International Affairs and Global Strategy www.iiste.org ISSN 2224-574X (Paper) ISSN 2224-8951 (Online) Vol.29, 2015 21 Theoretical Perspectives on Nigeria’s Enforcement of the International Court of Justice’s Verdict Over Bakassi Peninsula Dr. Odoh, Samuel I. 1 Nwogbaga, David M.E. 2 1. Department of Political Science, Ebonyi State University, P.M.B. 053, Abakaliki; Nigeria 2. Department of Political Science, Ebonyi State University, P.M.B. 053, Abakaliki; Nigeria *dnwogbaga504@gmail.com Abstract Various theoretical explanations have been advanced with respect to why Nigeria ceded Bakassi peninsula to Cameroun after initial rejection of the verdict passed by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on 10th October, 2002. The different arguments over the national interests that informed the ceding of the Bakassi peninsula to Cameroon, found expressions in the democratic-state theory, consequence theory, economic-aid theory, Deterrence theory, and the regime-type theory. Without prejudice to the postulations of the various theories, it is argued that though the identified variables all played out in Nigeria’s enforcement of the international court of Justice’s verdict, it seems to have been guided more by the consequence and the conspiracy theories. Introduction The Nigeria-Cameroon conflict over Bakassi Penninsula which lingered for more than 30 years originated from the colonial partitioning of Africa characterised by series of ambiguities and irregularities in attempts to define the territorial boundary between the two countries (Dakas, 1999; Akpan, 2009). Attempts to determine the actual boundary between the two nations had often caused diplomatic rows and violent crises especially in the oil-rich peninsula which at times resulted in the loss of lives and property of the citizens (Aminu, 1986; Jimi and Aminu, 1986). In 1982 for example, five Nigerian soldiers were killed at the border while the aborigines of Bakassi were severally attacked by the Cameroon Gendarmes (Vogt, 1986). In order to resolve the conflicts amicably, the two countries continually engaged in renewed discussions especially after the Maroua Declaration of 1975 signed by the then Head of State, Rtd. Gen. Yakubu Gowon which Cameroon believed, marked the ceding of Bakassi Penninsula to her (Dakas, 1999). However, mere discussions did not satisfy Cameroon’s quest to be in control as the aborigines who are Nigerians continued to occupy the area. This seriously troubled Cameroon and eventually compelled the government to take the border dispute with Nigeria to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on March 29, 1994. On 10th October 2002, the Court sitting at Hague gave its verdict to mark the end of the 8-year legal tussle in favour of Cameroon. The verdict required Nigeria to transfer possession and sovereignty over the territory to Cameroon without granting Self-Determination Rights to the Bakassi indigenes (Omoigui, 2002; Eke and Eke, 2007). As a consequence, Nigeria lost 35 communities to Cameroon while the indigenes were displaced (Omoigui, 2002; Yusufu, 2003). This generated consternations in Nigeria and aroused vitriolic comments from scholars, journalists, and commentators who not only described it as an invaluable loss of territorial integrity to the nation, but also as being repugnant to natural justice, equity and good conscience against the Bakassi people. Because of the criticisms that trailed the judgement, Nigeria initially refused to withdraw its troops from the area and hesitated in transferring sovereignty to Cameroon; neither did the government openly reject the ruling (Mulu, 2004; Jibril, 2004). Instead, the Nigerian government called for an agreement that would provide peace with honour and considerations for the welfare and security of the Bakassi people (Eke and Eke, 2007). In view of this, the Green Tree Agreement which was reached in New York City obliged both countries to periodically and jointly assess the conditions of the affected Nigerian population in the area and provide them with adequate assistance to ameliorate their sufferings (Eke and Eke, 2007). Meanwhile, the judgement opened avenues and opportunities to search for other diplomatic alternatives to address some extra-judicial issues that trailed the enforcement process especially as it affects the welfare and security of the Bakassi people. But amidst the controversies associated with ICJ’s verdict, the Nigerian government went ahead to enforce the ruling even without ratification by the National Assembly, and did not border to explore other diplomatic measures. The critical issue which has remained a puzzle to the researcher is why the Nigerian government despite her resolve not to cede an inch of the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon in the name of national interest later enforced the verdict, and evacuated the Bakassi people from their ancestral homeland against the popular opinions of Nigerians. It should be noted that whereas the National Assembly kicked against the enforcement of the verdict