Why interim Consortium leaders Mark Bareta and Tapang Tanku Ivo DO NOT GET IT.
On behalf of the interim leadership of the Consortium, Mark explains that a referendum should be pressed for so that the people choose to stay in the union or part ways.
This is why the approach is wanting:
– In international politics, this is considered as an INTERNAL AFFAIR. Therefore, other countries will not want to be seen as INTERFERING in the political process of another. The UN will only urge you to GO SETTLE YOUR INTERNAL disputes. Scotland is having series of referendums; did you hear the UN going there to organise a referendum? The best they and others can do is to send observers. BIYA will use his CPDM/ELECAM machinery and rig before your eyes. The world would say ‘there were little irregularities’ and endorse the results as they have always done before;
– There is NO TREATY OF UNION between the two Cameroons as art 102 of the UN Charter provides which attracts the penalty in art 103 rendering the union null and void . Asking for a referendum means you are saying, ‘there is a union treaty’. You can’t leave a union that never was!
– Art 4b of the African Union Constitutive Act obliges member states to respect their boundaries inherited at independence. That of La Republique clearly ends at the Mungo. DO NOT confuse the world that it ends at BAKASSI. If La Republique du CameroUn says it ends at Bakassi, then they MUST show proof of extension of their boundaries by brandishing a TREATY OF UNION as explained above;
– If it is federalism we seek, why is everybody preaching federalism being chased away? Why has Tassang run away? Why are leaders of Southern Cameroons majority parties PAP? Why is my hussy who, before now thought a political resolution were possible on the run? Why were the leaders arrested? Are these people willing to organise a referendum? I see bad faith in them and anyone with bad faith cannot in good faith organise a free and fair election in the name of a referendum.
Please, the actions of LRC is an act of colonialism. We have all the arguments and facts to back our case of self-defence. We must form a government NOW and a Southern Cameroons Defence Force to defend our territory from foreign aggression.
Mark and Ivo are great guys; great people with great intensions but this fight is deeper than we all think. I know this duo as very very smart fellows; I can be consoled that the reason they have for pushing federalism is not what they publicly defend. These guys may be playing diplomacy with Po Mbia…this may have a negative repercussion on the struggle. We all need to speak with ONE VOICE.
NB: We need ghost town pics of today.
AKOSON
From a federalist to an ‘independentist’. The SC MUST be free
Interim Consortium Response.
This is good. It is healthy for the debate to grow, interim leadership of the Consortium thinks we are missing something big. Having a referendum does not in any way means there was/is a union treaty. Organising a referendum does not in any ways legalised the present union. If such a referendum must occur, only Southern Cameroonians can vote as it was in 1961, that is why the 1972, 20th May referendum was illegal both in content, form and constitutionality because it involved Camerounese (Francophones) who had nothing to say in 1961 when Southern Cameroonians voted. We should recall that in 1961 plebiscite Southern Cameroons voted to join either Nigeria or La Republique Du Cameroun, does that 1961 vote means there was a treaty of union with Cameroun before the vote? Does it in anyway legalise this present union? We understand that if such a referendum organised today as a result of this struggle involves Francophones then the argument from Akoson would have been substantiated. If would have mean we accept the treaty of union which as we know does not exist.
Therefore, we reiterate that the referendum option is just a peaceful means as suggested by Mark Bareta where Southern Cameronians after 56 years of this come-we-stay marriage can finally have their say. Recalled that Mark Bareta, interim consortium leader also pointed out that away from the referendum option, arm struggle is another option which might become necessary as Southern Cameroonians are already becoming “radicalised” . The sovereign people of Southern Cameroons will have to make that decision on which options to take. We should note that the Cameroon Anglophone Society Society Consortium has clearly chosen the non-violent civil disobedience path and way back in January before the arrest of Consortium leaders, the Consortium had already called for a referendum. Mark Bareta is only pushing the referendum option first without necessarily taking any other options off the table.
3 comments
Federalism, referendums, plebiscite etc have all been tried before and they all have failed us woefully. Why can’t we just acknowledge that and agree that we should move on to something new, like independence? Let’s stop dancing around and asking for history to be repeated. We only have one option left and that option is independence for the people of Southern Cameroons (Ambazonia). Mr. Akoson has it just right. We should all do what it takes to get our independence now or be ready to go back to Paul Biya and his French backers, tail between our legs, apologize for daring to do what humans do when voilated, ask for forgiveness and then wait for what we cannot see coming.
I keep on asking and none of those propagating Federalism have not given me the compeling wisdom behind this Federalism quest. I like to polish up further what Augustine Ambe has said. We know that the Plebiscite of 1961 did not mean there was a Treaty of Union with Cameroon. Do not forget that the 1961 Plebiscite was conducted by neutral institution, (The UN) who also had jurisdiction to do so. As such, the results where free and fair. Then came 1972. Who conducted the referendum? La Republique du Camerooun. Note La Republic had no Authority to do that in the first place because she was an illegal occupant of Southern Cameroons because as you rightly said, had not signed a Union Treaty with Southern Cameroons. As result, we all saw what happened. The conduct of the Referendum itself was a fraud and that is what has kept us were we are today.
So tell me, who are you proposing will conduct a referendum this time around? If it is La Republique du Cameroun, then what is the essence of the current Southern Cameroonians’ revolution? Because giving La Republique the power will mean repeating the same errors our forefathers made. If on the other hand it is The UN, the question any intelligent mind will ask is, how many times will the UN give Southern Cameroonias their independence. Southern Cameroons already has its independence, she is only being annexed by La Republique du Cameroon. Southern Cameroonians must restore their statehood just as La Republique restored its statehood in 1984. So why is it right for La Republique du Cameroon to restore its sovereignty as gotten at Independence but wrong for Southern Cameroons to restore hers. Talking of a Referendum is like saying Southern Cameroons you do not have the right like La Republique to restore your statehood. This bizarre coming from the interim leaders. Could there be more to this their position now? That is why with all due respect, Mr. Tapang Ivo and Mark Bareta don’t get it.
i thought we agreed that all the pressure groups agreed to come together to have a single voice, which to me i think is a good step, i get a bit worried when i find that it seems as if we have not decided what the voice is, federalism or independence. its is my plea that we stick to the one voice , restoration of our statehood, or if we chose federalism let’s all rally behind it. after reading the above, i am now confused because i don’t know what we stand for.