The investigation into the assault of lawyer Me Richard Tamfu by gendarmes in Douala on November 27, 2024, has taken a dramatic turn. Whistleblower reports and testimonies from those involved reveal shocking details about the events leading up to and during the confrontation, raising serious questions about the conduct of Cameroon’s security forces and the integrity of the investigation.

The Context: A Lawyer Defending His Client

Me Tamfu’s ordeal began when his client, Dame Ndansi Olivia, approached him regarding a financial dispute involving 20 million FCFA related to the purchase of a Coaster vehicle. While initially deferring a follow-up meeting, Me Tamfu eventually went to Bonaberi to mediate the conflict at the request of his client.

Upon arrival, he engaged in mediation efforts and suggested that his client’s brother in Belgium settle the debt. Shortly afterward, gendarmes, including three in uniform and one in civilian attire, arrived at the scene. When Me Tamfu inquired about their purpose, they stated they were there to "fetch his client."

The gendarmes presented a letter of summons marked "Dès réception" (Upon receipt) and attempted to use it as a basis for arrest. Me Tamfu challenged this, asserting that a summons cannot legally justify arrest. His resistance reportedly incited the gendarmes, who allegedly subjected him to a brutal assault.

Alarming Allegations of Abuse

Me Tamfu described being physically dragged, beaten, and thrown into the back of a pick-up truck, which, notably, belonged to the plaintiff in the dispute. According to his client, Dame Ndansi Olivia, the gendarmes acted aggressively, repeating, “Where is the woman?” She stated that the assault on Me Tamfu resembled the treatment of a common criminal, leaving him humiliated and injured.

The Investigation: A Tense Confrontation

The investigation, ordered by SED (State Secretary for Defense) Galax Etoga, began at the Littoral Gendarmerie Legion, with key moments occurring in the office of Lieutenant-Colonel Zang, who was promoted to Colonel mid-investigation.

A confrontation between Me Tamfu and the three gendarmes accused of assault took place on the night of the incident, with glaring irregularities:

The fourth gendarme implicated in the assault was mysteriously absent.
Arrogance and defiance from the gendarmes: Sous-Lieutenant Medjo Eko, who reportedly led the assault, dismissively remarked, “I have several lawyers… but why bother bringing them here?”

The gendarmes denied all allegations, even claiming that Me Tamfu initiated a fight, including an outrageous accusation that he attempted to bite a gendarme’s genitals while restraining two others.

Competing Narratives

Gendarmes’ Claims

Me Tamfu allegedly prevented them from performing their duties.
He refused to identify himself or cooperate.
He disrupted their attempts to identify his client.

Me Tamfu’s Account

He identified himself upon arrival and did not engage in physical conflict.
He opposed the arrest of his client based solely on a summons, as it lacked legal grounds for such an action.

Client’s Testimony

The gendarmes arrived "in a state of war," aggressively demanding her whereabouts.
They brutally assaulted Me Tamfu for challenging their actions.
The primary intention of the gendarmes was not to identify her but to arrest her unlawfully.

Concerning Irregularities

Conflicts of interest: The pick-up truck used to transport Me Tamfu belonged to the plaintiff, raising questions about impartiality.
Celebrations during the investigation: The accused gendarmes were reportedly seen drinking alcohol during the proceedings, coinciding with Colonel Zang’s promotion.

Implications for Justice and Rule of Law

The case has exposed glaring flaws in the conduct of Cameroon’s security forces and raises broader concerns about accountability. Key issues include:

Excessive use of force: The brutal treatment of a lawyer performing his professional duties is a direct affront to the rule of law.
Judicial manipulation: The atmosphere of arrogance and impunity displayed by the accused gendarmes casts doubt on the fairness of the investigation.
Institutional failures: The use of a summons as a pretext for arrest and the involvement of the plaintiff’s resources in law enforcement actions suggest serious procedural violations.

What’s Next?

As the confrontation concluded at midnight, Cameroonians are left questioning whether the investigation will yield justice or be marred by the same impunity that enabled the assault. Human rights organizations and legal associations have called for transparency and accountability, with growing pressure on the government to ensure that those responsible face appropriate consequences.

For now, the focus remains on the results of the investigation and whether Cameroon’s judicial system can rise to the occasion in defending the rights of its citizens against abuse of power.