160. The Respondent State did not however respond specifically to the allegations concerning the relocation of major economic projects and enterprises from Southern Cameroon. It explained the reason for relocating the seaport to Douala from Limbe, otherwise known as Victoria. It argues that, Douala being the gateway into Cameroon, the government needed to monitor the movement of persons and good for evident security reasons and efficient customs control. 161. Every State has an obligation under international law to preserve the integrity of its entire territory. The maintenance of security and movements of persons and goods on the territory is part of that obligation. The argument by the Respondent State that it could not guarantee the security of persons and goods at Limbe, unless it moved the port, is tantamount to acknowledging that it had no control of Limbe. The Commission believes that the security and customs authorities could have effectively monitored the movement of persons and goods, even if the seaport had continued to be at Limbe. 162. The Commission states that the relocation of business enterprises and location of economic projects to Francophone Cameroon, which generated negative effects on the economic life of Southern Cameroon constituted violation of Article 19 of the Charter. Alleged violation of Article 20 163. The Complainants state that the “alleged unlawful and forced annexation and colonial occupation” of Southern Cameroon by the Respondent State constituted a violation of Article 20 of the Charter. They claim that Southern Cameroonians are entitled to exercise the rights to self determination under Article 20 of the Charter as a separate and distinct people from the people of “La Republique du Cameroon.” Article 20 stipulates that: 1. All peoples shall have the right to existence. They shall have the unquestionable and inalienable right to self determination. They shall freely determine their political status and shall pursue their economic and social development according to the policy they have freely chosen. 2. Colonised or oppressed peoples shall have the right to free themselves from the bonds of domination by resorting to any means recognised by the international community. 3. All peoples shall have the right to the assistance of the states parties to the present Charter in their liberation struggle against foreign domination, be it political, economic or cultural. 164. The Complainants submit that the UN plebiscite was premised on certain conditions, including the convening of a conference of equal representative delegations from the Republic of Cameroon and Southern Cameroon to work out the conditions for the transfer of sovereign powers to the future federation. It is further submitted that such arrangements should have been approved by the separate parliaments of the Republic of Cameroon and Southern Cameroon before sovereignty was transferred to a single entity representing both sides. The Complainants submit that the results of the plebiscite were never submitted to the parliament of the Southern Cameroon for approval. 165. The Respondent State did not respond to the allegations concerning “unlawful annexation and colonialism.” It submitted instead that the issues are incapable of adjudication by the Commission on account of its lack of jurisdiction. 166. The Respondent State contested further the claim that Southern Cameroonians are a “separate and distinct people” . The Commission shall examine this issue. 167. The Complainants reiterate that their “separate and distinct” identity is based on the British administration over Southern Cameroon. They submit that they speak the English language, and apply the common law legal tradition, as opposed to the Francophone zone, where French is spoken and the civil law system is applicable. 168. The Respondent State submitted that it does not dispute the basic historical facts concerning the Trust administration, but denies that Southern Cameroonians exist as a “people.” It states the following; “[t]he complainants raise in order to shore up this assertion the use of the English language (working language), the specificity of the legal system, of the educational system, of the system of government, traditional cultures. In fact, the specificities of former Southern Cameroons stem solely from the heritage of British administration and the legacy of Anglo-Saxon culture. No ethno-anthropological argument can be put forward to determine the existence of a people of Southern Cameroons, the