Advertisement

The brouhaha over Togoland Plebiscite  (3) : The Historical Fact
If the four unit formula recommended by the Visiting Mission were applied these two districts would be separated from the Gold Coast and remain under trusteeship pending a final plebiscite while the other four districts would be integrated with an independent Gold Coast

The brouhaha over Togoland Plebiscite (3) : The Historical Fact

This is the concluding part of the article by Emeritus Prof. D.E.K. Amenumey, the second part of which was published on Page 34 on Monday, September 5, 2016

All the same when the plebiscite figures are broken down, an interesting pattern emerges. In the first place, the northern section voted for, while the southern section voted against, integration. Again, of the six electoral districts, two, the Ewe districts of Ho and Kpando voted for separation. If the four unit formula recommended by the Visiting Mission were applied these two districts would be separated from the Gold Coast and remain under trusteeship pending a final plebiscite while the other four districts would be integrated with an independent Gold Coast.

However, with the pattern that had emerged from the voting figures, it was unlikely that the U.N. would agree to the isolation of the specifically Ewe areas. It would have required the co- operation of the British Government, but Britain had already made her position clear on this point.

On July 13, 1956 the British Government submitted a memorandum to the U.N. proposing that the only right and practicable course would be for the trusteeship agreement in respect of British Togoland to be terminated. It claimed that this proposal was based on three considerations:

(A) The plebiscite showed that the majority of the territory wanted union with the Gold Coast,

(B) This union was manifestly in the interests of the people of the territory, When the Gold Coast became independent the Trusteeship

(c)Agreement concerning British Togoland would become inoperable.

The British Government’s position was strengthened by the General Elections held in the Gold Coast and British Togoland on 12th and 17th July 1956. In the southern section of British Togoland the leaders, parties, issues and appeals were essentially the same as those involved in the plebiscite. The C.P.P., the party of integration and unitary government received 52.6 percent of the votes while in the northern section the C.P.P. and the N.P.P. between them received 96 per cent.

Thus, whereas the parties of integration had an overall majority of 58 per cent in the plebiscite, in July they received a majority of 73 per cent. The general election results confirmed and strengthened the validity of the plebiscite majority in favour of integration. They also fulfilled the British Government's condition for granting independence to the Gold Coast which wasitself a prerequisite for the termination of the Trusteeship Agreement and the integration of British Togoland into the Gold Coast.

These facts and figures were considered by the U.N. in taking a final decision on the fate of British Togoland. As against these, the World Body also considered how far the aims of the trusteeship system could be considered met by the territory not actually becoming independent in its own right, but as an integral part of another independent country. It also considered whether the two districts which voted for separation should be allowed the right to self-determination. The U.N. refused to consider the plebiscite results separately for South British Togoland. 

It was unwilling to support the fragmentation of the territory and also to create a precedent that might lead to the fragmentation of other trust territories and thereby delay their advance towards self government and independence. It considered the overall majority of 16 per cent big enough to warrant the termination of the Trusteeship Agreement. Accordingly, it authorised the integration of British Togoland with the Gold Coast when the latter became independent in March 1957. (U.N. General Assembly official Records Trusteeship Council Resolution 1496 (XVIII) and General Assembly Resolution 1044 (XI).

This decision and its implementation put an end to the Togoland unification question. As has come out in this article the debate on the future of British Togoland had arisen from the demand for Ewe unification, particularly after the modification of this demand to mean the unification of the two trust territories as an initial step. In the first place, it was the fact that other peoples besides the Ewe would be affected by this exercise that necessitated the consultation of the entire population of British Togoland on the territory's future. 

The Ewe unificationists had argued for a simultaneous plebiscite in French Togoland also, but the World Body did not consider that that territory had reached a comparably advanced political stage when a consultation of its people on the question of union with British Togoland would be meaningful. Before 1956 no proper consultation of the people or any scientific determination of the strength of the various political persuasions had been made other than rough assessments based on superficial estimates of the various U.N. Visiting Missions and extravagant claims of the various political groups about the size of their individual following. The 1956 plebiscite was the first scientific assessment and it tore a hole in the claims of the advocates of Ewe unification. It is to be emphasized, however, that this plebiscite actually did not take into account the position in the Ewe sections of the Gold Coast and French Togoland which were, after all, the main supporters of Ewe unification.

Now, even granted that the plebiscite was confined to British Togoland, it was one thing to establish that it was necessary to consult the entire population on the plebiscite options. It was quite another to determine whether the majority decision should apply to the entire territory as one unit or the majority should be determined for each section separately. It should be remembered that Britain did not administer the two sections of British Togoland together has one unit. On the contrary, the southern section of the territory was administered jointly with the “Colony” the northern section was also administered jointly with the “northern territories” of the Gold Coast. Since the destinies of the two sections had hitherto diverged, it is arguable that they really constituted two distinct units each of which could theoretically exercise the right to self-determination. The meaningful question, however, was one of how practicable this was in the given circumstances. The U.N. obviously did not consider that such a solution was practicable.

As pointed out earlier, because of practical consideration, particularly the insistence by Britain, the Administrative Authority that once the Gold became independent it would no longer be possible for Britain to administer any part of British Togoland that might vote against integration, the United Nations decided to treat the Trust Territory as one composite unit and not consider the Ewe section that voted against integration with the Gold Coast separately. Its decision affected the entire Trust Territory, Furthermore its decision was to be permanent. There was no time limit set. Hence any demand for secession by a section of the former British Togoland does not have any legal basis. In fact, even if the decision came from the entire former trust territory it would still not have any leg to stand on. Furthermore, it could not involve the portion of Ewe people like Peki, Anlo, Tongu, Some etc who had been part of the Gold Coast since the nineteenth century and did not come in on the wings of the plebiscite.

 

Read part two of The Brouhaha over Togoland Plebiscite here:

 

The writer is at the College of Humanities and Legal Studies U.C.C.

Writers [email protected]

Connect With Us : 0242202447 | 0551484843 | 0266361755 | 059 199 7513 |