MP's Question on the Southern Cameroons as rebuffed by the Government of Cameroun

June 26, 2009

 

AN ORAL QUESTION DIRECTED TO THE PRIME MINISTER OF CAMEROON

BY

HON AYAH Paul ABINE

MP FOR AKWAYA

 

THE SCNC EQUATION

 

Mr. Prime Minister,

      The pride of Cameroonians is that Cameroon is an island of peace in a turbulent sea. To preserve that priceless ideal, the President of the Republic went out of the normal to sign the Green Tree Accord with Nigeria on top of the judgment of the International Court of Justice at The Hague. Out of the way because it is common knowledge that final judicial decisions are automatically enforceable. To put it differently, orders of the courts are not subject to negotiations. But for the sake of peace and to prevent loss of human lives and property in the event of conflict, Cameroon voluntarily forfeited her legal right.

     

For some years now, a group of Cameroonians under the banner of SCNC have been arguing the case for the independence of the former British Southern Cameroons through the force of argument. In other words, they are arguing their case on legal grounds rather than resorting to the use of force. The Republic of Cameroon on her part has declined to talk with them on the argument that they are an illegal group. Banking on the ground of illegal existence, the forces of law and order have often clamped down on those persons. Some have suffered detention, and others have been imprisoned.

      The possibility or even probability of radicalizing those persons who are relying only on the law now to present their case may not be too remote. An example stares us in the face just next door. From our vaunted success in conflict-prevention beside legality as per the Green Tree Accord, one would logically have liked to see similar steps taken vis-à-vis the SCNC in order to forestall conflict so that we may continue to remain an island of peace in a turbulent sea. What therefore are the special insuperable hurdles between your Government and SCNC that render impossible similar conflict-prevention through dialogue beside strict observance of legality?

   Can it be said that an internal conflict does not disrupt peace, and that only external aggression does?

   Can it be said that an internal conflict does not result in the loss of human lives and property?

   Is it not true that conflicts and legality are often parallel to each other, and yet that every conflict ends up in reconciliation?

   If there can be no true reconciliation without the parties talking to one another, what difference does it make if the talking takes place even outside the law in order to prevent the conflict?

   Would any true man of peace wait for peace to be disrupted before suing for peace at the time that he can no longer efface the indelible scars of conflict?

   Have most nationalist movements not been described as illegal initially only for the governing body to turn round and talk with them eventually? Is such volte-face wisdom after suffering humanitarian crisis that could have been prevented by simply talking?

 

      Mr. Prime Minister,

We are all ears, Sir!

AYAH Paul ABINE

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.ayahpaul.com

 

 

NB: This question was disallowed by the Chairmen’s Conference of the National Assembly of Cameroon. The Chairmen’s Conference comprises the Bureau of the National Assembly and chairmen of the nine general committees – (standing committees). The ground for disallowance was that SCNC is an illegal body. It may be that made the person asking the question equally illegal in the reasoning of the Chairmen’s Conference.

 

AYAH PA