by Evaristus Chofor Fonkah, Cameroon, October 1997
THEME = JUSTICE
Cameroon was first colonised by Germany in 1884. After the defeat of the Germans in the First World War, France and Great Britain chased the Germans out of Africa, and shared the German colonies between them.
In the Cameroons, France took the part that was then known as East Cameroon, while Britain took West Cameroon and governed it along with Nigeria. After the Republic of Cameroon and Nigeria got their independence in January and October 1960 respectively, West Cameroon was given the opportunity of either joining The Federal Republic of Nigeria, or East Cameroon or declaring itself to be an independent state. The Northern part of West Cameroon opted to join the Federal Republic of Nigeria, while the South opted to join the Republic of Cameroon to form the Federal Republic of Cameroon in October 1961.
By so doing, the country inherited not only two different cultures from their colonial masters, but equally two languages, and two legal systems - the French Civil Code and English Common Law. The French-speaking part of Cameroon practices the inquisitorial system of law (whereby an accused is considered guilty until he can prove himself innocent), whilst the English-speaking part of Cameroon practices the accusatorial system (whereby an accused is considered not guilty until it can be proved otherwise).
Cameroon's official languages are French and English, but because the majority (three-quarters) of the population live in francophone areas, the bias is in favour of the French. Julius Achu is a young English-speaking lawyer living in Douala. He explains that when the interpretation of any law is unclear, the authentic version is taken to be the French one. The authorities consider French to be the more extensively used language, so most of the legal texts are drawn up in French, and then translated into English. At times, the actual meaning or intention of a text is missed out in the translation. In that case, says Lawyer Achu, two different interpretations are given to the same law; one by French-speaking courts and the other by English-speaking courts.
The above forms an important background to an appreciation of Cameroon's judiciary today.
Cameroon has three "arms" of government: The Executive, the Legislature, and the Judiciary. The Executive arm of government controls, dominates and dictates to the legislature and the judiciary.
Before the May 1997 parliamentary elections, the judiciary was very poorly paid. A Grade One Magistrate earned about 88,000 CFA francs (160 US dollars) a month. Just before the elections, the salaries were doubled to more than 220,000 CFA francs (400 US dollars per month). The poor salaries had rendered the magistrates so corrupt, that despite the increase, they found it difficult to break away from this vice. Justice is in the word, not in the deed. The ordinary citizen has lost so much confidence in the courts, that he feels reluctant to look to them for any protection.
Recently, Cameroon's judiciary was severely criticised by Amnesty International, in a report entitled: "Cameroon - Blatant disregard for human rights" (16 September 1997). Paragraphs two and three of that report read: "Hundreds of people opposed to, or critical of the government, particularly members or sympathizers of opposition political parties, journalists, human rights workers and students, have been harassed, beaten up, arrested and imprisoned. Security forces have systematically turned to torture, and ill-treatment of prisoners as well as those who fight for human rights. People have died under torture while detained. An abusive use of force by state agents, has provoked several deaths as well. Also, conditions in Cameroonian prisons, combined with cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, are at the origin of a very high mortality rate... The prisoners are usually detained far beyond the time limit fixed by the law, before being presented in front of a magistrate, who can then either indict them or allow their return to freedom".
Concern is expressed in the report, about the legislation authorising administrative detention, which has been used to imprison without any reason or trial, those who either oppose or criticise the government. These persons have no judicial backing to contest the irregularity of their detention. At times, administrative authorities refuse to conform to a judicial ruling, authorising the return to freedom of political prisoners. Serious procedural irregularities are frequent in cases involving the opposition. Constitutional modifications, which took effect from January 1996, have only feebly contributed to the reinforcement of the judiciary's independence.
The Report continues: "In addition to violations of the law by government authorities, more violations take place, and on a very large scale, by traditional rulers acting with the tacit approval of government. Some of these traditional rulers, especially in the North of the country, continue to illegally detain political opponents, submitting them to ill treatment".
The above extract from the Amnesty International Report, gives a clear summary of what is happening with Cameroon's judicial system. Cameroonians do not have any confidence in the courts, because most of the decisions that come out of them, depend on the whims and caprices of the judges.
Let us briefly look at those who are immediately involved in Cameroon's judicial system.
- Magistrates preside over cases in the different courts, from the Courts of First Instance (Magistrate's Courts), through to the Supreme Court. The profession of the magistrates is governed by Decree Number 95/048 of 8 March 1995.
- State Councils or attorneys (public prosecutors) prosecute and defend in court.
- Lawyers are governed in their practice, by Law Number 90/59 of 19 December 1990.
- Bailiffs help in the execution of decisions of the court and are governed by Decree Number 85/238 of 22 February 1985.
- Public notaries authenticate agreements made by lawyers for their clients, and are guided in their practice by Decree Number 95/034 of 24 February 1995.
- The Court Registrars sit in court, record proceedings in (French- speaking courts), serve processes (in English-speaking courts), and keep all evidence tendered. They are Commissioners of Oaths in English-speaking courts. Their profession is organised by Decree Number 75/771 of 18 December 1975.
- The police and the gendarmes assist in the enforcement of the decisions of the courts, and also help to keep the public peace.
- Divisional Officers (SDO/DO) represent the interests of the Chief Executive.
Apart from the lawyers whose profession is regulated by a law voted in parliament, all other professions within the judicial system are governed by Presidential decrees. Consequently, these professionals are open to manipulation by the Executive.
The Divisional Officers are employees of the Ministry of Territorial Administration (Interior Ministry or Ministry of Internal Affairs). The Divisional Officers wield enormous power, and they influence the decisions of magistrates to suit their masters. The police and gendarmes are at their beck and call. In short, SDOs, provincial governors, ministers and even the President himself seem to be above the law.
Look at what Governor Peter Oben Ashu of the English-speaking South West Province did. He once decided, off his own bat, that people living in his province who did not originate from that province, must obtain a "laissez-passer" (a pass permitting free movement in the province).
With an estimated population of 14 million people, Cameroon has about 510 lawyers, 350 pupil lawyers and about 420 magistrates. According to Lawyer Achu, this number is far too low. The ideal number of magistrates should be about 1,400. In thickly populated areas, each magistrate has to handle about 100 cases a day. It's impossible for a magistrate to have enough time to understand the cases before him, and to give a fair judgement. A maximum of 10 cases per day should be the norm.
Lawyer Achu's cry, ties in with Professor Kofela Kale's complaint. Professor Kale is a Professor of Law and has practised in the USA. He had been hearing cases in the Supreme Court, filed by political parties demanding the annulment of Cameroon's May 1997 parliamentary elections. He says that in a country like Cameroon where the usual process of justice is so slow, it is inconceivable that a court of final resort (the Supreme Court) can attempt to listen to over one hundred electoral petitions within 12 hours!
Magistrates' promotion is decided upon by the Supreme Council of Magistracy. This Council is presided over by the President of the Republic (the Chief Executive), whenever it sits to decide on the future of magistrates. No examination is conducted for the advancement of these magistrates. Any magistrate who hopes to be promoted, must therefore, have the sympathy of someone high up in the Executive. With the recent increase in their salaries, magistrates now earn more than double what a medical doctor or university lecturer earns. Obviously, they must now toe the party line!
Very often people are arrested and detained, even before a case against them has been prepared. Look at what happened to Professor Titus Edzoa, who at one time was successively the President's personal physician, Minister of Higher Education, Secretary-General at the Presidency of the Republic, and then Minister of Health. Professor Edzoa recently resigned from the government, and presented his candidature for the October 1997 presidential elections. He was immediately put under house arrest. On 3 July, 73 days after his resignation from the government, he was formally arrested and detained at the Kodengui maximum security prison, along with one of his protégés, Thierry Atangana. No official charges were made against him at the time, and newspaper reports said he was being accused of embezzling public funds. Others simply talked of political victimisation.
On 3 October 1997, the two accused were brought to court on charges of embezzling public funds. They were each sentenced to 15 years imprisonment, and fined 350 million CFA francs (about 636,364 US dollars). All their personal property was to be confiscated by the state.
During the hearing, one of the defence lawyers, Lawyer Odile Mballa, said the defence team knew in advance that the state had already decided on the 15-year prison sentence for their client. She had asked for the present case to be adjourned because Professor Edzoa had another case running concurrently before the courts, concerning the rejection of his application to run for the presidency. However, the presiding magistrate decided (or was he instructed?) to pass judgement that day. The defence lawyers walked out of court in protest, and their client received his expected sentence in their absence.
Cameroonians continue their fight to obtain a credible judiciary.
END