and the UN, was received
>> by the court on April 9, 2014.
>> Ladies and gentlemen, we are in
>> regular contact with the court to which we have submitted
>> further evidence on demand. But you know the court takes its
>> time between three to five years to render its
>> verdict.
>> However, we are confident of a
>> victorious outcome, considering the positive results of the
>> previous personal cases of two of our citizens, Gorgi Dinka
>> and Albert Mukong, against the Republic of Cameroun by this
>> very court.
>> It follows that we must watch
>> out against repeating the errors of the past. As an
>> Independent State we can no longer concede to the deceptive
>> proposals of another referendum, constitutional reform,
>> re-federation, and Vice-Presidency when there is no prior
>> Treaty to anchor any of these reforms.
>>
>> This does not suggest that
>> there is now room for a Treaty either. Not only is it
>> impossible to reconvene the UN-prescribed post-Plebiscite
>> International Conference, the parties to the Treaty no
>> longer exist for the following reasons, as well.
>> The Trusteeship Authority
>> expired on 30th September 1961, with the downing of the
>> British flag. So neither the UN nor Britain can return to
>> the Southern Cameroons to work out the Treaty, on the basis
>> of the Trusteeship Agreement. In addition, as an independent
>> State only the Southern Cameroons can work out a Treaty
>> between herself and whomever.
>> Furthermore, the Republic of
>> Cameroun tore away the democratically
>> elected government of Southern Cameroons in 1972, so there is no
>> legitimate
>> government representing the Southern Cameroons with whom to
>> work out any such Treaty today.
>> Thus the Francophone Republic
>> will finally be left alone to be licking its wounds. Since,
>> in light of the foregoing arguments, the Southern Cameroons
>> is bound to be restored its deserved
>> sovereignty.
>>
>> Long Live the SCNC
>> Long live the UN Right to Self
>> Determination
>> Long Live the Would-Be State of
>> Southern CameroonsSigned:THOMAS
>> N. NWACHAN,
>> B.A.
>> Hist., M.A Pol. Sc., M.A Mgt.
>> 1969
>> combined winner of Fulbright of US Congress, and
>> The
>> Lawrence Wien International Scholarships
>> Through
>> Brandeis University, Mass,
>> USA. Dr. Aaron T. M.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Martin
>> Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com [cameroon_politics]"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
>>
>> To:
>> "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
>> <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com"
>> <bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com>
>>
>> Sent: Tuesday,
>> May 24, 2016 11:09 AM
>> Subject:
>> [cameroon_politics] UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN
>> RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATION
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for Southern
>> Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS
>> ON DE-COLONIZATIONposted
>> by Akene
>> Asobo May 24, 2016 Home
>> *In the Series of United Nation resolutions of
>> the 9th of December 2015 that have sovereignty implication
>> for the Southern Cameroon Struggle, we believe that the news
>> of its coming was the basis of the rumour by the UNO State
>> that their British Cameroon was going to be freed on that
>> 9th of December 2015 .
>> Since the resolutions
>> came out, there have been a lot of wrong comments from
>> abroad and at home. But here in below, we publish an
>> incisive analysis by the SCNC of what these resolutions
>> really mean for the struggle of Southern Cameroon.
>> We have studiously read the December 9th 2015
>> UN Resolutions on decolonization, as well as the reactions
>> from many quarters particularly our members in the
>> diaspora.
>> The views expressed fall into two
>> categories namely:
>> Those that sincerely
>> confess that they do not understand the relevance of those
>> resolutions to our specific problem, and
>> Those who try to interpret wrongly by referring
>> to Resolution 1608 as dead, hence the Southern Cameroons
>> could never be liberated.
>> In this situation,
>> the SCNC is duty-bound to herein below, scientifically
>> explain the implications of these Resolutions for the
>> benefit of all Southern Cameroons citizens.
>> Generally speaking, the UN General Assembly
>> voted overwhelmingly to re-affirm its commitment to the
>> principle of self-determination as the Divine Right of all
>> peoples.
>> This re-assertion indicates that
>> the World Body is fully aware and concerned about the
>> different levels of human rights abuses, and certainly will
>> eventually resolve our annexation problem.
>> Specifically speaking, the list of the
>> remaining colonial territories comprising American Samoa,
>> Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands,
>> Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos
>> Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands, still in the
>> possession of the United States, Britain, and France, does
>> not include the Southern Cameroons.
>> The
>> meaning is that the Southern Cameroons was already
>> de-colonized.
>> Elsewhere the UN has published
>> another list of 15 Territories, including the Southern
>> Cameroons as former Trust Territories which were decolonized
>> by 1994. (See UN website sources URL:
>> http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/selfdet.shtml;
>> The first essential message implied – by
>> having not included our territory among those to be
>> decolonized – is that we were already Independent as of
>> 1st October 1961 even though most of our intellectual elite
>> continue to be unaware.
>> The second message
>> is that our problem is annexation, which means the
>> swallow-up of our state by another state. And its
>> de-annexation requires an entirely different procedure.
>> This analysis is especially important to some
>> of our Nationalist Movements such as the UNO-State Group and
>> the Southern Cameroons Lawyers Association. They have
>> wrongly continued to insist that we need to be independent,
>> whereas our quest at the present stage is for Sovereign
>> Recognition since we are already independent as of 1st
>> October 1961.
>> It is also important to some
>> of our compatriots who unfortunately are calling for an
>> armed struggle, being ignorant that an Independent State
>> does not articulate our annexation type of problem through
>> armed struggle. It would, like in war-torn Syria, destroy
>> our country before we return to the very peace table where
>> we should have started.
>> How we achieved Full
>> Independence.
>> By scientific analysis the
>> SCNC has 72 proofs of our Separate Independence from that of
>> the Francophone Republic of Cameroun. But suffice us to
>> here-in below present you just a half dozen of the most
>> elementary of them.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. The Plebiscite "Yes"
>> vote was a decision to achieve Independence, and not to
>> "join" whom ever for two reasons.
>> The
>> Independence issue was prioritized by being given the first
>> position in the Plebiscite Question of "Do You Wish to
>> Achieve Independence by Joining Nigeria?" Or "Do You
>> Wish To Achieve Independence By Joining the Republic of
>> Cameroon?"
>> The issue of Independence was
>> the antecedent of the condition of "joining", meaning
>> that it was indispensable, whereas the "joining", was
>> merely secondary.
>> A simple analogy is that
>> in a similar question of "Do You Wish to Go to New York by
>> Air or by Sea", the most important point is the decision
>> to go to New York. It is not the means of transport.
>> Furthermore, the UN endorsement vote of 19th
>> April 1961 on the outcome of the Plebiscite was on our
>> decision to achieve independence, and NOT on any
>> "Joining".
>> If the endorsement vote was
>> for the "joining", the United Nations would not have
>> called for the Post-Plebiscite International Conference
>> whereat the conditions of "joining" were still to be
>> discussed and its "modalities" worked out.The
>> second reason is that throughout the 72-year history of the
>> United Nations, the Organisation grants Independences. That
>> is why it designated 1st October 1961 as the Independence
>> Day of Southern Cameroons. Indeed, the World Body has never
>> granted any "joining"2.
>> The UN-required post-Plebiscite international conference did
>> not hold, so there was no occasion to have established any
>> "joining" between us and the Francophone Republic of
>> Cameroun through a Treaty which could only have resulted
>> from an International Conference.It
>> should be understood that the substituted Foumban conference
>> did not meet the standard of an International Conference, to
>> have worked out the required Treaty.It
>> follows that "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of
>> Cameroon", ironically called by the county's entire
>> virgin name at the suffix, as well as the multitude of other
>> subsequent constitutions therefrom, do not have the weight
>> of a Treaty.And
>> being strictly the exclusive Fundamental Law of the
>> Francophone Republic, it has no binding force on the
>> statehood of Southern Cameroons.Worse
>> still neither Britain nor the UN – which was to witness
>> the occasion – informed the Southern Cameroons government
>> that they would not attend the conference. Obviously the
>> Southern Cameroons government would not have proceeded to
>> the venue to be dominated by an overwhelming number of the
>> francophone delegation.With
>> this vacuum the Francophone Republic was able, through a
>> mere revision of their virgin constitution to impose their
>> name, flag, anthem, code of arms and national capital on the
>> Southern Cameroons till date, as the insignia of a
>> Federation which was never constituted.And
>> the Southern Cameroons became a mere appendix.3.
>> It is further noteworthy that in the aftermath of the
>> failure to convene the International Conference, the United
>> Nations did not call-off, suspend, or cancel their grant of
>> independence to Southern Cameroons.Similarly
>> Britain, the Administering Authority, did not deny
>> delivering the independence, which would have happened by
>> continuing to maintain their Trusteeship presence in the
>> Territory.Furthermore,
>> the Republic of Cameroun, on their part, did not complain
>> about the irregularity of federating with another
>> independent state without a prior Treaty.As
>> a result, the Southern Cameroons majestically moved forward
>> and consummated her full Independence on the designated 1st
>> October, 1961.The
>> term consummated means the populations celebrated the event,
>> which affixed their Permanent Seal on the
>> Independence.It
>> follows that, there was no longer any Independence "by
>> joining" as such, meaning that we unconditionally achieved
>> Full Independence inadvertently.This
>> Sovereign Class of Independence is the very type that most
>> African countries achieved, which our people were clamouring
>> for as a "third option", but the British brushed
>> aside.4.
>> There have been external confirmations to our independence.
>> Aside from the UN excluding us from being either a colony or
>> a Trust Territory, the Republic of Cameroun has itself
>> repeatedly recognised our separate Independence.For
>> instance, they placed the representative star of Southern
>> Cameroons on their flag from 1961 to 1972 which symbolises
>> that we were separately independent to have qualified for a
>> star.5.
>> Another piece of evidence is that the Republic of Cameroun
>> inserted the word "United" and the name of the country
>> at some point became United Republic of Cameroon. Whenever
>> the term "United" appears in the name of a country it
>> shows that the states that formed the supposed federation
>> were independent states.An
>> example is the use of the terminology "United" to
>> describe the 52 states of the USA which shows that the
>> states were independent countries that came together as
>> equals.The
>> same applies to "United" in the name United Kingdom,
>> which is also emphasising that Wales, Scotland, Northern
>> Ireland and England were independent kingdoms that united as
>> equal partners.6.
>> Finally, on the 20th of February 2014 during a fake
>> re-unification celebration in Buea (fake because
>> re-unification does not exist where there was no prior
>> unification in terms of a joint independence), Mr. Biya
>> himself declared that the Southern Cameroons is an
>> independent state. The population was clapping without
>> understanding the message.In
>> the speech a copy of which we have, for whoever may wish to
>> verify, he said "history cannot forget that Buea was once
>> the Headquarters of West Cameroon", and "history cannot
>> also forget that Buea was once the Capital of Southern
>> Cameroons"The
>> meaning is that when our country was an un-independent
>> territory Buea, the seat of government was a mere
>> headquarters. But when we achieved independence, the very
>> Buea transformed into a Capital.
>>
>>
>> Conclussion
>> Having proved that the Southern Cameroons is a
>> fully independent State from whatever angle of analysis, the
>> implied United Nations message to us through its recent
>> Resolutions is not that we pursue our de-annexation by armed
>> struggle.
>> Rather, it is for us to proceed
>> through pure democratic means, using established UN
>> Institutions. The ideal procedure is for us to begin from
>> litigation, the outcome of which would enable us rouse the
>> international community to act. This is the way (path) the
>> smaller Republic of Cameroun went (took) before redeeming
>> the Bakassi Peninsular from the almighty Nigeria. Not even
>> the Security Council can veto the decision of a court.
>> This is the vision that, after 11 years of
>> research and analysis, guided the SCNC to first sue the
>> Republic of Cameroon in the local high Court in Bamenda,
>> Southern Cameroons in September 2011.
>> The
>> dismissal verdict six months later coupled with two related
>> arrests of Thomas NWACHAN, the primary researcher and filer
>> of the case, helped open the door for the case to enter the
>> Geneva-based UN Human Rights Committee.
>> Our
>> 72-page petition by reason of 400 synoptic arguments,
>> jointly and severally indicting the Francophone Republic,
>> Britain and the UN, was received by the court on April 9,
>> 2014.
>> Ladies and gentlemen, we are in
>> regular contact with the court to which we have submitted
>> further evidence on demand. But you know the court takes its
>> time between three to five years to render its verdict.
>> However, we are confident of a victorious
>> outcome, considering the positive results of the previous
>> personal cases of two of our citizens, Gorgi Dinka and
>> Albert Mukong, against the Republic of Cameroun by this very
>> court.
>> It follows that we must watch out
>> against repeating the errors of the past. As an Independent
>> State we can no longer concede to the deceptive proposals of
>> another referendum, constitutional reform, re-federation,
>> and Vice-Presidency when there is no prior Treaty to anchor
>> any of these reforms.
>> This does not suggest
>> that there is now room for a Treaty either. Not only is it
>> impossible to reconvene the UN-prescribed post-Plebiscite
>> International Conference, the parties to the Treaty no
>> longer exist for the following reasons, as well.
>> The Trusteeship Authority expired on 30th
>> September 1961, with the downing of the British flag. So
>> neither the UN nor Britain can return to the Southern
>> Cameroons to work out the Treaty, on the basis of the
>> Trusteeship Agreement. In addition, as an independent State
>> only the Southern Cameroons can work out a Treaty between
>> herself and whomever.
>> Furthermore, the
>> Republic of Cameroun tore away the democratically elected
>> government of Southern Cameroons in 1972, so there is no
>> legitimate government representing the Southern Cameroons
>> with whom to work out any such Treaty today.
>> Thus the Francophone Republic will finally be
>> left alone to be licking its wounds. Since, in light of the
>> foregoing arguments, the Southern Cameroons is bound to be
>> restored its deserved sovereignty.
>> Long Live
>> the SCNC
>> Long live the UN Right to Self
>> Determination
>> Long Live the Would-Be State
>> of Southern CameroonsSigned:THOMAS
>> N. NWACHAN
>> B.A. Hist., M.A Pol. Sc., M.A
>> Mgt.
>> 1969 combined winner of Fulbright of US
>> Congress, and
>> The Lawrence Wien
>> International Scholarships
>> Through Brandeis
>> University, Mass, USA.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847 --
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp {
>> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px
>> 0;padding:0 10px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp hr {
>> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp #yiv9691609847hd {
>> color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
>> 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp #yiv9691609847ads {
>> margin-bottom:10px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp .yiv9691609847ad {
>> padding:0 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp .yiv9691609847ad p {
>> margin:0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp .yiv9691609847ad a {
>> color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-lc {
>> font-family:Arial;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-lc #yiv9691609847hd {
>> margin:10px
>> 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-lc .yiv9691609847ad {
>> margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847actions {
>> font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity {
>>
>> background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span {
>> font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span:first-child {
>> text-transform:uppercase;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span a {
>> color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span span {
>> color:#ff7900;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span
>> .yiv9691609847underline {
>> text-decoration:underline;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach {
>> clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
>> 0;width:400px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach div a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach img {
>> border:none;padding-right:5px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach label {
>> display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach label a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 blockquote {
>> margin:0 0 0 4px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847bold {
>> font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847bold a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 dd.yiv9691609847last p a {
>> font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 dd.yiv9691609847last p span {
>> margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 dd.yiv9691609847last p
>> span.yiv9691609847yshortcuts {
>> margin-right:0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847attach-table div div a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847attach-table {
>> width:400px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847file-title a, #yiv9691609847
>> div.yiv9691609847file-title a:active, #yiv9691609847
>> div.yiv9691609847file-title a:hover, #yiv9691609847
>> div.yiv9691609847file-title a:visited {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a,
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a:active,
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a:hover,
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a:visited {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div#yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-msg p a span.yiv9691609847yshortcuts {
>> font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847green {
>> color:#628c2a;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847MsoNormal {
>> margin:0 0 0 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 o {
>> font-size:0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847photos div {
>> float:left;width:72px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847photos div div {
>> border:1px solid
>> #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847photos div label {
>>
>> color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847reco-category {
>> font-size:77%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847reco-desc {
>> font-size:77%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847replbq {
>> margin:4px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {
>> margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg {
>> font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean,
>> sans-serif;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg table {
>> font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg select,
>> #yiv9691609847 input, #yiv9691609847 textarea {
>> font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9691609847
>> code {
>> font:115% monospace;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg * {
>> line-height:1.22em;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9691609847logo {
>> padding-bottom:10px;}
>>
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-msg p a {
>> font-family:Verdana;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-msg
>> p#yiv9691609847attach-count span {
>> color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-reco
>> #yiv9691609847reco-head {
>> color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-reco {
>> margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor #yiv9691609847ov
>> li a {
>> font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor #yiv9691609847ov
>> li {
>> font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor #yiv9691609847ov
>> ul {
>> margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-text {
>> font-family:Georgia;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-text p {
>> margin:0 0 1em 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-text tt {
>> font-size:120%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {
>> border-right:none !important;
>> }
>> #yiv9691609847
>>
>> __._,_.___
>> ------------------------------
>> Posted by: Immanuel TatahMentan <inmentan@yahoo.com>
>> ------------------------------
>> Reply via web post
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/conversations/messages/155732;_ylc=X3oDMTJza3F1cXFzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARtc2dJZAMxNTU3MzIEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDY0NjcwNzUy?act=reply&messageNum=155732>
>> • Reply to sender
>> <inmentan@yahoo.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcameroon_politics%5D%20UN%20Resolution%20Gives%20Great%20Hope%20for%20Southern%20Cameroons%20Sovereignty%3A%20SCNC%20REACTS%20TO%20RECENT%20UN%20RESOLUTIONS%20ON%20DE-COLONIZATION>
>> • Reply to group
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcameroon_politics%5D%20UN%20Resolution%20Gives%20Great%20Hope%20for%20Southern%20Cameroons%20Sovereignty%3A%20SCNC%20REACTS%20TO%20RECENT%20UN%20RESOLUTIONS%20ON%20DE-COLONIZATION>
>> • Start a New Topic
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdTkxODJzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzE0NjQ2NzA3NTI->
>> • Messages in this topic
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/conversations/topics/155382;_ylc=X3oDMTM5M3NwNGN2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARtc2dJZAMxNTU3MzIEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDY0NjcwNzUyBHRwY0lkAzE1NTM4Mg-->
>> (7)
>> ------------------------------
>> Have you tried the highest rated email app? <https://yho.com/1wwmgg>
>> With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email
>> app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your
>> inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an
>> email
>> again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
>> ------------------------------
>> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cameroon_politics/
>> Visit Your Group
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMHVldWc1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NjQ2NzA3NTI->
>>
>>
>> [image: Yahoo! Groups]
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbDZjMGx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ2NDY3MDc1Mg-->
>> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
>> Unsubscribe
>> <cameroon_politics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> •
>> Terms
>> of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>
>>
>> .
>>
>> __,_._,___
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> The thing always happens that you really believe in; and the belief in a
> thing makes it happen.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ambasbay" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Aaron Agien NYANGKWE
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
Tel. 237 673 42 71 27
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
senior Statesman Mola Njoh Litumbe;
"In other words, were the plebiscitary results ever ratified by the
United Nations itself so as to make them official? And, once Southern
Cameroons was "decolonized by joining East Cameroun" through the
plebiscite, what type of political arrangements did both sides make to
coexist. If, for example, a political arrangement was agreed upon by
both sides, did any external body like the United Nations bear witness
to it, and what were the terms?" Greg Takor
On 5/31/16, Ofege Ntemfac <ntemfacnchwete@gmail.com> wrote:
> UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC
> REACTS TO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATION
>
> In the Series of United Nation resolutions of the 9th of December 2015 that
> have sovereignty implication for the Southern Cameroon Struggle, we believe
> that the news of its coming was the basis of the rumour by the UNO State
> that their British Cameroons was going to be freed on that 9th of December
> 2015.
>
> Since the resolutions came out, there have been a lot of wrong comments
> from abroad and at home. But here in below, we publish an incisive analysis
> by the SCNC of what these resolutions really mean for the struggle of
> Southern Cameroon.
>
> We have studiously read the December 9th 2015 UN Resolutions on
> decolonization, as well as the reactions from many quarters particularly
> our members in the diaspora.
>
> The views expressed fall into two categories namely:
>
> Those that sincerely confess that they do not understand the relevance of
> those resolutions to our specific problem, and
>
> Those who try to interpret wrongly by referring to Resolution 1608 as dead,
> hence the Southern Cameroons could never be liberated.
>
> In this situation, the SCNC is duty-bound to herein below, scientifically
> explain the implications of these Resolutions for the benefit of all
> Southern Cameroons citizens.
>
> Generally speaking, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to
> re-affirm its commitment to the principle of self-determination as the
> Divine Right of all peoples.
>
> This re-assertion indicates that the World Body is fully aware and
> concerned about the different levels of human rights abuses, and certainly
> will eventually resolve our annexation problem.
>
> Specifically speaking, the list of the remaining colonial territories
> comprising American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands,
> Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos
> Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands, still in the possession of
> the United States, Britain, and France, does not include the Southern
> Cameroons.
>
> The meaning is that the Southern Cameroons was already de-colonized.
>
> Elsewhere the UN has published another list of 15 Territories, including
> the Southern Cameroons as former Trust Territories which were decolonized
> by 1994. (See UN website sources URL:
>
> http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/selfdet.shtml;
>
> The first essential message implied – by having not included our territory
> among those to be decolonized – is that we were already Independent as of
> 1st October 1961 even though most of our intellectual elite continue to be
> unaware.
>
> The second message is that our problem is annexation, which means the
> swallow-up of our state by another state. And its de-annexation requires an
> entirely different procedure.
>
> This analysis is especially important to some of our Nationalist Movements
> such as the UNO-State Group and the Southern Cameroons Lawyers Association.
> They have wrongly continued to insist that we need to be independent,
> whereas our quest at the present stage is for Sovereign Recognition since
> we are already independent as of 1st October 1961.
>
> It is also important to some of our compatriots who unfortunately are
> calling for an armed struggle, being ignorant that an Independent State
> does not articulate our annexation type of problem through armed struggle.
> It would, like in war-torn Syria, destroy our country before we return to
> the very peace table where we should have started.
>
> How we achieved Full Independence.
>
> By scientific analysis the SCNC has 72 proofs of our Separate Independence
> from that of the Francophone Republic of Cameroun. But suffice us to
> here-in below present you just a half dozen of the most elementary of them.
>
> 1. The Plebiscite "Yes" vote was a decision to achieve Independence, and
> not to "join" whom ever for two reasons.
>
> The Independence issue was prioritized by being given the first position in
> the Plebiscite Question of "Do You Wish to Achieve Independence by Joining
> Nigeria?" Or "Do You Wish To Achieve Independence By Joining the Republic
> of Cameroon?"
>
> The issue of Independence was the antecedent of the condition of "joining",
> meaning that it was indispensable, whereas the "joining", was merely
> secondary.
>
> A simple analogy is that in a similar question of "Do You Wish to Go to New
> York by Air or by Sea", the most important point is the decision to go to
> New York. It is not the means of transport.
>
> Furthermore, the UN endorsement vote of 19th April 1961 on the outcome of
> the Plebiscite was on our decision to achieve independence, and NOT on any
> "Joining".
>
> If the endorsement vote was for the "joining", the United Nations would not
> have called for the Post-Plebiscite International Conference whereat the
> conditions of "joining" were still to be discussed and its "modalities"
> worked out.
>
> The second reason is that throughout the 72-year history of the United
> Nations, the Organisation grants Independences. That is why it designated
> 1st October 1961 as the Independence Day of Southern Cameroons. Indeed, the
> World Body has never granted any "joining"
>
> 2. The UN-required post-Plebiscite international conference did not hold,
> so there was no occasion to have established any "joining" between us and
> the Francophone Republic of Cameroun through a Treaty which could only have
> resulted from an International Conference.
>
> It should be understood that the substituted Foumban conference did not
> meet the standard of an International Conference, to have worked out the
> required Treaty.
>
> It follows that "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon",
> ironically called by the county's entire virgin name at the suffix, as well
> as the multitude of other subsequent constitutions therefrom, do not have
> the weight of a Treaty.
>
> And being strictly the exclusive Fundamental Law of the Francophone
> Republic, it has no binding force on the statehood of Southern Cameroons.
>
> Worse still neither Britain nor the UN – which was to witness the occasion
> – informed the Southern Cameroons government that they would not attend the
> conference. Obviously the Southern Came-roons government would not have
> proceeded to the venue to be dominated by an overwhelming number of the
> francophone delegation.
>
> With this vacuum the Francophone Republic was able, through a mere revision
> of their virgin constitution to impose their name, flag, anthem, code of
> arms and national capital on the Southern Came-roons till date, as the
> insignia of a Federation which was never constituted.
>
> And the Southern Cameroons became a mere appendix.
>
> 3. It is further noteworthy that in the aftermath of the failure to convene
> the International Conference, the United Nations did not call-off, suspend,
> or cancel their grant of independence to Southern Cameroons.
>
> Similarly Britain, the Administering Authority, did not deny delivering the
> independence, which would have happened by continuing to maintain their
> Trusteeship presence in the Territory.
>
> Furthermore, the Republic of Cameroun, on their part, did not complain
> about the irregularity of federating with another independent state without
> a prior Treaty.
>
> As a result, the Southern Cameroons majestically moved forward and
> consummated her full Independence on the designated 1st October, 1961.
>
> The term consummated means the populations celebrated the event, which
> affixed their Permanent Seal on the Independence.
>
> It follows that, there was no longer any Independence "by joining" as such,
> meaning that we unconditionally achieved Full Independence inadvertently.
>
> This Sovereign Class of Independence is the very type that most African
> countries achieved, which our people were clamouring for as a "third
> option", but the British brushed aside.
>
> 4. There have been external confirmations to our independence. Aside from
> the UN excluding us from being either a colony or a Trust Territory, the
> Republic of Cameroun has itself repeatedly recognised our separate
> Independence.
>
> For instance, they placed the representative star of Southern Cameroons on
> their flag from 1961 to 1972 which symbolises that we were separately
> independent to have qualified for a star.
>
> 5. Another piece of evidence is that the Republic of Cameroun inserted the
> word "United" and the name of the country at some point became United
> Republic of Cameroon. Whenever the term "United" appears in the name of a
> country it shows that the states that formed the supposed federation were
> independent states.
>
> An example is the use of the terminology "United" to describe the 52 states
> of the USA which shows that the states were independent countries that came
> together as equals.
>
> The same applies to "United" in the name United Kingdom, which is also
> emphasising that Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and England were
> independent kingdoms that united as equal partners.
>
> 6. Finally, on the 20th of February 2014 during a fake re-unification
> celebration in Buea (fake because re-unification does not exist where there
> was no prior unification in terms of a joint independence), Mr. Biya
> himself declared that the Southern Cameroons is an independent state. The
> population was clapping without understanding the message.
>
> In the speech a copy of which we have, for whoever may wish to verify, he
> said "history cannot forget that Buea was once the Headquarters of West
> Cameroon", and "history cannot also forget that Buea was once the Capital
> of Southern Cameroons"
>
> The meaning is that when our country was an un-independent territory Buea,
> the seat of government was a mere headquarters. But when we achieved
> independence, the very Buea transformed into a Capital.
>
> Conclusion
>
> Having proved that the Southern Cameroons is a fully independent State from
> whatever angle of analysis, the implied United Nations message to us
> through its recent Resolutions is not that we pursue our de-annexation by
> armed struggle.
>
> Rather, it is for us to proceed through pure democratic means, using
> established UN Institutions. The ideal procedure is for us to begin from
> litigation, the outcome of which would enable us rouse the international
> community to act. This is the way (path) the smaller Republic of Cameroun
> went (took) before redeeming the Bakassi Peninsular from the almighty
> Nigeria. Not even the Security Council can veto the decision of a court.
>
> This is the vision that, after 11 years of research and analysis, guided
> the SCNC to first sue the Republic of Cameroon in the local high Court in
> Bamenda, Southern Cameroons in September 2011.
>
> The dismissal verdict six months later coupled with two related arrests of
> Thomas NWACHAN, the primary researcher and filer of the case, helped open
> the door for the case to enter the Geneva-based UN Human Rights Committee.
>
> Our 72-page petition by reason of 400 synoptic arguments, jointly and
> severally indicting the Francophone Republic, Britain and the UN, was
> received by the court on April 9, 2014.
>
> Ladies and gentlemen, we are in regular contact with the court to which we
> have submitted further evidence on demand. But you know the court takes its
> time between three to five years to render its verdict.
>
> However, we are confident of a victorious outcome, considering the positive
> results of the previous personal cases of two of our citizens, Gorgi Dinka
> and Albert Mukong, against the Republic of Came-roun by this very court.
>
> It follows that we must watch out against repeating the errors of the past.
> As an Independent State we can no longer concede to the deceptive proposals
> of another referendum, constitutional reform, re-federation, and
> Vice-Presidency when there is no prior Treaty to anchor any of these
> reforms.
>
> This does not suggest that there is now room for a Treaty either. Not only
> is it impossible to reconvene the UN-prescribed post-Plebiscite
> International Conference, the parties to the Treaty no longer exist for the
> following reasons, as well.
>
> The Trusteeship Authority expired on 30th September 1961, with the downing
> of the British flag. So neither the UN nor Britain can return to the
> Southern Cameroons to work out the Treaty, on the basis of the Trusteeship
> Agreement. In addition, as an independent State only the Southern Cameroons
> can work out a Treaty between herself and whomever.
>
> Furthermore, the Republic of Cameroun tore away the democratically elected
> government of Southern Cameroons in 1972, so there is no legitimate
> government representing the Southern Cameroons with whom to work out any
> such Treaty today.
>
> Thus the Francophone Republic will finally be left alone to be licking its
> wounds. Since, in light of the foregoing arguments, the Southern Cameroons
> is bound to be restored its deserved sovereign-ty.
>
> Long Live the SCNC
>
> Long live the UN Right to Self Determination
>
> Long Live the Would-Be State of Southern Cameroons
>
> On Mon, May 30, 2016 at 9:59 PM, Immanuel TatahMentan inmentan@yahoo.com
> [cameroon_politics] <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> My Dear Enow Takor,
>> What is at issue is :
>> 1 . The Southern Cameroons was militarily occupied immediately after the
>> Plebiscite in pursuit of socalled fleeing "maquisards" from LRC
>> 2 . Annexation in September 1961 by Ahidjo ' s asymmetrical federalism
>> 3. Colonization and systematic development of economic underdevelopment
>> as
>> from October 1,1961.
>> 4. Annihilation,exclusion, secession by President Paul Biya ' s LRC and
>> marginalization of the colony by the 1984 Biya decree reenacting LRC at
>> independence from January 1,1960.
>> Historically, that is the trajectory. The butt lickers of whatver
>> persuasion may twist history.But, the brutal facts face us without
>> blinking.
>> Tatah mentan
>>
>> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>> <https://overview.mail.yahoo.com/mobile/?.src=Android>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hello bro,
>> I am assuming that what they mean by "Southern Cameroons is already
>> decolonized by joining East Cameroun" is through the United Nations
>> organized plebiscite of February 1961. If my assumption is right, the
>> question then becomes whether the results of that plebiscite were ever
>> consumated. In other words, were the plebiscitary results ever ratified
>> by
>> the United Nations itself so as to make them official? And, once Southern
>> Cameroons was "decolonized by joining East Cameroun" through the
>> plebiscite, what type of political arrangements did both sides make to
>> coexist. If, for example, a political arrangement was agreed upon by both
>> sides, did any external body like the United Nations bear witness to it,
>> and what were the terms? Since Southern Cameroons supposedly joined East
>> Cameroun by plebiscite, we have gone through federal and unitary systems,
>> and finally, the incorporation of Southern Cameroons into East Cameroon
>> to
>> become part of La Republique du Cameroun, which is what East Cameroun
>> used
>> to be called. The transition to the United Republc of Cameroon is for all
>> intent and purpose, illegal because it was foisted on Southern
>> Cameroonians
>> through Ahidjou's extraconstitutionality. It was a single ballot issue of
>> oui/yes without a non/no ballot.Above all else,the last straw that tore
>> apart the unofficial results of the plebisite by which Souhern Cameoons
>> is
>> assumed to have been decolonized by joining East Cameroun is Paul Biya's
>> administrative fiat(Presiential Decree) which juridically abolished the
>> United Republic of Cameroon, although, again, this system was itself
>> illegal, and single handedly replaced it with the former East Cameroun
>> appellation of La Republique du Cameroun. By this decree, Southern
>> Cameroons ceased being decolonized by supposedly joining East Cameroun
>> juridically and de jure. onequently, what we now have is the illegal
>> occupation and annexation of Southern Cameroons by La Republique du
>> Cameroun, in my view.
>>
>> ENOW TAKOR
>> --------------------------------------------
>> On Mon, 5/30/16, Divine Rhyme hittback@yahoo.com [cameroon_politics] <
>> cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
>>
>> Subject: Re: [cameroon_politics] UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS ON
>> DE-COLONIZATION
>> To: "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>,
>> "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com" <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>, "
>> bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com" <bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com>
>> Cc: "Edwin Ngang" <ednngang@yahoo.com>, "Edwin Ngang" <
>> ednngang@hotmail.com>, "yahoogroups" <colo_angl@yahoogroups.com>
>> Date: Monday, May 30, 2016, 4:40 PM
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Below
>> is a cut and paste from a UN document where Southern
>> Cameroon is listed as already decolonized by joining East
>> Cameroon.Here
>> is where the matter becomes very unclear and it seems
>> different people interpret it differently.It is
>> clearly written here that decolonize by joining. We usually
>> say the devil is in the details. It
>> is clearly written here without any ambiguity thatNo
>> 1 Togoland (under British
>> administration)United with
>> the Gold Coast
>> (Colony and Protectorate), a Non-Self-Governing Territory
>> administered
>> by the United Kingdom, in 1957 to form
>> Ghana
>>
>> No.
>> II
>> Somaliland
>> (under Italian
>> administration)United
>> with British Somaliland Protectorate in 1960 to form
>> SomaliaNo.
>> III Tanganyika
>> (under British administration)Became
>> independent in 1961 (in
>> 1964, Tanganyika and the former protectorate of Zanzibar,
>> which had
>> become independent in 1963, united as a single State under the name of
>> the United Republic of
>> Tanzania)
>> No.
>> IV Cameroons
>> (under British administration) Northern
>> territory joined
>> Nigeria and Southern territory joined Cameroon
>> (1961)
>> No
>> V Ruanda-Urundi
>> (under Belgian administration)Voted
>> to
>> divide into the two
>> sovereign -States of Rwanda and Burundi in
>> 1962
>> Now
>> this is my problem
>> I
>> have just selected a few of the decolonized territories
>> listed in this UN publication, complete with their official
>> names as of the date of decolonization - either through
>> direct independence as single territories or as territories
>> which decided to form a new nation with others in
>> carefully defined status. The words UNITED and SELF GOVERNING in Free
>> Association with The USA...,(this in reference to The
>> Federated States of Micronesia) cannot be clearer.
>> In all these the descriptions are very
>> precise and unambiguous. But its only in the case of British
>> Cameroons where the word
>> JOINED is without any qualification - not even
>> an implied one.
>> . What could join
>> mean in this case?. United
>> definitely means two territories,
>> distinctly separate before, choose to come together by an
>> arrangement which has a definite process and requirements
>> known to the UN system and in international politics. United
>> usually entails having a single government, and
>> one international boundary. But territories can join with one another in
>> hundreds of
>> ways which the UN does not necessarily know about. And each
>> can still maintain their international boundaries. Most
>> territories have joined
>> and then united to form single states.
>> Therefore joining does not have a single meaning in
>> international politics. Logic tells me that joining does not necessarily
>> mean coming together as one but United
>> means exactly that except otherwise stated.
>> Has Southern Cameroons ever united
>> with French Cameroon? But then the
>> intriguing thing here is that in 1972 Ahidjo organized a
>> referendum to reunite
>> - meaning there had been a unification
>> before
>> - but when was that? Did he take
>> joining to mean uniting
>> giving him the reason to re-unite once
>> more?It seems this is one of the rare releases
>> from the struggle that has made sense to me without leaving
>> a bitter taste of doubt in my mind. This release does not
>> exaggerate its achievements so far but it sure gives real
>> hopes - but above all there is clarity in the approach.
>> Another interesting aspect is that unlike before, the writer
>> has stated his position on the matter without attempting to
>> vilify the approach from another front - in this case that
>> of Professor Chia. Professor Chia's approach too makes a
>> lot of sense but for the fact that he bases his argument
>> solely on the premise that Britain violated its trusteeship
>> mandate by splitting the territory in two and organizing
>> plebiscites separately to ask each part to choose either
>> to join
>> French Cameroon or The Federal Republic of
>> Nigeria. But if various arguments from lawyers
>> specialized in international law are correct, then
>> Professor Chia does not have much of a case because it seems
>> he has not bothered to make any arguments concerning the
>> various machinations by the regimes of Mr. Ahidjo and
>> presently Mr. Biya to violate the sovereignty of Southern
>> Cameroons. His problem is with Britain. But what I cannot
>> understand is what really stops all these Southern Cameroons
>> factions to come together and carry on the struggle from a
>> united platform. If that happens we might also come to
>> understand how is that Professor Chia is so convinced
>> about his approach. Why would he not believe these experts
>> on International law? There must be something wrong we seem
>> not to be seeing here. What might make some of us a little
>> bit skeptical about Professor Chia's approach is the
>> secrecy shrouding his entire enterprise. I personally
>> don't see the need for such secrecy. But common sense
>> does not allow me believe that he would not want to believe
>> in the expertise of international lawyers. There must be
>> something driving him forward.
>> FEN
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Skip
>> to main navigation Skip
>> to content
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Welcome to the United
>> Nations. It's your world.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN
>> Search
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> The
>> United Nations and Decolonization
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN
>> Home Main
>> Page Committee
>> of 24
>>
>> Regional
>> Seminars
>>
>> Fourth
>> Committee
>>
>> Documents
>>
>>
>> Press
>> Releases
>>
>> History
>>
>> International
>> Trusteeship System
>> Trust
>> and Non-Self-Governing Territories (1945-2002)
>> Trusteeship
>> Council
>> Trust
>> Territories that have achieved
>> self-determination
>>
>> Historical
>> Documents
>>
>> Resources
>>
>> Contact
>> Us
>>
>>
>> New
>> on the site
>>
>>
>>
>> Video:
>> PACC Tokelau: Vital Health
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Trust
>> Territories that have achieved self-determination
>>
>> Togoland
>> (under British administration)
>>
>> United
>> with the Gold Coast
>> (Colony and Protectorate), a Non-Self-Governing Territory
>> administered
>> by the United Kingdom, in 1957 to form Ghana
>>
>> Somaliland
>> (under Italian administration)
>> United
>> with British Somaliland Protectorate in 1960 to form
>> Somalia
>> Togoland
>> (under French administration)
>> Became
>> independent as Togo in 1960 etc.
>>
>> Cameroons
>> (under French administration)
>> Became
>> independent as Cameroon in 1960
>> Cameroons
>> (under British administration)
>> Northern
>> territory joined Nigeria and Southern territory joined
>> Cameroon (1961)
>> Tanganyika
>> (under British administration)
>> Became
>> independent in 1961 (in
>> 1964, Tanganyika and the former protectorate of Zanzibar,
>> which had
>> become independent in 1963, united as a single State under
>> the name of
>> the United Republic of Tanzania)
>> Ruanda-Urundi
>> (under Belgian administration)
>> Voted
>> to divide into the two sovereign States of Rwanda and
>> Burundi in 1962
>> Western
>> Samoa (under New Zealand administration)
>> Became
>> independent as Samoa in 1962
>> Nauru
>> (administered by Australia on behalf of Australia, New
>> Zealand and the United Kingdom)
>> Became
>> independent in 1968
>> New
>> Guinea (administered by Australia)
>> United
>> with the
>> Non-Self-Governing Territory of Papua, also administered by
>> Australia,
>> to become the independent State of Papua New Guinea in
>> 1975
>> Trust
>> Territory of the Pacific Islands:
>>
>>
>> Federated States of
>> Micronesia
>> Became fully self-governing in free
>> Association with the United States in 1990Republic of the
>> Marshall Islands
>>
>> Became fully self-governing in free
>> Association with the United States in 1990Commonwealth of the
>> Northern Mariana Islands
>>
>> Became fully self-governing as
>> Commonwealth of the United States in 1990Palau
>> Became fully self-governing in free
>> Association with the United States in 1994
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Copyright
>> | Terms
>> of Use | Privacy
>> Notice | Site
>> Index | Fraud
>> Alert | Contact Us
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Aaron Rezeh
>> rezehatm@yahoo.com [cameroon_politics]"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
>>
>> To:
>> "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
>> <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com"
>> <bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com>
>> Cc: Edwin Ngang
>> <ednngang@yahoo.com>; Edwin Ngang
>> <ednngang@hotmail.com>; yahoogroups
>> <colo_angl@yahoogroups.com>
>> Sent: Monday, May 30,
>> 2016 9:35 AM
>> Subject: Re:
>> [cameroon_politics] UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN
>> RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATION
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN
>> RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATIONposted
>> by Akene
>> Asobo May 24, 2016 Home
>> Just
>> reformatted version:*In
>> the Series of United Nation resolutions of the 9th of
>> December 2015 that have sovereignty implication for the
>> Southern Cameroon Struggle, we believe that the news of its
>> coming was the basis of the rumour by the UNO State that
>> their British Cameroon was going to be freed on that 9th of
>> December 2015 .Since
>> the resolutions came out, there have been a lot of wrong
>> comments from abroad and at home. But here in below, we
>> publish an incisive analysis by the SCNC of what these
>> resolutions really mean for the struggle of Southern
>> Cameroon.
>> We
>> have studiously read the December 9th 2015 UN Resolutions on
>> decolonization, as well as the reactions from many quarters
>> particularly our members in the diaspora.
>>
>> The
>> views expressed fall into two categories namely:Those
>> that sincerely confess that they do not understand the
>> relevance of those resolutions to our specific problem,
>> and
>> Those
>> who try to interpret wrongly by referring to Resolution 1608
>> as dead, hence the Southern Cameroons could never be
>> liberated.
>> In
>> this situation, the SCNC is duty-bound to herein below,
>> scientifically explain the implications of these Resolutions
>> for the benefit of all Southern Cameroons citizens.
>> Generally
>> speaking, the UN General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to
>> re-affirm its commitment to the principle of
>> self-determination as the Divine Right of all peoples.
>>
>> This re-assertion indicates
>> that the World Body is fully aware and concerned about the
>> different levels of human rights abuses, and certainly will
>> eventually resolve our annexation problem.
>> Specifically
>> speaking, the list of the remaining colonial territories
>> comprising American Samoa, Anguilla, Bermuda,
>> British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Guam, Montserrat,
>> Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos Islands, and the
>> United States Virgin Islands, still in the possession of the
>> United States, Britain, and France, does not include the
>> Southern Cameroons.
>> The meaning is that the
>> Southern Cameroons was already de-colonized. Elsewhere the UN has
>> published
>> another list of 15 Territories, including the Southern
>> Cameroons as former Trust Territories which were decolonized
>> by 1994. (See UN website sources URL:
>> http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/selfdet.shtml;The
>> first essential message implied – by having not included
>> our territory among those to be decolonized – is that we
>> were already Independent as of 1st October 1961 even though
>> most of our intellectual elite continue to be
>> unaware.
>>
>> The second message is that our
>> problem is annexation, which means the swallow-up of our
>> state by another state. And its de-annexation requires an
>> entirely different procedure.
>>
>> This analysis is especially
>> important to some of our Nationalist Movements such as the
>> UNO-State Group and the Southern Cameroons Lawyers
>> Association. They have wrongly continued to insist that we
>> need to be independent, whereas our quest at the present
>> stage is for Sovereign Recognition since we are already
>> independent as of 1st October 1961.
>> It is also important to some of
>> our compatriots who unfortunately are calling for an armed
>> struggle, being ignorant that an Independent State does not
>> articulate our annexation type of problem through armed
>> struggle. It would, like in war-torn Syria, destroy our
>> country before we return to the very peace table where we
>> should have started.
>>
>> How we achieved Full
>> Independence.
>> By scientific analysis
>> the SCNC has 72 proofs of our Separate Independence
>> from that of the Francophone Republic of Cameroun. But
>> suffice us to here-in below present you just a half dozen of
>> the most elementary of them.
>>
>>
>> 1.
>> The Plebiscite
>> "Yes" vote was a decision to achieve Independence, and
>> not to "join" whom ever for two reasons.
>> The Independence issue was
>> prioritized by being given the first position in the
>> Plebiscite Question of "Do You Wish to Achieve
>> Independence by Joining Nigeria?" Or "Do You Wish To
>> Achieve Independence By Joining the Republic of
>> Cameroon?"
>> The issue of Independence was
>> the antecedent of the condition of "joining", meaning
>> that it was indispensable, whereas the "joining", was merely
>> secondary.
>>
>> A simple analogy is that in a
>> similar question of "Do You Wish to Go to New York by Air
>> or by Sea", the most important point is the decision to go
>> to New York. It is not the means of transport.
>> Furthermore, the UN endorsement
>> vote of 19th April 1961 on the outcome of the Plebiscite was
>> on our decision to achieve independence, and NOT on any
>> "Joining".
>> If the endorsement vote was for
>> the "joining", the United Nations would not have called
>> for the Post-Plebiscite International Conference whereat the
>> conditions of "joining" were still to be discussed and
>> its "modalities" worked out.The second reason is that
>> throughout the 72-year history of the United Nations, the
>> Organisation grants Independences. That is why it designated
>> 1st
>> October 1961 as the Independence Day of
>> Southern Cameroons. Indeed, the World Body has
>> never granted any "joining"2. The UN-required
>> post-Plebiscite international conference did not hold, so
>> there was no occasion to have established any "joining"
>> between us and the Francophone Republic of Cameroun through
>> a Treaty which could only have resulted from an
>> International Conference.It
>> should be understood that the substituted Foumban conference
>> did not meet the standard of an International Conference, to
>> have worked out the required Treaty.It
>> follows that "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of
>> Cameroon", ironically called by the county's entire
>> virgin name at the suffix, as well as the multitude of other
>> subsequent constitutions therefrom, do not have the weight
>> of a Treaty.And
>> being strictly the exclusive Fundamental Law of the
>> Francophone Republic, it has no binding force on the
>> statehood of Southern Cameroons.Worse
>> still neither Britain nor the UN – which was to witness
>> the occasion – informed the Southern Cameroons government
>> that they would not attend the conference. Obviously the
>> Southern Cameroons government would not have proceeded to
>> the venue to be dominated by an overwhelming number of the
>> francophone delegation.With
>> this vacuum the Francophone Republic was able, through a
>> mere revision of their virgin constitution to impose their
>> name, flag, anthem, code of arms and national capital on the
>> Southern Cameroons till date, as the insignia of a
>> Federation which was never constituted.And
>> the Southern Cameroons became a mere appendix.3. It is further noteworthy
>> that
>> in the aftermath of the failure to convene the International
>> Conference, the United Nations did not call-off, suspend, or
>> cancel their grant of independence to Southern
>> Cameroons.Similarly
>> Britain, the Administering Authority, did not deny
>> delivering the independence, which would have happened by
>> continuing to maintain their Trusteeship presence in the
>> Territory.Furthermore,
>> the Republic of Cameroun, on their part, did not complain
>> about the irregularity of federating with another
>> independent state without a prior Treaty.As
>> a result, the Southern Cameroons majestically moved forward
>> and consummated her full Independence on the designated 1st
>> October, 1961.The
>> term consummated means the populations celebrated the event,
>> which affixed their Permanent Seal on the
>> Independence.It follows that, there was no
>> longer any Independence "by joining" as such, meaning that we
>> unconditionally achieved Full Independence
>> inadvertently.This
>> Sovereign Class of Independence is the very type that most
>> African countries achieved, which our people were clamouring
>> for as a "third option", but the British brushed
>> aside.4.
>> There have been
>> external confirmations to our independence. Aside from the
>> UN excluding us from being either a colony or a Trust
>> Territory, the Republic of Cameroun has itself repeatedly
>> recognised our separate Independence.For instance, they placed
>> the
>> representative star of Southern Cameroons on their flag from
>> 1961 to 1972 which symbolises that we were
>> separately independent to have qualified for a
>> star.5. Another piece of evidence is
>> that the Republic of Cameroun inserted the word "United"
>> and the name of the country at some point became United
>> Republic of Cameroon. Whenever the term "United" appears in the name of a
>> country it shows that the states that formed the supposed
>> federation were independent states.An example is the use of the
>> terminology "United" to describe the 52 states of the
>> USA which shows that the states were independent countries
>> that came together as equals.The same applies to
>> "United" in the name United Kingdom, which is also
>> emphasising that Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and
>> England were independent kingdoms that united as equal
>> partners.6.
>> Finally, on the 20th of
>> February 2014 during a fake re-unification celebration in
>> Buea (fake because re-unification does not exist where there
>> was no prior unification in terms of a joint independence),
>> Mr. Biya himself declared that the Southern Cameroons is an
>> independent state. The population was clapping without
>> understanding the message.In the speech a copy of which
>> we have, for whoever may wish to verify, he said "history
>> cannot forget that Buea
>> was
>> once the Headquarters of West Cameroon", and
>> "history cannot also forget that
>> Buea was
>> once the Capital of Southern
>> Cameroons"The
>> meaning is that when our country was an un-independent
>> territory Buea, the seat of government was a mere
>> headquarters. But when we achieved independence, the very
>> Buea transformed into a Capital.
>>
>>
>> Conclussion
>>
>> Having proved that the Southern
>> Cameroons is a fully independent State from whatever angle
>> of analysis, the implied United Nations message to us
>> through its recent Resolutions is not that we pursue our
>> de-annexation by armed struggle.
>> Rather, it is for us to proceed
>> through pure democratic means, using established UN
>> Institutions. The ideal procedure is for us to begin from
>> litigation, the outcome of which would enable us rouse the
>> international community to act. This is the way (path) the
>> smaller Republic of Cameroun went (took) before redeeming
>> the Bakassi Peninsular from the almighty Nigeria. Not even
>> the Security Council can veto the decision of a
>> court.
>>
>> This is the vision that, after
>> 11 years of research and analysis, guided the SCNC to first
>> sue the Republic of Cameroon in the local high Court in
>> Bamenda, Southern Cameroons in September 2011.
>> The dismissal verdict six
>> months later coupled with two related arrests of Thomas
>> NWACHAN, the primary researcher and filer of the case,
>> helped open the door for the case to enter the Geneva-based
>> UN Human Rights Committee.
>> Our 72-page petition by reason
>> of 400 synoptic arguments, jointly and severally indicting
>> the Francophone Republic, Britain and the UN, was received
>> by the court on April 9, 2014.
>> Ladies and gentlemen, we are in
>> regular contact with the court to which we have submitted
>> further evidence on demand. But you know the court takes its
>> time between three to five years to render its
>> verdict.
>> However, we are confident of a
>> victorious outcome, considering the positive results of the
>> previous personal cases of two of our citizens, Gorgi Dinka
>> and Albert Mukong, against the Republic of Cameroun by this
>> very court.
>> It follows that we must watch
>> out against repeating the errors of the past. As an
>> Independent State we can no longer concede to the deceptive
>> proposals of another referendum, constitutional reform,
>> re-federation, and Vice-Presidency when there is no prior
>> Treaty to anchor any of these reforms.
>>
>> This does not suggest that
>> there is now room for a Treaty either. Not only is it
>> impossible to reconvene the UN-prescribed post-Plebiscite
>> International Conference, the parties to the Treaty no
>> longer exist for the following reasons, as well.
>> The Trusteeship Authority
>> expired on 30th September 1961, with the downing of the
>> British flag. So neither the UN nor Britain can return to
>> the Southern Cameroons to work out the Treaty, on the basis
>> of the Trusteeship Agreement. In addition, as an independent
>> State only the Southern Cameroons can work out a Treaty
>> between herself and whomever.
>> Furthermore, the Republic of
>> Cameroun tore away the democratically
>> elected government of Southern Cameroons in 1972, so there is no
>> legitimate
>> government representing the Southern Cameroons with whom to
>> work out any such Treaty today.
>> Thus the Francophone Republic
>> will finally be left alone to be licking its wounds. Since,
>> in light of the foregoing arguments, the Southern Cameroons
>> is bound to be restored its deserved
>> sovereignty.
>>
>> Long Live the SCNC
>> Long live the UN Right to Self
>> Determination
>> Long Live the Would-Be State of
>> Southern CameroonsSigned:THOMAS
>> N. NWACHAN,
>> B.A.
>> Hist., M.A Pol. Sc., M.A Mgt.
>> 1969
>> combined winner of Fulbright of US Congress, and
>> The
>> Lawrence Wien International Scholarships
>> Through
>> Brandeis University, Mass,
>> USA. Dr. Aaron T. M.
>>
>>
>>
>> From: "Martin
>> Tumasang tumasangm@hotmail.com [cameroon_politics]"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>
>>
>> To:
>> "camnetwork@yahoogroups.com"
>> <camnetwork@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com"
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com>;
>> "bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com"
>> <bafutmanjong_uk@yahoogroups.com>
>>
>> Sent: Tuesday,
>> May 24, 2016 11:09 AM
>> Subject:
>> [cameroon_politics] UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for
>> Southern Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN
>> RESOLUTIONS ON DE-COLONIZATION
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> UN Resolution Gives Great Hope for Southern
>> Cameroons Sovereignty: SCNC REACTS TO RECENT UN RESOLUTIONS
>> ON DE-COLONIZATIONposted
>> by Akene
>> Asobo May 24, 2016 Home
>> *In the Series of United Nation resolutions of
>> the 9th of December 2015 that have sovereignty implication
>> for the Southern Cameroon Struggle, we believe that the news
>> of its coming was the basis of the rumour by the UNO State
>> that their British Cameroon was going to be freed on that
>> 9th of December 2015 .
>> Since the resolutions
>> came out, there have been a lot of wrong comments from
>> abroad and at home. But here in below, we publish an
>> incisive analysis by the SCNC of what these resolutions
>> really mean for the struggle of Southern Cameroon.
>> We have studiously read the December 9th 2015
>> UN Resolutions on decolonization, as well as the reactions
>> from many quarters particularly our members in the
>> diaspora.
>> The views expressed fall into two
>> categories namely:
>> Those that sincerely
>> confess that they do not understand the relevance of those
>> resolutions to our specific problem, and
>> Those who try to interpret wrongly by referring
>> to Resolution 1608 as dead, hence the Southern Cameroons
>> could never be liberated.
>> In this situation,
>> the SCNC is duty-bound to herein below, scientifically
>> explain the implications of these Resolutions for the
>> benefit of all Southern Cameroons citizens.
>> Generally speaking, the UN General Assembly
>> voted overwhelmingly to re-affirm its commitment to the
>> principle of self-determination as the Divine Right of all
>> peoples.
>> This re-assertion indicates that
>> the World Body is fully aware and concerned about the
>> different levels of human rights abuses, and certainly will
>> eventually resolve our annexation problem.
>> Specifically speaking, the list of the
>> remaining colonial territories comprising American Samoa,
>> Anguilla, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands,
>> Guam, Montserrat, Pitcairn, Saint Helena, Turks and Caicos
>> Islands, and the United States Virgin Islands, still in the
>> possession of the United States, Britain, and France, does
>> not include the Southern Cameroons.
>> The
>> meaning is that the Southern Cameroons was already
>> de-colonized.
>> Elsewhere the UN has published
>> another list of 15 Territories, including the Southern
>> Cameroons as former Trust Territories which were decolonized
>> by 1994. (See UN website sources URL:
>> http://www.un.org/en/decolonization/selfdet.shtml;
>> The first essential message implied – by
>> having not included our territory among those to be
>> decolonized – is that we were already Independent as of
>> 1st October 1961 even though most of our intellectual elite
>> continue to be unaware.
>> The second message
>> is that our problem is annexation, which means the
>> swallow-up of our state by another state. And its
>> de-annexation requires an entirely different procedure.
>> This analysis is especially important to some
>> of our Nationalist Movements such as the UNO-State Group and
>> the Southern Cameroons Lawyers Association. They have
>> wrongly continued to insist that we need to be independent,
>> whereas our quest at the present stage is for Sovereign
>> Recognition since we are already independent as of 1st
>> October 1961.
>> It is also important to some
>> of our compatriots who unfortunately are calling for an
>> armed struggle, being ignorant that an Independent State
>> does not articulate our annexation type of problem through
>> armed struggle. It would, like in war-torn Syria, destroy
>> our country before we return to the very peace table where
>> we should have started.
>> How we achieved Full
>> Independence.
>> By scientific analysis the
>> SCNC has 72 proofs of our Separate Independence from that of
>> the Francophone Republic of Cameroun. But suffice us to
>> here-in below present you just a half dozen of the most
>> elementary of them.
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. The Plebiscite "Yes"
>> vote was a decision to achieve Independence, and not to
>> "join" whom ever for two reasons.
>> The
>> Independence issue was prioritized by being given the first
>> position in the Plebiscite Question of "Do You Wish to
>> Achieve Independence by Joining Nigeria?" Or "Do You
>> Wish To Achieve Independence By Joining the Republic of
>> Cameroon?"
>> The issue of Independence was
>> the antecedent of the condition of "joining", meaning
>> that it was indispensable, whereas the "joining", was
>> merely secondary.
>> A simple analogy is that
>> in a similar question of "Do You Wish to Go to New York by
>> Air or by Sea", the most important point is the decision
>> to go to New York. It is not the means of transport.
>> Furthermore, the UN endorsement vote of 19th
>> April 1961 on the outcome of the Plebiscite was on our
>> decision to achieve independence, and NOT on any
>> "Joining".
>> If the endorsement vote was
>> for the "joining", the United Nations would not have
>> called for the Post-Plebiscite International Conference
>> whereat the conditions of "joining" were still to be
>> discussed and its "modalities" worked out.The
>> second reason is that throughout the 72-year history of the
>> United Nations, the Organisation grants Independences. That
>> is why it designated 1st October 1961 as the Independence
>> Day of Southern Cameroons. Indeed, the World Body has never
>> granted any "joining"2.
>> The UN-required post-Plebiscite international conference did
>> not hold, so there was no occasion to have established any
>> "joining" between us and the Francophone Republic of
>> Cameroun through a Treaty which could only have resulted
>> from an International Conference.It
>> should be understood that the substituted Foumban conference
>> did not meet the standard of an International Conference, to
>> have worked out the required Treaty.It
>> follows that "The Constitution of the Federal Republic of
>> Cameroon", ironically called by the county's entire
>> virgin name at the suffix, as well as the multitude of other
>> subsequent constitutions therefrom, do not have the weight
>> of a Treaty.And
>> being strictly the exclusive Fundamental Law of the
>> Francophone Republic, it has no binding force on the
>> statehood of Southern Cameroons.Worse
>> still neither Britain nor the UN – which was to witness
>> the occasion – informed the Southern Cameroons government
>> that they would not attend the conference. Obviously the
>> Southern Cameroons government would not have proceeded to
>> the venue to be dominated by an overwhelming number of the
>> francophone delegation.With
>> this vacuum the Francophone Republic was able, through a
>> mere revision of their virgin constitution to impose their
>> name, flag, anthem, code of arms and national capital on the
>> Southern Cameroons till date, as the insignia of a
>> Federation which was never constituted.And
>> the Southern Cameroons became a mere appendix.3.
>> It is further noteworthy that in the aftermath of the
>> failure to convene the International Conference, the United
>> Nations did not call-off, suspend, or cancel their grant of
>> independence to Southern Cameroons.Similarly
>> Britain, the Administering Authority, did not deny
>> delivering the independence, which would have happened by
>> continuing to maintain their Trusteeship presence in the
>> Territory.Furthermore,
>> the Republic of Cameroun, on their part, did not complain
>> about the irregularity of federating with another
>> independent state without a prior Treaty.As
>> a result, the Southern Cameroons majestically moved forward
>> and consummated her full Independence on the designated 1st
>> October, 1961.The
>> term consummated means the populations celebrated the event,
>> which affixed their Permanent Seal on the
>> Independence.It
>> follows that, there was no longer any Independence "by
>> joining" as such, meaning that we unconditionally achieved
>> Full Independence inadvertently.This
>> Sovereign Class of Independence is the very type that most
>> African countries achieved, which our people were clamouring
>> for as a "third option", but the British brushed
>> aside.4.
>> There have been external confirmations to our independence.
>> Aside from the UN excluding us from being either a colony or
>> a Trust Territory, the Republic of Cameroun has itself
>> repeatedly recognised our separate Independence.For
>> instance, they placed the representative star of Southern
>> Cameroons on their flag from 1961 to 1972 which symbolises
>> that we were separately independent to have qualified for a
>> star.5.
>> Another piece of evidence is that the Republic of Cameroun
>> inserted the word "United" and the name of the country
>> at some point became United Republic of Cameroon. Whenever
>> the term "United" appears in the name of a country it
>> shows that the states that formed the supposed federation
>> were independent states.An
>> example is the use of the terminology "United" to
>> describe the 52 states of the USA which shows that the
>> states were independent countries that came together as
>> equals.The
>> same applies to "United" in the name United Kingdom,
>> which is also emphasising that Wales, Scotland, Northern
>> Ireland and England were independent kingdoms that united as
>> equal partners.6.
>> Finally, on the 20th of February 2014 during a fake
>> re-unification celebration in Buea (fake because
>> re-unification does not exist where there was no prior
>> unification in terms of a joint independence), Mr. Biya
>> himself declared that the Southern Cameroons is an
>> independent state. The population was clapping without
>> understanding the message.In
>> the speech a copy of which we have, for whoever may wish to
>> verify, he said "history cannot forget that Buea was once
>> the Headquarters of West Cameroon", and "history cannot
>> also forget that Buea was once the Capital of Southern
>> Cameroons"The
>> meaning is that when our country was an un-independent
>> territory Buea, the seat of government was a mere
>> headquarters. But when we achieved independence, the very
>> Buea transformed into a Capital.
>>
>>
>> Conclussion
>> Having proved that the Southern Cameroons is a
>> fully independent State from whatever angle of analysis, the
>> implied United Nations message to us through its recent
>> Resolutions is not that we pursue our de-annexation by armed
>> struggle.
>> Rather, it is for us to proceed
>> through pure democratic means, using established UN
>> Institutions. The ideal procedure is for us to begin from
>> litigation, the outcome of which would enable us rouse the
>> international community to act. This is the way (path) the
>> smaller Republic of Cameroun went (took) before redeeming
>> the Bakassi Peninsular from the almighty Nigeria. Not even
>> the Security Council can veto the decision of a court.
>> This is the vision that, after 11 years of
>> research and analysis, guided the SCNC to first sue the
>> Republic of Cameroon in the local high Court in Bamenda,
>> Southern Cameroons in September 2011.
>> The
>> dismissal verdict six months later coupled with two related
>> arrests of Thomas NWACHAN, the primary researcher and filer
>> of the case, helped open the door for the case to enter the
>> Geneva-based UN Human Rights Committee.
>> Our
>> 72-page petition by reason of 400 synoptic arguments,
>> jointly and severally indicting the Francophone Republic,
>> Britain and the UN, was received by the court on April 9,
>> 2014.
>> Ladies and gentlemen, we are in
>> regular contact with the court to which we have submitted
>> further evidence on demand. But you know the court takes its
>> time between three to five years to render its verdict.
>> However, we are confident of a victorious
>> outcome, considering the positive results of the previous
>> personal cases of two of our citizens, Gorgi Dinka and
>> Albert Mukong, against the Republic of Cameroun by this very
>> court.
>> It follows that we must watch out
>> against repeating the errors of the past. As an Independent
>> State we can no longer concede to the deceptive proposals of
>> another referendum, constitutional reform, re-federation,
>> and Vice-Presidency when there is no prior Treaty to anchor
>> any of these reforms.
>> This does not suggest
>> that there is now room for a Treaty either. Not only is it
>> impossible to reconvene the UN-prescribed post-Plebiscite
>> International Conference, the parties to the Treaty no
>> longer exist for the following reasons, as well.
>> The Trusteeship Authority expired on 30th
>> September 1961, with the downing of the British flag. So
>> neither the UN nor Britain can return to the Southern
>> Cameroons to work out the Treaty, on the basis of the
>> Trusteeship Agreement. In addition, as an independent State
>> only the Southern Cameroons can work out a Treaty between
>> herself and whomever.
>> Furthermore, the
>> Republic of Cameroun tore away the democratically elected
>> government of Southern Cameroons in 1972, so there is no
>> legitimate government representing the Southern Cameroons
>> with whom to work out any such Treaty today.
>> Thus the Francophone Republic will finally be
>> left alone to be licking its wounds. Since, in light of the
>> foregoing arguments, the Southern Cameroons is bound to be
>> restored its deserved sovereignty.
>> Long Live
>> the SCNC
>> Long live the UN Right to Self
>> Determination
>> Long Live the Would-Be State
>> of Southern CameroonsSigned:THOMAS
>> N. NWACHAN
>> B.A. Hist., M.A Pol. Sc., M.A
>> Mgt.
>> 1969 combined winner of Fulbright of US
>> Congress, and
>> The Lawrence Wien
>> International Scholarships
>> Through Brandeis
>> University, Mass, USA.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847 --
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp {
>> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;font-family:Arial;margin:10px
>> 0;padding:0 10px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp hr {
>> border:1px solid #d8d8d8;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp #yiv9691609847hd {
>> color:#628c2a;font-size:85%;font-weight:700;line-height:122%;margin:10px
>> 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp #yiv9691609847ads {
>> margin-bottom:10px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp .yiv9691609847ad {
>> padding:0 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp .yiv9691609847ad p {
>> margin:0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mkp .yiv9691609847ad a {
>> color:#0000ff;text-decoration:none;}
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-lc {
>> font-family:Arial;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-lc #yiv9691609847hd {
>> margin:10px
>> 0px;font-weight:700;font-size:78%;line-height:122%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-lc .yiv9691609847ad {
>> margin-bottom:10px;padding:0 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847actions {
>> font-family:Verdana;font-size:11px;padding:10px 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity {
>>
>> background-color:#e0ecee;float:left;font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;padding:10px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span {
>> font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span:first-child {
>> text-transform:uppercase;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span a {
>> color:#5085b6;text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span span {
>> color:#ff7900;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847activity span
>> .yiv9691609847underline {
>> text-decoration:underline;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach {
>> clear:both;display:table;font-family:Arial;font-size:12px;padding:10px
>> 0;width:400px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach div a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach img {
>> border:none;padding-right:5px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach label {
>> display:block;margin-bottom:5px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847attach label a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 blockquote {
>> margin:0 0 0 4px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847bold {
>> font-family:Arial;font-size:13px;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847bold a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 dd.yiv9691609847last p a {
>> font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 dd.yiv9691609847last p span {
>> margin-right:10px;font-family:Verdana;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 dd.yiv9691609847last p
>> span.yiv9691609847yshortcuts {
>> margin-right:0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847attach-table div div a {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847attach-table {
>> width:400px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847file-title a, #yiv9691609847
>> div.yiv9691609847file-title a:active, #yiv9691609847
>> div.yiv9691609847file-title a:hover, #yiv9691609847
>> div.yiv9691609847file-title a:visited {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a,
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a:active,
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a:hover,
>> #yiv9691609847 div.yiv9691609847photo-title a:visited {
>> text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 div#yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg
>> #yiv9691609847ygrp-msg p a span.yiv9691609847yshortcuts {
>> font-family:Verdana;font-size:10px;font-weight:normal;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847green {
>> color:#628c2a;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847MsoNormal {
>> margin:0 0 0 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 o {
>> font-size:0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847photos div {
>> float:left;width:72px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847photos div div {
>> border:1px solid
>> #666666;height:62px;overflow:hidden;width:62px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847photos div label {
>>
>> color:#666666;font-size:10px;overflow:hidden;text-align:center;white-space:nowrap;width:64px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847reco-category {
>> font-size:77%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847reco-desc {
>> font-size:77%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 .yiv9691609847replbq {
>> margin:4px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-actbar div a:first-child {
>> margin-right:2px;padding-right:5px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg {
>> font-size:13px;font-family:Arial, helvetica, clean,
>> sans-serif;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg table {
>> font-size:inherit;font:100%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg select,
>> #yiv9691609847 input, #yiv9691609847 textarea {
>> font:99% Arial, Helvetica, clean, sans-serif;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg pre, #yiv9691609847
>> code {
>> font:115% monospace;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg * {
>> line-height:1.22em;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-mlmsg #yiv9691609847logo {
>> padding-bottom:10px;}
>>
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-msg p a {
>> font-family:Verdana;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-msg
>> p#yiv9691609847attach-count span {
>> color:#1E66AE;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-reco
>> #yiv9691609847reco-head {
>> color:#ff7900;font-weight:700;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-reco {
>> margin-bottom:20px;padding:0px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor #yiv9691609847ov
>> li a {
>> font-size:130%;text-decoration:none;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor #yiv9691609847ov
>> li {
>> font-size:77%;list-style-type:square;padding:6px 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-sponsor #yiv9691609847ov
>> ul {
>> margin:0;padding:0 0 0 8px;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-text {
>> font-family:Georgia;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-text p {
>> margin:0 0 1em 0;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-text tt {
>> font-size:120%;}
>>
>> #yiv9691609847 #yiv9691609847ygrp-vital ul li:last-child {
>> border-right:none !important;
>> }
>> #yiv9691609847
>>
>> __._,_.___
>> ------------------------------
>> Posted by: Immanuel TatahMentan <inmentan@yahoo.com>
>> ------------------------------
>> Reply via web post
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/conversations/messages/155732;_ylc=X3oDMTJza3F1cXFzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARtc2dJZAMxNTU3MzIEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDcnBseQRzdGltZQMxNDY0NjcwNzUy?act=reply&messageNum=155732>
>> • Reply to sender
>> <inmentan@yahoo.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcameroon_politics%5D%20UN%20Resolution%20Gives%20Great%20Hope%20for%20Southern%20Cameroons%20Sovereignty%3A%20SCNC%20REACTS%20TO%20RECENT%20UN%20RESOLUTIONS%20ON%20DE-COLONIZATION>
>> • Reply to group
>> <cameroon_politics@yahoogroups.com?subject=Re%3A%20%5Bcameroon_politics%5D%20UN%20Resolution%20Gives%20Great%20Hope%20for%20Southern%20Cameroons%20Sovereignty%3A%20SCNC%20REACTS%20TO%20RECENT%20UN%20RESOLUTIONS%20ON%20DE-COLONIZATION>
>> • Start a New Topic
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/conversations/newtopic;_ylc=X3oDMTJmdTkxODJzBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNudHBjBHN0aW1lAzE0NjQ2NzA3NTI->
>> • Messages in this topic
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/conversations/topics/155382;_ylc=X3oDMTM5M3NwNGN2BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARtc2dJZAMxNTU3MzIEc2VjA2Z0cgRzbGsDdnRwYwRzdGltZQMxNDY0NjcwNzUyBHRwY0lkAzE1NTM4Mg-->
>> (7)
>> ------------------------------
>> Have you tried the highest rated email app? <https://yho.com/1wwmgg>
>> With 4.5 stars in iTunes, the Yahoo Mail app is the highest rated email
>> app on the market. What are you waiting for? Now you can access all your
>> inboxes (Gmail, Outlook, AOL and more) in one place. Never delete an
>> again with 1000GB of free cloud storage.
>> ------------------------------
>> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cameroon_politics/
>> Visit Your Group
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/cameroon_politics/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmMHVldWc1BF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0NjQ2NzA3NTI->
>>
>>
>> [image: Yahoo! Groups]
>> <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlbDZjMGx1BF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzI0NzgyNTM1BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTExMDI2OARzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQ2NDY3MDc1Mg-->
>> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> •
>> Unsubscribe
>> <cameroon_politics-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com?subject=Unsubscribe> •
>> Terms
>> of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/>
>>
>> .
>>
>> __,_._,___
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
> The thing always happens that you really believe in; and the belief in a
> thing makes it happen.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "ambasbay" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
--
Aaron Agien NYANGKWE
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
Tel. 237 673 42 71 27
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambasbay" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambasbay+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
0 comments:
Post a Comment