Of recent, the question has been recurrent as to the prisoners of war in the Anglophone War. We all know that the parties to the Anglophone War are the Camerounese military and the “Amba fighters”. It is a matter of evidence who are the genuine Amba fighters and who are the “Fake Amba fighters” – some militia said to have been created and funded by the Camerounese Government.
It is not competent of us here to define and/or differentiate the components of Amba fighters. All that is material for our purpose is to express our opinion relative to the duty on both parties to the Anglophone War to protect prisoners of war who fall within their authority.
We have never failed to repeat that war is the legal right to kill. But, then, it must be killing within the rules of engagement as defined by international law. May we be permitted to clarify what is meant by the rules of engagement at law.
During battle – when on the battlefield – an enemy combatant who surrenders is automatically entitled to protection by the opposite camp. He must not from the moment of surrender be hurt, tortured or subjected to any degrading treatment…
The enemy combatant, captured in battle or otherwise, is automatically entitled to benefit from humane treatment without more.
The enemy combatant wounded in battled, who can no longer fight on, is automatically entitled to medical treatment for survival administered by the enemy camp.
These are just examples to illustrate that neither party to the present Anglophone War has the right to mistreat, much less, kill an enemy combatant captured or who, otherwise, surrenders willingly or due to incapacity in battle.
The question, now, is whether the thousands of Anglophones in captivity are prisoners of war. The answer, in our judgment, is that they are not, strictly speaking, prisoners of war. But we may classify/define them as prisoners of war from the fact that the Camerounese Government defines and treats every Anglophone as “secessionniste, terroriste and/or, automatically, someone hostile to the territorial integrity of Cameroun – whatever that means.
Strictly speaking, however, when called upon to present prisoners of war at the end of hostilities, the Camerounese Government may not meet the demand by simply presenting those innocent Anglophones in captivity, whether convicted or otherwise.
And the Amba fighters may wish to know that it shall not be any defence not to present the Camerounese combatants captured during battle on the pretext that the Camerounese military did mistreat Amba captives in the like manner.
Let this be known NOW so that every camp is put on their inquiry here and now!
THIS HAS BEEN ISSUED GRATIS
Without even consultation fee!