By Fonju Ndemesah
The President of the Republic Cameroon, His Excellency Paul Biya, in his message to the youths during the 44th Edition of the Youth day emphasized on the importance of 2010 as the culmination of 50 years of independence. The Head of State said:
“As you are already aware, 2010 will not be just another year. It does indeed mark the fiftieth anniversary of our accession to sovereignty.
This memorable event is certainly of great significance to all Cameroonians in that it restored their dignity as humans and citizens. However, for you, dear young compatriots, it must have special significance…”.
For many Cameroonians, the “special significance” of the past 50 years is overloaded with toil and increasing pauperization, which does not allow any space for celebration, but only anxiety to look for possible solutions towards the betterment of the livelihood of the people. Nonetheless, it will be unfair - to all those who fought and continue to do so in many parts of Africa, to say nothing has changed.
Cameroonians, just like many African countries, no longer forward their complains to Julius Von Soden, the first German governor to Cameroon, or to Louis Ajoulat - not to talk of a distant King or Queen called Elizabeth or Charles. They now address their plights to the present leaders who are all like them, especially in the pigmentation of the skin. The latter notwithstanding, many still question what this change of leadership has brought to the livelihood of the people? Is the governmentality that characterized the past 50 years, which President Paul Biya is asking us to celebrate, different from the government by terror and coercion which formed the basis of the colonial rule?
Scholars and keen readers of African events such as Mamdani, Mudimbe, Mbembe and Eboussi Boulaga argue that the fundamental elements and institutional foundations governing the postcolony are not different from those of the colonial period. If colonial sovereignty resided on three violent pillars: foundation violence, legitimization violence and the violence to maintain control (Mbembe 2000), the postcolonial system of governance have changed the rulers but has changed little or nothing in the ruling mentality. Just like in the colony, in the postcolony it is difficult to separate the state from the ruling figure. The two periods are governed by what Mbembe terms the “théatralisation” of commandment, continuous feastings, marching and adorations of the ruler of the moment. To say like Adésinà: ‘while colonialism failed to produce entrepreneurial, professional and middle classes, many African governments did not help matters because they ‘did not empower their peoples to embark on development initiatives to realise their creative potential’. Poor leadership, corruption and bad governance are pervasive forces further undermining weak states and dysfunctional economies inherited from colonialism’.
“Exceptional rule”- from coercion to plutocracy
It will be of little importance to point at the violence and coercion that characterized power during the colonial period, but, do events of today in Cameroon assure us of some change in the system of rule? From «le Parti Unifié » to «le Parti Unique », down to the present democratization process, presumably underpinned by its “grande ambitions” and "emergence 2035", many still question whether there have been any significant shift in the way of governance? Many observers argue that power seems to be held by a few and still characterized by terror, torture and human right abuses just like in the colony.
For example, the rule of President Ahidjo started and ended in an exceptional legislation characterized by violence with massacres, death on the train (1962), the Tombel killings (1966) and the bloody repressions of Dollé (E. Boulaga, 1997). In short the First Republic was characterized by an endemic violence.
Despite the initial euphoria that characterized the birth of the 2nd Republic, the latter immediately went back to the rule of the stick - once it had to face reality. Many recent events show that brutal force is still preferred to dialogue. The 2009 Report of the Human Right organisation, Amnesty International states that for more than 10 years the Cameroonian authorities in contravention of national and international human rights have made; “arbitrary arrests and unlawful detentions, extrajudicial executions, threats against human rights defenders and journalists, denial of rights to freedom of expression and association, harsh prison conditions, torture...”.
The policy of terror and intimidation rather than dialogue was used to repress the February 2010 protest causing the death of many innocent citizens. Political activist Mbuoa Massock was arrested on the 16 of February 2008 in the town of Zoétélé to prevent a public rally. Lapiro de Mbanga and Joe la Concience two musician and public opinion leaders were arrested in March and April 2008 for singing against the president’s plans to change the constitution to abolish the limit on the time he may remain in power. While Joe de Vinci Kameni popularly known as Joe la Conscience was released, Pierre Roger Lambo Sandjo popularly known as Lapiro de Mbanga spent three years in jail, and only came out in 2013 and later died in exile in USA.
Student protests have always been suppressed with “excessive lethal force”. In November 2006 at least two Buea students, Ivo Obia Ngemba and Moma Bennet were shot by security forces. In 2003, a demonstration of motorcycle riders (Benskin) was crushed with brutal force with five people shot death.
The above resume shows that the postcolony still makes a colonial use of power. The is still coercive and, most often, force is preferred to dialogue. Fear and terror has occupied the space of dialogue and mutual understanding. This monopoly of power by a few is also leading to increasing pressure to monopolize collective memory and space.
The Head of State talked about the celebration of the 50th anniversary of independence. What comes to the mind of many citizens are the following questions - since real dialogue and free opinion is subliminally suppressed in the ruling vocabulary, what will His Excellency say to those who believe we are independent but not free? Those who say we are not yet completely independent, or those who accept the independence but don’t agree with the present symbols used to celebrate it? I am referring to those who don’t see any need to celebrate in a country where you can meet a street named after Charles De Gaulle, Leclerc etc., but nothing with the names of of women and men many consider as the country’s real martyrs. As it has been pointed by many journalists and observers of the political scene, a monopolization of collective memory by a few is producing a disorganized organisation, which is a liability than an asset in welding the concept of nationhood that has been slowly, but smoothly, eroded by the polity of divide and rule borrowed from the colony, and applied by the successive post colonial governments in Cameroon.
Cameroon, just like many African countries, has been caught in a vicious cycle, in which economic decline, reduced capacity, and poor governance reinforce each other. Hence rather than thinking of feasting or celebrating, in many believe the Africa needs to join hands to break the ‘vicious cycle’. In fact, Cameroonian, just like many other African countries, need to seek solutions and possible actions to make the next 50 years different from the past 50 ones, which has been predominantly characterized by toil, unemployment and socio-political instability that have pushed many survive rather than live.
The President of the Republic Cameroon, His Excellency Paul Biya, in his message to the youths during the 44th Edition of the Youth day emphasized on the importance of 2010 as the culmination of 50 years of independence. The Head of State said:
“As you are already aware, 2010 will not be just another year. It does indeed mark the fiftieth anniversary of our accession to sovereignty.
This memorable event is certainly of great significance to all Cameroonians in that it restored their dignity as humans and citizens. However, for you, dear young compatriots, it must have special significance…”.
For many Cameroonians, the “special significance” of the past 50 years is overloaded with toil and increasing pauperization, which does not allow any space for celebration, but only anxiety to look for possible solutions towards the betterment of the livelihood of the people. Nonetheless, it will be unfair - to all those who fought and continue to do so in many parts of Africa, to say nothing has changed.
Cameroonians, just like many African countries, no longer forward their complains to Julius Von Soden, the first German governor to Cameroon, or to Louis Ajoulat - not to talk of a distant King or Queen called Elizabeth or Charles. They now address their plights to the present leaders who are all like them, especially in the pigmentation of the skin. The latter notwithstanding, many still question what this change of leadership has brought to the livelihood of the people? Is the governmentality that characterized the past 50 years, which President Paul Biya is asking us to celebrate, different from the government by terror and coercion which formed the basis of the colonial rule?
Scholars and keen readers of African events such as Mamdani, Mudimbe, Mbembe and Eboussi Boulaga argue that the fundamental elements and institutional foundations governing the postcolony are not different from those of the colonial period. If colonial sovereignty resided on three violent pillars: foundation violence, legitimization violence and the violence to maintain control (Mbembe 2000), the postcolonial system of governance have changed the rulers but has changed little or nothing in the ruling mentality. Just like in the colony, in the postcolony it is difficult to separate the state from the ruling figure. The two periods are governed by what Mbembe terms the “théatralisation” of commandment, continuous feastings, marching and adorations of the ruler of the moment. To say like Adésinà: ‘while colonialism failed to produce entrepreneurial, professional and middle classes, many African governments did not help matters because they ‘did not empower their peoples to embark on development initiatives to realise their creative potential’. Poor leadership, corruption and bad governance are pervasive forces further undermining weak states and dysfunctional economies inherited from colonialism’.
“Exceptional rule”- from coercion to plutocracy
It will be of little importance to point at the violence and coercion that characterized power during the colonial period, but, do events of today in Cameroon assure us of some change in the system of rule? From «le Parti Unifié » to «le Parti Unique », down to the present democratization process, presumably underpinned by its “grande ambitions” and "emergence 2035", many still question whether there have been any significant shift in the way of governance? Many observers argue that power seems to be held by a few and still characterized by terror, torture and human right abuses just like in the colony.
For example, the rule of President Ahidjo started and ended in an exceptional legislation characterized by violence with massacres, death on the train (1962), the Tombel killings (1966) and the bloody repressions of Dollé (E. Boulaga, 1997). In short the First Republic was characterized by an endemic violence.
Despite the initial euphoria that characterized the birth of the 2nd Republic, the latter immediately went back to the rule of the stick - once it had to face reality. Many recent events show that brutal force is still preferred to dialogue. The 2009 Report of the Human Right organisation, Amnesty International states that for more than 10 years the Cameroonian authorities in contravention of national and international human rights have made; “arbitrary arrests and unlawful detentions, extrajudicial executions, threats against human rights defenders and journalists, denial of rights to freedom of expression and association, harsh prison conditions, torture...”.
The policy of terror and intimidation rather than dialogue was used to repress the February 2010 protest causing the death of many innocent citizens. Political activist Mbuoa Massock was arrested on the 16 of February 2008 in the town of Zoétélé to prevent a public rally. Lapiro de Mbanga and Joe la Concience two musician and public opinion leaders were arrested in March and April 2008 for singing against the president’s plans to change the constitution to abolish the limit on the time he may remain in power. While Joe de Vinci Kameni popularly known as Joe la Conscience was released, Pierre Roger Lambo Sandjo popularly known as Lapiro de Mbanga spent three years in jail, and only came out in 2013 and later died in exile in USA.
Student protests have always been suppressed with “excessive lethal force”. In November 2006 at least two Buea students, Ivo Obia Ngemba and Moma Bennet were shot by security forces. In 2003, a demonstration of motorcycle riders (Benskin) was crushed with brutal force with five people shot death.
The above resume shows that the postcolony still makes a colonial use of power. The is still coercive and, most often, force is preferred to dialogue. Fear and terror has occupied the space of dialogue and mutual understanding. This monopoly of power by a few is also leading to increasing pressure to monopolize collective memory and space.
The Head of State talked about the celebration of the 50th anniversary of independence. What comes to the mind of many citizens are the following questions - since real dialogue and free opinion is subliminally suppressed in the ruling vocabulary, what will His Excellency say to those who believe we are independent but not free? Those who say we are not yet completely independent, or those who accept the independence but don’t agree with the present symbols used to celebrate it? I am referring to those who don’t see any need to celebrate in a country where you can meet a street named after Charles De Gaulle, Leclerc etc., but nothing with the names of of women and men many consider as the country’s real martyrs. As it has been pointed by many journalists and observers of the political scene, a monopolization of collective memory by a few is producing a disorganized organisation, which is a liability than an asset in welding the concept of nationhood that has been slowly, but smoothly, eroded by the polity of divide and rule borrowed from the colony, and applied by the successive post colonial governments in Cameroon.
Cameroon, just like many African countries, has been caught in a vicious cycle, in which economic decline, reduced capacity, and poor governance reinforce each other. Hence rather than thinking of feasting or celebrating, in many believe the Africa needs to join hands to break the ‘vicious cycle’. In fact, Cameroonian, just like many other African countries, need to seek solutions and possible actions to make the next 50 years different from the past 50 ones, which has been predominantly characterized by toil, unemployment and socio-political instability that have pushed many survive rather than live.
 |  |