Lagos – For Nigeria to avert a recurrence of the Bakassi Peninsula imbroglio, it should review its permanent submission to the jurisdiction of International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague, a don has said.
Emeritus Professor of Law, Adedokun Adeyemi, disclosed this in an interview on Thursday in Lagos.
Adeyemi, a former Dean, Faculty of Law, University of Lagos, recently renamed Moshood Abiola University, said Nigeria's permanent submission to the ICJ's jurisdiction has had negative consequences on the country.
“We had in the 60s `foolishly' submitted to the jurisdiction of the court and it was obligatory that we appear before it in the Cameroun suit on Bakassi Peninsula.
“The concept of sovereignty provides that one cannot just bring a case against a state except the country consents to the jurisdiction of the court.
“Some industrialised states like the U.S.and UK have not submitted permanently to the jurisdiction of the court and are circumspect in the conventions and treaties they sign, '' he said.
The professor of public law deplored the arbitrary signing of treaties and conventions without knowing the implications on the country and the people.
Adeyemi added:“Nigeria should study the implication of any treaty or convention before we ratify it. If you sign a treaty and you do not ratify it, you are not under any obligation to submit to it”.
He stressed that in signing any treaty, the interest of the country and the welfare of the people should be paramount.
“After 50 years of independence, Nigeria should be regarded as a mature country and this should be demonstrated in international circles and reflect in how we fashion our foreign policies.
“The security and interest of the people should be the primary focus of government as enshrined in Section 14 of the 1999 constitution,'' Adeyemi said.
On the Bakassi Peninsula, Adeyemi said shoddy preparations for the case by previous administrations led to Nigeria losing the territory.
He observed that Nigeria was not represented during the trial of the case by international law treaty experts like Professors Akin Oyebode, Michael Ajomo, Itse Sagay and David Ijalaiye.
“If we had these people on the Nigerian team, we probably would not have lost the case,'' the don said.
He recalled that a legal luminary, Sir Ian Brownlie, QC, of Oxford University, was invited to join the Nigerian team of lawyers rather late.
“Cameroun was represented in the case by its experts on international treaties, while Nigeria was not represented by experts.
“We had a beautiful opportunity of crossing a legal hurdle in the Bakassi case; Cameroon itself has not completed the process of a second plebiscite after the Southern Cameroun and Northern Cameroun were joined.
“If the issue of the plebiscite had been espoused during the case, the claim of Cameroun over the Bakassi Peninsula would not have sailed through,'' Adeyemi said.
He explained that a second plebiscite was required to be conducted in Southern Cameroun after some years to ratify the union, but noted that it had not been held.
On the agitations by some ethnic groups for self-determination, Adeyemi said the situation had brought to the fore the need for a national discourse to chart a new course for the country.
According to him, the members of the National Assembly are not the true representatives of the people, having been constituted under a constitution supervised by the military.
“The government and the people should take these things seriously. We must never get to a situation that Nigeria splinters.
“Let nobody be under the illusion that if Nigeria breaks up there will be a North, East and West geo-political regions.
“We may splinter into over 200 units with different militia groups in control like in Somalia. Whatever it takes, we must make sure that Nigeria remains one,'' Adeyemi stressed.
The don said Nigeria was currently not operating a true federalism, adding“we have to sit down and decide what type of government we want.
“The need to convene the meeting to decide that has become urgent.''
He warned politicians against making inciting comments that could lead to ethno-religious conflicts. (NAN)
