Was Southern Cameroons an Independent State to Sign an Act of Union with LRC?

1. Independence Is Not Required to Sign a Union Treaty

Many people assume that only independent states can sign treaties. That is not true.
Under international law, any political entity with recognized governmental competence can negotiate and sign an agreement concerning its future status. This includes:

• trust territories

• protectorates

• mandated territories

• autonomous regions under colonial administration

Southern Cameroons fell under this category. It had:

• a functioning self-government

• a democratically elected Prime Minister

• a House of Assembly

• executive authority recognized by the United Nations

• the right to determine its future under Article 76(b)

These powers were enough to sign a treaty of union, if such a treaty had been negotiated, drafted, signed, and ratified.

2. What the UN Actually Required in Resolution 1608

The United Nations made the legal path very clear. Resolution 1608 called for:

• a tripartite meeting between Southern Cameroons, La République du Cameroun, and the United Kingdom

• the negotiation and signing of a union treaty

• the completion of that treaty before the trusteeship ended

This means the UN expected Southern Cameroons to act with the authority necessary to sign such a treaty.
If Southern Cameroons lacked the legal competence, the UN would not have required it to negotiate a treaty in the first place.

3. The Real Problem Is Not Whether Southern Cameroons Could Sign

The real issue is that no treaty was ever signed at all.

It is not a question of capability. It is a question of execution.
Southern Cameroons had the legal authority. La République du Cameroun had the legal authority. The UK had administrative authority.
Yet the treaty required under Resolution 1608:

• was never drafted

• was never signed

• was never ratified

• was never deposited at the UN

Without that final step, no union came into legal existence.

4. Examples from Around the World

Other countries have had similar situations where entities that were not fully independent still negotiated treaties or union acts. Some examples include:

• Singapore negotiated its union with Malaysia before becoming a fully independent republic.

• Eritrea negotiated arrangements with Ethiopia while still under UN supervision.

• Trust territories in the Pacific entered compacts with the United States before final independence.

In every case, the key issue is not whether the territory was fully sovereign.
It is whether the required treaty was properly negotiated, signed, ratified, and recognized.

Southern Cameroons followed the process up to the negotiating table, but the final legal act never happened.

5. The Final Answer You Can Give Publicly

Here’s the simplest way to answer the comment:

Southern Cameroons did not need to be a fully independent state to sign a union treaty. It already had the legal authority under UN Trusteeship law to negotiate its future. The issue is not that Southern Cameroons lacked capacity. The issue is that no union treaty was ever signed, which means no legal union was ever formed.