7, April 2017
Do anti-terrorism laws in Cameroon shackle the hands of justice? 0
Cameroon’s law on “the suppression of acts of terrorism”, to wit: No 2014/028 of 12/23/2015, came into being within the backdrop of the necessity to contain the constant threats of terrorism which the country witnesses from Nigeria’s Islamist Jihadist group, Boko Haram. This law does not define terrorism, but merely lays down what it may constitute, a la Camerounais. Section 2 of Chapter II specifically states that, whoever, acting alone or as an accomplice or an accessory, commits or threatens to commit an act likely to cause death, endanger physical integrity, cause bodily injury or material damage, destroy natural resources, the environment or cultural heritage with intent to: “(i) Intimidate the public, provoke a situation of terror or face the victim, the government/and or a national or international organization to carry out or refrain from carrying out an act, adopt or renounce a particular position; (ii) disrupt the national functioning of public services to the public to create a crisis situation among the public; (iii) create widespread insurrection in the country; (iv) shall be punished with the death penalty”. For the same motives as stated above, the law imposes capital punishment for anyone whosoever provides or makes use of arms and war material; provides or makes use of micro-organisms or any other biological agent, especially viruses, mushroom clouds, or toxins; provides or uses chemical, psychotropic, radioactive, or hypnotizing agents; or takes hostages.
Fight against terrorism.
Recently, the Boko Haram insurgents from Nigeria have found safe heavens in Nigeria’s neighbors, Cameroon inclusive. The three Northern Provinces of Adamawa, North, and Extreme North of Cameroon, because of proximity, have been the most hit hard throughout the country. While the fight against terrorism is a legitimate concern, there is fear the government of Cameroon can turn this law into an oppression tool, to crack down on any oppositional movements that may seek to demand better living conditions when the government becomes autocratic, tyrannical and or oppressive. The law increases the government’s power to impose executive lawlessness, high handedness and dictatorialness to the extent where the same law seems to shackle the scales of justice, tilting them towards the favour of the government operatives, against citizens of the country.
Intriguing here is, the law does not define what terrorism is. In loose terms, this means in the Cameroons, any activity that challenges state polity, can be deemed to be an act of terrorism. In that vein, social activism and other legitimate political manifestations stand chances of easily being branded as terrorist activities, just to punish the concerned, or crackdown on dissent. For a country that claims to battle the ills of terrorism, this law, may well be a recipe for abuses or infringements on personal liberties and freedoms. The importance of this law lies more not on what it has stated to protect, but on what it implies and as such, it may be making justice not to be just.
Crackdown on dissent.
The seventeen (17) Sections of the counter-terrorism law that are divided into four (04) Chapters, cover great grounds not only pertaining to “terror”, but also other spheres of societal and state life that are not even terrorism-related. With the inclusion of words like “act likely to cause death”, “endanger physical integrity”, “intimidate the public”, “disrupt the national functioning of public services”, “create widespread insurrection in the country”, etc., the government arrogated to itself, the legal instrumentality to suppress any form of challenge to its supremacy. The legislation vastly expands power that usually is invoked only during a state of emergency.
Quite often than not, most civil society organizations and their activities all over the world have been perceived to be attempts at causing social instability and unrest and by extension, causing harm to the government. These may fall within what this law refers to as, “acts that disrupt the “national functioning of public services, acts that cause bodily injury or material damage, etc.” By projecting itself to be a strong legislation against terrorism, the Cameroon government has either deliberately or inadvertently shut the doors for any attempts at political reconciliation, dialogue, or rehabilitation of those who may find themselves on the wrong side of state excesses and perceived successes. The domestic predicament is further accentuated by the fact that in the Cameroons, there are a great many groupings of dissatisfied peoples. Thus, whilst the Bamilekes of the West Province may still bare the grudge of state-sponsored terrorism of the 1960s during which there were the Maquizaars that brutally maimed and killed many of their peoples, the Anglophones of Southern Cameroons are dissatisfied with discrimination, marginalization and general maltreatment by the Yaounde government, the Ewondos and Beties of the South are angry at the lavish and posh life lived by the president and his men, right in their faces, yet they wallow in abject poverty like the rest of the country. In short, in the Cameroons, there is no tolerance for dissent.
Unconstitutionality of the law.
Cameroon’s anti-terrorism law is in total contradiction of the Constitution of the country. It establishes permanent special terrorism circuits in the court system and suffers from constitutional deficiencies in the course. Chapter 3, Section 11 ordains that, “the duration of remand in custody shall be fifteen (15) days renewable upon the authorization of the state prosecutor”. This means once accused, a person can be incarcerated ad infinitum, as there is no limit to the remand periods. Such incarceration, it also means, can be ordered by a state prosecutor. It is trite law that only a trial magistrate in a duly constituted court has the powers of deciding that someone can or should do time in jail. Unfortunately, this law strips off the powers of sentencing from the trial judge and gratuitously awards them to the prosecutor. This is an anomaly. It is an arrogant usurpation of the judges’ role. An accused who benefits from a ruling of the court admitting him or her to bail, may under the Cameroon counterterrorism law, be re-arrested and detained by a prosecuting magistrate. The prosecutor here (of course for the state) assumes the avuncular position of an accuser, judge and jury. Having not taken into consideration the difference between the duties of a prosecuting and those of a presiding magistrate, this law threatens the buoyancy of any oppositional opinions in societal life as holders of such opinions may be arrested and detained at any time, if their ideas are rooted in dissent of any kind. This is inauspicious! With this new era of ubiquitous prosecutors on behalf of the state, the very fabrics of fair trials are under a dangerous threat of extinction within the face of the Cameroonian legal sphere, at least when it comes to counter terrorism. It is trite law that once a ruling of a court has been handed down, it can only be reversed by a court of appellate jurisdiction. But with the law under review, a prosecutor may ignore the court ruling and arrest and incarcerate an accused person who is already enjoying bail. This again is a fragrant violation of the basic principles of law and fair hearing. It is a travesty of justice.
An accused person is expected to be deemed to be innocent until proven guilty by a duly constituted trial court. The illegality of this law is further seen from the perspective where it deprives the accused of the presumption of innocence. This is against the constitution of the country, which in its preamble states that: “the law shall ensure the right of every person to a fair hearing before the courts… and every person is presumed innocent until found guilty during a hearing conducted in strict compliance with the rights of the defence”. For the period of remand in custody to be according to the length of the prosecutor’s foot, is a compendious way of saying the accused has no right to be admitted to bail or at most, they are at the mercy of the prosecutor. In a civilized society, this is not how justice works. That being so, the accused, it may seem, are being declared guilty under this law, even before trial. This is in contravention with the Constitution which states that everyone has a right to bail when they are deserving thereof.
Under Cameroon’s law on suppression of acts of terrorism, the accused cannot benefit from the common law remedy of habeas corpus, which is a writ challenging the reasons or conditions of a person’s arrest and confinement. It is intended to probe into the lawfulness or lack thereof, of a person’s detention and thus prevent unlawful or arbitrary imprisonment. This remedy is made available in Articles 584 – 588 of the Criminal Procedure Code 2005, under its Book VI Special Procedures. If an application for habeas corpus is granted, a writ is issued directing the custodian to bring the confined person before the court to stand trial for the alleged charges and to be admitted to bail. Habeas corpus, is a very strong-spirited tool a person under custody can use to ensure that his or her arrest and incarceration is not unlawful. Whenever a person is arrested and detained through an unfair process, that imprisonment is unlawful, and the concerned must be given enough information by the legal department in order to know why their liberty is being restricted so that they may be given the opportunity to answer any charges levied against them in court. It is our contention that this anti-terrorism law violates the constitution of Cameroon when the same denies the accused a right to habeas corpus. This is because the constitution in its preamble again states that, “every accused person has a right to …humane treatment in all circumstances. Under no circumstances shall any person be subjected to torture, cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment”. The Article 65 of the constitution provides a very invaluable support to the preamble by stating that the preamble is an integral part of the constitution. It is unimpeachable therefore to say that both the constitution and its preamble are of the same probative value and possess the same weight and magnitude. The Cameroon law on the suppression of acts of terrorism fails to afford the accused with all the constitutional protections accorded him or her by the constitution which in its preamble further states that, “the state shall guarantee all citizens … the freedoms set forth in the Preamble of the Constitution”. This, to me, is an aberration. It is repugnant to equity, natural justice, and good conscience.
Doctrine of Supremacy of laws.
Also known as the principle of hierarchy of laws, this principle puts laws in a conformity pyramid, with the international laws and treaties at the top of the niche, while municipal laws are found lower in the echelons. It is a legal principle which stops nations which are signatories to certain international conventions and treaties, from legislating laws that contravene the said conventions and treaties. Cameroon is signatory to the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhumane and Degrading Treatment and Punishment 1987, the Universal declaration of Human Rights 1948, The African Chatter on Human and Peoples’ Rights 1986, and many others. By accepting to become a signatory to these conventions, the government signed to acquiesce to the provisions of these international treaties and conventions. All of these legal instruments condemn the death penalty. Article 45 of the Cameroon constitution even gives legislative recognition to the above, when it states that, “duly approved and ratified treaties and international agreements shall, … override national laws…”. These provisions also render illegal, unconstitutional, and unacceptable within the committee of law-abiding nations of the world, the portions of the counterterrorism laws that impose capital punishment.
The wisdom of military justice.
The Cameroon counter terrorism law places jurisdiction for adjudication of matters relating to suppression of acts of terrorism exclusively in the hands of the military tribunals. Hitherto now, the military tribunals had jurisdiction to try offences of purely military nature, provided for in the “code de justice militaire” governed by Ordinance No 72 of August 26th 1972 as amended by law No 87-9 of July 15th 1987. These offences were those committed by soldiers, inside military establishments or in the course of service or of any nature in which a soldier is involved, or offences relating to firearms and firearms legislation or offences during state of emergency. Terrorism laws make citizens to be tried under military law. The law makes military tribunals to also try civilians for events that are committed neither by military officers, nor with the use of firearms. This in itself, could be seen as the fabrication of a self-serving law on terror, … a smoke screen to terrorize the public and ordinary citizens with.
The code de justice militaire observes the inquisitorial system of adjudication as opposed to the adversarial system that obtains in the civil courts. While in the adversarial system the presiding judge listens to both sides without prior knowledge of the facts and evidence of the case, in the inquisitorial system, the judge gathers evidence directly from the accused, by questioning them rigorously, with the intention of bringing out the truth. A premium is placed on the rights of the accused in the adversarial system, while on the inquisitorial system, those rights are secondary to the discovery of truth. It is a worrisome situation in that although the accused in an inquisitorial system may not be considered guilty before the trial, a presumption of innocence which is the bedrock of the adversarial system is not a requirement here.As such, it is easy to see that an accused undergoing trial in an inquisitorial system of adjudication (which obtains at the military tribunal,) is disadvantaged over his or her counterpart in an adversarial system. For a crime where punishment is death, it is only a bad law that sets up a trial that puts the accused at a disadvantage of any kind.
Judgment at the military tribunal is made after a collective vote of the assessors and the trial judge. Assessors are usually lay in the law. For crimes where the punishment is death, isn’t it outrageous to hear that such huge responsibilities are put into the hands of lay people? Scholars have held that this is a joke.Worse of all, a two-thirds majority is required to convict a suspect/accused in an inquisitorial system, whereas a unanimous verdict is the norm in an adversarial system. Again, the accessors, apart from having neither knowledge of the law nor of counterterrorism, the accused in these cases do not have the opportunity to question them about possible biasses. It is unheard of that people’s lives can be toyed with, in a manner as despicable as letting them undergo life-determining trials under military justice.
Conclusion.
With such a draconian law, the Cameroon government enshrined a latent state of emergency as the law of the land. The law seems to set out, not to protect the citizenry, but rather to protect the state… making it indicative of the consolidation of excessive power in the hands of the executive. While the ruling elite splurges, the rest of the clan wallows in squalor. With this law, the government equipped itself with even greater powers to continue stamping out its critics and opponents under its opaque war on terrorism. Cameroon’s anti-terrorism law looks like a midnight law that marks and makes the country a republic of darkness. It considers all criticism or dissent as terrorism. On a whole, this law is an affront to common sense. With all its deficiencies, the law is a good example of what a good law should not be. It is unwarranted, inadmissible, and unacceptable as the same was not legislated to prosecute, but to persecute the accused. Dissenting such a law to my mind, is a non-reformist reform that should become part of a broader Pax Kamaruna movement that recognizes the interconnectedness of the law and the importance of being fair. The struggle to ensure the existence of a fair society is inextricably linked to the struggle to dismantle any ideation that breads bigotry, gaffe, despotism, and their ilks. Movements for the defense of fair laws in Cameroon must preach ex cathedra, sermons that seek to remove the whole country from this quack mire of a scandal and bring it into the mid-and-center of the fight for justice that is truly just. Justice, it is said, must not only be done, but must also be seen as being done, and that to my mind, must start with the existence of good laws, not the laws that shackle the very hands of justice itself.
By Tanyi-Mbianyor Samuel Tabi
*Tanyi-Mbianyor Samuel Tabi is an Attorney-at-Law, a Solicitor and a Notary Public. An expert in counterterrorism, he holds a Master’s Degree in Public Administration with a concentration in Terrorism, Peace and Mediation. He is a member of both the Cameroon and Canadian Bar Associations and is currently a Ph.D candidate in Public Policy and Law at the Walden University School of Public Policy.



















10, April 2017
Anglophone Problem: The Cost of Marginalization 0
If you need peace, then you must practice justice, if not yours will be the kingdom of trouble and instability. This aptly applies to Cameroon where the Anglophone problem has shattered the country’s image as an oasis of peace in a desert of chaos. Over the last six months, Cameroon has been in the spotlight for all the wrong reasons. The English-speaking part of the country has been dealing with marginalization for more than five decades and they want this to stop. All attempts by the English-speaking minority to draw the political elite’s attention to this worrying situation has always met with tricks and intimidation. Over the years, the Yaoundé government has succeeded to manufacture its own Anglophone leaders and this Anglophone political elite has always had its work cut out for it – sedate its people with vain promises, food and drinks so as to keep them in check. The elite has been very effective, using all means, including unfulfilled promises and, where necessary, employ threats of imprisonment or death for those who dare speak out about the pain and suffering marginalization is inflicting on the peace-loving people of West Cameroon.
But after fifty-six years, West Cameroonians feel it is time to break the chains of silence and face a monster that has been spreading death and destruction in a region that holds more than 60% of the country’s wealth. Cameroon’s oil and gold fields are lodged in the country’s south-west region, precisely in Ndian division, where poverty; that which dehumanizes and robs people of their dignity, has taken root. While the country’s refinery may be located in Limbe, Anglophone Cameroon’s coastal city, the oil fields are in the Rio Del Rey estuary in Ndian Division,while localities around Mbonge in the same division are home to large gold deposits. Manyu Division, which is also in the south-west region, is blessed with huge and dense equatorial forests that have been hiding some of the finest timber on the continent, but the people of this region have been sorry spectators of the destruction that is taking place in their forests, as this ageless timber makes its way to East Cameroon.
Oil experts hold that Manyu Division could be sitting on huge oil deposits and there are efforts underway to find out if this region with some of the finest minds in the country could be hiding wealth that can transform the entire country if equitably shared. The region’s sub-soil is throwing up riches that only go to enrich others while the locals watch helplessly from a distance as others feed fat from their manna. It is not in error that many south-westerners have been calling for Canadian-style federalism that will ensure that the government sets up an equalization fund to hold all revenues from natural resources. These revenues will be shared equitably among the different regions of the country for development purposes as practiced by successive Canadian governments which have generated wealth for their people and made Canada the envy of the world. Canada’s Alberta oil sands have brought trillions of dollars to the country’s coffers and the prudent management of the country has brought free education and health care to all the citizens of this great nation. Anglophones are looking forward to the day Canadian federalism will become a reality in their own country. It will be a welcome relief as they will no longer be ruled by French-speaking administrative officers and be taught by Francophone teachers whose knowledge of English is, at best, rudimentary.
However, the rich sub-soil alone did not trigger the current confrontation between the government and the Anglophone minority that is determined to put an end to five decades of contempt and disrespect. Anglophone lawyers who triggered the strike have been vocal about their fate. The government’s error of judgment stemming from transferring Francophone magistrates and judges to Anglophone courts has, on many occasions, led to a clear travesty of justice, with many innocent Anglophones serving long jail terms just because the judges cannot understand English. It has never been the government’s policy to appoint interpreters in court as practiced in Canada, a country that has the same official languages as Cameroon and similar problems. While many Anglophones can speak English and French, their knowledge of legal jargons leaves much to be desired and this has been the root cause of the bitterness against a government they claim is not people-centered.
The frustrations also stem from the fact that Anglophones have, for a very long time, been excluded, either by error or by design, from the School of Magistracy and Administration (ENAM), the institution that trains administrative officers and magistrates, for more than five decades. The military brass is purely francophone and the cabinet which comprises thirty-nine ministers only has one Anglophone minister. Anglophones believe that right from the beginning of this “lopsidedrelationship”,they have always been considered as the inferior party, with Francophones being the “primus inter peres”. Many Anglophones clearly say they are sick and tired of playing second fiddle to Francophones whose perspective of life is very much driven by short-term thinking and egoism. Abnegation, according to many Anglophones, is a foreign concept to Francophone Cameroonians who, Anglophones claim, have played a key role in bringing the economy of this once prosperous nation to its knees. Anglophones argue that Francophones are naturally submissive, but quietly dictatorial, and would not question anything for fear of acting against constituted authority. They also contend that they are more participatory in their approach to life and their education pushes them into questioning everything except the existence of God. The Anglophone approach is completely at variance with Francophone thinking which has, over the last fifty years, brought a lot of pain and suffering to Anglophones who voluntarily opted to be part of a marriage they thought was predicated on justice, trust and love of fatherland.
Five decades after the UN-staged reunification, the frustrations of the English-speaking minority have boiled over and Anglophones are seeking a way out of this relationship. The strikes that started in October 2016 were aimed at drawing the government’s attention to the angst that has been inhabiting the Anglophone mind. But faithful to its intimidation strategy, the government dispatched its armed forces – known today by Anglophones as “Harm Forces” due to their killing and maiming of innocent civilians, to quash the strikes and send home a strong message to all those who thought they could change the status quo. The military action succeeded, unfortunately, not to intimidate Anglophones, but to radicalize the already frustrated Anglophones who are determined to put an end to the status quo ante, something that is actually coming to pass as the government is bending over backwards to appease Anglophones through a series of measures that some hold are coming too late. Anglophones hold that their call for federalism has been upgraded to the restoration of statehood and discussing federalism is like solving the wrong problem. Today, the country is divided along linguistic lines and the consequences of this conflict go well beyond what many observers had predicted.
When Cameroon’s English-speaking minority decided to challenge the government, many around the world thought the flaring of tempers would not last for more than a week. To many, it was an exercise in failure as the country’s government is noted for its uncanny ways of eradicating dissent and opposition. Intimidation laced with money has always been the government’s method of choice and this has always worked like a charm, especially among Francophones who, many Anglophones consider to be gullible and malleable. Today, the government is at its wit’s end as Anglophones have continued to resist all attempts by the government to break the back of a revolt that has been largely peaceful and without clear leaders. The country has been split and Anglophones are no longer as patriotic as they used to be. Even the Nations Cup could not unite this country whose love for football used to be unquestionable. The patriotism deficit among Anglophones is one poison that is gradually destroying many government officials and they fear that if much is not done to check this unfortunate trend, future generations will continue to question the unity and indivisibility of this country that was designed to be a model on the continent.
This patriotism deficit has been made all the more worse by the disconnection of the Internet in West Cameroon because of the strikes. Many Anglophones hold that this is testimony to the government’s determination to roll them back into the dark ages. They claim that it is their constitutional right to express their frustration with a political system that has been preying on its own citizens. They point to the backwardness of the Anglophone region as proof of the marginalization they have been complaining about. They also hold that strikes organized by Francophone medical staff and teachers in recent weeks had not attracted the type of brutality that had been unleashed on Anglophones. They contend that Anglophone lives do not matter to the government as many Anglophones have been killed and others arrested and taken to Yaoundé without any charges laid against them. This has made the divide a lot trickier than the government had thought.
Today, schools are still closed in both Anglophone regions of the country and it is clear that a blank year is staring both the students and government in the face. The government has been beaten hollow in a conflict that is clearly unconventional. Its ability to manufacture leaders for the people has been tested and it has proven to be wanting. Despite calls by the government for students to go back to school, many Anglophone students are refusing to return to school, with many clearly sympathizing with their striking parents who have been victims of a system that has robbed them of their dignity and jailed them in poverty. They argue that if the government really wants things to return to normal, it must release theirs leaders and fellow West Cameroonians, especially Buea University students, who are in jail for no justified reason.
They are also urging the government to create a commission of inquiry to investigate the killings that have radicalized Anglophones. They want the Internet to be restored as it is a great learning tool that will also enable them to conduct research and stay in touch with their families and friends. They argue that the disconnection of the Internet has caused many Anglophones to lose their jobs. Most of the software development firms that were headquartered in Buea, the south-west regional capital, have simply relocated and this has killed Silicon Mountain, the software hub modeled on America’s Silicon Valley.
But of all the consequences of the conflict that will not go away anytime soon is the destruction that it has wreaked on the economy. Cameroon’s economy has been in a free fall for many decades. Poor management and corruption have pushed this once prosperous economy to the brink. With Cameroon considered today as a fragile country, many investors, especially rich members of the Cameroon Diaspora, hold that it will be too much of a risk to invest in a country where civil liberties are overtly violated and dissent openly crushed. Many investors have faith in the country’s bilingual nature and the effectiveness of its human resources, but they have doubts about the country’s future stability. The Anglophone problem is just one of the many issues facing the government and it is clearly the tip of the iceberg.
Though Francophones have all along been docile and indifferent to the sorry plight of the Anglophone minority, their grumbling has in recent times become loud and clear, and this is causing government officials to lose sleep. The Anglophone virus is gradually spreading and Francophones seem to be finding their voices. Many Francophones are poor and the unemployment rate among them is so high that their frustration could be clearly seen on their faces. High unemployment, poor healthcare, lack of proper infrastructure, scandals in FECAFOOT (FECAFOOD as Anglophones call it) and corruption in the civil service are gradually converging to produce the perfect storm that may be very hard to stem. If the country’s government wants to avert a future political catastrophe, it must change the way it does business. Years of frustration are gradually pushing the Francophone majority, considered by Anglophones as the “junk majority”, into departing from its traditional way of thinking. This implies calling the management ability of their leaders into question and holding them accountable.
The cost of many years of marginalization is turning out to be very high. Cameroonians have become very unpatriotic, their faith in their systems and government has been diluted by corruption, unemployment and mismanagement. Anglophones have challenged the system and they have proven that they are capable of engineering change in a country that was once thought to be unchangeable. Cabinet ministers have been cut down to normal human proportions and the ever-increasing impact of the crisis is causing many talented and educated Cameroonians to leave the country. Many Anglophones hold that their future lies somewhere else and this has triggered a new wave of brain drain that will surely hurt the country’s economy. Those who are abroad have decided to settle wherever they are, as they are scared of being arrested for their participation in the Anglophone rebellion that has left many parts of West Cameroon without police and administrative officers.
If this conflict and its impact have to be checked, the government has to change its tactics. It must understand that dialogue, indeed genuine dialogue, is an idea whose time has come. It must learn how to listen to the people. It must understand that for the country to be truly united and indivisible, it must come up with participatory approaches that will enable every Cameroon to take ownership of any and every decision that the government takes. It must stop the arbitrary arrests and must also restore the Internet. The government must also understand that the Anglophone problem is simply the tip of the iceberg and its failure to find peaceful and lasting solutions might bring the entire iceberg to the surface.
Cameroon is a key player in the Central African sub-region. It is considered as the engine of the sub-region and any problem that destabilizes Cameroon will automatically create ripple effects that will reach the other fragile countries that surround it. If the sub-region has to be spared another major man-made catastrophe, then wisdom must prevail in Cameroon. Anglophone leaders, the real leaders, most of whom are in jail, must be released and brought to the negotiating table so that together with the government, a new future can be designed for the country. The cost of conflict is always high and conflict does not benefit anybody. The government has to play its part and it must start listening to its citizens. It must stop muzzling up its citizens so that new and innovative ideas can flourish in the country. No nation has ever attained its full development potential without its citizens being able to express their minds. If Cameroon has to check the cost of this conflict, government authorities must embrace new ways. They must acknowledge that old ways have failed. The government must also understand that those who make peaceful change impossible, only make violent change inevitable. The world is watching and anything short of a peaceful resolution will be unwelcome.
Dr. Joachim Arrey.
Cameroon Concord News Group
About the Author: The author of this piece has served as the executive director of the Global Think-Tank for Africa, a Canada-based public relations outfit that provides image-related advice to African governments. He has published extensively on Cameroon’s political and economic development, especially in the early 90s when the wind of change was blowing across the continent. He has also served as a translator, technical writer, journalist and editor for several international organizations and corporations across the globe. He studied communication at the University of Leicester in the United Kingdom and technical writing in George Brown College, Toronto, Canada. He is also a trained translator and holds a Ph.D.