Joe Dinga Pefok (Uncle Joe)
At A Workshop In Douala, The Expert, Dr Col Magistrate DIDIER SIPA NDONGMO, Looked At Two Examples In Conflict Resolution That Involved Cameroon: The Conflict B/w Cameroon And Nigeria Over Bakassi Peninsular, That Was Successfully Resolved By UN’s Mediation, And The 2019 “Major National Dialogue” That Failed To End The Armed Conflict In NW/SW Regions, And Why.
An international expert in conflict resolution, Dr Colonel Magistrate Didier Sipa Ndongmo (retired senior military judge), has explained that there is an internationally recommended procedure to follow, in conflict resolution between two or more parties. This procedure also serves as a guideline in preparations for conflict resolution.
The expert was speaking during a presentation he delivered at a high level workshop that was jointly organized in Douala on April 10, 2026 by the Heritage Higher Institute of Peace and Development Studies in Yaounde, and the Nico Halle & Co Law Firm in Douala, on the theme: JUSTICE, PEACE BUIDLING, AND RECONCILIATION IN CAMEROON, to celebrate the 3rd anniversary of the partnership between the two great institutions. Four resource persons or experts made presentations at the workshop. Dr Col Mag Didier Sipa Ndongmo ‘s presentation was on the topic: Mediation As An Alternative Mechanism For Justice & Peace Building In Cameroon.
The Mediator Must Be Neutral And Credible / Inclusive Dialogue
Meanwhile, the US trained conflict resolution expert, Dr Col Mag Didier Sipa Ndongmo, said one of the first things to do in a conflict resolution process, is to get or find a mediator, and that the mediator must be neutral and credible or trusted by the parties in the conflict. The mediator can be a country, an organization, or even a personality. If one of the parties in the conflict considers the mediator as not being a neutral or credible party, it will not accept the mediator. T0he mediator must not only be considered to be neutral, but must in the course of the peace talks prove to be neutral in the conflict. The mediator must also have a good knowledge of the main causes or background of the conflict, in order to be in the position to better conduct the talks, while at the time not taking sides. It should be noted that it is the mediator that chairs the peace talk that brings together the parties in a conflict.
Another point is that all parties that are actually involved in the conflict, have to be invited to the peace talks on the conflict. The parties must all participate in the peace talks, if the conflict has to be effectively resolved, or brought to an end. That is, the dialogue between parties in a conflict aimed at seeking an end to the conflict, has to be an inclusive dialogue. If one of the parties, especially a major party, is left out of the peace talk, things will definitely not work. There is also the possibility that a party which is left out of a peace talk, even if a small party, can also deliberately decide to play the role of a spoiler.
Parties Independently Designate Their Delegates
Another point which the expert raised is that, the different sides or parties in a conflict that have to take part in a dialogue or peace talk, each independently designates their representatives at the talks. This means that non- of the parties to take part in the peace talks, has the right to impose on the other party, the persons it would like see designated as its representative at the talks. Rather, each party designates the personalities it thinks can best defend its interest in the talks.
There is also the issue of the number of number of persons that each party in a conflict can designate to represent it at a peace talk. The number of persons in a delegation to represent a party in a conflict at a peace talk has, to be reduced to the barest minimum. This means that members of the delegation must all be persons that are relevant to the peace talks. When people who are not relevant in a peace talks or dialogue, or persons who do not have a good knowledge of the issues, sit in the hall during the talks, they serve more as a distraction.
Enough Time Must Be Given To Resolve A Conflict
The expert in conflict resolution also stated that mediation in a conflict must be given enough time. Delegations to peace talks do often need time to return home after a session, to brief their governments, their people, their organization or institutions, or to consult with their governments, their people or their organizations, on the responds to give to certain issues raised by the other parties at the talks.
There has to be no unnecessary rush in the peace talks. It should be noted that in any conflict, there are root causes and immediate causes. The root causes are often very complicated or difficult to resolve, but must be resolved to ensure lasting peace. If only the immediate causes of a conflict are resolved, peace might be restored, but what will be certain, is that the peace will be temporal or short lived. As long as the root causes of a conflict are not tackled or resolved, there will remain the risk of the possibility of the conflict sparking off again, sooner or later.
The Conflict Over The Oil Rich Bakassi Peninsular
Meanwhile the conflict resolution expert, Dr Col Mag Sipa Ndongmo, took as an example of a success story in conflict resolution that involved Cameroon, the case of the conflict between neighbouring Nigeria and Cameroon over the oil rich Bakassi Peninsular. To begin with, there was a neutral mediator, precisely the United Nations, whose Secretary General then was Ghanaian born, Koffi Anan (now of blessed memory). It was the mediator (United Nations) that chaired the meetings or peace talks. Both Nigeria and Cameroon accepted that the United Nations, which they both considered a neutral party in the conflict, should play the role of mediator in the resolution of the conflict.
Also, both Cameroon and Nigeria independently designated their representatives to the peace talks. Nigeria did not try to decide on those who should be in the Cameroonian delegation, just as Cameroon too did not try to do same for the Nigerian delegation.
Furthermore, members of the Cameroon delegation to the peace talks, just like members of the Nigerian delegation to the talks, were all relevant to the talks, That is, they were all considered by their different countries, as having important roles to play for the interest of their different countries, at the peace talks. Some members of the delegations were lawyers, historians among others. These were all professions very relevant in the peace talks, on the conflict over the ownership of the oil rich Bakassi Peninsular.
Also, the effective resolution of the Bakassi Crisis or Conflict by the UN mediation which culminated in the signing of the Green Accord between Nigeria and Cameroon, took four years. The United Nations that was the mediator did not rush the process. Enough time was given for the resolution of the conflict.
Suffice to say that in 2006 in New York, Nigeria and Cameroon under the mediation of the United Nations, signed the Green Tree Accord, ending the conflict over the ownership of oil rich Bakassi Peninsular. Nigeria endorsed the established facts that the Bakassi Peninsular rightly belong to Cameroon, and on August 14, 2008, Nigeria officially ceded the Bakassi Peninsular to Cameroon. Thus at the end of the day, the conflict between Nigeria and Cameroon over the Bakassi Peninsular was successfully resolved through UN mediation, or through an inclusive dialogue. It should be noted that the UN mediation in the conflict over the Bakassi Peninsular, strictly followed the internationally recommended procedure in conflict resolution.
The 2019 “Major National Dialogue”
Meanwhile, as for the 2019 “Major National Dialogue”, that was supposedly organized to end the Anglophone Crisis in Cameroon, that in late 2017 escalated into an armed conflict between Government troops and separatist fighters, the result was a woeful failure for obvious reasons. It should be noted that the separatists are a section of the Anglophone Cameroonians, who say they want to secede and create an independent State they call, Ambazonia. The separatist leaders are mostly based in the diaspora.
Meanwhile, to begin with, as concerns the 2019 ‘Major National Dialogue’ that was said to had been convened to end the Anglophone Crisis, especially the armed conflict, it was convened by President Paul Biya, that is, the Government. It should be noted that the Cameroon Government or the Biya Government, is a party in the armed conflict in the two Anglophone Regions, because Government troops are fighting on the instruction of the Government.
Second Point: The ‘Major National Dialogue’ was chaired by Prime Minister Chief Dr Joseph Dion Ngute, designated by President Biya. Thus again, the government that is a party in the armed conflict in the two Anglophone Regions of Cameroon, was the one that chaired the ‘Major National Dialogue”.
Third Point: Participants at the ‘Major National Dialogue’ were all selected or invited by the Government. Thus again, the Government that is a party in the armed conflict in the two Anglophone Regions, was the one that selected or invited all the participants to the ‘Major National Dialogue’.
Separatists Were Not Present At the ‘Major National Dialogue’
Fourth Point: This point, which is one of the key points in this whole thing, is that the separatists were not present at the ‘Major National Dialogue”. Yet the separatists constitute one of the two camps involved in the armed conflict in the two Anglophone Regions. As aforementioned, the armed conflict in the two Anglophone Regions is between government troops and separatist fighters. How then could the Government organize the ‘Major National Dialogue’ to end the conflict, in the absence of the separatists! With whom then did the Government side, dialogue! That is why critics dismissed what the Government or Biya regime terms as the 2019 Major National Dialogue, as a monologue. There was no dialogue. As is commonly said, one does not dialogue with his friends, rather, he dialogues with his opponent or enemy.
Another negative point related to the 2019 ‘Major National Dialogue’ in the sense of conflict resolution, was that the event was flooded with people who were not relevant to the main ‘objective’ of the event, which was to end the armed conflict or the escalated Anglophone Crisis. The ‘Major National Dialogue’ looked more like a congress of the ruling CPDM Party.
Gross Violation Of Procedure In Conflict Resolution
Meanwhile, from all the above, it was not surprising to observers in Cameroon and beyond, that the so called Major National Dialogue the Biya Government organized in Yaounde from September 30 – October 4, 2019, woefully failed to end the armed conflict between Government troops and separatist fighters in the two Anglophone Regions. The organizers of the ‘Major National Dialogue’ violated all aspects of the internationally recommended procedure in conflict resolution.
