The cession of Bakassi to Cameroon has been a topic of debate in Nigeria for many years. Recently, former Attorney General of Nigeria, Michael Aondoakaa, weighed in on the issue, defending the decision made by former President Olusegun Obasanjo to cede the peninsula to Cameroon. According to Aondoakaa, Obasanjo acted in the best interest of Nigeria when he decided to cede Bakassi to Cameroon. The former AGF stated that the decision was made to avoid a potential war with Cameroon, which would have had devastating consequences for Nigeria. Aondoakaa also noted that the cession of Bakassi was a result of a long-standing dispute between Nigeria and Cameroon over the ownership of the peninsula. The dispute had been ongoing for many years, with both countries claiming ownership of the territory. In 2008, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in favor of Cameroon, stating that the peninsula belonged to Cameroon. Following the ICJ’s ruling, Obasanjo decided to cede Bakassi to Cameroon, a decision that was widely criticized by many Nigerians. However, Aondoakaa believes that Obasanjo’s decision was the right one, as it prevented a potential war between Nigeria and Cameroon. The former AGF also noted that the cession of Bakassi has not had a significant impact on Nigeria’s economy or security. In fact, Aondoakaa stated that Nigeria has benefited from the cession of Bakassi, as it has improved relations between Nigeria and Cameroon. The two countries have since strengthened their bilateral ties, with increased trade and cooperation between them. Aondoakaa’s comments have sparked a debate in Nigeria, with some people agreeing with his views and others disagreeing. Some have argued that the cession of Bakassi was a mistake, as it has led to the displacement of many Nigerians who lived in the peninsula. Others have argued that the decision was necessary to avoid a war with Cameroon. The debate over the cession of Bakassi is likely to continue, with many Nigerians still having strong opinions on the issue. Despite the controversy surrounding the cession of Bakassi, Aondoakaa remains convinced that Obasanjo’s decision was the right one. The former AGF believes that the decision has helped to promote peace and stability in the region, and has improved relations between Nigeria and Cameroon. In conclusion, the cession of Bakassi to Cameroon remains a contentious issue in Nigeria, with many people still debating the merits of the decision. However, Aondoakaa’s comments have provided a new perspective on the issue, highlighting the potential benefits of the cession. As the debate continues, it is likely that more Nigerians will weigh in on the issue, sharing their opinions and perspectives on the cession of Bakassi. The cession of Bakassi has also raised questions about the role of international law in resolving disputes between countries. The ICJ’s ruling on the ownership of Bakassi has been cited as an example of how international law can be used to resolve disputes peacefully. However, others have argued that the ICJ’s ruling was flawed, and that the cession of Bakassi was a result of political pressure rather than a genuine attempt to resolve the dispute. The debate over the cession of Bakassi is also likely to have implications for Nigeria’s foreign policy, as the country seeks to navigate its relationships with other countries in the region. As Nigeria continues to grow and develop, it is likely that the country will face more challenges and disputes with its neighbors. The cession of Bakassi has provided a valuable lesson in the importance of diplomacy and international cooperation in resolving disputes peacefully. In the end, the cession of Bakassi to Cameroon will remain a contentious issue in Nigeria, with many people still debating the merits of the decision. However, Aondoakaa’s comments have provided a new perspective on the issue, highlighting the potential benefits of the cession and the importance of promoting peace and stability in the region.