As United Nations’ Court Hears Palestine’s Self Determination Case Today – What Can Biafra Agitators Learn?
Invite By Daily Tab24.
Since the inception of Biafra agitation of this dispensation in 1999, various leaders of the secessionist movements have been feeding their members with the notion that United Nation can declare the state of Biafra.
Millions of Dollars went into alleged lobbying to get the approval or UN or compel UN to declare the sovereignty of Biafra. The UN narrative has become the cornerstone of conviction for the various leaders. Uwazurike embraced the notion and sold to his members that UN would one day declare Biafra a sovereign state. He went further to telling his members that UN has outlined a procedure for agitation and when followed, they would declare the sovereign state of his elusive Biafra.
When Nnamdi Kanu took over from Uwazurike, he anchored his possibility of Biafra on the United Nation’s involvement. Millions was donated by his members and he flashed many pictures he claimed to have taken at United Nations offices. It was a calculated move aimed to use United Nations to promote his group and sustain the proceeds that flow uninterruptedly.
Being a third- world country, Nigerians of Igbo extraction embraced the idea and in various cities, they chanted United Nations and anchored their hope or reason for agitation on the capacity of the United Nations to call for referendum or declare the sovereign state of Biafra. Most people in the old Eastern region speak or agitate for Biafra because there is a consensus United Nations can or will interfere in the matter.
There is now a practical yardstick – a case study. Palestine like Vatican City has observer status in the United Nations; this brings them closer to statehood than any other people. In real sense; if United Nations can unilaterally declare sovereignty, Palestinians would have had their state long before now.
UN General Assembly requested for an advisory opinion on the “Legal consequences arising from the ongoing violation by Israel of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, from its prolonged occupation, settlement and annexation of the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967”
Palestine Authority lobbied for the move and asked the advisory opinion to rule that Israel’s occupation of West Bank is illegal.
One major thing to take away from this case is; United Nations fully agreed that Palestine has the right to an independent state. They agreed with all the details thereof, meaning UN really wants to help Palestine, but what is stopping now? If UN cannot help or declare sovereignty for a people they gave observer status – what happens to a people it barely knows?
In this case, Israel made clear that UN has no jurisdiction over the case, and cannot rightly declare or interfere in the matter. What Israel did was to avoid sending lawyers to submit counter-argument. This means that what UN is doing has no bearing on Israel. Why?
UN has no right or a provision set aside for it to declare a sovereign state anywhere in the world. They are incapacitated and can only offer advisory opinion. The advisory opinion they eventually make is not binding and has no effect on the matter.
UN is where nations of the world gather to deliberate and not where nations are created. So, when someone tells you UN will give you sovereignty; remind them what is happening with Palestine, and how UN has no jurisdiction to declare sovereignty.
