Cameroon

2, June 2016

Paul Biya and2014: Another Catalogue of Failures and Development Bluffs ⁰

Some hours before 8:00 p.m. when Paul Biya had to address the nation, I bought a copy of Marafa Hamidou Yaya’s recent book “Le Choix de l’Action” [Choice of Action]. Since I was very interested in the elections he organized, I quickly thumbed through the book and fell on p. 57 where a telephone exchange he had with Paul Biya related to the election of Jean Jacques Ekindi in 2007 to the National Assembly from Wouri Centre constituency, is reported. It left me upset and disappointed that indeed, the people’s will has always been manipulated from the summit of the state by the same person who always refers to the people’s will when he is asked why he is still hanging on for 32 years.

It is in that state of despair that I sat checking his past New Year messages while waiting for the griots to draw the curtains. So by the time he started speaking, I had just read what he said on December 31, 2011: “we now have a roadmap, the Growth and Employment Strategy Paper which sets the objectives for this decade…”; we are entering our “first phase of a ‘long march’ towards being an emergent country…” like the “new Asian dragons some 30 years ago”; Cameroon would be a “vast construction site in 2012”; “in the past, government action suffered from lack of entrepreneurial approach and the administration from inactivity. We must overcome this inertia which has caused us so much harm”; “corruption is an insidious and dreadful enemy”; there will be a “new impetus” …

On December 31, 2012 he promised victory over the energy “battle,” linking of regional capitals with tarred roads, the “agrarian revolution,” that “in a couple of months or a couple of years our country will be dotted with construction sites, dams, power plants, ports, factories and road,” etc. And the rhetorical questions of December 31, 2013: “Are we different from others that are succeeding in other places? What do we lack? What is the use of some follow-up commissions? Why does government action lack coherence and transparency? Why are there so many administrative bottlenecks…?”

Well, here we are at the end of 2014 or at the beginning of 2015. There is no way of having a structured examination of the message because it did not really have a structure. It is interesting how we believed these utterances even after some 30 unproductive years about vast construction sites, energy battles, road maps, agrarian revolutions, and … “emergence”! As expected, everything has become blurred just a few years after the “emergence” mantra entered our political discourse. That blurring has caused the tinkering of another buzz word: “contingency plan!”

When the regime engaged in a fast and loose game with its actions at the council of ministers’ meeting of December 9, 2014, there was no doubt that it was just a frantic effort to write the script of the end-of-year message. After all, a contingency plan was promised in the December 31, 2013 message, so with a few days left, something needed to be done! And so they engaged in another aimless search for “newness” by adding “contingency plan” to their evolving vocabulary of “development”: ambition, realization, emergence, and now …contingency plan! And who do we have to look over it? Not the government, not a group of hired multidisciplinary experts, but a group of ministers led by the prime minister! If such a small group of ministers can follow-up a “plan” that will get us out of the tunnel, why the large government the regime sustains?

Not to worry because the “plan” is just a plan. The regime is good at indulging in these types of games of misdiagnosis and partial diagnosis that give them outcomes beyond their comprehension, so they always package placebos and tote them around as cures! Nothing can be expected from a government run as several disjointed parts, manned by people who consider themselves “creations” of one man, whom they spend their time worshipping instead of working as a coordinated team to serve the interests of the nation. The regime is surely at its wits’ end!

Our abhorrence of repressive instruments, whether they are the 1962 anti-subversion ordinance or the 2014 anti-terrorism law is based on our distrust of a regime that abused the anti-subversive ordinance to create more problems for society. We remember Bebey Eyidi and others that were jailed as “subversives” for criticizing Ahidjo; we remember Yondo Black and others that were jailed by Biya as “subversives” just for thinking about multiparty politics. We remember how Ahidjo imposed his one-party regime and subverted the reunification agenda in a society cowed by the anti-subversion ordinance. Importantly, we remember how Law no 90/054 on the maintenance of law and order has been abused by administrative authorities to seriously reduce the societal space in which civil society and opposition political parties were supposed to carry out their activities.

The letter of the anti-terrorism law may not be to repress social liberties, but the above self-serving abuses inform us not to trust a regime that has orchestrated those abuses in the past. In an age when humans sentence themselves to death by acting like suicide bombers, the political and social consequences of the death sentence should always be well considered to avoidoutcomes like those that followed the execution in 1995 of leaders of the Movement for the Survival of the Ogoni People (MOSOP), including its founder Ken Saro-Wirwa, or the execution of Boko Haram founder Mohamed Yusuf in 2009, to name just those two cases. It is also appropriate to sound the warning again: in applying the anti-terrorism law, we should beware of McCarthyism!

On top of these worries, when an instrument meant for the protection of citizens and their properties is used to breach the rights of citizens to their individuality, the emergence of citizen responsibility is blocked. In the absence of such responsibility, there can be no solidarity. And in the absence of solidarity in society, no force can fight against the monster of modern terrorism. Citizen responsibility is like the responsibility of a family member for the behavior of other family members. From past experience, we fear that the spirit of the anti-terrorism law may endanger citizen responsibility because it seems to be more about the safety of the Biya regime which most Cameroonians no longer want, than about the security of the nation which all Cameroonians want and are anxious to support.

On December 31, 2013 Paul Biya said that the constitutional council would be put in place in “un délai raisonnable” [a reasonable time]. There must be some mystery about the Constitutional Council, not the simple putting together of people from different structures in the manner prescribed up to 19 years ago by the Constitution of January 18, 1996. If the regime agonizes over a simple matter like this, more difficult actions needed to unleash the nation’s potential in manufacturing, in services, and indeed in all sectors will take it a very long time – if ever! This toying with simple actions is indeed a metaphor for the laxity that we keep hearing about from its champion.

The problem of Cameroon today does not seem to be the lack of budgetary allocations because each year, annual budgets are under-spent, and much of the budgeted money is embezzled. The problem is therefore not about cutting costs and charging more taxes or spending scarce resources on the fight against terrorism. The problem is government systems and procedures that do not just work. The problem is the way we have done things during 30-some years which cannot produce different results. The problem is an environment bounded by repressive laws that inhibit the free flow of ideas, obstruct interactions between people with different perspectives, and lock up citizen potentials. The problem cannot really be said to be the absence of “peace” because we cannot convincingly say that our achievements during the last 30 year of “peace” – before Boko Haram et al. – can be described as “positive.”

The problem of our society is roads that are built without a maintenance infrastructure (periodic, routine or rehabilitation) so they become weak and dilapidated with age like we witness all over the country. The problem is that we are unable to appropriately streamline our investment projects along our two seasons of rain and sunshine. The problem is the absence of a transparent and efficient anti-corruption program which is not itself mired in corruption. The problem is that too many decisions in the country are in the hands of too few and too same people. The problem is that those at the summit of the state still have a one-party mindset, and treat those who criticize or differ with state authorities like enemies.
A government must have an overall strategy of service delivery to society. Government departments should be run by people who consider themselves business leaders, capable of continuous innovative and strategic thinking and action. Such strategies and innovations should be discussed, evaluated and fine-tuned in regular ministerial council meetings. Ministerial council meetings are not supposed to be a monologue. The president who constitutionally presides over the meetings should use the forum to draw from the collective expertise of each participant, not for staging the shows that give the impression of a haughty master in a kindergarten classroom.
It is amusing after reading the exchanges between Marafa Hamidou Yaya and Paul Biya as indicated above, to hear him say that our democracy is “working well!” There is obviously a serious disconnect between the people and the regime of Paul Biya. At the end of the day, development is a human product. However many “plans” or much money is thrown into the process, when the people are not in the right mood, only the same results of failure and end-of-year rhetorical questions will keep repeating themselves.

The fact that the outcomes of government actions do not produce desired services for so long a time is an indication that government is stuck in an unproductive routine. Perhaps the some university dons or other experts need to carry out some human-sciences-based analyses on both government and the society it serves to find insights that can be translated to productive initiatives, different from the decorative “plans” that always end up in failure and the enrichment of regime barons through corruption and embezzlement. But such insights may be beyond the comprehension of a gerontocracy. That is precisely why the need for change in Cameroon is so urgent.

Tazoacha Asonganyi

Yaounde.

2, June 2016

The Making of an SCNC Leader and Why It Should Change ⁰

You would be forgiven for understanding the Guardian Post editorial, under the penmanship of Ngah Chris, as an enthusiastic endorsement of Hon. Ayah as the next SCNC Chairman. Yet, the title (“How Justice Ayah Paul was Catapulted to the SCNC Chairmanship”) suggests that the election is a done deal. Welcome to making of an SCNC leader!

Upon further scrutiny, it seems a leader is yet to be elected or “selected” – the exact word used by the Guardian Post. The paper says “a reinvigorated and united SCNC executive is about to be elected”. It will be, we are told, at an upcoming “Elective General Assembly” where Hon. Ayah “will be selected [nice choice of verb] to replace the deceased Chief Ayamba”. The sales pitch for Hon. Ayah describes him as having an “unblemished profile and record… the right candidate” for the “uphill task” of “enormous complexities” at time of “sweeping allegations” of the Biya regime buying leaders over.

The editorial is partly aimed at discrediting everyone else who might threaten Hon. Ayah’s rise to the helm of the SCNC. Without verification, the paper accusations that Nfor Ngala Nfor has tried to “usurp leadership” whereas, as it claims, he is a “government agent”. The other potential troublemaker is Ambassador Fossung, who lives in exile in the USA. He is dismissively portrayed as claiming to be the “legitimate leader” but reduced to providing lame leadership via sharing tracts and videos online.

To its credit, the Guardian Post acknowledges that Hon. Ayah cannot seek to become president of “La Republique” while also fighting to restore the independence of Southern Cameroons. The paper does not go further to add that Hon. Ayah cannot fight a regime on whose Supreme Court bench he plans to take oath to defend. Reportedly “on good authority”, the paper announces Hon. Ayah’s upcoming resignation from PAP (the political party he founded) to satisfy “hawks within the SCNC” (also known as secessionists) who asked for and obtained no less of Prince Ndoki Mukete before that. Stepping down, says the Guardian Post will make Hon. Ayah “an unquestionable candidate for leadership” of the SCNC.

Democracy and Meritocracy Managed by Dictators

Even as they have clamored louder for democracy and meritocracy, Cameroonians – sadly of all political stripes – have grown increasingly complacent, comfortable – even resigned – to dictatorship dressed in this kind of rave review of politicians, steeped in intellectual dishonesty and the manipulation inherent in the spiritual vote cast by the Guardian Post in this editorial. Endorsing Hon. Ayah would make sense for a newspaper like this if at least two candidates were running for the position and the paper would endorse one, providing reasons to readers (also voters) why the paper has done so.

There are no known rival candidates in this case. In fact, we do not even know if Hon. Ayah is even running or is being manipulated into running. This is the old-time, one-party “Ahidjo versus Ahidjo” ballot! We get no explanation why Hon. Ayah may be better suited for attending to the Augean task of unifying fractious factions; of infusing new blood; of building a movement more capable to standing up to the expected attacks from the Biya regime.

We, as a people, will not get competent, qualified leaders of integrity until we set rigorous selection criteria and abide by them in electing – not selecting – our leaders. The process needs to become more transparent, inclusive, competitive and democratic. The health of our democracy is dependent on that. So far, though, from grassroots movements to the Top Job in the land, dictatorship is our DNA. Far too many dictators are in training at the helm of political parties and other grassroots movements like the SCNC for Cameroon to hope to enthrone democracy without a genuine reawakening.

Everyone mentioned for a position in Cameroon is almost always invariably praised as qualified for it. Yet, anyone old enough to breastfeed knows what qualifications would make a good SCNC leader, for example. The movement has a clearly defined goal. It suffers currently from a number of setbacks, not the least of which is lack of seriousness, professionalism and unity of purpose at the helm. These are problems that democracy and meritocracy can fix. However, our movements dodge democracy; shun meritocracy; continue to wallow in some Ahidjo-invented concept known as “regionalism”. Steadfast leaders will not emerge if past betrayals and the likelihood of recurrence are overlooked and if lack of support a movement and a people still qualifies the holder of the curriculum vitae to lead it.

Unlike Rome, not all roads lead to the achievement of the goals set for itself by the SCNC. As shaky leadership to, during and immediately after the Foumban Conference proved, it is easy for the regime in Yaounde and their French masters to take Anglophone leaders for a ride. Southern Cameroonians cannot afford such a misstep in the aftermath of the landmark Banjul Ruling and on the eve of the sun setting on President Biya’s current seven-year term. It may matter more now and in the near future who leads the SCNC than it has ever mattered at any time in our history. And, on that count, it is my opinion that Hon. Ayah is woefully unqualified to lead the SCNC.

Excuses, World Without End…

Apologists for Hon. Ayah, like the Guardian Post, have been scrambling to find excuses for his past and even future shortcomings, in the hope of remodeling him away from his CPDM past (and future?). They have tried to find the right words to shoehorn him into the position of SCNC Chair. Good luck with that!

The Guardian Post says of him that he was “a lone voice in the wilderness” during his two terms as Member of Parliament in Cameroon’s National Assembly. Not true! The SDF spoke louder, but never – even once – benefited from the support of his voice or vote.

The one time Hon. Ayah is credited with voting against the CPDM was when he was not there and never voted. Hon. Ayah was “no show” when parliament voted to give President Biya constitutional authority to lift presidential term limits and, not only to forgive all crimes committed by any president while in office but also to grant them immunity from prosecution once out of office. Hon. Ayah, quite honestly, cannot take credit for what he neither did nor for a vote he never cast. Significantly, he did not find it important enough to be in parliament to express his opposition at a time when hundreds of Cameroonians were being killed by security forces stamping out street protests against what MPs were approving.

Unlike Hon, Ayah, the SDF parliamentary group can take credit for walking out of parliament in protest. The five members of parliament who stayed through the deliberations and then voted against the amendment can take credit for what they did. But, Hon. Ayah…. Please!!! Hon. Ayah knows that by his absence he provided proxy to the CPDM to cast his vote alongside other dictatorship likeminded MPs of the party in power. That vote was in April 2008. Not once since then and in January 2011 when he resigned from the CPDM did he caucus with the SDF or vote along with them. Even as he complaint of “fearing for his life and of family safety” in early 2011, Hon. Ayah was acting emboldened – not frightened – going on to put up one of the most disgraceful showings on a presidential ballot ever!

A Lone Political Wolf

Remarkably, he continued to be Chair of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the National Assembly – not ever once stepping so much as out of line with the ruling CPDM. Tied to the hip with the CPDM, it is not forlorn to imagine that Hon. Ayah has never been his own man. It is CPDM appointments and decrees of its Leader-President Biya that made him magistrate plenipotentiary. For all the legal heavyweight paint him to be – and he may well be – his legal prowess did not associate with other legal luminaries like Prof. Carlson Anyangwe in defending the Southern Cameroons cause before a national court (such as Bamenda or Buea) or an international tribunal (such as Banjul). As the patient legal dog, Hon. Ayah ultimately got fed one of the fattest Supreme Court bones. We are told he could use that position to advance Southern Cameroons, but for that to be aligned with his past performance how about they allowed us to read just one landmark ruling he handed down as a magistrate of the bench. Just one!

The SCNC needs a leader who connects well with the grassroots. One forumist, Bens Awaah, offered advice where the Guardian Post editorial failed. “When the Southern Zone militants assemble to elect the next SCNC Chairman”, Ben Awaah wrote, “they should elect a young, energetic and visionary man or woman, whose sole interest is to take us to independence. He/she must be a people person, able to build bridges and to bring more people from the region to the cause. Northern Zone people and Mola Njoh Litumbe have always been there, working and waiting”.

Forget many aspects of those basic qualifications! Hon. Ayah’s past suggests that he is neither the leader the SCNC deserves nor the one it has been waiting for. His role as CPDM-appointed, regime-obedient Supreme Court Justice denies him the potential to grow into that role. He is seen as a “lone political wolf”; not without some justification. For example, he announced his bid for the presidency via email and followed it up with phone conversations to media editors, even as most aspirants spoke to monstrous crowds. A Cameroonian blogger once pondered thus about him: “maybe he needs to connect more with the grassroots. The same people who are the silent majority, invisible yet always present”.

While some of the wordings used by the blogger to describe Hon. Ayah cross sacred family lines, they are worth being shared three years after they were first posted. “What is most lacking for the Hon. Ayah Paul,” the blogger wrote “is traction. He says just the right things, has the right ideas, is married to a Francophone from Douala (no fear of secession), and has the academic and professional credentials relevant for the presidency of Cameroon”. The blogpost remains unchallenged to this date by Hon. Ayah.

The Market in Illusions

There is no shame in Cameroon these days of selling illusions to the highest bidder. The Guardian Post has one on sale. It argues that the tough issues opposing “La Republique” to Southern Cameroons can be thrashed out amicably “through internal dialogue without resort to international arbitration, the consequences of which is (sic) difficult to predict for now”. The Guardian Post is also an oracle teller, predicting – we have to presume – less consequences if internal dialogue was adopted! The last time we tried that via street protests in February 2008, a few hundred civilians were shot dead and thousands more, including the now late Lapiro de Mbanga, were thrown in jail. By comparison, the proceedings before the Court in Banjul had a casualty figure of exactly “zero mort”! So, too, did Bakassi!

The Guardian Post informs us that the Biya regime spent taxpayers’ money to sponsor “some blacklegs within the movement to The Gambia and Senegal to pose as leaders” during the Banjul Hearing. If that is true, could the Biya regime be up to the same bunch of tricks with Hon. Ayah?

Admitting – without confessing to the sheer violence that the regime visits on dissident movements – the Guardian Post offers the following advice: allow SCNC members to “hold their assembly without interruption by security forces so that in the end, Yaounde will be able to know who to dialogue with for the interest of ‘national unity and integrity'” Holy smoke! If dialogue is for the interest of “national unity and integrity”, how can that dialogue be at the service of the SCNC and its followers?

By Oke Akombi Ayukepi Akap

2, June 2016

Laquintinie Hospital Saga: Where is our collective conscience ⁰

The Laquintinie Hospital incident has not only shocked the entire nation, it has indeed thrown up many questions about healthcare in a country where elections focus more on individuals rather than on issues and policies that can enable the country address those issues that have blighted the people’s lives. The pictures of a woman slaughtering her own sister within a certified medical facility just to save her sister’s twins is an indication that the country’s healthcare system is suffering from serious issues. This is a job that was supposed to have been done by health officials of that medical facility, but since money has replaced humanity in our own country, lots of people, including medical doctors, have simply walked away from the theory of being there for their fellow citizens for a philosophy wherein money is the be-all-and-end-all of life. There is nothing else that can really beat this gross display of inhumanity by Laquintinie hospital officials. And this case is simply the tip of the iceberg.

Many Cameroonians have lost their lives just because of inhumanity and carelessness in our hospitals. When you visit some of our hospitals, you end up shedding tears when you see how fellow citizens are treated. Not only are these hospitals not equipped, they have, at best, been reduced to consultation clinics and, at worst, funeral homes. Our hospitals are now places where people pay their transport fare to spend their last days. The type of things that happen in Cameroon’s hospitals could kill a patient even before they get to meet the medical doctors who themselves have become businesspeople. Nowhere else in the world, except in Cameroon, is someone charged for being on the premises of a medical facility. In most hospitals around the country, access– not to the medical officials – is paid. Laquintinie is very much notorious for that. This underscores the point that even emergencies are not considered as emergencies, if the patient or their loved ones accompanying them do not have money to pay for access. This even gets worse if you have to meet with the medical doctors themselves. If you do not have money to deposit, then yours is the kingdom of pain and death. Nobody will attend to you and many hardworking, but unfortunate Cameroonians, have lost their lives just because of this type of mentality that is very much countenanced by a government that is more elitist than populist.

Of course, the Laquintinie incident seems to be a wake-up call. Even members of the ruling party are calling for disciplinary measures against officials of the hospital. But it is not the hospital that is the problem. Laquintinie is just a symptom of a disease that has affected the entire nation. Moral decadence and inhumanity have become the cancers of our country. This is a country where crooks are hailed as strong men, thieves are revered and con-men have become models to our children. Punishing Laquintinie hospital officials will be a welcome measure, but such a measure will not address the issues facing the entire nation. You do not eradicate a disease by striking at the branches instead of the roots. Cameroon is gone down the drain. Morals have disappeared from the country. The community spirit and strong sense of citizenship that characterized the country in the 70s, 80s and, maybe, the 90s have simply migrated to other parts of the world. Go to most schools in the country, and you will be shocked beyond expression at the attitude of the teachers. If levels of healthcare and education have taken a nosedive in Cameroon, it is surely not in error or by accident. It is the way the government has run the system.

The notion of Garbage in, Garbage out (GIGO) also applies to human systems and not only to the computer. Take a look at the way teachers are recruited and you understand why standards of education have suffered over the last two decades. Most Cameroonian teachers are simply a bunch of people who are fleeing unemployment. They are not driven by the passion we saw in our teachers in the 60s and 70s. Teachers were the makers of men and they exuded knowledge wherever they were. Compare them to what we have today, and your mind will bleed for a country that is already on life support. For the medical field, the story is grimmer. Many of our medical doctors have simply transformed the Oath of Hippocrates into an Oath of Hypocrisy. For sure, these doctors were pushed into our faculties of medicine by some invisible hand and even when they cannot perform properly in school, they cannot be dismissed. That should explain why we have lots of butchers in our hospitals wielding long, sharp knives. They are always prepared to operate or to exaggerate the extent of the patient’s illness just to make a quick buck. Cameroon needs a new vision, a vision that will place the citizens of that country at the heart of every action.

One would think that after the colourful celebrations of the International Women’s Day in Cameroon, Cameroonian women will be treated like queens every day. But the nasty and unpardonable incident that took place at the Laquintinie Hospital in Douala underscores that the nation and its leaders are simply paying lip-service to the whole notion of women and their rights. Worse of all, is the public’s indifference; indifference that has pushed me into questioning the whole notion of a collective conscience in our country. While the hospital officials have gone mute since the incident took place, government officials, for their part, have been struggling to provide explanations, some of which have been at best annoying. How could a country endowed with some of the finest human resources on the continent be going through this for so many decades. Why should we be losing our women at a time when technology has simplified delivery across the world? And where is our collective conscience. Our silence in the face of this disaster is tantamount to acquiescence. While we may have been reduced to sorry spectators of events in our country, let’s not forget that our silence is being considered as approval of what is happening to some of us. If this can happen to Mr. A, then it will one day happen to Mr. B. This has nothing to do with tribe or region. Our leaders should be held accountable and this is one moment that can enable our leaders understand that we cannot always be taken for a ride. Silence cannot always be golden, not when human life is involved.

2, June 2016

Subversion of Due Process: The Presidency and “Epervier” ⁰

The news of recent has been the condemnation of Yves Michel Fotso to life imprisonment for alleged embezzlement of public funds. The news was being distilled to us at the same time that newspapers like “Mutations” (No. 4132 of April 25, 2016) were questioning why barons of the regime like Paul Atanga Nji, Jean Tabi Manga, Max Ayina Ohandja, Roger Moise Eyene Nlom, Marc Samatana and many others, whom reports of “commissions of enquiry” have since presented as suspects to face trial for embezzlement of public funds, have never been charged with embezzlement.

Further, a group called “REA-Mouvement Réaliste” said to be composed of grassroots militants of the CPDM (Génération Libre No. 221 of April 27, 2016), in a 10-year analysis of “Epervier” launched in Y2006, has concluded that the whole process seems to have been improvised because it was launched without adequate preparation and a clear intention to really fight against corruption.

The group named G11 that seems to have suffered the most from the operation has since had presumed members publishing books from their prison abodes. The books have been unanimous in claiming that “Epervier” is a politico-judicial exercise to eliminate the perceived political rivals of the man of November 6, 1982.

Many have criticized them for writing about the woes of Cameroon only when there was a divorce between them and the regime. To such criticism one can say that there is always a time and a reason for writing – to praise, admonish, propose, or some other – all of which are valid. In the end, we can only read the mind of characters like the taciturn and introverted man of November 6, through windows opened by those who worked closely with him – like Marafa, Olanguena, Edzoa, Mebara, and others – who write for any reason at all.

Invariably, “rebels” always assume the posture of attack to alter psychological situation of their adversaries to force them to lose their sense of security. The windows they have opened by doing this seem to be comforting the suspicion that indeed, “Epervier” is a political gimmick, and what is euphemistically called “Tcs” – or the Scc if you like – seems to be a kangaroo court to put icing on the cake of “Epervier. Those who use the tired argument of sour grapes as an excuse to avoid reading the books of the “rebel” writers as attentively as they deserve, miss facing the challenge of the comprehension that each of the books represents.

It is obviously interesting that when “Epervier” came to being, article 66 of the constitution of 1996 meant to protect public funds and resources from embezzlers was a dead letter, and is still a dead letter today! “Epervier” was launched when all press condemnations of the corruption of regime barons were met with calls for evidence – “où sont les preuves?”

It was therefore interesting to read a report titled: “Presidency rubbishes supreme state audit report implicating CAMTEL GM” (Guardian Post No. 0907, 13/04/16). The report says that allegations of misappropriation, mismanagement and outright embezzlement of the general manager covering the period 2010-2015, and the recommendation of special proceedings against him by the Special criminal court (SCC) were “rubbished” by the presidency because: CAMTEL is not yet using OHADA rules and cannot be judged by those standard; that much work of restructuring was carried out before the GM’s tenure; and that CONSUPE was rather hard when it reviewed the human, material and health resources management – consequently there was a bias in the way the review was done by CONSUPE!

These are most obviously supposed to be judicial decisions, not decisions of “the presidency”!The decisions leave the perception that they are for entirely partisan, if not personal reasons, and call into question the institutions on which “Epervier” depends.The man of November 6 wants to keep power by all means, so the presidency is seen as a partisan structure, and should not have the final say on issues of corruption.

The “rubbishing” of the report by “the presidency” is wrong for several reasons. First, one would think that the government of Cameroon has what the government of West Cameroon had – “General Orders” and “Financial Instructions”- that guide governance activities and the work of commissions of enquiry.

Second, in Africa, – especially in Cameroon – all power is secured and preserved through opacities and duplicities; indeed, power or the seeking of power is always the cause of corruption. Political power always trumps and stifles justice, development and even commonsense.

Third, the courts have a technical way of playing idea-games with concepts related to questions of fact and questions of law, to reach the verdict of “guilty” or “not guilty”. In the process, some people are declared “guilty,” even though they did nothing; and others “not guilty” even though they committed the act! Each case depends on the ability to “prove beyond a reasonable doubt.” It is wrong for the presidency to allow the courts to do this for some people, while protecting other people from facing the challenge.

Fourth, corruption always starts with the subversion of due process allegedly for the greater good. It is this power to “rubbish” reports of duly constituted commissions or to “doctor” them, that CPDM militants in prison are describing as politico-judicial manipulations. It is this exercise of power at the presidency that feeds the suspicion that the fight against corruption is a fight for the preservation of power. Subverting due process is tantamount to subverting the authority of the judiciary.

It is the people – all the people – that prosecute all successful fights against corruption. In this, the executive arm of government should be the facilitator, not a constitutive power. The executive should see to it that the fight is well prosecuted, not prosecute it itself!

The fight against corruption as presently prosecuted by the presidency leaves the impression that it is more concerned with “prevention” rather than “cure”. The evidence gathered during the last 10 years of “Epervier” permits a serious government to pursue curative measures, rather than “rubbish” findings in their pretentious effort to “cure” corruption.

Tazoacha Asonganyi

Yaounde.

2, June 2016

Deployment of US forces in Cameroon: End of the absentee commander-in-chief beacon ⁰

With the notable exception of Cameroonians, the announced deployment of American soldiers to Cameroon to combat Boko Haram terrorists should not come as a surprise to keen observers. First the Americans have been around for a while under supposedly different circumstances. There can be no gainsaying that the United States stated policy has always been to protect American economic and strategic interests where ever they are located or threatened. The Chad-Cameroon pipeline project and the Pecten Cameroon offshore oil exploitation and others fall within this category. Additionally US strategic interests in the sub-region, particularly in the oil rich Gulf of Guinea, in Equatorial Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe and the Great Lakes region warrant an American security presence.

There is no doubt that terrorist groups like Boko Haram which has publicly declared its allegiance to ISIS and others like Al Qaeda in the Maghreb and other criminal gangs in Africa Sahel have publicly declared and have the capacity to strike US interests in the sub-region or from basis in the sub-region. The US decision to deploy its soldiers in Cameroon to enable it participate in the ongoing war against Boko Haram is the clearest evidence that either terrorist groups have set up basis in Cameroon warranting US direction intervention. Also, the US might have found sufficient factors and indicia of reliability that Cameroon is or potentially a sanctuary of internal and international terrorism. To this extent, there is no reason to blame the US for taking measures to protect its regional and global strategic interests. The United States policy in this regard is well known and should therefore not surprise anyone.

The problem however lies with Cameroon. There is no gainsaying that Boko Haram and the threats of international terrorism posed grave danger requiring appropriate response. The response included urgent remedial tactical and strategic military action. However the declaration of war from a foreign capital by President Paul Biya was an unprecedented violation of the constitution he swore to defend and an assault on the sovereignty of Cameroon. To this extent, both the Boko Haram that the President declared war against from a foreign capital to combat and the President can be said of being culpable of crimes against the sovereignty of the nation.

Added to this, his prosecution of the war betrays a despicable lack of leadership and respect for the victims of the war and the sacrifices in life and limb of our valiant men and women in combat for the defense of the fatherland. Worse, President Paul Biya rushed through the National Assembly a liberticidal law against terrorism whose purport is to support his perpetuation of eternal power through the suppression of civil liberties and fundamental freedoms. This law places the country under emergency rule and gives tacit blessings to the very culture of fear that Boko Haram hoped to instill in the citizenry. Inviting the USA into the war as he did the French before without informing his people and seeking a mandate to do so from the National Assembly is proof of a potential treasonable violation of the constitution and disregard for sovereign will of the people.

The Americans are thus deploying in a war and war zone of potential distinct strategic interests. Observers have not lost sight of the fact that the war in both the US and France forces are deployed or are deploying was in part fueled by arms indiscriminately dropped by France under Sarkozy to criminal gangs in the Libya and African Sahel. These were intended, according to that Sarkozy, to combat the forces of Muammar Ghadafi. There can therefore be no doubt that by the participation of the US and NATO in the war for regime change in Libya the US and France raised the profile of terrorists in parts of Africa, Boko Haram being one of the most visible.

In Libya and elsewhere as we see in Syria, the US , France and Great Britain have characterized terrorist groups into good terrorists and bad terrorists, although the difference between both categories can easily be conflated or even tenuous to ascertain. The transmutation from good rebels to bad rebels indeed is hard to ascertain as the US, NATO in the world has come to learn in Libya where the criminal gangs they left in place after Khadafy have invited ISIS to take control of the state and opened a floodgate of unprecedented migration to Europe. So far thousands are dying in the Mediterranean on the watch of the supposed moral guarantors of the supposed civilized world.

Coming back to the US intended deployment to Cameroon, there is no doubt that the mission as announced is genuine but the signals it sends are obvious. Regarding these signals, we must first consider the cacophony of actors in the field. There are a recently constituted regional forces with Head Quarters in Ndjamena, French supposedly reconnaissance Units a euphemism for a French military presence and now the US. Only a person with jaundiced eyes will doubt the fact that French colonial military and economic pact with Cameroon makes the polity under potential French military control. The US military deployment will alter the balance of power and influence in Cameroon and the sub-region.

One obvious fact which must be stated is that with this deployment, the US will remain in Cameroon for a long time to come. Inviting the US to deploy its forces seemed easy for Mr Paul Biya but asking them to park and go home may be problematic in the future. Rather than put a time frame for it to execute and end its mandate, it will be re-enforced and given a more robust mandate with time.

The deployment also may be construed as a rare signal that President Biya’s more than three decades of personal power may be coming to an end. If this deployment and other international and internal dynamics do not end it, the French will conclude that he no longer serves their interest and kick him out from power.

There are emerging signs that the end of President Paul Biya may plunge the country into a potential blood bath due to a paucity of a viable constitutional arrangement for a smooth transition. Overtime Paul Biya and the international community by neglect and insufficient attention have allowed the Southern Cameroons problem to snowball into a potential time bomb that may explode drawing in communities in neighbouring Nigeria and international involvement. The complexity of the Southern Cameroons problem makes France an unlikely country to intervene once it explodes. The presence of the US forces may be construed as a potential stabilization force that may caution the potential fallout and obviate a needless bloodletting.

Many Cameroonians fear that the presence of American soldiers will invite American enemies far and wide worldwide to the Cameroon warfront. Cameroonians are however divided whether the deployment will attenuate or put brakes to the vampirism of French colonial and neocolonial policies that plunged the sub-region in the bloodletting that is ongoing. No matter from which perspective one may see it, this deployment marks the beginning of a potential new era and the end of one. None echoes the independence that most Cameroonians and African crave for. But both put the spotlight on those who profess to effectively rule Cameroon. It is from this perspective that we should anxiously consider this significant development. Let the truth which President lacks the courage to admit to inform his country men and women be told, this deployment by the greatest superpower on earth marks a significant development worth noting.

Lest we forget, Cameroon is at war, an international armed conflict. That fact and the deployment place its sovereignty and destiny in the hands of foreign powers. There is need therefore for a change of guard at the helm of the state to manage this and other developments. The time for the Cameroon Army to be tele-commanded from foreign holiday resorts and hotels may be coming to end. The deployment of US forces carries symbolic weight. One thing that this deployment may beacon is that the time of directing the war effort while foreign forces and those from the super power are on the ground may soon be over.

By Soter Agbaw-Ebai and Oke Akombi Ayukepi Akap

2, June 2016

Cameroon Air Force to deploy 19 Aircraft during National Day celebration ⁰

The Cameroon Air Force will deploy about 19 aircrafts to take part in the airshow on 19th May 2016 and during the Military Parade on National Day on 20th May 2016. The much bigger deployment of combat helicopters and fighter jets will take part in the highly coordinated air spectacle in the skies of Yaoundé.