*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:
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.
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 Cameroons
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.