A reader of the Independentist by name Epykom, writes to the editorial team, accusing Dr. Samuel Ikome Sako,the President of the Ambazonian government in Exile, as being paid to delay the struggle.

Letter to the Editor

This is all what Sako’s followers know that Liberation struggle depends on governing. They have forgotten that life is conceived in division, so for stability in the move let’s have all the leadership be as higher the disorder is the more stable state, the theory of entropy in my mind. Sako is worse leader I have known. As he brought this discord in the struggle because he to be president. He is being paid to delay this struggle.

Epykom

Editor’s Response

Dear Epykom:

I thank you for sharing his opinion. In every liberation movement, voices will clash, and disagreements will arise. But let us be clear: passion must not override reason, nor should suspicion replace evidence.

First, the claim that “life is conceived in division” and therefore disorder is stabilising is a dangerous misreading of both science and history. Division may create new beginnings, yes, but unchecked disorder destroys nations. If instability were truly the measure of strength, then failed states would be the most stable in the world. But we all know they are not. What sustains a people under trial is not chaos, but order — institutions that channel differences into progress.

Second, to accuse Dr Samuel Ikome Sako of being “paid to delay the struggle” without presenting proof is not only unjust but also reckless. It is the very tactic our enemies in Yaoundé use: to spread doubt, discredit leaders, and weaken the movement from within. Ambazonians must be vigilant not to become tools of that same strategy.

Third, governance is not a distraction from liberation. It is the backbone of liberation. Ask history: Charles de Gaulle governed Free France in exile while still fighting the Nazi occupation. Nelson Mandela and the ANC prepared frameworks of governance long before apartheid fell. Liberation without governance is a recipe for collapse the day after freedom is declared. Dr Sako’s insistence on governance is not personal ambition — it is foresight.

No leader will appeal to all, that much is true. But in this struggle, the measure of a leader should not be how many admirers or critics he has, but whether his actions protect the dignity of our people and advance the cause of freedom. To date, the record shows that Dr Sako has pushed for unity through the Swiss Talks, for structure through the Ambazonian Coalition Team, and for continuity through the Government.

Unity does not mean silencing debate. It means keeping our disagreements within the family, while standing together against the occupier. Let us therefore be cautious: when critique turns into baseless accusation, it ceases to strengthen and begins to destroy.

Respectfully,
The Editorial Desk