WELCOME TO BAKASSI

ONLINE

MEMORANDUM SUBMITTED TO THE SENATE OF THE FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA ON THE GREEN TREE AGREEMENT CONCERNING THE MODALITIES OF WITHDRAWAL AND TRANSFER OF AUTHORITY IN BAKASSI PENINSULA BY THE PEOPLE AND REPRESENTATIVES OF BAKASSI

HISTORICAL ANTECEDENTS

1.  Bakassi before the advent of the Europeans was called IDOMBI. The Efiks arrived Old Calabar around the 13th Century and being fishermen settled around the riverine side of Calabar. By 1470, the Portuguese had established trade links with them. Both Akpabuyo and Idombi (Bakassi) are contiguous landscape separated from one another by Akpa Ikang (Akpayafe). The Efiks founded and occupied the whole of Akpabuyo and then moved on to Bakassi.

2.  Thus in the 16th Century, Prince Emma Atai Iboku of Old town migrated by sea and founded Atabong west as an Efik settlement in Bakassi. About the same time, Chief Abana Umo Duke from Duke Family in Duke Town Calabar migrated and founded Abana, which he named after himself Chief Mkpeti Umana from Ntiero family of Duke Town Calabar founded INE Akpak. Chief Ankot Abia Ntekim Umo of Henshaw Town founded Atabong East. Prince Archibong Edem of Archibong family founded Archibong Town where Nigerian troops were based. The Usak Edet people in IDOMBI were the Efuts who occupied Rio Del Rey. They also joined as people of IDOMBI to declare themselves subjects of Kings and Chiefs of Calabar on 9th September 1884.

3.  Apart from the above main towns, the Efiks between the 16th and 18th Centuries founded numerous fishing posts which include Ekanem Esin, Mben Mong, Edem Abasi, Inua Abasi, Inua Mba and Ine Odiong, Ine Ofiom, Ine Akpa Ikang, Ine Ufan Asuquo, Ine Mba, Ine Abana, Ine Atabong, Ine Ekaya, Ine Okopedi, Ine Ibout Owong, Ine Ekoi, Ine Nkani-Okure, Ine Ukpone, Akwa Ine, Ine Akpa Nkanya etc. All these settlements and fishing posts made up the Efik territory in the whole of Bakassi Peninsula.

STRUCTURE OF OLD CALABAR

4.  Old Calabar contains three distinct Nations – The Efiks, the Efuts and the Quas. Of the three nations, the Efiks dominated the scene and the Efuts declared and accepted the jurisdiction of the Efiks in 1884. The Efiks occupied the riverine side of Calabar and were the first to come in contact with the Europeans. This accounted for their early education and civilization and they alone entered into treaties with the Europeans. Because of their long contact with the Europeans, the Efiks became synonymous with Old Calabar. Thus, the Efik Ruling Houses which are also found in Bakassi are made up of Henshaw Town (the founders of Atabong East), Duke Town (the founders of Abana, Ine Inpak, Archibong Town) Old town (the founders of Atabong West) and Cobham Town. The founders of these houses were blood relations and until 1972 all kings of Old Calabar came from Duke Town, hence most of the treaties with the British were signed by the kings from Duke Town.

THE TREATIES

5.  In the 1880’s there was a mad rush by the British to make treaties and confer protection on every village/ town that they came across in Nigeria. The people of Idombi (Bakassi), Efut and Tom Shot (Efiat) on 8th, 9th and 11th September 1884 made declarations to the British as follows:

“We the undersigned King and Chiefs of Efut, Idombi, Tom Shot declare that we our people and country are subject to the authority and jurisdiction of Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar and that we cannot therefore make any treaty with a foreign power for ourselves but that any treaty the said Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar have made or may hereafter make is and will be binding on us”

By this declaration, the inhabitants of Idombi (Bakassi) who themselves were Efiks and Efuts Usak Edet acknowledged the jurisdiction of the Efik kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar, who by custom tradition and other usages were the owners of the whole area of the peninsula where their settlements were planted.

6.  On 10th September 1884, Her Majesty, Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom signed a treaty of friendship and protection with the Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar and part of the treaty reads:

“Her majesty the Queen of Great Britain and Ireland in compliance with the request of the Kings, Chiefs and people of Old Calabar thereby undertake to extend to them and the territory under their authority and jurisdiction her favour and protection”

This treaty covered all territories (of which Bakassi was one) under the jurisdiction and authority of the Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar.

PREVIOUS ATTEMPTS TO CEDE BAKASSI

7.  We have established above the Efik ownership of Bakassi and the treaties that the Obong of Calabar entered with the British. We shall now show the attempts by both the British and Nigerian leaders to Cede Bakassi to foreign powers without consultation with its Kings and people of Old Calabar.

Agreement with Germany

In all the agreements of 1885,1890,1893,1906 between Britain and Germany, Great Britain gave the necessary protection to the interest of the Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar by ensuring that Bakassi peninsula remained part and parcel of Nigeria. This was in keeping with the Treaty of Protection of 1884 between Britain and the Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar. Then in 1913, Britain entered into an inconclusive agreement with Germany purporting to give away Bakassi Peninsula to Germany. This agreement was vehemently opposed by the Kings and Chiefs of Old Calabar who claimed that since Bakassi was an Efik territory and Britain was offering it only protection through the Treaty of Friendship with the Kings and Chiefs of Calabar, then only the Kings and Chiefs of Calabar could sign away their lands and not Britain. Records show that the proposed agreement with Germany was placed before the British Parliament in September 1913 but the British stalled its passage until the outbreak of war in 1914 when the proposed Treaty was frustrated. The Agreement of 1913 was not registered with the League of Nations as required by International Law. It was therefore null and void.

General Gowons attempts to Cede Bakassi

At the end of the civil war, and, in particular in June 1975, General Yakubu Gowon the then Nigerian military Head of state and President Ahidjo of Cameroon attempted to redraw the boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon without consulting the people of Bakassi or the Obong and Chiefs of Calabar. This resulted in the Maroua Declaration which attempted to cede, Bakassi to the Cameroon. The people of Nigeria protested against the declaration, which was never ratified by the then Supreme Military Council. When Gowon was overthrown on 29th July 1975, the then Head of State, General Murtala Mohammed openly denounced and disassociated Nigeria from the Maroua Declaration. President Ahidjo was informed of the position of the new Government in which General Obasanjo was the Chief of Staff Supreme Headquarters.

8. When the Efiks are pushed to the wall and have nowhere else to go they raise their hands to the Heavens and say “ABASI DO” and somehow God answers their prayers. The above two circumstances purporting to cede our land without our consent were stalled in Gods mysterious ways and we are sure that the GreenTree Agreement will meet the same fate

Plebiscites of 1961

9. The franchise for the plebiscites of 1961 which, concerned southern Cameroon, was limited to those born in Cameroon or whose parents were born in Cameroon. Since the people of IDOMBI (Bakassi) were all Efiks and the place was part of Nigeria, they did not vote. Bakassi was not a point of issue but southern Cameroon. Bakassi was not part of southern Cameroon and was not the subject of plebiscite. The papers presented by the UN on the plebiscite will give credence to this. The register of voters did not include Bakassi since it was part of Nigeria.

THE GREEN TREE AGREEMENT (GTA)

10 This agreement by which Nigeria recognizes the sovereignty of Cameroon over Bakassi Peninsula in accordance with the judgment of the International Court of Justice of 10 October 2002 but which “shall in no way be construed as an interpretation or modification of the judgment of the International Court of Justice of 10th October 2002 for which the Agreement only sets out the modalities of implementation” is a lazy mans agreement (see Articles 1 and 7). We do not know how Nigeria can fall into this trap. How can Nigeria enter into an agreement ceding its territory to a foreign country without giving serious interpretation to the purported judgment. It is a huge joke. The people of Bakassi who are seriously affected by this Agreement were never consulted. The Obong and Chiefs of Calabar the owners of Bakassi were never consulted and their consent sought. Everything was done in secrecy. We gave away our land, we gave away 10% of the worlds Oil and Gas reserves, we gave away our right of fishing in waters that contain most of the worlds shrimps and lobsters, we have created the country’s worst refugee problem and the security of Nigeria is at risk because our warships cannot sail into the Calabar estuary without the permission of Cameroon. Cameroon can even stop civilian ships sailing under the Nigerian flag from sailing through Calabar estuary into Calabar.

11 Indeed the GreenTree Agreement (GTA) has been overtaken by events and should be discarded. Article 3 (2) of the agreement reads:

“In particular, Cameroon shall:

(a) not force Nigerian nationals living in the Bakassi
Peninsula to leave the Zone or to change their nationality;

(b) respect their culture, language and beliefs;

(c) respect their right to continue their agricultural and fishing activities;

(d) protect their property and their customary land rights;

(e) not levy in any discriminatory manner any taxes and other dues on Nigerian nationals living in the Zone; and

(f) take every necessary measure to protect Nigerian nationals living in the Zone from any harassment or harm.”

12 Article 3 envisaged that Nigerians will live peacefully in Bakassi without molestation. The issue of resettlement did not arise as this is not even mentioned anywhere in the Agreement. It is unfortunate that as soon as the Nigerian Flag was lowered, Cameroon started ethnic cleansing and many Nigerians fled their homes in Bakassi. By the Agreement, both Nigeria and the United Nations have successfully created a refugee problem in Nigeria for Nigerians.

The Cross River State is now talking of resettlement from “Old” to “New” Bakassi. Some senators are talking of “resettlement” which is not in the Agreement. The Cross River State Government is resettling people from Bakassi into Ikang (new Bakassi) which has been occupied from time immemorial by the people of Ikang. There is no doubt that Nigeria is postponing the evil day when there will be bloodshed and war between the original owners of Ikang and the new comers from Bakassi. In any case, Bakassi is still part of Nigeria in accordance with our constitution and the issue of “NEW” or “OLD” Bakassi does not arise.

13 Nigeria has ceded Bakassi to Cameroon. In doing so, it has transferred the land mass, the wealth, the oil and gas therein to Cameroon. Bakassi as we have seen was owned by the Kings, Chiefs and people of Old Calabar. These people were never consulted or their consent sought before transferring their property to Cameroon. The Kings, Chiefs and people of Old Calabar deserve very heavy compensation from Nigeria, Cameroon and the United Nations (UN) for being deprived of their wealth and ancestral homeland.

OUR DEMANDS

14 The people of Calabar and Bakassi reject the ceding of Bakassi to Cameroon as per the GreenTree Agreement and we ask the Senate of the Federal Republic not to ratify the GreenTree Agreement. However should the politicians wish to cede Bakassi to Cameroon, the people of Calabar and Bakassi demand as follows:

a) There should be a referendum to determine the wishes of the people of Bakassi, failing which it must be assumed that they are being forcefully deprived of their land in which case they should be duly and adequately compensated :

b) Such compensation to be borne by Cameroon and guaranteed by the UN should be paid to the returning indigenes of Bakassi in respect of their shrines, parents graves, houses and lost opportunities;

c) The people of Bakassi should be resettled in a virgin land in the Cross River estuary;

d) the cost of resettlement, relocation and provision of infrastructure and other facilities should be borne by Cameroon and the UN;

e)The Obong of Calabar, Chiefs, and people of Calabar and Bakassi should be compensated for the loss of their land. In particular all royalties in respect of oil and gas won in the Bakassi Peninsula should be paid to the Kings, Chiefs and people of Calabar. The payment of the Royalties should be guaranteed by the UN;

f)Compensation should be paid to the Cross River State Government in respect of the potential losses of future income under the derivation principle enshrined in our constitution;

g)Nigerians should be allowed unfettered freedom to fish in the Bakassi peninsula;

h)The maps contained in annex 2 of GTA be adjusted so as to redemarcate the Calabar estuary and allow the Nigerian Navy the right of passage to defend Nigerians in the Cross River State in case of an attack by Cameroon;

i)The Nigerian constitution be amended accordingly.

CONCLUSION

15 Finally, we must say that the people of Bakassi may be poor, they may be powerless, they may be minorities or they may even be inconsequential, yet they are Nigerians and they deserve the protection, which our constitution confers on all Nigerians.