Pursuing the Right to an Effective Remedy for Human Rights Violation(s) In Cameroon: The Need for Legislative Reform

Undoubtedly, global and regional human rights instruments clearly entrench the right to an effective remedy for a human rights violation. The substantive nature of the right to an effective remedy makes it relevant to the realisation of the right to equality as well as the right to equal protection under the law. Cameroon, as a State Party to most of these human rights instruments, is bound to adopt measures aimed at giving effect to the rights contained therein. One of such steps, in my opinion, is the enactment of domestic legislation that defines the content of these rights; stipulates the forums where remedies for human violations could be pursued; specifies what kinds of remedies a victim of a human rights violation would get at the end; and lastly, defines who can access such forums. Unfortunately, the lack of domestic legislation that meets these requirements means the right to an effective remedy for a human rights violation in Cameroon cannot be realised. It is argued in this paper that the critical nature of the right to a remedy, given its bearing on other substantive human rights as well as the protection and promotion of human rights, warrants progressive efforts undertaken by the State in order to give effect to this right. Therefore, the sheer lack of a legislative instrument in this regard makes it very difficult for the pursuit of a right to a remedy when there is a violation of human rights. As evidenced by legislative developments in numerous African States that are States Parties to these international instruments, there is growing consensus that the enactment of domestic legislation that answers the questions of content; forums; outcomes and access is a positive and vital step towards the realisation of the right to an effective remedy for a human rights violation.    &nbsp

Beyond the Contours of Normally Acceptable Political Violence: Is Cameroon a Conflict/Transitional Society in the Offing?

Legal scholars and other social scientists agree that political violence comprising assaults on civil and political liberties may occur in the context of contentious politics. Unfortunately, there have been instances in history where such politics is marked by intermittent attacks against people's rights and freedoms. Such attacks occur when politics has gone sour, and there are times when the violence exceeds the bounds of what is acceptable. From the documented atrocities of Nazi Germany, the horrendous crimes of the regime of Slobodan Milosevic in the former Yugoslavia, the outrageous crimes perpetrated during the genocide in Rwanda, the shameful and despicable inhumanities inflicted on the people of Darfur in the Sudan, and the violence in post-electoral Kenya, to the bloodshed in areas like Mali, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, etc, violent conflict has punctuated world history. Added to this list of countries is Cameroon, which in the last quarter of 2016 degenerated into a hotspot of political violence in the English-speaking regions. The perpetration of political violence in Cameroon has raised serious questions that may be relevant not only to the resolution of the political problem that gave rise to the violence but also to laying the foundations of a post-conflict Cameroon that is united and honours the principles of truth, justice and reconciliation. This paper describes some of the salient occurrences of political violence in Cameroon and argues that the presence of specific elements elevates this violence to the level of a serious crime in international law. It is argued herein that crimes against humanity may have been committed during the state action against the Anglophones in Cameroon. It is also argued that the political character of the violence, added to the scale of the victimisation and its systematic and protracted nature, qualify Cameroon as a transitional society engaged in conflict that is in need of transitional justice. Reflecting on the extent of the suffering of the victims of such political violence, this paper discusses the function of the justice system in establishing the truth and holding the perpetrators accountable. Past instances of political violence in Cameroon have been glossed over, but in our opinion, healing a fragmented and disunited Cameroon with its history of grave violations of human rights requires that the perpetrators be held accountable, and that truth and justice should prevail. Such considerations should be factored into the legal and political architecture of a post-conflict, transitional Cameroon.     &nbsp

Sentencing for the offence of misappropriation of public funds: the flawed and problematic approach of Cameroon’s Special Criminal Court

Over a decade since the Special Criminal Court (SCC) was established in Cameroon, hundreds of individuals have been indicted, tried and convicted. Sentences have been imposed, most of which include a term of imprisonment (principal punishment/penalty) and confiscation as accessory penalty or punishment. Research focus has not been directed at the sentences which, as argued in this paper, are inconsistent, incommensurate with the amounts of money stolen and a significant departure from the Penal Code. This paper aims to explore the aspect of sentencing by the SCC. Design/methodology/approach – To identify, highlight and discuss the issue of sentencing, the paper looks at a blend of primary and secondary materials: primary materials here include but not limited to the judgements of the SCC and other courts in Cameroon and the Penal Code. Secondary materials shall include the works of scholars in the fields of criminal law, criminal justice and penal reform. Findings – A few findings were made: first, the judges are inconsistent in the manner in which they determine the appropriate sentence. Second, in making that determination, the judges would have been oblivious to the prescripts in the Penal Code, which provides the term of imprisonment, and in the event of a mitigating circumstance, the prescribed minimum to be applied. Yet, the default imposition of an aggravating circumstance (being a civil servant) was not explored by the SCC. Finally, whether the sentences imposed are commensurate with the amounts of monies stolen. Research limitations/implications – This research unravels key insights into the functioning of the SCC. It advances the knowledge thereon and adds to the literature on corruption in Cameroon. Practical implications – The prosecution and judges at the SCC should deepen their knowledge of Cameroonian criminal law, especially on the nature of liberty given to judges to determine within the prescribed range of the sentence to be imposed but also consider the existence of an aggravating factor – civil servant. They must also consider whether the sentences imposed befit the crime for which they are convicted

Accountability of Law Enforcement Personnel for Human Rights Violations in Cameroon: Trends and Challenges

Law enforcement personnel are critically important in both the security and criminal justice sectors. Unlike ordinary citizens, they possess the broad powers needed to perform the tasks in these sectors: for example, they possess the power to arrest and detain; to search premises and seize items; to interrogate individuals; to stop assemblies; to check and even to restrict the movements of people during certain times; and to use force and firearms in specific circumstances. In exercising such powers, they are required to act independently and judiciously. Also, they must stay within the remit of the law. Such powers, however, render them prone to committing human rights abuses since by their very nature, they interfere with the civil and political rights of individuals. In instances of violations they are expected to be held accountable. Accountability for law enforcement for human rights violations evokes and entails the notions of lawfulness and legitimacy. As legitimacy touches on the public perception of law enforcement personnel, it becomes vital to explore what mechanisms are put in place to ensure accountability as well as possible challenges that hamper it. Examining the notion of the accountability of law enforcement personnel in the context of Cameroon, this paper argues that selective accountability has been the trend which puts the country at quite a distance from its international human rights obligations. Informed by empirical evidence from credible governmental bodies, the paper identifies and assesses the legal framework on accountability, touching on a few instances of selective accountability, and argues that if lawfulness and legitimacy are to be the cornerstones of accountability, then a comprehensive approach must be considered, including the de-politicisation of law enforcement units in Cameroon

Book review: Canefe N Critical Perspectives on Crimes against Humanity: The Limits of Universal Jurisdiction in the Global South (University of Wales Press 2020)

In the current anti-accountability sentiment that has plagued most of Africa, triggered by the nasty politics of selectivity that is primarily motivated by considerations of realpolitik or the interests of specific states, Canefe's book lays bare the fundamental moral, legal and philosophical standpoint that advances the argument that perpetrators of mass atrocities must be held accountable. Unfortunately, the reality is different. She explores the vast (and almost impossible) impediments to attaining such an objective. Recognising the distinct and persuasive voices echoed by scholars from the Global South, the book examines the utilitarian effectiveness of using universal jurisdiction as a means towards this end. The critical views and responses of scholars who belong to TWAIL (an intellectual blog that is hotly and hardly contested by their counterparts from the Global North) expose, debunk and denounce the legitimacy of international law. The book argues that an international legal order that is largely mono-culturalistic, developed from selected principles, values and opinions from the West, cannot and should not be taken as a prototype of the global legal order. Instead, legal pluralism as a distinct feature of a diverse and multicultural world requires that a consensus is obtained: this is crucial if the world seeks to achieve what she calls a "neutralized universalization" of international law

Delineating the role of foreign governments in the fight against corruption in Africa

Corruption on the African continent unfolds two unique trends: first, the involvement of senior state officials in the perpetration of grand corruption; and secondly, the illicit and surreptitious transfer of stolen assets and funds beyond Africa’s borders. As such, African States are heavily drained of their resources when corruption is committed. Foreign states become safe havens for stolen assets from Africa which makes Africa’s development stagnated, paralysed and hijacked by the perpetrators. Compounded by a litany of challenges such as weak institutions; poorly written laws; a culture of impunity; the absence of the rule of law; a widening gap between the rich and the poor; the pangs of underdevelopment; undermanned and under-resourced anti-corruption institutions and a sheer absence of a strong political will, the fight against corruption in Africa is one of Africa’s biggest battles. While some national efforts to overcome this invisible enemy amongst the African people (corruption) may be commended, it is clear that such efforts themselves are insufficient and ineffective: a holistic approach is more than needed, especially given the trends in which grand corruption in particular is committed. Borrowing from relevant international legal instruments, this paper argues that it is a moral and legal imperative for non-African States to enjoin Africa in its fight against corruption. In making this thesis, this paper identifies and discusses the different ways in which such non-African states can help Africa in its fight against corruption

70 Years after the UDHR: A Provocative Reflection Shaped by African Experiences

The 70th anniversary of the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights presents an opportunity for critical reflections from the Global South on why the dream of universalising the rights contained in this ground-breaking document is still just a dream. Shaped by a rigorous interrogation of African experiences as narrated by practitioners and scholars, this paper revisits some of the leading contentious issues which, undoubtedly, have impacted on the realisation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on the African continent. The paper revisits the issue of meaning, and how uncertainties surrounding it have triggered controversial perceptions and constructions of the notion of human rights, aggravated by adjectival calibrations. Capturing the views of scholars and practitioners, this paper takes an evidence-based approach to the matter as it identifies and discusses some of the common, recurrent challenges that have compromised the aspiration of universalising the ideals articulated in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. These include, amongst other things, the impact of slavery and the slave trade, colonialism and neo-colonialism, the nature and impact of western hypocrisy, double-standards, bias and inconsistency – factors that not only dilute the recognition of human rights but further deepen the mistrust and misgivings Africans have about human rights. Lastly, the paper appraises the adverse impact of corruption on the realisation of human rights on the African continent. It is argued that all these factors, cumulatively, adversely impact on the perception and realisation of human rights on the African continent

Prosecuting the offence of misappropriation of public funds: an insight into Cameroon's Special Criminal Court

The fight against the misappropriation of public funds perpetrated by individuals, especially public servants, for private gain, enjoys different degrees of commitment by different countries. The enactment of laws and establishment of institutional mechanisms towards this end are partly a reflection of the attainment of such a mission and can also be the measure by which such a commitment can be assessed. Rated as one of the most corrupt countries in Africa by Transparency International, the global anti-corruption watchdog, the Republic of Cameroon recently enacted a law that created a Special Criminal Court. This comes as one of the most robust and significant legislative developments in the fight against the misappropriation of public funds. The mandate of the Special Criminal Court is to bring to justice persons who "cause loss of at least 50.000.000 CFA Francs (equivalent to about USD 100.000) relating to misappropriation of public funds and other related offences provided for in the Cameroon Penal Code and International Conventions ratified by Cameroon". This paper examines the offence of the misappropriation of public funds. It looks at aspects of the Special Criminal Court as provided by the Law that established it as well as supplementary legislation enacted to address specific issues related to the Special Criminal Court. The paper also examines the offence for which individuals are prosecuted in the Special Criminal Court. As a bold step in fighting and defeating the "invisible enemy amongst us" (that is, corruption), this paper argues that an institutional mechanism like the Special Criminal Court that has docked several top-notch politicians and former cabinet members for trial, is an example to emulate and confirms that corruption can be fought if and only if the political will to do so is present.Keywords: Corruption; misappropriation of public funds; Special Criminal Court; embezzlement; political corruptio