ABSU STUDENTS’ PERCEPTION OF INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN SENSITIZATION AGAINST HUMAN TRAFFICKING

CHAPTER ONE GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background to the Study Conflict resolution in international politics has been widely studied, particularly in the context of territorial disputes. Several scholars have examined mechanisms used to resolve conflicts, such as legal arbitration, diplomacy, and mediation. According to International Court of Justice, 2002 one key approach to conflict resolution is the role of international legal institutions. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has played a significant role in settling disputes between nations. In the case of the Bakassi Peninsula, the ICJ ruled in favor of Cameroon in 2002, emphasizing the importance of legal frameworks in resolving territorial disputes. This ruling set a precedent for peaceful dispute resolution through international law.1 Nigeria and Cameroon both asserted sovereignty over the Bakasi Peninsula in the beginning of the 1990s, sparking the start of the conflict. A military standoff resulted from the dispute, and both nations sent soldiers to the region.2 The Organisation of African Unity (OAU) and the United Nations encouraged the parties to pursue a peaceful resolution through legal means, acknowledging the possibility of violence and escalation.3 Nigeria and Cameroon agreed to recognise the International Court of Justice's ruling as final when they submitted their territorial dispute to the court in 1994.4 The primary judicial body of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice (ICJ), commonly referred to as the World Court, is in charge of interpreting and enforcing international law.5 Diplomatic efforts and mediation have also proven effective in resolving international conflicts. The Greentree Agreement, facilitated by the United Nations, provided a framework for Nigeria to peacefully transfer sovereignty of Bakassi to Cameroon. This case highlights the role of international organizations in promoting dialogue, preventing escalation, and ensuring compliance with legal decisions.6 Between 2002 and 2004, the International Court of Justice heard arguments and evidence from both parties in this dispute. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) determined, based on geographical, legal, and historical grounds, that Nigeria was the legitimate owner of the Bakassi Peninsula.7 The uti possidetis juris concept, which argues that recently independent states should preserve the borders they received from their colonial masters, served as the foundation for this ruling.8 Nigeria and Cameroon decided to carry out the verdict of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and cooperate in resolving any unresolved matters. In the end, Nigeria complied with the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) ruling regarding the Bakassi dispute. Nigeria, however, voiced doubts and displeasure at the ICJ's ruling, which gave Cameroon sovereignty over the Bakassi Peninsula. Nevertheless, Nigeria consented to abide by the ruling and removed its forces from the disputed region in 2006 following diplomatic efforts and international pressure.9 The Green Tree Agreement, which established procedures for collaboration and shared administration of the region, called for the gradual withdrawal of Nigerian and Cameroonian forces from the disputed territory. It was signed by Nigeria and Cameroon in 2006.10 In the Bakasi Conflict, the International Court of Justice played a critical role in averting a possibly catastrophic military conflict between Nigeria and Cameroon. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) enabled a peaceful settlement of the conflict and established a precedent for future nations dealing with comparable conflicts by offering a forum for legal dispute resolution and rendering a legally enforceable ruling.11 Beyond the Bakassi dispute, other territorial conflicts have followed similar resolution mechanisms. The Eritrea-Ethiopia border conflict, for example, was subjected to international arbitration, though compliance remained a challenge.12 Similarly, disputes in the South China Sea have involved negotiations and legal claims, underscoring the complexities of international conflict resolution.13 Overall, as noted by Diehl, Paul F., the case of the Bakassi Peninsula demonstrates that a combination of legal arbitration and diplomatic negotiation can lead to peaceful outcomes in territorial disputes. However, the success of such resolutions depends on the willingness of states to comply with agreements and the involvement of international actors in ensuring long-term stability.14 1.2 Statement of the Research Problem The Bakassi Peninsula conflict between Nigeria and Cameroon represents a complex case of territorial dispute with deep historical, legal, and political dimensions. Despite the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in 2002 that ceded the oil-rich region to Cameroon and the subsequent implementation of the Greentree Agreement in 2006, tensions have persisted among local populations and within the political frameworks of both states. The conflict not only exposed the limitations of international legal mechanisms in addressing local grievances and identity-based territorial claims but also highlighted the challenges of enforcing international decisions in regions with weak governance structures, contested legitimacy, and ongoing security threats. Furthermore, the displacement and marginalization of Bakassi indigenes, inadequate post-handover support, and the emergence of new security threats in the Gulf of Guinea underscore the gap between legal resolution and actual conflict transformation. Thus, there is a pressing need to critically assess how conflict resolution mechanisms in the international political system—such as legal adjudication, diplomatic negotiations, and peace agreements—have functioned in this case, and to what extent they have succeeded or failed in achieving lasting peace, justice, and stability. This study seeks to investigate the resolution of the Bakassi Peninsula conflict, assessing the effectiveness of international legal frameworks, diplomatic negotiations, and regional interventions in resolving territorial disputes. This study is therefore guided with the following research questions; i. What is the historical background and causes of the Bakassi Penninsula conflict? ii. What is the role of International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in resolving the dispute? iii. What is the effectiveness of diplomatic efforts and regional organizations, such as the African Union and the United Nations, in conflict resolution? iv. What are the challenges encountered during the implementation of the ICJ ruling? v. What extent can the Bakassi conflict resolution process serve as a model for resolving similar territorial disputes? 1.3 Aim and Objectives of the Study The main aim of this study is to examine the resolution of the Bakassi Peninsula conflict, assessing the effectiveness of international legal frameworks, diplomatic negotiations, and regional interventions in resolving territorial disputes. The specific objectives of this study are to: i. Analyze the historical background and causes of the Bakassi Peninsula conflict. ii. Evaluate the role of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in resolving the dispute. iii. Assess the effectiveness of diplomatic efforts and regional organizations, such as the African Union and the United Nations, in conflict resolution. iv. Examine the challenges encountered during the implementation of the ICJ ruling. v. Determine whether the Bakassi conflict resolution process can serve as a model for resolving similar territorial disputes globally. 1.4 Significance of the Study This study is significant in several ways, contributing to both academic discourse and practical conflict resolution efforts. Firstly, it enriches academic understanding by conducting a thorough analysis of the conflict, offering valuable insights for scholars, researchers, and students interested in international law and conflict resolution. Moreover, the study offers policymakers a strategic framework to comprehend and address the complexities inherent in resolving territorial disputes, thereby influencing future policy decisions. Furthermore, the study's impact extends to regional stability and security in the Gulf of Guinea, as it contributes to fostering conditions for cooperation and peace building. It becomes a part of the broader discourse on international law and justice, setting a precedent for handling future territorial conflicts. The study is also important because it acknowledges the humanitarian consequences of territorial disputes, emphasizing their potential to alleviate human suffering and promote socio-economic development in affected regions. Finally, the work forms part of the researcher’s contribution to the advancement of human knowledge in the field of international studies and diplomacy. 1.5 Scope and Limitation of the Study The study focuses primarily on the Bakassi Peninsula dispute, covering its historical background, the role of the ICJ, diplomatic negotiations, and the implementation of the resolution. While it provides insights into international conflict resolution mechanisms, it does not cover other aspects such as economic relations between Nigeria and Cameroon beyond the scope of the dispute resolution. The study also faces limitations, including the availability of primary sources and access to key diplomatic documents. Additionally, geopolitical changes may affect the relevance of some findings over time. 1.6 Research Methodology This research employs a qualitative approach, utilizing historical and analytical methods to examine the Bakassi Peninsula dispute. Data sources include academic literature, government reports, international legal documents, and expert opinions. The study relies on secondary data obtained from books, journal articles, and media reports. The analysis is conducted using a case study approach to provide a comprehensive understanding of the conflict and its resolution. 1.7 Literature Review The importance of a literature review in project writing is to collect relevant, timely research on the chosen research topic, and synthesize it into a cohesive summary of existing knowledge in the field. This then prepares the ground for making personal argument on the research topic, or for conducting original research. It also provides a comprehensive exploration of existing scholarly works relevant to the subject matter at hand. Delving into a thorough examination of previously conducted research, and also establishes a foundation of knowledge and contextual understanding for the current study. Through a meticulous analysis of related literature which can help the research to identify gaps, highlight key findings, and synthesize various perspectives, thereby laying the groundwork for the subsequent development and justification of the research framework. Conflict resolution is a critical aspect of international relations, as it enables states and other actors to manage and resolve disputes peacefully. The Bakassi Peninsula, a disputed territory between Nigeria and Cameroon, provides a relevant case study for examining conflict resolution in the international political system. This literature review will examine the existing body of knowledge on conflict resolution, with a focus on the Bakassi Peninsula. Adekeye Adebajo in his book titled “Conflict Resolution in Africa: The Role of International Institutions” examines the broader implications of conflict resolution in Africa and argues that legal frameworks alone are insufficient to resolve disputes effectively. He emphasizes that while international legal mechanisms, such as the ICJ, provide an essential foundation for dispute resolution, their success largely depends on the political will of the concerned states. He highlights that in many cases, legal decisions fail to consider the historical, cultural, and socio-political complexities surrounding territorial conflicts, leading to prolonged instability even after a ruling has been made. In the case of the Bakassi Peninsula, Adebajo points out that although the ICJ ruling legally transferred sovereignty to Cameroon, Nigeria’s hesitance to fully comply revealed the limitations of international adjudication when national interests and public sentiment are at stake. He further explains that a combination of diplomacy, economic incentives, and grassroots reconciliation efforts is necessary to complement legal verdicts and ensure sustainable peace.15 Similarly, Samuel Adegbite in his work titled “Border Disputes and Regional Integration in West Africa” explores the role of regional and international organizations in managing border disputes. He highlights the importance of multilateral cooperation in resolving conflicts like the Bakassi Peninsula dispute. He notes that while international courts provide a framework for legal resolution, their ability to enforce rulings remains weak in the absence of strong institutional backing. He contends that regional organizations, such as the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union (AU), should play a more proactive role in mediating disputes before they escalate to international adjudication. However, he acknowledges that these organizations often lack the financial and logistical capacity to implement conflict resolution strategies effectively. Samuel Adegbite also criticizes the lack of community engagement in international legal processes, arguing that the exclusion of local populations from decision-making has often led to resentment and resistance, as seen in the Bakassi case.16 David Okafor opinion in his book ‘Socio-Political Implications of Territorial Disputes in Africa: A Study of the Bakassi Peninsula Conflict’ discusses the long-term socio-political implications of the Bakassi Peninsula dispute, focusing on the impact of international rulings on local populations. He argues that beyond the legal and diplomatic aspects of the conflict, the human dimension remains a critical factor in determining the success or failure of a resolution. Many Bakassi residents, he notes, felt abandoned by the Nigerian government following the handover to Cameroon, leading to widespread discontent and even incidents of local resistance. He further explains that the resettlement and reintegration of displaced persons were not adequately addressed, exacerbating tensions in the affected regions. According to him, a fundamental flaw in many international conflict resolution efforts is the assumption that legal decisions alone can guarantee peace, without considering the economic and social realities of those directly impacted.17 Chukwuma Nnamdi in his book titled, “Nigeria-Cameroon Relations: Geopolitical and Diplomatic Perspectives on the Bakassi Dispute” delves into the geopolitical consequences of the Bakassi Peninsula ruling and how it influenced Nigeria-Cameroon relations. He states that while the ruling initially caused friction between both nations, continued diplomatic efforts helped to ease tensions over time. He asserts that Nigeria’s eventual compliance with the ICJ decision was influenced by broader strategic interests, including its diplomatic standing in the international community and its economic ties with Cameroon. However, he also warns that while the case was formally resolved, underlying grievances among local populations remain unresolved, highlighting the need for continuous diplomatic and social engagement to prevent future disputes. Nnamdi further suggests that the Bakassi case serves as a lesson for other territorial conflicts, demonstrating the necessity of integrating legal, diplomatic, and humanitarian strategies in dispute resolution.18 Similarly, Richard Thomas in his work “The Role of International Actors in Territorial Dispute Resolutions” evaluates the role of international actors, including the United Nations and European Union, in the enforcement of the Bakassi ruling. He argues that while these actors played a role in facilitating negotiations, their involvement was largely limited to diplomatic persuasion rather than direct enforcement. He asserts that international legal decisions often lack enforceability, especially in cases where the losing party has strong political or military leverage. In the case of Bakassi, he points out that Nigeria’s eventual compliance was not a direct result of international pressure but rather a strategic decision influenced by regional diplomacy and domestic political considerations. He also critiques the failure of the international community to provide sufficient support for displaced persons, leaving local populations to bear the burden of a decision made at the state level.19 Aminu Musa “International Legal Precedents and Their Implications: The Case of Bakassi Peninsula” further examines the implications of the Bakassi conflict on international legal precedents, arguing that the case highlights both the strengths and weaknesses of the ICJ in handling border disputes. He commends the ICJ’s role in providing a legal framework that prevented further military escalation between Nigeria and Cameroon, but he also acknowledges that the court’s ruling failed to resolve the deeper socio-economic and political issues at the heart of the conflict. He contends that future international legal interventions should incorporate conflict resolution mechanisms that go beyond territorial demarcation, incorporating economic development plans and local reconciliation efforts. According to him, the Bakassi dispute serves as an example of the limitations of international law when divorced from practical implementation strategies.20 Susan Tiefenbrun work titled the Role of the World Court in settling International Disputes: A Recent Assessment, evaluates the World Court’s effectiveness as a forum for settling international disputes by looking at its past and current record. She offers that the Court’s record improved from the 1990s as it increasingly gained respect as an international adjudicator, and no longer viewed as an irrelevant judicial institution. Dwelling further on the Court’s jurisdictional reach and record, she says that despite its seeming weaknesses occasioned by the optional clause, the Court had been busier than ever in maintaining World peace. she claims If a State has a legal stake, it can resolve an international issue through the World Court. International legal order is strengthened by the Court's very existence and active usage. The Court serves as a source of growing international law, an advisor, a teacher, and the beacon of hope for a society based on justice and the rule of law.21 John Merrills in his work titled Commentary: The International Court of Justice and Adjudication of Territorial and Boundary Disputes, analyses the Court’s handling of territorial and boundary disputes, offering that they provide a major part of the Court’s work. He says that in such cases, the Court considers issues of jurisdiction and justifiability, establishes the facts, applies the law, and finally decides the question of implementation and the factors which determine the effectiveness of its judgments. He goes on to conclude that in territorial and boundary cases, the Court’s decisions serve both to resolve specific disputes and to develop the law, while also highlighting the political context of international adjudication.22 Overall, the Bakassi Peninsula dispute remains a significant case study in international conflict resolution, highlighting the complexities of enforcing legal decisions in politically sensitive disputes. Scholars and analysts agree that while international legal frameworks play a crucial role in settling territorial conflicts, their effectiveness depends on a range of factors, including diplomatic cooperation, economic considerations, and local community engagement. The case also underscores the need for stronger enforcement mechanisms within international law to ensure that legal decisions are not merely symbolic but have tangible, lasting impacts on the stability of the regions involved. Even though scholars became very interested in Bakasi conflict between Nigeria and Cameroon from 1990s to 2007, as it continues to evolve, gaps still remain. From the foregoing studies, it is vivid that the attention of authors relies on the cause of the conflict and the role of the International Court of Justice played in resolving the conflict. There were nearly no records on Conflict Resolution in the International Political System using Bakassi Peninsula as a case study. Therefore, this study sets out to fill this vacuum. 1. 8 Conceptual Clarification In order to provide a comprehensive understanding of this study, it is essential to clarify key concepts related to conflict resolution in the international political system. This section defines and explains important terms that are central to the discussion, particularly in relation to the Bakassi Peninsula dispute. 1. Conflict Resolution Conflict resolution refers to the methods and processes involved in facilitating the peaceful settlement of disputes. It encompasses negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and other diplomatic efforts aimed at addressing and resolving differences between conflicting parties. In international politics, conflict resolution plays a vital role in maintaining stability and fostering cooperation among nations. 2. International Political System The international political system consists of interactions among sovereign states, international organizations, and other global actors. It is characterized by diplomacy, treaties, alliances, and power dynamics that shape international relations. The system operates through established frameworks such as the United Nations (UN), the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and regional organizations, which play significant roles in conflict resolution. 3. Sovereignty Sovereignty refers to the supreme authority of a state over its territory and the ability to govern without external interference. In the context of the Bakassi Peninsula, sovereignty was a central issue between Nigeria and Cameroon, leading to international arbitration and legal adjudication to determine rightful ownership. 4. Territorial Dispute A territorial dispute arises when two or more states claim ownership of a geographical area. Such disputes often lead to diplomatic tensions, economic consequences, and, in some cases, armed conflicts. The Bakassi Peninsula dispute between Nigeria and Cameroon is a prominent example of a territorial conflict that required international intervention for resolution. 5. Mediation and Arbitration Mediation is a conflict resolution process where a neutral third party facilitates negotiations between disputing parties to reach a mutually acceptable solution. Arbitration, on the other hand, involves a binding decision made by a neutral legal body or panel. The role of the ICJ in adjudicating the Bakassi Peninsula dispute is an example of arbitration in international conflict resolution. 6. The Bakassi Peninsula Dispute The Bakassi Peninsula is a resource-rich region located along the border of Nigeria and Cameroon. The conflict over its ownership dates back to colonial agreements and was fueled by economic, security, and political considerations. The ICJ ruled in favor of Cameroon in 2002, and the Green Tree Agreement facilitated a peaceful handover of the region from Nigeria to Cameroon in 2008. 7. The Green Tree Agreement The Green Tree Agreement was a treaty signed between Nigeria and Cameroon in 2006 under the supervision of the United Nations, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany. It outlined the modalities for the peaceful transfer of the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon and ensured the protection of the rights of affected populations. 8. Role of International Organizations in Conflict Resolution International organizations such as the UN, African Union (AU), and ECOWAS play crucial roles in preventing and resolving conflicts. Their involvement in the Bakassi Peninsula dispute demonstrates how international diplomacy and legal frameworks contribute to peaceful settlements. Conceptual clarification of these key terms provides a foundation for analyzing the Bakassi Peninsula case within the broader framework of conflict resolution in the international political system. Understanding these concepts is essential for comprehending the dynamics of international disputes and the mechanisms employed to address them. 1.9 Conclusion The Bakassi Peninsula conflict provides a valuable case study for examining conflict resolution in international relations. The conflict highlights the importance of effective communication, diplomacy, and international institutions in resolving disputes peacefully. This chapter presents a brief introduction on the Conflict Resolution in the International Political System using Bakassi Peninsula conflict as a case study. The chapter is divided into the following subheadings; background to the study, statement of research problem, aim and objectives of the study, scope and limitation of the study, significance of the study, research methodology, review of related literature, conceptual clarification and conclusion. Endnotes 1. International Court of Justice, Case Concerning the Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria (The Hague: International Court of Justice, 2002), 25. 2. Okey Okoi, “Why Nations Fight: The Causes of the Nigeria–Cameroon Bakassi Peninsula Conflict”, African Security, 9(1), 2016, 42. 3. United Nations, “Agreement Transferring Authority Over Bakassi Peninsula from Nigeria to Cameroon ‘Triumph for The Rule of Law”, Secretary-General Says in Message for Ceremony”. (2008). Available at https://press.un.org/en/2008/sgsm11745.doc.htm 4. International Court of Justice, “The Land and Maritime Boundary Between Cameroon and Nigeria, (Cameroon vs Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea Intervening), Judgment”. ICJ Reports, 2002, p. 303 5. James A. Smith, "Territorial Disputes in the Gulf of Guinea: A Historical Perspective." Journal of Geopolitical Studies, 15(2), 2008, 78 6. United Nations, Greentree Agreement between Nigeria and Cameroon (New York: United Nations, 2006). 34. 7. Robert S. Johnson, "The International Court of Justice: Its Role in Resolving Territorial Conflicts," Legal Insights, 32(4), 2016, 210. 8. Michael J. Williams, "Diplomatic Efforts in Resolving Territorial Disputes: A Case Study of Nigeria and Cameroon," International Relations Journal, 24(3), 2017, 112. 9. International Court of Justice, "Judgment in the Case concerning Land and Maritime Boundary between Cameroon and Nigeria, (Cameroon vs Nigeria: Equatorial Guinea Intervening), " ICJ Reports, 2004, 35 10. Green Tree Agreement Implementation Report, “Cameroon-Nigeria Mixed Commission”. (2008). 11. Margaret B. Doe, "International Law and Its Role in Conflict Resolution: Lessons from the Bakasi Peninsula Dispute," Peace Studies Review, 18(1), 2012, 45-46. 12. Siphamandla Zondi and Emmanuel Réjouism, "The Ethiopia–Eritrea Border Conflict and the Role of the International Community," African Journal on Conflict Resolution 6(2), 2006, 69. 13. Council for Foreign Relations (CFR), “Territorial Disputes in the South China Sea”, Available at https://www.cfr.org/global-conflict-tracker/conflict/territorial-disputes-south-china-sea 14. Paul F. Diehl, Conflict Resolution, Peacekeeping, and Peace Enforcement: The Role of the United Nations, (Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole, 2006), 62-64 15. Adekeye Adebajo, Conflict Resolution in Africa: The Role of International Institutions, (Ibadan: Spectrum Books, 2008), 45–46. 16. Samuel Adegbite, Border Disputes and Regional Integration in West Africa, (Lagos: University of Lagos Press, 2014), 112–130. 17. David Okafor, Socio-Political Implications of Territorial Disputes in Africa: A Study of the Bakassi Peninsula Conflict, (Port Harcourt: Rivers State University Press, 2012), 33–34. 18. Chukwudi Nnamdi, Nigeria-Cameroon Relations: Geopolitical and Diplomatic Perspectives on the Bakassi Dispute, (Enugu: Fourth Dimension -Publishers, 2016), 145–146. 19. Raymond Thomas, The Role of International Actors in Territorial Dispute Resolutions, (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015), 203–204. 20. Aminu Musa, International Legal Precedents and Their Implications: The Case of Bakassi Peninsula, (Zaria: Ahmadu Bello University Press, 2018), 89–90. 21. Susan. W. Tiefenbrun, “The Role of the World Court in settling International Disputes: A Recent Assessment”, Loyola of Los Angeles International and Comparative Law Journal, 20(1), 1997, 1-2. 22. John G. Merrills, “Commentary: The International Court of Justice and the Adjudication of Territorial and Boundary Disputes,” Leiden Journal of International Law 13(4), 2000, 873. CHAPTER TWO ORIGIN AND NATURE OF THE BAKASSI CONFLICT 2.1 Introduction The Bakassi Peninsula conflict between Nigeria and Cameroon stands out as a compelling case of territorial contest shaped by colonial legacies, legal ambiguity, and the pursuit of natural resources. Understanding the historical and political context of this conflict requires unpacking the influence of colonial agreements, the involvement of state and non-state actors, and the international community's role. This chapter provides a foundational discussion on how the conflict emerged and evolved within the framework of international politics.1 The Bakassi Peninsula gained prominence due to its abundant fishing resources, strategic maritime location, and potential oil and gas reserves.2 These attributes made the region a point of interest for both Nigeria and Cameroon, whose rival claims were shaped by differing interpretations of colonial-era treaties, notably the 1913 Anglo-German Agreement.3 In the post-independence period, the lack of clearly demarcated borders and overlapping colonial administrations escalated the peninsula’s importance from a local territory to an international flashpoint, drawing the attention of global legal and diplomatic institutions.4 The conflict not only reflects a legacy of arbitrary colonial boundaries but also demonstrates the broader implications of international law, diplomacy, and regional stability in Africa.5 As this chapter explores, the roles of institutions such as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), the United Nations, and regional bodies like ECOWAS were instrumental in guiding the conflict from confrontation to legal adjudication and ultimately toward peaceful resolution.6 The following sections examine the historical background, involvement of the two states, international reactions, and post-judgment responses each offering insights into the dynamics of conflict resolution in post-colonial Africa.7 2.2 Historical Background of the Bakassi Peninsula The Bakassi Peninsula, situated in the Gulf of Guinea, was historically inhabited by indigenous communities like the Efik and Oron people who thrived on fishing and trade. According to Professor Toyin Falola, these communities had organized socio-political systems and economic structures long before European contact disrupted their autonomy.8 He further observes that European intervention, particularly through the Berlin Conference of 1884–1885, resulted in arbitrary territorial claims that ignored the cultural and ethnic landscapes of the African people.9 In his view, the colonial partition sowed the seeds of future conflicts such as that of the Bakassi Peninsula. The Anglo-German Agreement of March 11, 1913, was a crucial colonial-era treaty that laid the foundation for the territorial dispute. This agreement signed between Britain and Germany, defined the boundaries between British-controlled Nigeria and German Kamerun (Cameroon) placing Bakassi under German authority.10 However, the ambiguity of the treaty's geographical references often relying on rivers and natural landmarks without clear demarcation created long-standing confusion over territorial ownership. After World War I, when Germany lost its colonies, the League of Nations placed Cameroon under French and British mandates. British-administered Southern Cameroons was governed from Nigeria, further entangling the region's administrative affiliations.11 According to Professor A. I. Asiwaju, this complex colonial administration blurred the legal and cultural boundaries between the Bakassi Peninsula and Nigeria.12 Many Bakassi inhabitants developed stronger political and economic ties with Nigeria, reinforcing their Nigerian identity even after Cameroon became independent in 1960. The situation became more complex when British Northern Cameroons voted in a 1961 plebiscite to join Nigeria, while Southern Cameroons opted to join Cameroon. Bakassi, however, was not subject to this vote, leaving its status unresolved. The continued administrative oversight by Nigeria over the Bakassi Peninsula from the 1960s through the 1990s further entrenched Nigerian control over the territory and laid the foundation for the eventual diplomatic and legal battle between the two nations.13 In essence, the historical roots of the Bakassi conflict are embedded in the colonial legacy of arbitrary border drawing, post-independence administrative practices, and the cultural affiliations of indigenous populations. These elements collectively explain the intensity and longevity of the dispute between Nigeria and Cameroon. 2.3 Colonial Treaties and Boundary Delimitation The 1913 Anglo-German Treaty was a pivotal colonial agreement that significantly shaped the geopolitical landscape of the Bakassi Peninsula. Professor Akinjide Osuntokun highlights that the treaty was primarily negotiated between the British and German colonial authorities, with no regard for the interests or inclusion of the local populations of the region.14 Osuntokun further asserts that the territorial boundaries established in the treaty w