CONTEXTUALIZING THE USE OF THE DIPLOMATIC ALTERNATIVE IN CONFLICT RESOLUTION IN THE DISPUTE BETWEEN NIGERIA AND CAMEROON OVER BAKASSI 1994 -2006

Abstract

This study focuses on the subject of the application of alternative means as a complement to the judicial, adjudication and arbitration options in the resolution of disputes/conflicts. The Nigeria-Cameroon conflict over Bakassi is used as a case in point. By blending the theoretical perspectives on the diplomacy/negotiation approach with the reality of this case it argues that the application of alternative dispute resolution mechanism, in this instance, facilitated a long lasting and negotiated settlement, which led to amicable and final resolution. With the understanding that dispute/conflict resolution seeks to find solutions acceptable to both parties to achieve peaceful coexistence, the question arises as to whether the ICJ’s ruling in itself was able to amicably resolve the dispute? What we find is that the Ruling of 2002 did not in itself lead to instant settlement, rather it drew negative responses from Nigeria, so that it took the intervention of stakeholders in the international system, especially the Western countries, and particularly the UN and its then Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, to activate the UN machinery to put in place direct bilateral talks between Nigeria and Cameroon to iron out their differences. The emergent Mixed Commission and the Greentree Agreement of 2006 ensured the achievement of reconciliation, lasting peace and final resolution along the lines of the ICJ’s Judgment of 2002.