On 20th May 2010, the United Nation’s 64th President of the general Assembly handed to President Paul Biya two beautiful maps,one  of Republic of Cameroon another other of Southern Cameroons.

 

 

PRESS STATEMENT

December 12, 2016

Southern Cameroons Peoples Organisation (SCAPO)

Constructive Dialogue between Southern Cameroons and French Cameroun
• Southern Cameroons again accepts constructive dialogue with French Cameroon under ACHPR mediation
• Demands that dialogue outcome be forwarded to African Union, UNO
• Applies for AU Membership
• Beefs up War Crimes Case file at ICC

Ladies and gentlemen of the Press,

The Southern Cameroons Peoples Organisation, SCAPO on November 29, 2016 forwarded a report to the African Commission on Human and Peoples Rights (ACHPR) based in Banjul, Gambia reiterating its acceptation “constructive dialogue” with French Cameroun as recommended by the commission in 2009.
The Southern Cameroons Report to Banjul titled “The implementation of the 2009 Decisions of the African Commission on Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) on communication 266/2003, the Recommendation on Constructive Dialogue,” emphasizes that the outcome of the said “constructive dialogue” be forwarded to the African Union General Assembly where “La Republique du Cameroun (French Cameroun) should be asked to put before the African Union and the UN, proofs to show that indeed she has title over the Southern Cameroons and her presence in that territory is not annexation.”
Consequently, SCAPO, has asked the AU “to grant Southern Cameroon membership while confirming the international boundaries of Southern Cameroons as described in the League of Nations mandate and the United Nations Charter.”
The report, signed by the Southern Cameroons Peoples Organisation, SCAPO, is on behalf of the complainants in Communications 266/2003, who in 2003, and on the behalf of all Southern Cameroonians, tabled a 306-paragraph case (with affidavits) against French Cameroun for colonization. traces the root cause of the escalation between Southern Cameroons and French Cameroun today.
Recall that the landmark human rights case, Communications 266/2003, ended in 2009 with the ACHPR finding French Cameroun guilty on almost all counts of the human and peoples rights as listed in the Southern Cameroons complaint. The ACHPR ruled that Southern Cameroonians are “a people” and hence have all the inalienable rights recognized to all peoples by both the African and United Nations Charter. In more precise terms, the ACHPR said that “the people of Southern Cameroon” qualify to be referred to as “a people” because they manifest numerous characteristics and affinities, which include a common history, linguistic tradition, territorial connection and political outlook. More importantly they identify themselves as a people with a separate and distinct identity. Identity is an innate characteristic within a people. It is up to other external people to recognise such existence, but not to deny it.” (See Paragraphs 178-179 of the 2009 Banjul Ruling)
Peoples everywhere, especially peoples who live in their own territory (homeland) and aspire to their own state, have a fundamental right to reject colonization and the right to self-government or self-determination. Self-determination means that every people, so recognised, have the right to freely determine their political status, and the right to freely pursue their economic and social development according to the policy they have chosen. The right to self-determination is recognised and protected by both the AU and UNO Charters.
Furthermore, the ACHPR 2009 verdict ordered the government of French Cameroon to pay compensation to all businesses in Southern Cameroons which had suffered because of the imposition of the OHADA Law upon their practice by the government in Yaounde.
However, the ACHPR recommended “constructive dialogue”, under its good offices, for an amicable and long-lasting solution to all the issues bounden on domestic constitutional and international law in the now thorny Southern Cameroons Palaver.
In 2010, both SCAPO and the SCNC, representing the people of Southern Cameroons, accepted the ACHPR recommended “constructive dialogue” under ACHPR mediation as a credible and serious means of seeking a lasting solution to what is now the very obvious annexation, colonization and military occupation of independent Southern Cameroons by French Cameroun.
But rather than engaging in “constructive dialogue, French Cameroun has escalated its colonial francophonization of Southern Cameroons by, notably, imposing its francophonity, school system. civil law traditions etc. on Southern Cameroons.
The escalation of French Cameroon colonization is the root cause of the escalation in the occupied territory of the Southern Cameroons today which escalation has led to over fifteen deaths, officially.

 

Incidentally, the call for “constructive dialogue” was also made by the current Prime Minister of French Cameroun, Mr. Philemon Yang, as he addressed supporters of the ruling, Cameroun Peoples Democratic Party, CPDM, during a rally within the precincts of Ayaba Hotel, Bamenda, on Thursday, December 6, 2016. Mr. Yang said “constructive dialogue” was the only way to end the clear insurrection in the annexed English-speaking regions of Cameroun.
Premier Yang was speaking at the close of an exceptionally murderous day in Bamenda during which well-armed elite forces of the French Cameroun army of occupation, BIR (Brigade d’intervention rapide) coordinated with the disreputably savage paratroopers from the Koutaba airbase in French Cameroun to visit murder to, at least, ten unarmed civilians in various parts of Bamenda.
Amnesty International on Friday, December 7, 2016, asked the government in Yaounde to justify all killings and disappearances in the colonized English-speaking regions.

Soldiers from French Cameroun on Friday, December 9, murdered at least five persons in Kumba to the south of Southern Cameroons.
Many more persons, including students, have been “disappeared” in both Buea and Bamenda. There are hundreds more Southern Cameroonians illegally detained in police and gendarmerie cells all over the Southern Cameroons by the French Cameroun army of occupation.
The killing of these Southern Cameroonians, most of them by stray bullets, is a War Crime. SCAPO will be making a full and muscled representation at the International War Crimes Tribunal in The Hague about these deaths and disappearances, the outcome of callous use war weapons and live bullets against unarmed civilians. In a Cameroun government communiqué broadcast on the BBC French service (and other media), this day, December 12, 2016, the self-appointed spokesman of the colonial regime in Yaounde, Mr. Issa Tchiroma Bakary, confirmed that the government of French Cameroun is involved in disappeances and death squads in Southern Cameroons by stating the policy of his government to track and murder (“mettre hors état de nuire”, his exact words) Southern Cameroonians demanding their rights. Mr. Tchiroma now figures prominently on the War Crimes list to the ICC.
SCAPO reminds the regime in Yaounde that on Monday, March 03, 2008, the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court received a 181-page complaint (with affidavits) titled “Genocide and Crimes against Humanity in/by French Cameroun” recounting the history of genocidal practices by successive regimes in Yaounde and attributing responsibility. This case file was beefed up with the particulars of signed document from Beti Elite in Yaounde calling for attacks against foreigners (Southern Cameroonians in the main) residing in Yaoundé.
See SCAPO’s Genocam Supplements 1 and 2.
The Southern Cameroonians Peoples Organisation, representing all Southern Cameroonians, underscores that “in handing down its decision on Communication 266/2003, Kevin Ngwang Gumne and others V. Cameroon, the African Commission made seven recommendations to the respondent state (French Cameroun) and two to complainants (215) Southern Cameroons.” The ACHPR explicitly requested the parties to report on the implementation of the decisions 215 (4).”
Southern Cameroonians are saying that this report to Banjul “was limiting itself to the recommendation on Constructive Dialogue 215–(I) (VI); 2.ii) “because it is the only recommendation that was made to both parties and on which both parties responded in the affirmative.”
Note that “the commission had set a deadline of 180 days for this report but before the deadline was due the respondent State (French Cameroun) requested for time extension stating that they received their own copy of the commission’s decision late and that they needed time to prepare for the dialogue.”
Their request was granted.
Southern Cameroons draws world opinion to the fact that “seven years after the African Commission took the decision in Communication 266/2003 French Cameroun has implemented none of the recommendations.
Not even one!
Consequently, as far as the specific recommendation on dialogue is concerned, Southern Cameroons reports as follows:
1. That French Cameroun, or La Republique du Cameroun, used the time extension granted at their request to carry out elaborate preparation (including the construction of monuments which they called “Re-unification monuments” in Buea and Bamenda for celebrating the event of “re-unification”. This controversial event took place in Buea on 20th February 2014 at a time when the people of Southern Cameroons were expecting the start of the dialogue proposed in communication 266/2003.
SCAPO tabled evidence (Appendices A and B) of the so-called “Re-unification monument” as well as Mr. Biya’s speech in Buea in 2014 to mark the so-called anniversary of the alleged “Re-unification.”

2. That soon after the decision on communication 266/2003 was made public, a serious attempt was made by a Mr. Leke, chief Oben and Dr. Tita (all natives of the Southern Cameroons posing as complainants in Communication 266/2003) to withdraw the said communication. The three persons claimed that they wanted to take up the constructive dialogue proposed in the communication, and that before doing so; they wanted to withdraw the said Communication 266/2003.

The reply, by the Commission, was that their names did not figure on the list of complainants and they could therefore not withdraw what they did not file. They were advised that if they had their own complaint they were free to file it. The three persons then approached the real complainants in communication 266/2003 and proposed that they join them to take up the dialogue with the respondent state. They were told that they had erred by impersonating and attempting to withdraw what they had not filed and additionally they had come to Banjul as part of the State delegation.

The Southern Cameroonian underscored that the French Cameroun engineered fraud was uncovered thanks to “the vigilant manner in which the Secretariat of the Commission handled this episode by Mr. Leke, Chief Oben and Dr. Tita. The Southern Cameroonians sent forth their gratitude to the ACHPR.

3. That while accepting the constructive dialogue proposal, complainants proposed as venue for the dialogue the facilities of UN in New York or the facilities of the AU in Addis Ababa or the facilities of the African Commission in Banjul. They further proposed that the dialogue be based strictly on the principles of international law, in particular the principles of the United Nations and those of the African Union. These principles are the same principles that every country on earth would cite in its defense if its territory or any of its rights whatsoever were being violated by another country.

The complainants, i.e. Southern Cameroonians, underscored that “La Republique du Cameroun would invoke these same principles in any dispute with another country.” Furthermore, the Southern Cameroonians said, French Cameroun, for example, “claims Southern Cameroons to be 2 provinces of her state and, so far, is unable to say by what instruments of International Law the Southern Cameroons became a part of her territory. What were the boundaries of the territory which La Republique du Cameroun inherited on its day of independence on 1 January 1960, on which date its boundaries were frozen pursuant to Article 4(b) of the African Union Constitutive Act? When and by what instruments were these boundaries subsequently expanded to include the territory of the Southern Cameroons? By what instrument of International Law were the people of the Southern Cameroons disinherited of their territory to confer the said territory to La Republique du Cameroun? It was hoped that these questions would be answered unambiguously during the proposed dialogue facilitated by the African Commission.”

4. In view of the fact that while the respondent state has avoided the proposed dialogue for 7 years while human rights violations in the Southern Cameroons have intensified resulting in the present very dangerous escalation between “anglophones” and francophones, and considering that the Assembly of the AU may decide on what action to take after the consideration of reports and recommendations tendered to it by any of its organs and further that it is the jurisdiction of the Assembly to consider membership into the A.U, complainants in communication 266/2003 make the following requests :

A. That the recommended dialogue in communication 266/2003 be forwarded to the African Union Assembly and La Republique du Cameroun be required to put before the African Union the following proofs to show that indeed she has title over the Southern Cameroons and her presence in that territory is not annexation:

i) Under Article 102(1) of the UN Charter: A valid international treaty between the Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun filed at the UN secretariat testifying to any boundary arrangement between the two states after the independence of La Republique du Cameroun.

ii) Under paragraph 5 of Resolution 1608(XV) of 21 April 1961, a valid Treaty of Union between the State of Southern Cameroons and La Republique du Cameroun at the termination British Trusteeship in the Southern Cameroons.

iii) Under Article 4(b) of the African Union Constitutive Act: The map and boundary treaties of La Republique du Cameroun as they stood on its day of independence, 1 January 1960.

iv) Under UNGA Resolution 2625(xxv) of 24 October,1970: A valid international legal instrument, dated 1961, by which the Republic of Cameroon claims title and jurisdiction over the Southern Cameroons.

B. That La Republique du Cameroun be further required to show in what way her “No” vote on UNGA Resolution 1608 XV was not a vote against Southern Cameroon’s independence, and was not a vote against Southern Cameroon joining her.

C. That since The Southern Cameroon was still a UN Trust Territory with its own complete international boundary on January 1st 1960 (date of La Republique du Cameroun’s independence) La Republique du Cameroun be declared to be in violation of Article 4(b) of the AU constitutive Act and be requested to peacefully withdraw her troops and pro-consuls from the territory of the Southern Cameroons.

D. That Southern Cameroon be granted membership of the AU and her international boundaries as described in the League of Nations mandate and the United Nations Charter be confirmed by the General Assembly of the AU on the admission of the Southern Cameroon into membership of the AU.

The report, by SCAPO, on behalf of the Complainants in Communications 266/2003, and, ergo, all Southern Cameroonian, was signed the National Chairman of SCAPO, the Rt. Hon. Augustine Feh Ndangam.

 

The SCAPO report has since been forwarded to the Chairperson of the Assembly of the A.U, the African Union Executive Council and the African Union Peace and Security Council, etc.

The SCAPO report all but puts paid to attempts by current French Cameroun premier Philemon Yang, to “divide and impera” (Divide and Rule) by attempting so called “dialogue” with various picketing Southern Cameroon groups. For one thing, Yang does not define policy in French Cameroun and, thence, cannot make any credible, binding and lasting decision especially on the colonization of Southern Cameroons by French Cameroun, an issue concerning international law, the African Union Charter, the United Nations Organisation Charter and, especially, the now-reactivated Decolonization Committee of the UN Trusteeship Council.

The Rt. Hon. Augustine Feh Ndangam
National Chairman – SCAPO
Copy to:
– The Secretary General of the United Nations.
– The President of the UN Security Council.
– The Chairperson of the Assembly of the A.U.
– The President of the Commission of the African Union.
– The African Union Executive Council.
– The African Union Peace and Security Council
– The Chairperson of the African Commission, Banjul, The Gambia.
– The Executive Secretary, ECOWAS.
– The Ambassador, United States Embassy, Yaounde.
– The Canadian High Commission, Yaoundé.
– The Ambassador, French Embassy, Yaoundé.
– The British High Commission, Yaoundé.
– The Ambassador, Russian Embassy, Yaoundé.
– The Ambassador, Embassy of the Peoples Republic of China, Yaoundé.
– The Nigerian High Commission, Yaoundé.
– All Political Parties with Headquarters in Southern Cameroons.
– All Political Parties of the Republic of the Cameroons.
– All Traditional Rulers of the Southern Cameroons.
– All Deputies of Southern Cameroons Origin in the National Assembly of La Republique du Cameroun.
– All Mayors of Southern Cameroons Local Government Areas.
– The Press, National and International.



 

 

 

Please share post:

Share to Google Buzz
Share to Google Plus
Share to LiveJournal
Share to MyWorld
Please follow and like us:
0

Comments

comments

Powered by Facebook Comments

Read on » » »