Letter to the Editor
Sir/Madam,
Presidential candidate Issa Tchiroma deserves credit for finally acknowledging that the root causes of the Southern Cameroons conflict must be addressed. However, his recent statement misrepresenting the 1961 plebiscite risks perpetuating the very historical distortions that have long eroded trust between peoples and undermined genuine dialogue.
Mr. Tchiroma claimed that the United Nations presented both Northern and Southern Cameroons with the same choice: either to join Nigeria or to join Cameroon. This assertion is factually incorrect and legally misleading.
In the Northern Cameroons, the decolonization process unfolded through two distinct plebiscites. The first, held in 1959, asked the population whether they wished to integrate into Nigeria immediately or defer the decision. The second, conducted in 1961 under UN supervision, asked whether to achieve independence by joining Nigeria or by joining the Republic of Cameroon.
In the Southern Cameroons, by contrast, there was only one plebiscite in February 1961. The electorate was asked whether they wished to achieve independence by joining Nigeria or by joining the Republic of Cameroon. Crucially, a third option — full independence — was formally requested by Southern Cameroons leaders but denied by both the United Nations and the administering authority, Britain. As a result, the people cast their votes within a restricted and legally deficient framework, on the explicit understanding that any union with Cameroon would take the form of a federal arrangement based on equality of status between the two territories.
Here lies the most critical point Mr. Tchiroma omitted: no Treaty of Union was ever negotiated, signed, ratified, or deposited at the United Nations between the already independent Republic of Cameroon (which achieved sovereignty on 1 January 1960) and the Southern Cameroons (which voted in February 1961). Under international law, such a treaty is the indispensable legal instrument required to bind two sovereign entities into a new federal or unitary state. Its absence means that the so-called “union” was never legally consummated. Instead, what followed was the unilateral absorption of Southern Cameroons by Yaoundé, in violation of the plebiscite’s intent, the UN Trusteeship framework, and the principle of self-determination enshrined in the UN Charter and Resolution 1514 (XV).
To suggest that the Southern Cameroons simply “chose to join” Cameroon is therefore historically simplistic and legally untenable. The truth is that the people were denied the right to full independence, promised a federal partnership, and ultimately annexed without a Treaty of Union.
Any genuine effort to resolve this decades-long conflict must begin with a clear acknowledgment of these historical and legal realities. Only by facing the truth honestly can Cameroon, Southern Cameroons, and the international community build a credible foundation for a just and lasting peace.
Sincerely, Johnson Fonwi
