Time for Anglophones solidarity in defence of collective identity

In my contribution to the current debate on “English Language banned in NW Courts – Lawyers to make submissions in French only” which comes in reaction to interview Bar. Robert Nso Fon granted Sylvanus Ezieh as published in The Cameroon Journal of Feb. 27, 2015, I regret to state that in spite of the anger this ill-treatment has generated, the problem is still being treated in an isolated manner. Sylvanus Ezieh opens his story with a loud cry “The Common Law Practice has again suffered a major setback.” Most regrettably with all the facts before us we continue to compartmentalise a major problem well masterminded and deliberately executed to erase a country from the map of Africa, assimilate a people with a distinct identity, history, culture, heritage, a political entity in international law, indeed a nation state. By this escapist attitude we make it a trivial issue.

Sylvanus Ezieh briefly refers to last year’s problem on appointment of notaries. On this matter I addressed an Open Letter to the Common Law Lawyers, captioned “WE MUST BE OUR OWN REDEEMERS!” For its relevance in this matter, it is here attached for your comprehensive exploitation.

Bar. Nso Fon in this interview said “We are obliged to make our submissions in French, so why would they oblige us to make our submissions in French again in our own courts?” May I ask “We” who? And which “our own courts?” These two questions, “we” who? And which “our own courts?” constitute the basis of my contribution. What is implicit here is that Bar. Robert Fon is painting a picture of distinction but in my humble opinion at the same time failing to project and rigorously hold unto by playing the game of accommodation via submission as if not sure of his self-worth and distinct identity of his people and NATION on whose behalf he speaks.

The question is if Robert Nso Fon, his Anglophone Lawyers and Judges and the people they stand for have their own courts, should Francophonesie foreigners, be appointed to lord it over them? If they have their own courts, should those responsible for decision-making and appointment not also be their own people with the same shared ideals and values?

When such a complex problem of international dimension is reduced to an issue of fighting for the rights of a “minority”, we miss the issue, indeed the big picture. When it is reduced to Francophone vs Anglophone, we trivialise it into conflict between two tribes in one politico-legal entity or nation state whereas it is not.

The Common Law and Civil Law Conflict in which the former is suffocating under the crushing weight of the latter is the direct consequence of the annexation, colonial occupation which goes with assimilation of British Southern Cameroons, which inherited the Common Law System, by la Republique du Cameroun that inherited the Civil Law System. The point is that the two are incompatible; they are like light and darkness and with la Republique du Cameroun controlling all the statepowers, the Civil Law has become the stronger force and dictating with the mission of annihilating the Common Law system. This explains why Francophone judges now have to lord it in Southern Cameroons courts or Common Law jurisdiction courts.

What Fon and his colleagues should know is that the occupied and annexed have no voice and rights and no independent institutions of their own to be respected and preserved by the occupier and annexationist. That is why I raise the question “we”,who?and “which our own courts?” Until we call the thing by its right name and confront it head on, our efforts will ever remain futile and subjected to compartmentalisation. Annexation like colonialism is a monster that can never be panel-beaten and given a human face. It must be fought against and destroyed or it destroys you!

The more we continue to talk of harmonisation of the educational system, the GCE problems, admission of unqualified Francophone into our professional schools at the detriment of our own qualified students, the posting of Francophone to teach our children in Fran-Anglais, harmonisation of the legal system, appointment of notaries, discriminatory payment of Traditional Rulers, appointment of Francophone judges to lord it in Anglophone courts, among others, we miss the central issue. The pertinent question is why is it always the other way round? Just to use your terminologies: if Anglophone lawyers are obliged to make presentation in Francophone courts in French why Francophone judges should not similarly be obliged to make submissions in Anglophone courts in English? Because British Southern Cameroons has become the footstool of la Republique du Cameroun and its citizens exist at the pleasure of the powers that be, their captors. Is there any Francophone region in which all judges of the Appeal court are Anglophones? Will any among us be thinking rightly to conclude that the posting of FrancophoneJudges to the Court of Appeal in Bamenda is in error?

Southern Cameroonians, journalists, including lawyers and retired judges have been kidnapped and taken to la Republique du Cameroun and tried under the Napoleonic Code by Francophone Judges after having been set free by Anglophone Judges in Anglophone Courts. On evidence judgements delivered by Anglophone Courts have been set aside and accused Southern Cameroonians retried under the Civil law in la Republique territory and convicted, etc. Can you name one; I say just one instance where one trial of whoever Francophone suspect was transferred from the Civil Court and retried under the Common Law by Anglophone Judges and judgement passed?

North West Fons have gone to Yaoundé and protested against one thing or the other and come back. The Fako Chiefs have taken their turn and gesticulated and returned. In Manyu the Chiefs gesticulated against the timber companies who have taken over the rich forest and are destroying the environment offering no compensations and providing not even roads. Under the pretext of listening to their cries they were assembled with their notables, arrested, tortured and detained. The logs destined for export at the Douala seaport are stamped, Sangmalima. As royalty for petrol is paid to Douala City Council, so is royalty for timber paid to Sangmalima City Council, in la Republique du Cameroun. British Southern Cameroons is la Republique du Cameroun’s colony and every colony is a farm for the metropolis.

Last year the lawyers took their turn and marched in their flamboyant robes and returned. While discussing with Bar. Fon, President of NOWELA, I told him the Yaoundé regime has a diabolic scheme to which dialogue and listening to the cries and will of British Southern Cameroons is anathema or an unnecessary luxury. I told him the solution they expect from their protests and so-called audiences with the big guns in Yaoundé is calm before the storm through the window, I must admit, I was beaten down flat even in my prediction for as Bar. Fon has admitted himself and we are all witnesses, the storm came through the wide door and swept the Barrister and his peers off their feet

A holistic perception and approach is the only way out. That is why Samuel Laikenjoh and Albert Zama make their firm recommendations calling for boycott of all court sessions by all Southern Cameroons (not Anglophone) lawyers and judges as a starting point.

If there was any union at all, the entities involved were not Anglophone and Francophone. There were British Southern Cameroons and la Republique du Cameroun, political entities of equal standing with full rights of national self-existence in international law. This must be respected and defended for union of any kind does not mean absorption or annexation of the one by the other.

Taking 1961 as the take-off point when these two distinct entities came together, this is what the Montevideo Convention of 1933 on the Rights and Duties of States in its Art. 1 has for our inspiration and take home message that should reinforce our legitimate resolve for the change we urgently need;

“The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications: (a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.”

The fundamental question is was British Southern Cameroons a state in 1961? The answer is a resounding YES! Art. 3 of this very Convention which is respected and like other similar international instruments govern relations between nation states state that the right to self-existence is a function of its internal system including the courts. But where is British Southern Cameroons today?

And the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACHPR) in its Ruling on Communication 266/2003 in 2009 confirmed and upheld the distinctiveness of British Southern Cameroonians from la Republique du Cameroun citizens when in Art. 179 it declares;

“…The Commission finds that ‘the people of Southern Cameroon” qualify to be referred to as a “people” because they manifest numerous characteristics and affinities which include a common history, linguistic tradition, territorial connection, and political outlook. More importantly they identify themselves as a people with a separate and distinct identity. Identity is an innate characteristic within a people. It is up to other external people to recognise such existence, but not to deny it.”

From these you now understand what I mean by the big picture we miss when we compartmentalise the problem or play into the annexationist’s diabolic policy of divide, weaken and rule forever.

We must not be deceived and carried away by the smiles of someone with a hidden agenda and armed with guns against our distinct identity, inherent political and legal rights and aspirations.

We must stop listening to empty promises when the hard fact of annexation, colonial occupation, economic plunder, subjugation, is what we live every day.

We must as a people, those in the diaspora included, in solidarity say “No” to personal favours and temporary solutions for what affects one, concerns us all and posterity.

We must say “YES to permanent solution! YES to people centred solution, and in solidarity rise in defence of collective identity. This will permanently place us on the map of free peoples and free nations, the status we lost in 1961 as a people and nation state under international supervision. We must be our own redeemer for the will of the people and right to self –determination is a permanent right of any given people and becomes a matter of urgency for a people under annexation. Like Namibians, South Africans, Estonians, who suffered same, we deserve no less! NOW IS THE TIME!