160 Borders without belonging: statelessness, displacement, and human insecurity in post-han- The Bakassi displacement also illustrates how media silence intersects with broader patterns of marginalization and statelessness in post-colonial Africa. As Manby (2016) and Hussain (2023) observe, statelessness often results not only from legal exclusion but also from epistemic invisibility — that is, the absence of affected populations from public knowledge systems. In Bakassi, this invisibility has been reinforced by the failure of Nigerian and Cameroonian authorities to publicly acknowledge and address the long-term implications of their policies. Even global platforms have rarely highlighted the plight of these communities in the same way as more high-profile displacement crises. The lack of international media attention diminishes the urgency of intervention, funding, or humanitarian relief. The silence surrounding Bakassi’s displaced communities is not merely an oversight but a structural feature of how displacement is narrated or ignored in African border politics. The ICJ ruling, hailed in international law circles as a peaceful solution to a long-standing territorial conflict, stands in stark contrast to the unresolved social and humanitarian problems it helped generate. As Beckly (2013) and Ebolo (2022) emphasize, peace agreements that ignore the voices of displaced populations are not sustainable. The Bakassi case should compel scholars, journalists, and policymakers to reconsider how media representation or its absence shapes the fate of marginalized communities. Only through inclusive, people-centered approaches to both justice and journalism can the silences of displacement be effectively broken. Discussion The findings of this study point to a profound disjunction between the formal legal mechanisms deployed to resolve the Bakassi Peninsula dispute and the lived experiences of those most affected by the territorial handover. While the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruling in 2002 and the Greentree Agreement of 2006 have been globally acclaimed for demonstrating a rare instance of peaceful adjudication of an African territorial conflict (Bonchuk 2014; International Peace Institute 2008), they nonetheless illustrate the limitations of legalism devoid of a robust human rights foundation. These instruments prioritized the principle of uti possidetis juris, the maintenance of inherited colonial boundaries but failed to adequately address the human security and identity needs of displaced borderland communities. In this sense, the case of Bakassi not only reveals the insufficiencies of state-centric international law but also underscores how conflict resolution that fails to Brazilian Journal of African Studies | Porto Alegre | v. 10, n. 19, Jan./Jun. 2025 | p. 144-169