Doubts over credibility of public exams growing

Entrance tests into some professional schools are often reportedly marred by corruption.

Over the years, the cankerworm of corruption has kept its ugly head stuck in the conduct of administrative competitive examinations into professional schools which usually open the doors to permanent, decent and more secure jobs in various departments of the Civil Service.

As Cameroonians scramble for the few places usually advertised for such schools spread around the country, survival of the smartest in corrupt practices has become the norm, while merit is the exception.

Tales and experiences abound in Cameroon as to how much is given in bribe by candidates in administrative competitive examinations to succeed. More so, another popular form of corruption, called influence peddling, is used by some influential State personalities, corporate and political heavyweights to oblige examination organisers to include the names of their candidates, whether the latter sat for the examination or not and no matter their performance.

This phenomenon has grown out of proportion, explaining why so many shades of opinion increasingly cast doubts on the country’s system of administrative competitive examinations. The level of credibility has dropped to the extent that many blame corruption in examinations for professional insensitivity, incompetence and malpractices observed amongst a growing number of public servants today.

It is therefore easy to comprehend why the bill to revise the Penal Code, under scrutiny in Parliament, spells out in its new Section 163-1 punishment for malpractices in administrative competitive examinations and other examinations.

In effect, Section 163-1(1) is to the effect that whoever, through corruption, facilitates the success or causes the failure of a candidate in an administrative competitive examination or other examinations shall be punished with imprisonment for from 2 (two) to 5 (five) years or with fine of from FCFA 200,000 to FCFA 2,000,000 or with both such imprisonment and fine.

Section 163-1(2) even adds that whoever through corruption declares successful one of more candidates who did not sit an examination shall be punished as provided for in Section 163-1(1). Tough times lie ahead should this bill be promulgated. To be forewarned is to be forearmed!