By Babah Kanu
babbiuskay@gmail.com
+23276927562
Analytics have thought us to think more and talk less on issues that border on human existence. It is said that the greatest part of hell is preserved for those who in moral crisis reserve their neutrality. I therefore broke silence on the bilateral relationship threatening border issue between Sierra Leone and Guinea, as my thought is always directed to commenting on issues of great concern to mankind. I have refused to comment on the politics of Sierra Leone as my readers sometimes call to hear from me. I choose not to because I see the politics of Sierra Leone as a hate game and not civil engagement.
The border dispute between Sierra Leone and Guinea serves as a wakeup call for international arbitration rather than confrontation. The best alternative in my estimation is international arbitration to secure a permanent ruling on the matter. Confrontation can only sour the soup and lead to considerable to Sierra Leone than Guinea. Yes we can fight, but considering the loss is not a brain drain.
The long-standing Yenga dispute has remained a sensitive issue between Sierra Leone and Guinea for years, despite several bilateral and regional mediation efforts. Yenga, a border town in Sierra Leone, has been at the center of territorial disagreements since the end of Sierra Leone’s civil war.
Brooding on the nature of the Guinea’s stance with the Economic Community of West African State (ECOWAS), Sierra Leone can urgently present a case to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for international arbitration on border dispute.
In the interim, the ICJ may deploy troops until the matter is resolve, as in the case of Nigeria and Cameroon 2002.
Government has already adopted a decisive diplomatic decision on the matter, but should demonstrate pro-activeness in contacting the International Court of Justice for a lasting decision.
The ICJ’s role in international arbitration law on border dispute is vital in maintaining stability amid territorial disagreements and promoting peace. Its authority ensures that disputes are addressed impartially, based on concrete legal principles rather than political considerations.
The ICJ’s jurisprudence in resolving boundary disputes involves examining territorial claims, historical rights, treaties, and boundary delimitations. Its decisions aim to clarify complex border issues and promote legal certainty. The ICJ’s role in boundary disputes underscores its importance in fostering peaceful conflict resolution in the international community.
The Government of Sierra Leone to take immediate and decisive steps to secure the service of the International Court of Justice for the permanen to the border crisis.