Government of Ambazonia

Monday, February 19, 2018
Home  >  SEO Optimized
Letter to Dr. Tumasang PDF Print E-mail
Written by Amos N. Mudoh   
Thursday, 10 February 2011 19:00

Dear Comrade Tumasang,

I pray that you will have some time to read this my little input in reaction to your mail personally addressed to Teacher T and not me. And I also pray that Teacher T will not hold me for reacting to his mail without his consent.

Sir, while your concerns were to determine which possible model Teacher T is employing, my reaction will just be an appraisal of some of the issues I see in the various models you have stated. May be it will help us a bit.


What many have failed to understand or have been wrongly made to understand is that Fon Dinka is not all and all. This notion is a very bad one. Fon Dinka is not saying he is all and all. What we should note is that there were, there are, and there will be people working with Fon Dinka. All these people including Fon Dinka belongs to Ambazonia. Ambazonia is not Dinka property. The fact is that Yaounde knows the caliber of people that have been or are always associated with Ambazonia. So they have been doing everything possible with the help of some of our people to paint black or belittle the Ambazonia model that was born to replace the United Nations Trust Territory of British Southern Cameroons, so that Cameroun will have nothing to hang on, but to do the right thing if she is honest. Fon Dinka is not working alone as the agents of Yaounde are making other to belief.

This is a clear fact because, during the Bamenda CNU Congress in 1985 which was the first time the New Social Order came to light with Fon Gorji signature on it, it was not him alone that did the work. If one gets into archives of this struggle, or if you have been following posting on this forum, you would have noticed that, one of recent postings contain names of many active Ambazonia brains that started the struggle with the Fon. Fon Dinka has never said it was him alone. During the Mount Mary ACC I, Fon Dinka was not in the country and you will accept with me that there were reputable pro-Ambazonia personalities in that meeting putting the Ambazonia idea. Also CAM archives will as well confirmed that there were Pro-Ambazonia members within the CAM. So how come that, some individual will keep telling lies and others keep accepting without reasoning that Ambazonia is one man’s property?

One will also say that HCB /28/92 verdict was not just Fon Dinka alone that did all the work. There were reputable Ambazonians involve in the process. Another example is the Ambazonia intervention in the Bakassi case at the ICJ in 1995. The truth is that there were other reputable Ambazonia personalities who took part. Some of the documents were signed by Ambazonians and not only Fon Dinka. In 1995 still when the 9 man SCNC that went to the UN, and then to UK on their way back, made with pro-Ambazonian team (including Fon Dinka  being their leader), they pleaded for join cooperation with SCNC; it was not only Fon Dinka? In the Ambazonia UN ICCPR/1134/2002 case against Cameroon there were other lawyers that represented Fon Dinka. Even in the suspended London talks with Cameroon, there were both Ambazonians and Foreigners doing the work. It is not Fon Dinka alone and he has never claimed to be the only one doing all these works.

Therefore when someone stand up to say Fon Dinka is taking himself to be a god, or he is the sole person doing everything Ambazonia had been doing, it not correct. There had been, there are, and there will ever be Ambazonian intellectuals working behind the scenes. They respect everybody and not that somebody is a god. So, anybody who is holding or saying Fon Dinka is a god is not saying the truth. Most of them are doing the job Yaounde has assigned them to do against our people; that is, to make Ambazonia be nothing else but Fon Gorji Dinka so that Ambazonians will keep fighting each other and not Yaounde. Ambazonians including Fon Dinka know very well that it is the leadership of a sovereign nation that the British tactful handed to Cameroon to hold us captive. It is not to prove that we are a people or is it to prove our international boundaries again. Cameroon and the international community already know all this things. So Cameroon does not want to see anyone that stands to fill that leadership gape that the British tactfully handed to them. If we have such a leadership, Cameroon will have a counterpart to speak the truth with. So, for anybody to say that Fon Dinka is god or is being taken by pro-Ambazonians to be a god is just not true. Such people are just out to divide our people. What has he been gaining from this position for all these years apart from personal sacrifices just like other true Ambazonian patriots?

On your model 2: THE CONSENSUS MODEL

The need to come together is a good thing, and no reasonable person will argue that. In 1995 Pro-Ambazonians pleaded with the SCNC for a come together to have a united forced. The SCNC rejected it. The worst thing is that some of those who did their best to stop the unified front are the very once standing on rooftops now, and talking for come together. Till date, they have not said why they fought hard against the first appeal that Ambazonians made for a united front. To compound things some of the ring leaders shouting for come together had been attacking what Ambazonians has done; or have been doing their best to paint the entire Ambazonia to be one man property (that of Fon Dinka).

While some people might have been asking questions about HCB 28/92 to know, but others are doing so because they truly know that, that court verdict is one of the crucial and unbreakable rocks in front of Cameroon as far as the law is concern.  The verdict has made things totally impossible for Yaounde to get the present MPs in the Cameroon parliament to revert to any legal Federation any more. This is because HCB 28/92 being a court verdict had long barred any MP from Ambazonia since 1992 till tomorrow from ever carrying out any action that will be legally binding so far Ambazonia is alive.

The second reason that HCB 28/92 is an unbreakable rock to Cameroon is that should Cameroun ever think to negotiate with Ambazonia, it will be facing the Head of State of another nation (Ambazonia) and not a leader of group.

Thirdly any Ambazonian that claims HCB 28/92 can never be proven guilty in a true court of law for charges of secession. For any arrest of an Ambazonian he or she will only suffer but illegal detention for some time.

Fourthly HCB 28/92 is being fully backed by the verdict of the Military Tribunal. These are the four crucial points that faces Cameroon at the home front and she has been doing her best with the help of some of our people to belittle that verdict at all cost, so that our people will not know the true value or importance of that verdict.

One serious secrete that those who abandon the original Ambazonia model to pursue SDF as well as other models will not tell our people in the open is that, it is the Military Tribunal victory of  Ambazonia and HCB 28/92 that have made totally impossible for any Anglophone to became president in Cameroon. These two verdicts clearly sealed any Anglophones as real foreigners. So who ever is given a position in Cameroon government is just to be there to sell our people.

In 1992 when Alexis Depanda Mouelle was announcing results of the 11th October president election said, his hands were tied, have we ever been told some of those ropes that tied his hands? Have you been told why Bouba Bello backed out of the coalition; given that he was briefed of the Southern Cameroons question as being the undercover agenda of the SDF should the coalition take power? Why will Bello standby a foreigner who will win but will not be given the victory?  Have we asked ourselves while no one political leader in Cameroon is not talking about Southern Cameroons problems? All what the Cameroon politicians want is for the SDF (that is led by a foreigner) to help them be president in their country Cameroon. They know very well that if SDF join and lead the coalition, they will win but the presidency will not be given to the coalition presidential candidate because he is a foreigner, and so have been insisting on a Cameroonian to be the leader of the coalition even if he or she is not having the numbers or strong political base as the SDF.

Those who were there (in Cameroon politics) and have known these facts why not go back to their abandoned Ambazonia model with honest minds or even build on it? All they see is one man as if it is only one person doing all the work. The worst thing for Cameroon is that these two verdicts (HCB 28/92 and the Military Tribunal) have entered the international arenas and are causing havoc as seen in Anna Bakassi Peace Accord, UN boundaries pillars, the two maps debacle by the 64th President of the UN General Assembly, and it is becoming clear that our people are now aware that what the agents of Yaounde have been talking about the HCB 28/92 is not true. Why is it that our people are the people doing the argument Cameroon should have been doing?

I think this will help explain why anybody that attack HCB28/92 is never taken lightly by pro-Ambazonian; especially when past behaviors of those attackers are known by Ambazonians, and are factored in such attacks. Again I think coming together is good, but it will be best to all pro-Ambazonian patriots if those crying for a consensus are doing so with pure motives.

Another point of concern is that of leadership conference. One big problem with the leadership conference is that the way it is being packaged now by some of people is likely geared towards personality politics. That is how I personally feel and I think other pro-Ambazonia do feel the same. This is because proponents of Ambazonia believe that all things should revolve around the following: 1) a State; 2) Strong institutions; 3) Best ideas relative to other ideas, and 4) that personality politics should not have a place completely. If we insist that some particular persons or leaders must accept to come to that conference; to me it is setting the floor for personality politics. Because for pro-Ambazonia there is nobody to say he is all and all.

Many have taken Ambazonia to be one person which is totally wrong. This wrong notion can be backed up with the following examples: during the days of CAM, there were honorable pro-Ambazonia in CAM, and a person like Fon Dinka was not at home. During the Mount Mary meeting in Buea 1993 those who were present will accept the fact that there were pro-Ambazonia in that meeting. In Adams Town meeting in North America there were pro-Ambazonia representative present as well as representative from other groups.

So, if a conference venue is fixed, let everybody be informed and during the conference the best ideas should be adopted. To say that for a leadership conference to work certain personalities most be there is not the right way to go I think. I am confident that if the conference venue is build say in Nigeria, Europe, North America, Asia or at home, there will be Ambazonians to state the Ambazonia ideas just as Fon Dinka would have done if he was present. To have in mind that we most hear from particular persons is a dangerous path I think. AAC I was not successful because certain personalities or leaders were made to be there. By now there is more than enough information to choose the best ideas and as well as possible people to entrust with leadership.

Some of the sales mens of leadership conference initiative (which is a good initiative), have been taking us towards the dangerous personality politics that has bedeviled our struggle for years. Such a direction will make many people to be thinking of personalities first and not thinking of the State, Strong institutions and the Best ideas relative to others and from anybody.  The western countries like USA, UK and others do not do personality politics at all. Once someone term of office is over he or she is gone. That office or post goes to the next person. The incumbent finds his/her self in the community and life goes on, and normal personal respect which is fundamental right to all comes in place.

To me, Comrade Yembe and peers with their Buea 2011 initiative is a good one. It is open to all and not tied to some personalities. If it works well and the end results are adopted based on best ideas relative to other ideas that will be great.

On your model 3) THE FOUR GOSPEL MODEL

Yes, there are 4 gospels, Mathew, Mark, Luke and John. These gospels are centered on Jesus Christ (the New Testament); while having God and his activities in the Old Testament as the reference point. What do you think would have happened if the 4 gospels had refused to capitalize on Jesus but went concentrating on God and his activities in the Old Testament? Jesus came to correct (if I may say) some of the misunderstanding of the Old Testament to give better life. The Sadducees and the Pharisees had the upper hand in the Old Testament. So too has Cameroon having the upper hand if we keep talking of anything British Southern Cameroons as focus and not as a reference point. If we now say the UN Trust Territory of British Southern Cameroons is our God and his activities in the Old Testament; and that the birth of Ambazonia is Jesus Christ with the New Testament will that be wrong?

When Ambazonian state came to lights in 1985, there were strong intellectuals behind her, with the aims of correcting the past. It then led to the arrest, detention of the leader and he was charged for high treason. When this leader by God Grace was found not guilty, did that not mean that the architects of that plan were right? Why it is that other Apostle did not continue to build on that victory of the new state, but instead they decided to start writing about the Old Testament?  The big problem is that many still consider Ambazonia as one of the Apostle (movement). Ambazonia setting is likened to a complete transformation of the old to new. That is why in Ambazonia you will hear of Head of State who is to continue from where the old prime ministers ended. Anything that is based completely on the old (UN Trust Territory of British Southern Cameroons) as a focus and not a reference is a problem for us, but works well for Cameroon our occupier.

Cameroon is very comfortable with anything that is British Southern Cameroons because Cameroon also has South Region (Ebolowa), and Southern Cameroons is just part of Cameroon because literally the word southern means we are part of Cameroon. If one takes British Southern Cameroons, we will not have any help from Britain, and secondly British Southern Cameroons was dead long ago. Because of these obstacles that stand our way it makes it hard for anyone who want to focus solely on the old and not using the old as a reference point. One will clearly see that all other Apostles (SCNC, SCAPO, SCYL, etc etc; are focusing solely on the good Old, with all these negative factors that need strong efforts to be re-explained to the world that has long forgotten of it.  Ambazonia is not one of the Apostles (movement) but the New Testament the revived old and dead British Southern Cameroons. If these clarifications are noted one can see why Ambazonian thinks differently.


Please, Fon Dinka is not saying he single handedly started the resistance. And if he had ever said say so (of which I doubt) it is not true. Those who propagate the version that Fon Dinka is the sole person that started the resistance are liars. What I have seen is that those who betrayed the Fon Dinka as a person or Dinka as the leader they choose, and those that betrayed Ambazonian people are not honest enough to say openly that they made a mistake and will want to come back. Instead they will rather admit their errors to themselves, and then start new liberation path ways. Well it is good that they are trying to do something but it is not the best idea because new liberation path ways only fragments the limited resources, waste time why our people are suffering. Fon Dinka is not preventing any body from prospering. He has not stopped anyone from doing what he or she want to do and so too are pro-Ambazonia patriots.

Take for example Dr Fonlon who failed to read the New Social Order at the Bamenda CNU congress in 1995 as per their agreement. Yet Fonlon was still a good friend to Fon Dinka after that incident. Take another example, when Fru Ndi and host of others, who went their own way to form the SDF as an alternative strategy, did Fon Dinka and his peers not contribute strategies to the SDF so that their model could be unified? Did they not asked for strategy and the Fon Dinka and his peers gave them a 10 step strategy on what to do in order to achieve what they had started pre 1984? Was that not happening at a crucial point that cooperation was needed by other leaders that went their own ways when things were hot Dinka? Did Dinka and peers not give the advice? If that advice had been implemented, where do you think this struggle would have been? Was it a bad advice to frustrate them? What do we have on the table as evidence that Fon Dinka is blocking those who betrayed the course? Put it out please, I might be blind.

When the SCNC/SCAPO delegation took to Abuja Federal High court in early 2002 and Fon Dinka was contacted for help and he reacted by getting Ambazonian peers especially those in Nigeria to help with ideas and materials. Does that show as Fon Dinka as leader, as individual, and other Ambazonians as persons that do not want to see other leaders to prosper? What was the outcome of such interaction? Is there any sign out there to show that Fon Dinka and the Ambazonian patriots did not react positively to the initiatives of others? What happened at Abuja? Was this not a crucial moment that other leaders have reached, and needed help that could have moved us forward? What happened to the advised that Dinka and other Ambazonian  gave them?

When in 1995 a 9man delegation to the UN were returning and made Fon Dinka and other Ambazonians in the UK, did they not recognized the delegation and asked for cooperation? Was that not a crucial point that we would have had one voice, and for other leaders to prosper?

Sir, can you really state out clearly what Fon Dinka personally or as a leader of state of Ambazonia has done to stop any group from moving forward? Has Fon Dinka stopped any leader from using any of the court verdicts with his name to fight for our people’s freedom? Is their moving forward based only on the personality of Dinka? Is it Fon Dinka or any Ambazonian that has advised Cameroon not to go for the proposed ACHPR talks as we read from Honorable Ayah’s write up? Please throw more light on how Fon Dinka is stopping other leaders from prospering. Any action taken by any true comrades for the sake of our people is important because those people have sacrificed something. What I have personally noticed with criticisms made by Fon Dinka and other Ambazonians are because they have navigated most of the waters first.

When other leaders are about to take some of these routes that, Fon Dinka and peers had taken before, they are able to criticize it because they had been there and know the best steps to take. Take the case of Fon Dinka and other Ambazonians criticizing the Banjul offensive. Do you know that Ambazonian patriots had long taken the struggle to the then Organization of African Unity (OAU) in what was called Ambazonia vs. La Republique du Cameroun? And the charge was: ILLEGAL OCCUPATION OF AMBAZONIA BY LA REPUBLIQUE DU CAMEROUN. Straight to the point and the charge is not that which gives anybody the opportunity to maneuver it; be it the accused or the judge. Given the technicality that Ambazonia (British Southern Cameroons) was not seated at the UN or the then Organisation of Africa Union, it will be best for the matter to be addressed direct to the UN because only this world body can correct it. They left the AU with full knowledge of AU limitation over their charge against Cameroon.

Because our comrades went to ACHPR with genuine problem but linked it with a cancer name southern Cameroons as the focus, it gave the Commission something to work on because there is only one African State called Republic of Cameroon. Worst is the fact that, the charges against Cameroon were multiple; which gave the commission and the accused the opportunity to choose what will favor them to deliberate on. The commission put aside the sovereignty charges but decides to preside on marginalization, discrimination for a people inside Cameroon. That suits the Cameroon very well. To whose advantage will the transformation of SCNC/SCPO as political parties in Cameroon serve? Or the separation of Cameroon judiciary powers from that of the president. None of the Cameroon politicians, and not to talk less of the SDF is talking about this judiciary power separation that the ACHPR court has pointed out. When Fon Dinka and other Ambazonians criticized other initiatives they do so either because the initiative is not well formulated or the end result has been watered down, not that those people did not scarified money, time etc etc.

Again Fon Dinka and other patriots were happy with the initiatives of the people that took the struggle to Abuja High Court, but they criticized the final verdict because it felt short of what could have moved us ahead. They refused to accept other people contributions. May be they did so because the wrongly thought the State Ambazonia is one man personal property.

I am aware that in one of the posting on this forum, somebody quoted Fon Dinka as saying that it will be a good thing for SCNC/SCAPO to adopt State Ambazonia name since they are now certain that anything with the name Cameroon is affecting our struggle to our disadvantage, but instead working to the advantage of Cameroon. Is that someone blocking the progress of other leaders?

I will not denial the fact Ambazonian patriots will do all they can to truly rebuke any person that have bad motives.

Comrade the main problem facing this struggle from not reaching it final end before now is that personally politics had been number one; Sell out for personal gains as number two; the influences different academia as number three and the list goes on and on.