Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mohammed Ndarani Mohammed, has urged President Bola Tinubu to revisit the 2002 International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling that ceded the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon.
Mohammed argues that revisiting the judgement is crucial for aligning with the President’s ‘Renewed Hope Agenda,’ aiming to remedy the injustice faced by the former Nigerian citizens and the loss of the region’s valuable oil and mineral resources.
In a statement made available to The Guardian on Wednesday Mohammed stressed that Nigeria has grounds to call for a ‘judicial revisit’ under special proceedings, noting that the country failed to present its best case during the original trial.
“Nigeria lost the case due to an unratified 1913 Anglo-German Agreement, which became the crux of the legal argument. Our failure to challenge this properly contributed to the unfavorable outcome,” Mohammed explained.
“Nigeria Government failed to understand the point of argument on the expression ,Rio del Rey , rather than Rio _ dos’ Nigeria failed to argue that Germany didn’t expressly demarcate the area of litigation in the Bakassi peninsula before ceding in the alleged treaty to Anglophone Britain,” The SAN further added.
The lawyer highlighted that the 1913 treaty shifted the boundary between Nigeria and Cameroon from the Rio del Rey River to the Akpa Yafe River, pushing the disputed Bakassi Peninsula into Cameroon.
“Nigeria did not adequately argue that the treaty failed to establish who the first occupants of Bakassi were,” Mohammed said, adding that this failure overlooked crucial questions of native land rights.
Drawing on African customary law, he stated: “The philosophy of land in Africa distinguishes between physical land and its intangible benefits. Nigeria should have emphasized this distinction, especially in the context of colonial treaties.”
Mohammed blamed technical blunders, particularly from Nigeria’s Surveyor-General’s Office, for further weakening the case. “The Ministry of Justice’s argument that the ICJ lacked jurisdiction was incorrect, given the court’s wide-reaching powers under Article 36 of its statute,” he added.
Citing the possibility of legal recourse, Mohammed pointed out that the ICJ allows for the revision of judgments under Article 61 of its statute if new facts emerge that were previously unknown to both the court and the parties involved.
He stated: “If vital facts were not considered in the original decision, Nigeria can apply for a revision of the judgment. Such an application would need to demonstrate that these facts could potentially overturn the previous ruling.”
Referencing relevant international case law, Mohammed mentioned several instances where countries successfully sought revision of ICJ judgments, including disputes involving Tunisia, Libya, and Bosnia. He encouraged Nigeria to adopt a similar approach, assembling a team of experienced legal minds to critically examine the Bakassi case and pursue a revisit.
“In light of President Tinubu’s Renewed Hope agenda and the competence of Attorney General Prince Lateef Fagbemi (SAN), I believe revisiting the Bakassi judgement is achievable,” Mohammed said, praising a recent Supreme Court ruling on local government autonomy as a positive step towards reclaiming marginalised rights in Nigeria.
