Yaoundé Military Tribunal Postpones Martinez Zogo Hearing Amid Defense Appeals

This brevity was due to the near-unanimous agreement among the parties for an inevitable postponement, as several lawyers have appealed to the Center Court of Appeal against the military tribunal's decision to refuse the defense counsel a copy of the procedure file.

Since the first hearing on March 25, the defense attorneys have requested their own copies of the procedure file. This file contains the order listing the charges against each accused, hearing transcripts, and various expert reports. This request was denied by the panel of judges led by Colonel Jacques Misse Njone. Despite renewed efforts during the last hearing on May 6, the tribunal president formally rejected their request, allowing only file consultations. Consequently, several attorneys have appealed to the Center Court of Appeal to compel the military tribunal to provide copies of the procedure file.

The lawyers' appeal suspends the ongoing proceedings at the military tribunal. "When an appeal is lodged, the tribunal president cannot take any action," explained one involved attorney. To highlight the lack of stakes in today's session, Me Mbumi, the attorney for Colonel Justin Danwe, one of the main accused, stated he attended without any case files, anticipating the postponement pending the Court of Appeal's decision. According to him, "this legal issue (providing the procedure file) must be resolved because it affects whether lawyers will face difficulties or not in the future." He emphasized that decisions on pleading guilty or not guilty hinge on the procedure file.

However, some attorneys expressed impatience, noting the case has been pending at the military tribunal for four months without substantive debates, focusing solely on procedural issues. This group argued that the military tribunal could at least "notify the charges" while awaiting the Court of Appeal's decision. This proposal was rejected by others who argued that notifying the charges equates to opening substantive debates, which cannot proceed without the defense having the procedure file.

The Court of Appeal's decision is expected on July 18, prompting the military tribunal president to schedule the next hearing for July 29. However, some attorneys caution that the process may extend if the Court of Appeal delays its decision. If the defense's appeal is unsuccessful, some attorneys have indicated they might escalate the matter to the Supreme Court, further delaying substantive debates.