Cameroun Bishops Taking Sides With The Oppressor- Consortium Leader

Bishop Samuel Kleda with President Paul Biya

Consortium Responds to the National Episcopal Conference of Cameroun

“The Spirit of the Lord is upon Me because the Lord has anointed Me to preach good news to the meek. He has sent Me to bind up the broken hearted, to PROCLAIM LIBERTY TO THE CAPTIVES and the OPENING of the PRISON to those who are bound;” (Isaiah 61:1)

It is not in our culture and upbringing to bandy words with God’s servants for in the process we fear, we may in fact, grieve the Lord. But today we find ourselves obliged to do exactly what we know we should not; answer God’s servants in the public domain, for if we do not, the Church, or part thereof, may derail our struggle for the liberation of God’s people as directed by the scripture above, the very reason for which Jesus Christ came and died.

On Saturday the 29th of April, 2017, the Bishops of Cameroon gathered in Yaounde within the framework of the 42nd general assembly of the National Episcopal Conference and issued a message titled: “One People, One Nation”. That message focused entirely on the Southern Cameroons Question, the reason for the ongoing unrest in the North West and South West regions of the country.

In as much as we appreciate the interest the National Episcopal Conference has taken in this matter, we regret that in successive letters to the Christians, the leaders of the Catholic Church in Cameroun have demonstrated that either they do not understand the real issues at stake, or they have simply decided to pay a deaf ear and to take sides with the oppressor against the oppressed people of Southern Cameroons.

However, it is important for national and international opinion to note that the National Episcopal Conference of Cameroun did receive the Executive of the Cameroon Anglophone Civil Society Consortium and leaders of Teachers’ Unions in the persons of: Barrister Nkongho Felix Agbor Balla, Dr. Fontem A. Neba and Mr. Tassang Wilfred for the Consortium on the one hand and Mr. Tameh Valentine, Mr. Kimfon Michael, Mr. Afuh Stephen and Mr. Ayeah Emmanuel for the Teachers’ Unions on the other hand. During the occasion, the Joint Delegation gave the prelates all the education, facts and figures that they needed to know on the Anglophone Problem; from the historical frauds, Constitutional coup in 1972 to all manners of discrimination and oppression; these were in the legal, educational, linguistic and socio-cultural domains.

The Bishops of Cameroon are among some of the finest educated minds that this country can offer, with the sharpest analytical brains and therefore, as living witnesses to all these discriminations and having all the facts and figures at their disposal, being Apostles of the truth and of justice we expected the Church to stand out for justice and speak same without fear or favour.

Our God in His mercy will forgive us, if in the course of condemning the work of the enemy in the Church; we pass judgment on His servants. We only do this so that the people He has given us to lead to freedom land, the very nation He gave our forefathers may not be misled by His servants who have allowed the secular to overwhelm the spiritual. The issues raised in the message of the Bishops of Cameroon therefore require that we get to the roots of some of them in a systematic manner to enable greater understanding.

One People, One Nation

Our Bishops titled their message to the Christians: “One People, One Nation”. We consider this deliberate falsehood because we are convinced our prelates know better; that Southern Cameroons is geographically defined, has a separate colonial history from La République du Cameroun, that we have a Language of our own (English), that we have a legal system of our own (Common Law), that we have an educational system of our own, that we have different socio-politico-cultural practices, that we have internationally recognized boundaries different from those of La République du Cameroun, that we attained independence on different dates (1st January, 1960 for La République du Cameroun and 1st October, 1961 for Southern Cameroons) and much more, meaning we cannot be termed “One People, One Nation”, especially as an earlier intention by our forefathers to forge a union with those they passionately referred to as “Our Brothers” failed woefully with these so-called brothers turning out to be predators, annexationist-colonialists who have in fact treated us for 56 years worse than the Whiteman did. Truth is, where the Germans and the British used our languages and customs and laws to rule us before introducing theirs along the line, La République du Cameroun has attempted to completely annihilate us in all these aspects.

The Bishops of Cameroon, we all know, are all philosophers and either sociologists and or anthropologists, meaning therefore that they have a mastery of the situation on the ground. Further, the deliberate refusal of the National Episcopal Conference of Cameroon to endorse the letter written by the Bishops of the Bamenda Ecclesiastical Province (whose faithful have undergone and are still undergoing all the ills that we have mentioned) to the Head of State, President Paul Biya, outlining the problems and their manifestations, beginning from the genesis, tells of a huge disagreement on what the truth is among the Bishops of Cameroun.

The disagreement referred to above, reminds us of the events of the year 2010, leading to activities to mark the 50th anniversary of the independence of our two countries. The National Episcopal Conference unanimously decided to send out an Episcopal Letter to be read in all mission stations on a particular Sunday condemning corruption, tribalism and all negative isms in government, in the Church’s bid to mark 50 years of independence and reunification of the two Cameroons. Strangely, that Letter was read in all the Dioceses except in the churches of the Dioceses in the Centre, South and East regions; an indication that the Church in these areas is satisfied with Cameroun as it is. It is maybe needless to recall that street demonstrations and prayers against multiparty politics (liberty and democracy) in 1990 were led by prelates of, and from these same regions.

Tassang Wilfred
Programs Coordinator
Consortium

Source: http://bareta.press/cameroun-bishops-taking-sides-oppressor-consortium-leader/

Decentralization Is Not A Solution To The Anglophone Problem in Cameroon

Decentralization Is Not A Solution To The Anglophone Problem in Cameroon

I write this article against the backdrop of popular demand to clarify public opinion on the two concepts of Decentralization and Federation and how decentralization will not be the solution to the Anglophone problem in Cameroon.

I base my submission on what I see as the most comprehensive definition of the Anglophone problem articulated by the Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Bamenda. The Key issues highlighted by their definition are:

The failure of successive governments of Cameroon, since 1961, to respect and implement the articles of the Constitution that uphold and safeguard what British Southern Cameroons brought along to the Union in 1961 (Legacy),

The flagrant and constant disregard for the Constitution, The cavalier management of the 1972 Referendum which took out the foundational element (Federalism) of the 1961 Constitution. The 1984 Law amending the Constitution, which gave the country the original East Cameroon name (The Republic of Cameroon) and thereby erased the identity of the West Cameroonians from the original union,The deliberate and systematic erosion of the West Cameroon cultural identity which the 1961 Constitution sought to preserve and protect by providing for a bi-cultural federation.

Decentralization is a political system which is the direct opposite of Centralized government. From 1972 to present, Cameroon has been a centralized state. This means power in concentrated at the center and all services are delivered from there. Over the years this system has failed to satisfactorily deliver services to Cameroon explaining the unrest of the early 1990s. In 1996, the government grudgingly gave to the mounting pressure and introduced a decentralized constitution. This was followed by the decentralization laws of 2004.

Decentralization Is Not A Solution To The Anglophone Problem in Cameroon. These measures have not been able to solve the problems Cameroonians are facing talk less of the specific problems faced by Anglophones in Cameroon. Bad governances has persisted, corruption has been unabated, chasing of files has become more complicated, unemployment has been increasing, moral values have decayed, tribalism and nepotism have been upheld, and you name the rest.

Decentralization which was introduced as a panacea to solve problems of centralization has therefore not produced the desired results. The reasons are not hard to find. Decentralization means the agenda is determined by the top and devolved or passed down to the decentralized units. By implication therefore, decentralization is top down. It is the top that decides how much power it wants to release to the lower levels. The decentralized units there just execute the policies and accountability is to the top. Decentralized units do not have constitutional safeguards and can be dismantled by the central authority. This system does not meet up with the demands of democracy where power is with the base and accountability is to the people and not the leaders.

Let us examine the typical case of Cameroon where several political parties run the councils. Leadership of the councils is elected by the population. As such accountability is normally supposed to be to the electorate. However, with the practice of decentralization, the leadership of the councils (Mayors) are forced to implement the agenda of the party in power which defines polices at the top. Parties of the opposition therefore have to implement policies that are defined by the party in power. The population is deprived of the power of citizen control. Some mayors find themselves in the difficult position of fulfilling the promises they made to their electorate since they have to be accountable to the top and not the bottom. This makes accountability difficult and betrays the argument that Cameroon is a democracy.

The central authority also uses the powers at the center to distribute resources. Decentralized units which belong to the opposition parties are openly discriminated in the allocation of these resources.

Federalism on the other hand is a political system where the central government and regional governments share power and decision making. The autonomy of regional units is constitutionally rooted in federalism. So, federalism is about the autonomy of the regions. Federalism allows regions a constitutionally legitimate basis on which they can disagree with the center or indeed with other regions. It is therefore not surprising that countries formed through a union of autonomous entities like Southern Cameroons and La Republique in 1961 would more likely want to maintain their autonomy within a federal structure. That is the case with Cameroon. Southern Cameroons came into the union as an autonomous entity and sort to protect such autonomy through a federation. If Southern Cameroons’ forefathers of reunification were not given guarantees that they were to retain the legacy they brought into the union, they would likely not have gone into the deal. That is why they see any move that does not protect this autonomy as a threat and a betrayal of confidence by the other party to the union. 

In federal systems, the central government cannot overrule the federated states because power belongs first to the regional states. It is the regions that give power to the Federal government to manage issues of national security and foreign relations. The Federated states have the authority to decide on their programs and run them, determine the leaders to rule them and are accountable to the electorate. Sovereignty is shared between the Federal structure and the Federal government at the central level.

With the Federal system, you will agree with me that the guarantees being asked for by the Anglophones would be guaranteed by the constitution. They will develop their programs, run their affairs, consolidate their legacy and participate fully in public debate. Accountability will be to the electorate and leadership will be legitimate. Constitutional change will be the subject of a referendum and not a decision of the central authority as we have today.

I therefore conclude on the note that Federalism and only Federalism will solve the problems of the Anglophones in Cameroon. Decentralization will be administering malaria treatment to a person suffering from diarrhoea.

Barrister Akere Muna

Crisis Resolution in Cameroon. 

First Sight, Second Thought

Common Law Lawyers in Bamenda

The practice of crisis “resolution” is an art and as well as a science that can be used as a tool to bring major positive changes in political, social, and economic systems. The present case of the “Anglophone Crises” in Cameroon is an opportunity to analyse the failures of the regime in resolving this historical problem. Crisis resolution means terminating conflict/crisis with an outcome that, in the view of the parties involved, is a permanent solution to the problem. Crisis resolution, as opposed to crisis “management” or “settlement,” requires methods that get to the root of problems and, therefore, are highly analytical, historical and consensual. It is a broad base spectrum approach aimed at eliminating the root causes.

Cameroon is going through one of its deepest political crisis since its independence. Immediately the federal structure of Cameroon was abolished in 1972, Cameroon has seen some momentary crisis that have oft been quelled down by the government. But this time, a strike action that was initiated by Lawyers and supported by teachers quickly gained patronage from the people of Anglophone Cameroon (Southern Cameroon) and soon became a political movement. A simple corporatist demands had rapidly spiralled into a political demand by a people calling for a return to a 2 state federation. The government’s response was symptomatic of the regime and that only helped in radicalising the people and pushing them to call for a complete restoration.

The government had cosmetically design some dialogue with the leaders of the Anglophone problem who had come under an umbrella of the Cameroon Anglophone Civil Society Consortium. But no common ground was reached and they were subsequently arrested or chased into exile. There was also some smokescreen dialogue that was initiated by the prime minister through an ad hoc committee. But this committee lacked the legitimacy and authority to heed to the demands of the Anglophone Leaders.  On the agenda of the leaders was an unconditional return to a 2 state federation. A subject regarded to by the government as a Taboo.

It is worth mentioning that, the demand for a return to federation is not new from Anglophones.  One of the major resolutions of the 1993 All Anglophone Conference in Buea (AACI) was a return to a two state federation as defined by the 1961 constitution. But the regime decided to play foul by diluting this request with decentralisation. Except that, for 21 years (1996-2017), the dispositions of decentralisation in the constitution are yet to see the light of day. 

Newspaper Caption of 1993 after AAC

Half Measure.

If there is anything British Southern Cameroons have been accustomed to, it is the paltry solution approach of the regime. Hardly can one remember of a solution worth its weight on any national issue. Their modus operandi has always been first to deny the problem, then try a divide and rule tactic through tribal appointments and then give some half backed solutions that may at best only postpone the problem. The situation today calls for profound solutions to avert the impending explosion. It is either people are shot, buildings/markets are burnt, indiscriminate and massive arrest, intimidations and incomprehensible court adjournments. Two major decisions have been arrived at lately by the regime as a response to the Anglophone problem.

 The National Commission on the Promotion of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism.

Some of the goals of this provocative commission are to study and propose to the head of state solutions towards the promotion of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism. A patronising directive designed to fail as the creators of the commission had on several occasions refused that there is no Bilingualism problem in Cameroon. And even so, Anglophones had never asked for another budget sucking institution that has no power to regulate, sanction or enforce. Be it as it may, even if the commission was to be important, the following shortcomings defeats its essence.

Parity: 

If Cameroon is said to be a bilingual country with both English and French on the same pedestals, how come a commission to promote bilingualism has more French representatives (9) than English (6). Is this not the very origin of the Anglophone problem? For a country that wants to repair the agony it has meted on the Anglophones, it was but logical to have at least parity or understandably more English Cameroonians than Francophones. Worst still, the vice president of the commission promises to learn English in order to promote bilingualism.

Competence and moral standing: 

Article 3 of the presidential decree appointing members of this commission says, these people shall be of a good moral standing void of any public reproach. But we are aware of the xenophobic tendencies of Musonge (Commission president), Amah Tutu Muna’s entrenched failures at the ministry of culture and the financial issues raised against Afessi Mbafor (National Youth Council President). Would we not be having another Esseka type commission? Time will tell.

Creation or Addition of Common law to ENAM and Supreme Court

The attempted solutions to the Common Law Lawyers’ issues which the minister of justice and keeper of the seal (Laurent Esso) presented during his press conference on March 31^st 2017, ended up exposing him rather than doing well to his sickening administration. This press conference exposed the falsehood, intellectual dishonesty and arrogance of the regime. Otherwise, how can we jail people who propose solution and code name them “Terrorist”?

This is one of the greatest paradox yet to come from a regime that seems all over the place and totally confused. Before the announced creation of the common law department at ENAM and Common law Bench at the Supreme Court, the present Justice Minister had vehemently refused that there was never a problem with the Bi-Jural system of Cameroon. He had termed the leaders of the common law lawyers association as terrorist. Agbor Balla is still incarcerated in Yaoundé, while Elias Eyembe and Bogba Harmony are all on the run. Yet what they stood for has been shamelessly given today as a gift from the head of state. After bald-facedly twisting and manipulating public opinion to thinking that Common Law Lawyers were asking for a mere translation of the Uniform Act of Business Law (OHADA). It became born on him and the regime that, this might be another magical solution. But again, it’s a little too late and inconsequential. 

Anglophone crisis in Cameroon

One of the long-standing erroneous notion we have noticed in the past 56 years is that, conflict originates from the “natural aggressiveness” of Southern Cameroonians who do not behave in a “Republican” or “civilised” manner. This “natural aggressiveness,” however, is nothing more than a label. It reflects an attitude that attributes conflict to instinct, immorality, or deliberate anti-social behaviour, thus justifying its repression. This “theory” cannot explain historically how Anglophones have been systematically brutalised, killed, maimed and forced into exile for raising a finger in their country. Recently, we saw protesting teachers in Yaoundé, invited into a well air-conditioned office, offered snacks to discuss their plight. But we can also remember that Lawyers in Bamenda and Buea, in their wigs and robes, were beaten and rubbed in mud. The same thing happened to UB students who were even shouting “No Violence”, yet our forces still had the effrontery to attack them, tear gas them, break into student hostels, throw them into dirty water from toilet tanks, kitchen sewage etc. 

Striking teachers in Yaounde and striking lawyers in Buea

In Bamenda on December 8^th and a week later in Kumba, some unarmed Cameroonians where killed with no justification. The same can be recalled in 1990, when the SDF was lunched in Bamenda. This double standard treatment opens up avenues for many questions.

My Conclusion

Values and human needs are universal and are not for trading. Sufficient coercion on the one side and the lack of bargaining power on the other can sometimes lead to suspicion and impede dialogue. The tendency to offer appeasement deals, but not to its full resolution can only procrastinate the problem. Intimidation through summons, arrests, torture and the brutal use of force, do not necessarily solve the problem. A constitutional assembly needs to be convened where Cameroonians of equal status (West-East) would sit down and define the type of Cameroon the want to live in. Creating a Common Law Department in ENAM doesn’t guarantee that the students admitted there will be from Southern Cameroons. It may end up being the same game where Students admitted there would be from East Cameroon and will be later sent to occupy West Cameroon. We are all aware that the Higher Technical Teachers Training Colleges in Bambili and Kumba, have more students from East Cameroon than West Cameroon irrespective of the extreme shortage of such teachers from west Cameroon. 

The people of the NW and SW (Southern Cameroonians) need a system that protects and preserve their identity, recognition of their specificity, and that offers opportunities for its people and promote accountable leadership and participative development. We expect the government to stop the collective punishment imposed on the people of the Northwest and Southwest. Restore internet, release all in jail and offer amnesty to those on the run, demilitarise all the towns of Northwest and Southwest, bring order and stop the burning of houses and markets (Becoming a norm) then reopen national inclusive dialogue with the peoples representatives. A stitch in time, saves nine. The delayed tactics approach may not in every case yield the desired results. Court adjournments and deliberate delays, may not be enough to break the peoples resolve. 

29 YEARS: HAYATOU HUMILIATED IN CAF ELECTIONS.

ISSA HAYATOU-Former CAF President

It is often said, it is advisable to leave the stage while the applause is loudest, but not when you are called Hayatou and hails from Cameroon. African Football on Thursday March 16, 2017 landed a new leader with the election of the 57 year old Madagascar's Ahmed Ahmad  who has ousted long serving  Issa Hayatou  during an elections held in Addis Ababa Ethiopia. Ahmad garnered a total of 34 votes against Hayatou's 20 votes ending an era that lasted for close to three decade. The 70 year old Cameroonian born Hayatou has ruled African football since 1988 (29 uninterrupted years) and was going for an eighth term in office.

Ahmad Ahmad: Celebrating his victory with members of the Zimbabwe FA

Issa Hayatou, president of the Confederation of African Football (CAF) for an era spanning 29 years and a senior administrator at FIFA throughout its years of corruption scandals, has finally been deposed. Hayatou, a former teacher and sports minister from the Hayatous’ dynasty in Cameroon was first elected as the CAF president in 1988 and became a member of the FIFA executive committee two years later.

Ahmad will replace him on FIFA’s governing council. So this election signals the departure of another old face from world football’s governing body executive committee. One which overlapped with the 17-year presidency of Sepp Blatter. This marks a new page in football governance in Africa and the world. The corrupt Sepp Blatter and Michel Platini were all banned from any footballing activity and Hayatou’s departure brings a logical end to Blatter and his cronies.

Some people have been quick to identify G. Infantino (FIFA President) as the main man who masterminded the humiliation of Hayatou, given that Hayatou did not support his campaign to the helm of FIFA. Others think that, people just needed change and Hayatou wasn’t that person to revitalise African football. Be it the former or later, it was obvious that, world football needed a new breathe of air.

Cameroon Reacts;

The response from Hayatou’s humiliation from CAF was received with mixed feelings in Cameroon. As of now, no official statement has been made by the Ministry or Fecafoot. But, most football pundits were quick to say “at long last” he’s gone. While his supporters are rather quick to point out his 3 major achievements in African football amongst which include.

1.  Increase in world cup places from 2 to 5;
2. AFCON from 8 team to 16;
3. The financial stability of CAF;

Nonetheless, they have also complained that, Hayatou did not received the required support from the regime as necessary. Thus there were no diplomatic campagins in his favour. Nonetheless, Hayatou was either so naïve or too dictatorial not to have seen his defeat coming. It was very evident that, most FA presidents were becoming exasperated with Hayatou and needed a new blood in the management of African football. Hayatou was a leader who during his reign saw so many changes in African football. Within this changes, he did little or nothing extraordinary to have them. Most of the changes were a function of time and some. Even North Korea with his maligned leader has overseen some changes in the country. We expected the Confederation of African Football to expand and change in various domains. Here are some of the failure of Hayatou.

1. Africa remains a net exporters of footballers to other regions of the world. If you meet any African youth who plays football and ask him about his dream, he will tell you Europe;
2. Africa is still importing at almost 95% football managers. During the just ended AFCON, ONLY 2 national sides had an African as the head coach. Today, Cote d’Ivoire have just appointed Marc Wilmorts as its new coach. That is not progress;
3. If we compare CAF and the AFC in the last 29 years, there is a worrying disparity. The game in Asia has improved, Clubs can import players and use domestic trainers, the go to the world cup and don’t end up having 8-0 and 0 points at the group stage. Meanwhile, Africa is the complete opposite;
4. Since Cameroon in 1990, Senegal in 2002 and Ghana in 2010 that reached the Quarter Finals of the world cup, no other African team has gone beyond that (Semis);
5. He didn’t not prepare his departure. In most international organisations, people prepare their successors. His departure has left Cameroon sterile in the league of African football management.

My Conclusions.

Don’t hold on to a Public Office for too long: One great lesson we can learn from Issa Hayatou’s humiliation is not to hold on for too long a public office. Public office is not a lifelong appointment, it’s for a meaningful period of time. Many of the African public office holders who break this rule often end up being booed, ridiculed and humiliated out of office. How honourable would it have been had Mobutu Sesesoko, YahYah Jahmeh, Samuel Doe, Idi Amin, and Sepp Blatter handed over power early enough before the governed got tired of them and were shamed out of the office. I hope current FIFA’s president, Ahmad Ahmad, Robert Mugabe, Paul Biya, Denis Sassou Ngessou, Obiang Nguema, Dos Santos, Idriss Deby, Kabila etc will learn a lesson or two. And for Cameroonians, Don’t Just Wish for Change, Go for It: Ahmad’s wished to see African football change and he went for it and got it. He didn’t just say it but he hunt for it until he achieved it.

A nation divided: tensions mount in Cameroon as English speakers marginalised by Francophone majority 

Cameroon's capital city Yaoundé

18 March 2017 • 3:25pm

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.

Protests in Cameroon in December 2016 

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.

 

Daniel Mekobe Sone; Cameroon's head of the Supreme Court

 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.

A woman in northern Cameroon Credit: AFP/Getty Images

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.

Cameroon's President Paul Biya Credit: AFP/Getty Images

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.”

Written By 

Adrian Blomfield, Nairobi

Source

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/18/nation-divided-tensions-mount-cameroon-english-speakers-marginalisedby/

Federalism or a two-state solution: Exploring the options for a lasting solution to the crisis in Cameroon

Paul Biya-President of Cameroon since 1982

Photograph — AFP

The recent developments in the crisis that has engulfed Cameroon, particularly the English speaking region of the country, have shown that the crux of the battle goes beyond language. It is a battle for survival where a largely marginalised people are challenging a western import that has abused them and seen them pushed to the periphery since the unceremonious solemnisation of the union in 1961. It is a battle for recognition, for equality, and for survival. Hence, a fix of just the language, if it does happen, might just not be the ultimate solution.

It all started in November when the people of Bamenda, which if southern Cameroon were to be a country, will be the capital of the English-speaking region, took to the street to protest the continuous marginalisation by the government. Days before the protest, policemen went into a school where students were protesting the use of French in English regions to harass the students and teachers, hit them with police batons while dragging career lawyers by their clothes. In the aftermath of the physical assault, the people fearing for their lives at the hand of the police, who had now become instruments of oppression, announced a stay at home to protest the continuous oppression. The strike which has seen schools and courts closed has now entered its third month.

The English-speaking Cameroonians are protesting what they describe as political and economic marginalisation, in which language is being used as the ultimate weapon. The Paul Biya-led government in June 2016 started posting French-speaking teachers and lecturers to schools and tertiary institutions in the English-speaking regions of Cameroon. The act was not limited to schools, as French-speaking judges who had no knowledge of English common laws, which operates in the English-speaking region, were posted to adjudicate and preside over court sessions. This was done, I believe, to force the people, who would not want to remain incommunicado, to pick up French if they would want to remain relevant in their own country. The plan, however, failed to score its goal as the people took to the street in November 2016 to protest it, while also calling for the implementation of de facto and de jure bilingualism and federalism in the country.

If the intentions of the government are true, implementation of a federal state should not be hard. However, the continual denial of the existence of a people marginalised in two of the ten regions of the country shows that the government is only interested in achieving a ‘One Cameroon’ of their own vision, and they are prepared to do that by any means possible.

For one, the government does not see the use of French-speaking judges in English-speaking regions as an anomaly, let alone an imposition. Speaking in November 2016, the Cameroonian Minister in charge of special duties in the presidency, Atanja Nji reportedly said there was no Anglophone problem in Cameroon. This view was also corroborated by the Minister of Communication, Issa Tchiroma Bakary while speaking on Aljazeera’s AJstream. Apparently, the imposition is only normal, while in contrast, an English-speaking judge cannot preside over a court in any of the French-speaking regions. How normal is that?

While the importance of achieving a country of one people cannot be overemphasised, there is also the place of respecting a people’s right to self-determination. As a matter of fact, monolingualism is not the way, the only way to unify a country. Canada is officially a bilingual country which is excelling and the people are living as Canadians – not English-speaking Canadians and French-speaking Canadians.

English speaking Cameroonians are not demanding an imposition on the French-speaking regions of Cameroon, they are only demanding that they be treated as a people with yearnings and aspirations. That they be given jobs that belong to them not discriminated on the basis of their language, and not be made slaves in their own community.

In reply to their demands, the government for the past two months has shut down internet connections over the English speaking regions, while assaults continued on the frontiers of the resistance, and every other English-speaking Cameroonian the lawless policemen fall upon. Untold carnage and crime against humanity have being perpetrated by Paul Biya while the world watches on. The UN being widely regarded as the watchdog of world politics sits by as well while a people’s right to self-determination is violently violated.

In spite of all this, the government of Paul Biya has continued to maintain and deny the existence of a problem –not even a language problem – in the region. They are, by that way, lending credence to the atrocities of the police, showing that their actions are backed by the government. What is happening in Cameroon is basically a recolonisation of the English-speaking people by the France-backed French speaking regime of the country. Even though the constitution of the land clearly spells out French and English as the official languages of the country, official documents continue to be rendered in French, with no English translation.

This already shows that the government does not recognise a people different from the majority. For all they care, there is only one Cameroon, there should be only one Cameroon, and there must be only one Cameroon. Cameroon today is a product of a union between the French-speaking Republique de Cameroon and the English-speaking Southern Cameroon who opted to join the republic in a federal union while the northern English-speaking Cameroon opted to join Nigeria.

The plan to unify Cameroon cannot be realised with the use of force. A people cannot be kept in a union against their wishes. And their wish here is simple. The government should either recognise them as a people and a part of a Cameroon that houses two different people that can be made one or allow the people have their own state. Self-determination is a fundamental human right.

The Cameroonian government has two options: federalism or a two-state solution.  However, Paul Biya is having none of that. The reactions of his government so far have shown that they are far from accepting anything that tends towards independence for southern Cameroon. For one, they would have to acknowledge the existence of a problem between the two regions which until now they have failed to do. Nothing can be done in that regard. And with a pact signed with France to invade in the wake of any perceived break or crack in the unholy union, a defiant push for a two-state solution might turn out into a full-blown civil war.

However, given that the idea of a two-state solution appears expensive, not necessarily in terms of money, and too far-fetched as it remains foreign to Africa, the closest and efficient solution would an establishment of true federalism in Cameroon. A federalism which allows both regions to develop at their own pace, able to control the majority of resources in their region. This solution will allow for the propagation of preferred language in every setting within both regions without any problem. It would also mean that the Cameroon constitution would not only recognise English as an official language, as it presently does, it will also enforce the use of both languages of English and French in any and all official settings.

This would enforce the teaching of both languages at schools, which means every Cameroonian child will grow up to be competent in both English and French. And since this proposition is also contained in the very agreement that brought these once separate peoples together in 1961, the best thing for the government to resolve the lingering crisis is to honour the agreement, or allow the English speaking region to form a country of their own.

Author

Olumide Jokotade

http://venturesafrica.com/federalism-or-a-two-state-solution-exploring-the-options-for-a-lasting-solution-to-the-crisis-in-cameroon/

The Cameroonian Unity

Reunification Monument

Cameroon is going through a turbulent period and this rough patch seemingly will last longer than expected. Since November 2016, the English speaking people of the country have been protesting against the regime and system of governance in what is popularly and erroneously called “The Anglophone Problem”. It all started with a memo addressed to the head of state by Common Law Lawyers from the former British Southern Cameroons in 2015 highlighting marginalisation, and assimilation of the people of Southern Cameroons. The response from the Government was orthodox (Silence-Arrogance-Disrespect). Cameroon is a bilingual country which is a product of the Former British Southern Cameroons and French Cameroon who came together through a constitutional Plebiscite of 1961 to form a Federal Republic. Cameroon was thus a country with a double heritage of its Culture, history, language, education and justice system. Given that the educational system was also affected by this marginalisation and assimilation, the teachers’ trade union of the Anglo-Saxon subsystem of education (Southern Cameroons) were also invited to down their pens, chalks and pencils. The response from the teaching community was sweeping and extraordinary across Southern Cameroons. All schools from Nursery to the Universities, private and denominational schools as well as public schools were all closed. This struggle rapidly gained legitimacy and support from all other sectors and quickly became the Southern Cameroon Struggle.

As written by Mwalimu George Ngwane in his article, “The Cameroonian Condition”, he asserts that, following the plebiscite in 1961, Cameroon subjected itself to an innovative model of governance by setting up a federal state. This brought together two nations that had carried from their colonial pasts the burden of divergent linguistic heritages. In Cameroon we can ask the question: “Why did the two Cameroons decide to reunite on 1 October 1961?” At the time President Ahmadou Ahidjo had this to say: “After more than forty years of separation, we are today reconstituting one family, one nation and one state. I express the wish that this reunification of the national territory should be the gauge and symbol of the unity of our hearts and minds.”

Reactions of the Government

In riposte to the strike action, government undertook some virtually inconsequential measures that were apparently aimed at solving the problems raised by the teachers and lawyers. But it was not just about teachers/Lawyers any longer as these trade unions had decided to come together under an umbrella civil society organisation (The Anglophone Civil Society Consortium). The government had to take some crucial decisions which started with;

          I.            The creation of an inter-ministerial ad hoc committee charged to look into the grievances of Teachers of the Anglophone subsystem of education. But it met its waterloo as the demands placed on the table had transcended into a peoples request-A return to a 2 state federation as it was before 1972. Unfortunately the ad hoc committee did not have the competency to address this request and the snail pace reaction thereafter from the regime only helped to push for more solidarity for southern Cameroons.

        II.      The next step ushered in by the regime was the indiscriminate, arbitrary arrest and kidnappings of consortium leaders (Agbor Balla, Dr Fontem Neba, Mancho Bibixy etc). Internet in Southern Cameroons completely shut down, the national communication council’s censorship on private media not to talk about Federalism. The most crooked of it all was the series of lies from CRTV and Issa Tchiroma, Arrogance from Laurent Esso and the diabolical gusto of Fame Ndongo. But this only went further to make the chronic divide in Cameroon deeper.

How United then are we?

The President and his cronies have always stated that Cameroon is one and indivisible. A declaration that hinges on the principles of unity in diversity as articulated in the CNU-CPDM manifesto and the constitution of Cameroon. If Cameroon was truly united as asserted by the proponents of the Indivisibility of Cameroon. How come that:

1. The Francophone community (east of the mungo) is yet to show solidarity to striking lawyers and teachers. It’s impossible to validate that a country that parades itself as the example of national unity would have one section of the country in peril while the other is celebrating. Teachers and lawyers east of the mungo would have shown their esprit de corps towards their peers;
2. Lawyers in Southern Cameroons had been out of court for quite some time. In spite of their momentous number in the Bar Council of Cameroon, there was little or no show of camaraderie from their mates of French Cameroon;
3. When Cameroon witnessed one of its bloodiest day in this struggle in Bamenda, the head of state was in Yaoundé celebrating with lionesses. While Bamenda was weeping, Yaoundé was in fanfare. In a supposed united and indivisible country;  
4. The series of arrest of civil society leaders of Anglophone extraction, including Justice Ayah Paul Abine has been without widespread condemnation. No one stood up for them, not even other civil societies, political parties, Magistrates etc east of the mungo. Not even the UPC party that prides itself as the cradle of the Re-unification of Cameroon.

Then came the most exacting and extraordinary action. A collective punishment was placed on the people of Southern Cameroon against all national and international laws. The decision to shut down the internet in this part of the country was repugnant to natural justice (Collective Punishment). But unfortunately, this is a country that preaches the promotion of a digital economy, where the president calls the youths “Génération Android” and uses youth slangs (dans la sauce), yet so far away from reality. Regrettably for the regime, Nji Collins, a product from the Silicon Mountain based in Buea, was this year’s winner of the Goggle Coding Challenge. He was the first African and at 17, he had to leave Bamenda to Mbouda to submit his bid. Since January 17^th, The Northwest and Southwest regions of Cameroon have been without internet. I am yet to see public denunciation from the people who are our brothers. We have seen how some French opinion holders have radicalised sentiments east of the mungo against the struggles of Southern Cameroons. But these individuals who flood TV panels to denigrate the struggle should remember that, Southern Cameroonians on their own voted to join them in 1961, fought for political plurality in Cameroon, pushed for freedom of speech and expression, unilaterally fought for an education board to which the BACC Exam board was a fallout.

My Take

With over 250 ethnicities and approximately 130 languages, Cameroon is known for its cultural and linguistic diversity. From the deep Equatorial rain forest of the south (with access to the Atlantic Ocean), through the grass field and savanna, to the northern arid regions (Open to the Sahara Desert), Cameroon is Africa in miniature. A country at the cross roads of Africa, sanctioned with Africa’s two most dominant cultures and languages (French and English). These cultures have been brought together in an uneasy and rather artificial unity under the umbrella of colonial styled administration for over a 56 years. One of the urgent needs of the country remains the establishment of the genuine unity which overrides the politically fragmented groups with their diverse languages and customs. But this unity doesn’t come through assimilation, but through the respect of diversities.

My observations from the 1996 constitutional law of decentralisation are wide and varied. If after 21 years since the law was promulgated, nothing tangible has been done is indicative of governments’ desire not to decentralise Cameroon.  Regional institutions still keep going back to the central government like in colonial days, when we had to wait on decisions from the centre in Paris or London. Secondly, the Law of 2004 completely makes nonsense of the question of decentralisation when it gives supervisory powers to Governors, SDO and DOs over regional/local elected officials. It’s more evident and palpable when you see the way the ruling CPDM is managed. This is a party that doesn’t believe that power is with the people. Otherwise, how can we explain the appointment of regional, divisional and sub divisional coordinators by the central committee to oversee locally elected section leaders?

 The minimum form of Governance that can guarantee the diversity of Cameroon and protect individual identities, values, specifications is a two state federation. As posited by Professor Verkijika Fanso, national unity in Cameroon is partially a reality and overwhelmingly a myth. He further states that, since unification, the interests of the Anglophone community concerning the country have generally been ignored. National unity can only be encouraged and promoted by taking into consideration the interests of the component parts. But when the views of one are imposed on the other in an effort to assimilate, resistance is certain and national unity becomes farfetched.