Seun Bamidele Colonial Legacies and the Reproduction of Statelessness The origins of the Bakassi Peninsula conflict are embedded in the broader legacy of colonial cartography and legal frameworks that ignored indigenous spatial relations, community boundaries, and sociopolitical arrangements. The partitioning of Africa by European powers prioritized geopolitical expediency over ethnic, cultural, and ecological coherence. In the case of Bakassi, the Anglo-German Treaty of 1913, concluded between Britain and Germany, delineated territorial control in West Africa without local consent (Bonchuk 2014; Ebolo 2022). This treaty, later used by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in its 2002 ruling, legitimized Cameroon’s sovereignty over the territory. However, by relying exclusively on colonial-era instruments, the ICJ sidelined indigenous claims and effectively decoupled legal sovereignty from socio-political belonging (Nwoko 2015; Ezeilo 2010). The ICJ’s legalistic approach to the conflict disregarded the intricate and historically rooted identities of Bakassi’s inhabitants. Though the court ruled in accordance with international law principles on territorial sovereignty, it failed to address the social and humanitarian implications of its judgment. This included questions of citizenship, protection, and political belonging for Nigerian communities long domiciled in the territory (ICJ 2002a; Akhere 2023). The Greentree Agreement (2006), which operationalized the ICJ verdict, contained no binding guarantees for the protection of those at risk of statelessness. Instead, the onus was left on Nigeria and Cameroon to negotiate the status of Bakassi residents, many of whom were caught in legal limbo after the transfer of authority (International Peace Institute 2008; Baye 2010). As a consequence, thousands of displaced Nigerians found themselves excluded from both Nigerian and Cameroonian citizenship regimes. According to Odinkalu (2012) and the Cameroon Multi-Country Office (2017), the citizenship status of Bakassi residents remains unresolved years after the transition. Many refused to naturalize in Cameroon due to fear of marginalization or cultural alienation, while others faced procedural and bureaucratic hurdles that blocked legal assimilation (Nguindip 2017; Manby 2016). This has entrenched a condition of de facto statelessness, characterized by a lack of political representation, access to public services, and legal recognition. The situation disproportionately affects women and youth, who face compounded vulnerabilities due to their socioeconomic marginalization (Oke-Chinda 2021; Dayil 2015). The consequences of statelessness extend beyond legal invisibility to include psychosocial trauma, economic deprivation, and long-term disemBrazilian Journal of African Studies | Porto Alegre | v. 10, n. 19, Jan./Jun. 2025 | p. 144-169 153