Editorial

Back in the 1990s, thousands of Cameroonians were not only willing… thousands accepted to be brutalized during street protests and rallies. Hundreds of thousands joined ghost town campaigns. Tens of thousands accepted to be arrested, detained, tortured, raped, “disappeared” or killed.

It was, they considered, a small price to pay for the ideal they were fighting for. Only few guessed or could have imagined then that they would be rewarded with one-man rule for over a quarter of a century. Few of those who fervently believed in the magic of “power to the people” could have imagined that the opposition political party they fought so hard to build and for which so many were killed would – by 2017 - become one of Cameroon’s least democratic political parties.

Welcome to the Social Democratic Front (SDF)! Welcome to the shameful legacy of the once endearing SDF leader, Ni John Fru Ndi. This is the same politician… I beg your pardon… this is the demagogue whom younger SDF colleagues – like Hon. Joseph Wirba and yours truly – did not hesitate to referred to as “Pa”. This is the man who had millions chanting the “Papa eeeellleee… Yayayoooo” as he took to the soapbox. Twenty-seven years after, one thing is obvious: how the mighty have fallen! You would be ashamed to brag about such a record… except if you are Mr. Fru Ndi, who apparently does not know how not to.

Definitely irked by the fact that one parliamentarian (Hon. Joseph Wirba) has, indeed, stolen his political thunder, Mr. Fru Ndi used a recent media outing (interview granted Equinoxe TV and aired by CRTV) to find a very public way of hauling that Member of Parliament (MP) under the bus. The SDF leader is apparently so irked he cannot even bring himself into recognizing the MP by his name or title.

The Fru Ndi Rant, as it should be called, begins with words to the following effect: “One of the SDF parliamentarians, Joe Wirba… after he talked in parliament… He came. I congratulated him,” says Mr. Fru Ndi. Only a few seconds later, he admits: “I cautioned him”.

Question: which is which? Did Mr. Fru Ndi “congratulate” or “caution” Hon. Wirba? Did he do both?

The case Mr. Fru Ndi makes for the political crucifixion of Hon. Wirba accuses the MP of daring to be himself; not the SDF… of daring to speak up in support of Southern Cameroonians, whereas the SDF would have preferred their massacre. Ahmadou Ahidjo would have been very proud of Mr. Fru Ndi when he says the following of Hon. Wirba: “He talked more from a personal point of view - I, not we. He talked not from the point of view of the party”. Ni John Fru Ndi wants viewers to know he was generous with advice to Hon. Wirba. “He should make sure that when he is talking he is talking as an SDF member”. Translation? How dare anyone within the SDF outshine Fru Ndi? If Hon. Wirba had such a powerful speech, why did he not let the boss deliver it?

Like all rants, this one opens a window into Mr. Fru Ndi’s heart. What the viewer sees is a man who, after 27 years of “come-no-go” rule, remains anxious to advertise the party as “private” property; not open to those who, like Hon. Wirba, he lambasts as “opportunists”.

“Is the SDF a place for opportunists?”, he asks, really meaning to say: “only one opportunist is welcome here”. The SDF, he adds, is not “where you come and start your own thing and you are running in your direction and expect the party to follow you”.

Got that, Hon. Wirba? Don’t try to run for president or prime minister from the one seat Mr. Fru Nid already occupies. And, please know that no one who wants to still be around would join you. Not other MPs. Not the Divisional Coordinator of the SDF for Bui Division. Not the mayor. Never mind that thousands of the people turned out to encourage you at that rally. This is no longer the “power to the people” party.

What Does Cautioning Hon. Wirba Mean?

Even if it is hard, let us still try to understand what Mr. Fru Ndi cautioned Hon. Wirba about. Did the SDF leader caution the MP from Jakiri not to decry the rape of his niece at the University of Buea by security forces? Did he caution Hon. Wirba not to ask to many questions about colonialism? Questions like: “does the president know that the governors and SDOs sent to West Cameroon behave like colonizers”? Did Mr. Fru Ndi caution Hon. Wirba to keep quiet about being told by cabinet ministers that Southern Cameroonians were supposed to melt like cubes of sugar in a bowl of water? Did Mr. Fru Ndi caution Hon. Wirba not to tell the colonial regime that “the people of West Cameroon cannot be your slaves”? Did he caution Hon. Wirba to say, instead, that Yaounde conquered Buea in war? Would Mr. Fru Ndi have preferred no one accused Yaounde of having a “master plan to finish our culture” in West Cameroon?

When the SDF leader says Hon. Wirba did not speak on behalf of the party, is it because the SDF does not really stand for federalism? When Mr. Fru Ndi claims (with TV cameras rolling) that the MP from Jakiri did not speak for the party, can anyone imagine what Mr. Fru Ndi has said to the colonial regime (with the cameras off)? If Hon. Wirba got so much love from Mr. Fru Ndi for calling Southern Cameroons West Cameroon, what exactly has Mr. Ndi said about Hon. Nji, whose speech from the same floor of parliament, preferred the name Southern Cameroons? Imagine what the SDF leader feels about the MP from Bafut speaking up so eloquently on behalf of the people during a meeting with Premier Yang?

Happily, Mr. Fru Ndi’s rant educates Southern Cameroonians about the profound depths of dictatorship into which the SDF has sunk. MPs for the SDF, he says, are not authorized to hold any views of their own. They are legislators for the party. Never mind the people.

Without trading one evil for another, it is worth pointing out that even the ruling CPDM proved more tolerant of their MPs holding their own views. While still an MP for the CPDM, Hon. Paul Ayah Abine resigned from that party in January 2011, more than a year ahead of end of the term in 2012. The CPDM did not deliver him give him up for arrest until five years later.

Not Possible to Fool the People All the Time

By playing “cry baby”, Mr. Fru Ndi has brought attention to and highlighted the magnanimity of Hon. Wirba, as shown in his letter. Unlike Ni John Fru Ndi, Hon. Wirba knows that in Biya’s Cameroon “laws exist only on paper”. He knows that “the real law of the land is the absolute authority of the president” and that the president “rules by the barrel of the gun”.

However hard Mr. Fru Ndi tries, he and the SDF people like him and Hon. Joseph Mbah Ndam have made a hostage won’t fool the people and won’t certainly undo what I call the Wirba Shine. Who has forgotten how Hon. Mbah Ndam claimed that the terrorism law which is now being used to imprison Southern Cameroonians did not curb civil liberties? Shortly after that counter-terrorism legislation was passed Hon. Mbah Ndam claimed that the law “has not limited the right of anybody”. He added that the law “has not deprived Cameroonians of their right to public manifestations (sic); it has not deprived political parties of holding public rallies and manifestations (sic) against evils committed by the government”. This is the same Hon. Mbah Ndam who claimed that “the military tribunal that exists in Cameroon today is no longer that murderous military tribunal of old”. He said the regime follows “due process”.

Just as Mr. Fru Ndi was the man of the hour in 1990, Hon. Wirba is the man of the hour today. Sadly, this is the same Fru Ndi who does not want to get out of the way for younger politicians like Hon. Wirba to follow despite being on record saying: “I have done my best. If citizens feel disgruntled with the regime, they should lead a protest march and I will support them”, adding: “Let them lead and I will follow”. Mr. Fru Ndi has never wanted to follow despite admitting two years ago that his party had failed Cameroonians and that he was giving up. “We have fought so hard to change things in parliament, but failed”, Mr. Fru Ndi confessed.

What is the logic of saying the above and then trying so hard to prevent Hon. Wirba from taking “the bold step to cry out against the regime’s systematic enslavement of the people of West Cameroon”? Those of us who, like Hon. Wirba, felt we developed a “Father-Son” relationship while working with Mr. Fru Ndi and the SDF, wonder why the SDF indulges in such betraying silence. Hon. Wirba is right. Mr. Fru Ndi no longer stands by or speaks up for the people. Not even when the people need him the most, as Hon. Wirba did. Mr. Fru Ndi’s “complete silence on such a capital issue” as the independence of Southern Cameroons - which also touches “every West Cameroonian at home or abroad” – enocurages the oppressors (the colonizers) to hunt all our people down with impunity. As in Hon. Wirba’s case, silence on the independence of Southern Cameroons has forced all of us Southern Cameroonians to realize that we are on our own. For with a democrat like Fru Ndi, no Southern Cameroonian needs a dictator.

Details

Ntumfoyn Boh Herbert

30.Mar.2017

Hits: 3911

Write comment (0 Comments)

"The time has therefore come for our nation to put into place a new paradigm for the management of our cultural diversity. That is the price we must pay to find the true unity we seek and through it the strength for which we clamor. The legal system of Cameroon is bi-jural constitutionally, politically socially, culturally and intellectually. Disregarding this fact is an assault on the very foundation on which our nation is built. While it is true that diversity might well create ambiguity complexity and even confusion, the danger of assimilation under the guise of harmonization now appears as a time bomb."

Forcing learned gentlemen of the law into the streets robed in their wigs and gowns is something no Government should wish for. Lawyers are the defenders of those without power, and the watchdogs of the rule of law. Citizens, who are witnesses to such a spectacle, will immediately feel fragile, and the existence of the rule of law in any country will immediately be questioned. As pictures of lawyers flooded the social media last November 08, 2016, and as I saw lawyers in the streets of Bamenda armed only with their ideas, their professional paraphernalia and the request for a dialogue, I wondered about the kind of denial that causes a few to think that because they shut their eyes nothing is happening; and that because they close their ears nothing is being said.

The fact that I can relate without any strain to the frustration of the Common Law practitioner convinces me to conclude that, the effects of cultural diversity in a country on the behavior of its citizens are complex and powerful. The time has therefore come for our nation to put into place a new paradigm for the management of our cultural diversity. That is the price we must pay to find the true unity we seek and through it the strength for which we clamor.

From the dawn of the Federation of Cameroon, the biggest challenge that hung over it like the “Damocles Sword”, was and has been the management of our diversity. Passionate Southern Cameroonians who had the vision of a United States of Africa, thought that maybe a United Cameroon was just the place to start. They felt the shackles that were constituted by a legacy of different colonial cultures could not be allowed to stand in the way of the reunification of peoples torn apart and dispersed by a War they did not start and had nothing to do with. A War which caused the colonizer to suddenly discover in Africans the virtue of valuable partners for the purposes of war but at the same time maintaining them as second class citizens for the purposes of colonization. The Federation that was born guaranteed the protection of diversity. It did so through its constitution. A Bilingual Nation, Federated States with their own Parliaments and Governments, a President and Vice President, one from either culture. Inherited laws, practices and customs maintained in either state of the federation and several other guaranties. So the Common Law lawyers had a Bar freely elected and independent, the civil law jurisdictions had no bar and were under the control of the Government whose prerogative it was to appoint lawyers.

Under the seduction of a 100% increase and even more in salaries West Cameroonians made the chant “going federal” their mantra. Yes, salaries were doubled even tripled, and some people moved to Yaounde. Arrears were paid on the new salaries and people carted away ton loads of money. “Federalization” was indeed a misnomer, for what in fact was the path to a centralization that spelt the death of the Federation. Still in good faith, the new form of the Union was given a chance. Dealing with the legal framework meant the organization of the Bar had to be revisited. So a new Law was passed in 1972 creating a Cameroon Bar totally controlled by the Government in which the lawyers were appointed by a presidential decree. The decade that followed was one in which the Bar fought for its independence and that is another story. The point of this article is not to make a pilgrimage into the past, but to reflect on the way forward. Some of those who have made the need to have a homogeneous society their objective, have failed to ensure that it does not become synonymous to assimilation. Any society with a minority that has a specific historical, geographical, and socio-political history must be managed in a manner to allay any fears of assimilation or discrimination and prejudice.

The movement of the Common Law Lawyers today must bring us to admit that diversity in our country has been mismanaged. This has produced, negative dynamics, ethnocentrism, stereotyping and cultural clashes. These negative dynamics over the years have combined with imbalanced structures to create an atmosphere of social injustice. While it is true that diversity might well create ambiguity complexity and even confusion, the danger of assimilation under the guise of harmonization now appears as a time bomb. In such an atmosphere polarization of social groups becomes easy and this ultimately will breed cynicism and resentment and even heighten friction and tension that could all lead to unfathomable consequences in terms of civil and political unrest.

It will be remiss of me to give the impression that there are no other diversities to be managed. Different groups have come up with memoranda about their regions, what is the response? These are the cries of people who feel that they have been left behind or in some cases left out totally. Many international reports have concluded that the economic predicament of the areas attacked in the Central African Region, indeed facilitated the penetration by the terrorists. Thus many regions do face discrimination in many subtle forms, which are slowly contributing to disappointment and anger. When conflict is the unfortunate outcome, the “majority” or the group controlling power will see and treat any incident as “isolated” when in fact the minority just count it as another event in the pattern of oppression and injustice that is embedded in the system.

I must hasten to add that there have been times when I have personally been witness to the clear demonstration of political will to protect diversity and ensure the respect of our constitution . When the very first OHADA laws were promulgated, the then Minister of Justice, Mr. Laurent Esso, delayed the application of the OHADA laws throughout the territory until they were translated and duly gazetted. He did this regardless of the coming into force date as per the Treaty. He insisted to the dismay of OHADA authorities that our nation is bilingual and bi-jural. Further the accommodation of customary law in our judicial system is clear evidence of the fact that diversity can be accommodated.

In the final analysis, we must avoid building a nation where dialogue is assimilated to weakness and the strength of nation demonstrated by the use of force against its own people. We must have a system that builds in horizontal and vertical communication in the management of our diversity. We must unlearn practices rooted in an old mind set, change the way we manage diversity in our nation, shift our culture, revamp our policies, redesign and create new structures and emphasize the fact the ultimate goal of any Government is a better life for it citizens. The Swiss, the Nigerians, the Belgians, the Canadians, the Tanzanians just to name a few have all learned this. It is urgent that a high level Dialogue be initiated. So heed to the cry of the Common Law Lawyers we must, otherwise in the words of Alan Paton in his revered book Cry the Beloved Country “I have one great fear in my heart, that one day, when they are turned to loving they will find that we are turned to hating”. Respecting diversity might well mean CRTV will have a channel or channels in English, Cameroon Tribune reverts to having an English Edition as it once did and the Supreme Court having Common Law Benches sitting as it once was.

The cultural assimilation of a people no matter how well disguised cannot be successful and can ultimately only lead to disastrous consequences for all the concerned. The legal system of Cameroon is bi-jural constitutionally, politically socially, culturally and intellectually. Disregarding this fact is an assault on the very foundation on which our nation is built.

*Akere Muna is a Cameroonian lawyer who is currently the Chairman of the International Anti-Corruption Conference Council. He previously served as the Vice-Chair of Transparency International, and he has presided over the Pan African Lawyers Union and the Cameroon Bar Association.

Details

Rita Akana

28.Mar.2017

Hits: 2798

Write comment (0 Comments)

To be born an English speaker in a world where the language remains the lingua franca of trade and diplomacy is normally to draw first prize in the linguistic lottery of life.

But in one corner of Africa, having English as a mother tongue has proved a curse thanks to a colonial anomaly that left a seething Anglophone underclass in a slither of overwhelmingly French-speaking Cameroon.

For the past four months, the two English-speaking regions of western Cameroon have risen up against a perceived decades-long assault by the Francophone elite on their language and British traditions, staging a campaign of general strikes, demonstrations and the occasional riot.

A ruthless response by the government, characterised by the killing of protesters and a two-month internet shutdown in English-speaking regions, has hardened antagonisms, pitching the West African country into deep crisis and raising questions about its survival as a unified state.

Amid growing secessionists mutterings, Britain has become more active in recent days in attempting to defuse the confrontation. Last week Brian Olley, the British High Commissioner to Cameroon, met Paul Biya, the country’s 84-year-old president, and is understood to have called on him to end the use of force against protesters.

“We have raised our concerns with the government of Cameroon and will continue to raise these issues, including allowing access to the internet,” a Foreign Office spokeswoman said.

But such quiet diplomacy has also angered some Anglophone activists, who accuse Britain of abandoning its responsibilities in the former British Southern Cameroons, which united with the much larger French Cameroons in 1961.

“Britain made us what we are and now most people in Britain don’t even know we exist,” an activist involved in the demonstrations said.

Despite the anger, Anglophone Cameroonians, who make up less than a fifth of the county’s 23m people, remain stubbornly loyal to their colonial traditions. To the bewilderment and often the derision of French speakers, they insist on forming orderly queues, referring to bars as “off-licences” and dressing up their judges and lawyers in powdered wigs.

Both British common law and the GCE O-and-A-level syllabus remain deeply cherished. 

It is a loyalty that has rarely been reciprocated by Britain

The British Cameroons were made famous by the writings of naturalist Gerald Durrell, who visited in the Forties to search for the elusive hairy toad. He was memorably assisted by an uproarious Anglophone king, the Fon of Bafut, a gin-and-bitters-swilling pidgin speaker with a large retinue of drum-playing, bosom-jiggling wives whom Durrell taught the Conga.

But Britain generally wanted little to do with the place. William Gladstone turned down a plea for annexation from local kings in 1884, allowing Bismark to take it for Germany.

After the First World War, Britain turned over five-sixths of the territory to France, agreeing to an arbitrary border line drawn up by Francois Georges-Picot, the French diplomat jointly responsible for the Middle East’s controversial modern boundaries.

Heartbroken local kings, like the Sultan of Bamum, protested in vain.

“I wish to follow the King of England and to be his servant, together with my country, so that we may be freshened with dew,” the sultan wrote in a letter to George V “who puts the evil men to flight and the troublesome to prison.”

After independence in 1960, the British Cameroons were wooed into union with the much larger French Cameroons by a promise that they would be equal members of a federal, bilingual state — a pledge broken when the federal constitution was abandoned in 1972.

Since then, English speakers say they have been shut out of jobs, denied fair political representation and deprived of revenues from oil, much of which is extracted from former British territory.

Matters came to a head in November when a group of lawyers staged a small protest outside the courthouse in Bamenda, Cameroon’s largest Anglophone city, to demand the withdrawal of judges who spoke no English and had no understanding of British common law. The protest was broken up with tear gas.

The authorities must have assumed that, as in the past, the protests would peter out. Instead, the movement grew, drawing in Anglophone teachers, angered by state attempts to replace them with French speakers with knowledge of neither English nor the GCE syllabus.

Students joined in too, only to see their halls of residence raided and female students beaten and sexually abused by the police, according to activists.

The government admits to six protester deaths, though activists say the true toll is much higher.

With force alone appearing to fail, Mr Biya has since January attempted to seal off Anglophone Cameroon from the outside world by cutting off internet access to the two regions.

An absolutist gerontocrat who has clung to power through a series of controversial elections, there are signs that even French-speakers are finally losing patience with a leader who spends so much time in Europe his people view him as an absentee landlord.

Last October a Cameroonian stood outside the Intercontinental Hotel in Geneva, where the president is said to have spent most of the Summer, and hurled insults at Mr Biya through a loud-hailer.

Since then the president has shown signs of increasing paranoia. He was mocked by even French speakers after the present Miss Cameroon was stripped of her crown in January, allegedly for calling on the government to listen to Anglophone concerns.

So far, however, there is little sign that Mr Biya will relent. Most of the leaders of the protest movement have been arrested in recent weeks and charged with “terrorism, hostility against the fatherland, secession, revolution, contempt of the president… group rebellion, civil war and dissemination of fake news.”

Facing the death penalty, their trial before a military tribunal has shown Cameroon’s problems in microcosm. Bewigged defence lawyers, seated across the room from bare-headed Francophone prosecutors, struggled to follow proceedings conducted in French. When an interpreter was eventually provided the translation was so poor that few were any the wiser.

It is a sign, Anglophone Cameroonians say, that they will never be understood or accepted by the French speaking majority.

“The Anglophones are a people,” Henry Ngale Monono, a barrister, wrote recently in a Cameroonian newsletter. “We have a common culture, a common language. The Francophones want is to think like them behave like them, act like them — which is not possible.”       

                                                

Details

Adrian Blomfield, British Telegraph

27.Mar.2017

Hits: 3431

Write comment (0 Comments)

Dear President Paul Biya,

Everyone knows that the arrests of Barrister Balla and Supreme Court Lord Justice Ayah Paul were effected without due process of the law. In speaking out and leading, these lawyers did just what lawyers do best in their careers and for their communities.
Then came the summons and interrogation of Barrister Akere Muna for expressing his personal views about your end of year speech. For a country that prides itself with freedom of expression and association and respect for the rule of law, these arrests, detentions and trials have put a serious dent on national unity and national integration that you hold so near and dear to your heart.

Your Excellency, what these three men I have cited above have in common is that they all come from Southern Cameroon, they are all well respected national and international lawyers and have all expressed only views related to their profession that affect not only their lives but also the lives of millions of their English speaking communities. 

But today they are being charged and or threatened to be charged with terrorism and treason. Both charges come with a death penalty looming over their heads.

Sir, people are asking where have these three lawyers gone wrong? If extraordinary men of their magnitude could be treated like poppets would, what would this regime not do to thwart and hurt the ordinary Southern Cameroonian?

It was only a few days ago that Your Excellency stated in Italy that speaking of federalism is a taboo and definitely there will be no dialogue if federalism is what Anglophones want.

Sir. The problem with this statement I'm afraid is that, 90% of the people from Southern Cameroon no longer want to stay in the union, largely because of torture and marginalization.

Due to wanton human rights abuses and Internet blackout, over 90% Anglophones at home and abroad now want separation and outright independence, (if I'm lying to you try a referendum Sir in the two English speaking Regions). Now discussing federalism around some of our people is fast also becoming a taboo.

As a leader and the father of the nation, Mr. President, you have to be fed the truth. Yet i'm worried no one around you who has your ears is willing or courageous enough to tell you this. Not even foreign friendly nations. It's rather unfortunate!

Now we have a deadlock situation where no one side is willing to shake or shift their goal post for dialogue to genuinely begin and give our people the peace, prosperity and liberty every one of us deserves.

The regime appears to be placing it's bets on the army and the courts to silent all forms of expressions by Southern Cameroonians.

On the other hand, effective ghost towns and close down of schools have persisted despite numerous trips by the PM to the regions and continues arrests. But no one seems to face the truth as to why our people have still not given up and it is your right and place Mr. President to know.

Your excellency, order the courts to stop all these trials. Authorize the prisons to release everyone and all these leaders without conditions. Command the forces of law and order to stop the arrests. Instruct CRTV to hold off on all forms of media propaganda on this issue! In so doing you will diffuse tensions.

In the higest interest of peace, liberty and freedom, Your Excellency, permit me use this opportunity to respectfully request for audience aimed at telling you the whole truth and handing you a road map for genuine dialogue as my own modest contribution towards peace and finding lasting solutions to this problem.

Respectfully,

Dr. David Makongo. USA

Details

Rita Akana

25.Mar.2017

Hits: 3740

Write comment (0 Comments)

Cameroon is One and Indivisible: Which Cameroon? BY AKERE MUNA Published 10 January 2017.

‘Cameroon is one and indivisible’ is a pronouncement that is supposed to have a solemn ring to it. However, there is so much happening in Cameroon today that such a statement now produces more questions than answers. Are we talking about a territory or a people?

As a Territory?
Cameroon as a country, or parts thereof, has been known as:
KAMERUN, SOUTHERN and NORTHERN CAMEROONS, “LA REPUBLIC DU CAMEROUN”, FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON, WEST CAMEROON, EAST CAMEROON, THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON and the second “LA REPUBLIQUE DU CAMEROUN”. Only the Constitution of the FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON of 1961 describes the territory of Cameroon. This constitution provides in Article 1 as follows:

1. (1) With effect from the 1st October 1961, the Federal Republic of Cameroon shall be constituted from the territory of the Republic of Cameroon, hereafter to be styled East Cameroon, and the territory of the Southern Cameroons, formerly under British trusteeship, hereafter to be styled West Cameroon.

Subsequent constitutions do not define the territories but proceed to change the name of the country. While the 1972 constitution attempts to maintain the notion of two territories getting together and forming a United Cameroon, the 1984 Constitution must be considered as the one that created the greatest confusion in the identification of the territory of the Cameroon. The 1984 Constitution states:

Article 1
1.
The United Republic of Cameroon shall, with effect from the date of entry into force of this law, be known as Republic of Cameroon (Law No 84-1 of February 4,1984).

By reverting to the name Republic of Cameroon, already defined by the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Cameroon as being East Cameroon, the perennial question has always been: What happened to Southern Cameroons or West Cameroon? So, when one affirms that the Republic of Cameroon is One and Indivisible, does this also concern Southern Cameroons or West Cameroon?

If ever there was a need to change the name of the country, it would be to revert to the German appellation KAMERUN. All the main political parties of Southern Cameroons did, in fact, use the word Kamerun, namely: KNDP (Kamerun People’s Democratic Party), KNC (Kamerun National Party) KPP (Kamerun People’s Part) and OK (one Kamerun). It is clear from this that, while the affirmation of the Southern Cameroonians for a genuine reconstitution of the former colonial entity, based on the two inherited cultures in the form of a federation, the intention of the Republic of Cameroon has been opaque to say the least.

 The constant changing of the name is what has heightened suspicion. The “Anglophone problem”, as it is sadly described, is indeed a Cameroonian problem. We seem to be in denial of our history and our past. All the publications about the Independence of La Republique du Cameroon or East Cameroon commands us to face our history, once and for all, and make the necessary adjustments. Whether it is the book “KAMERUN”, or the recent publications “La Guerre du Cameroun” or “La France Afrique” in which East Cameroun is described as the laboratory of the “France-Afrique” policy, it is clear that there are issues that must be addressed.  

Some of us still have traumatizing memories of human heads on sticks in roundabouts, as one travelled through the Bamileke region during the years of the fight for independence. I cannot forget seeing the burning down of entire villages of people whose only desire was freedom. UPC, a historic party, struggled through suspicion, humiliation and persecution. A very well known French actor, during this process, actually affirmed that Independence was “given” to those who wanted it the least.

NGO’s in Namibia today are trying to sue Germany; the Kenyans sued the British for the repression in the era of the Mau Mau and obtained compensation. NGO’s in Cameroon are getting ready, in light of the release of the archives of the colonial and post-colonial period by the French government, to sue for compensation. The trusteeship agreements are being re-visited by different groups to see which clauses may have been violated. There is now the whole debate about payments by francophone colonies to France, and people are agitating about the political implications of the CFA franc.

If in the complex maze of this all we can gather is that this is an “Anglophone problem”, which we acknowledge half-heartedly and under pressure, then I am sad for my country. This continuous denial of facing our colonial history must stop. We must discuss it, understand it, and draw the conclusions that will help us chart a future. Simply rehabilitating people and calling them national heroes, without any concrete action to right the wrongs, talking of founding fathers without naming them, is at best a game of ruse. No street names, no national heroes day, no stamps, no monuments, just words of some anonymous folks, will take us nowhere. Furthermore, when a citizen of the country pays homage to a Father of Reunification in the form a statute in Douala, it is broken, pulled down and dragged through the streets of Douala under the nose of thousands of citizens who stare in total stupefaction and bewilderment. The so-called “Anglophone problem” is, in fact, a result of the state of denial we are in.

As a people?
As a people, are we then one and indivisible? It is interesting to read what a reporter for LE MONDE Afrique, Yann Gwet, says in commenting on the President’s 2017, New Year speech. He writes:

“Listening to President Biya, 82 years, talking about this jungle as a “democratic country and a “State of law” and positioning himself as the protector of “the foundations of our living together” solemnly referring to the Constitution, whereas he has been in power for thirty-three years, forcefully reaffirming the unity and indivisibility of Cameroon in reply to the “worries” of striking Teachers and Lawyers in the Anglophone part of the country who are described in the speech as “manipulated and guided extremists” I had the confirmation of what I already know. There are two Cameroons one official and one real.”

If we want to consolidate our unity, it is the real Cameroon we must face. We must talk to one another, frankly, truthfully, and transparently. If we continue to stay in denial, then we will never be united, the divisions will continue, and we will lose the peace we so dearly cherish.

Details

Rita Akana

25.Mar.2017

Hits: 3135

Write comment (0 Comments)

Hon CAVAYE Yegue Djibril will now celebrate his silver jubilee as Speaker of the National Assembly. Twenty five times he has been elected to lead the lower house of Parliament.

The MP from Mayo Sava division in the Far north region remains the oldest member of Parliament, spending 47 years, the age of former Ivorian Prime minister and now House speaker Guillaume Soro.  

What is even more intriguing is why he has always won the election as House speaker with no rival either from the CPDM or opposition parties. When Cameroon concord put this observation to Hon Cyprain Awudu Mbaya he explains that it is a waste of time for the SDF to chose a candidate to challenge the long serving House speaker.

"How do u expect us to contest the House speaker when the ruling CPDM has a sweeping majority in the house? They have always put in mechanisms to block us from exercising our rights" he lamented.

Hon CAVAYE Yegue Djibril is a die hard member of the ruling CPDM party and enjoys so much support from over 145 MPs of the CPDM coloration. Besides prior to the election of bureau members, MPs of the party always meets with their hierarchy where strict instructions are given on who will stand . Thus dismissing any possibility of a rivalry within the governing party. 

Details

Tawe Gije nkfunji

23.Mar.2017

Hits: 2697

Write comment (0 Comments)