By AkereMuna (of Lincoln Inn London)
Barrister at Law
Senior Barrister AkereMuna, a source of
inspiration to Common Law Lawyers
|
Forcing learned gentlemen of the law into
the streets robed in their wigs and gowns is something no government should
wish for. Lawyers are the defenders of those who without power, and the
watchdogs of the rule of law. Citizens, who are witnesses to such a spectacle,
will immediately feel fragile, and the existence of the rule of law in any
country immediately be questioned.
As
pictures of lawyers flooded the social media last November 8, 2016, and as I
saw lawyers in the streets of Bamenda armed only with their ideas, their
professional paraphernalia and the request for dialogue, I wondered about the
kind of denial that causes a few to think that because they shut their eyes
nothing is happening; and that because they close their ears nothing is being said.
The
fact that I can relate without any strain to the frustration of the Common Law
practitioner convinces me to conclude that, the effects of cultural diversity
in a country on the behavior of its citizens are complex and powerful.
The
time has therefore come for our nation to put into place a new paradigm for the
management of our cultural diversity. That is the price we must pay to find
true unity we seek and through it the strength for which we clamor.
From
the dawn of the federation of Cameroon, the biggest challenge that hung over it
like the “Damocles Sword”, was and has been the management of our diversity.
Passionate
Southern Cameroonians who had the vision of a United States of Africa, thought
that maybe a United Cameroon was just the place to start. They felt the
shackles that were constituted by a legacy of different cultures could not be
allowed to stand in the way of the re-unification of peoples torn apart and
dispersed by a war they did not start and had nothing to do with. A war which caused
the colonizer to suddenly discover in Africans the virtue of valuable partners
for the purpose of war but at the same time maintaining them as second class citizens for the purpose
of colonization.
The
Federation that was born guaranteed the protection of diversity. It did so
through its constitution. A Bilingual Nation, Federated States with their own
Parliaments and Governments, a President and Vice President, one from either
culture. Inherited laws, practices and customs maintained in either state of
the federation and several other guarantees.
So
the Common Law Lawyers had a Bar freely elected and independent, the civil law
jurisdiction had no bar and were under the control of the government whose
prerogative it was to appoint lawyers.
Under
the seduction of a 100% increase and even more in salaries West Cameroonians
made the chant “going federal” their mantra. Yes, salaries were doubled even
tripled, and some people moved to Yaounde. Arrears were paid on the new
salaries and people carted away tons of money.
“Federalization”
was indeed a misnomer, for what in fact was the path to a centralization that
spelt the death of the federation. Still in good faith, the new form of union
was given a chance.
Dealing
with the legal framework meant the organization of the Bar had to be revisited.
So a new Law was passed in 1972 creating a Cameroon Bar totally controlled by
the government in which the lawyers were appointed by a presidential decree.
The decade that followed was one in which the Baar fought for its independence
and that is another story.
The
point of this story is not to make a pilgrimage into the past, but to reflect
on the way forward. Some of those who have made the need to have a homogenous
society their objective have failed to ensure that it does not become
synonymous to assimilation.
Any
society with a minority that has a specific historical, geographical, and
socio-political history must be managed in a manner to allay any fears of
assimilation or discrimination and prejudice.
The
movement of the Common Law Lawyers today must bring us to admit that diversity
in our country has been mismanaged. This has produced, negative dynamics,
ethnocentrism, stereotyping and cultural clashes. These negative dynamics over
the years have combined with imbalanced structures to create an atmosphere of
social injustice.
While
it is true that diversity might well create ambiguity, complexity and even
confusion, the danger of assimilation under the guise of harmonization now
appears as a time bomb. In such an atmosphere polarization of social groups
becomes easy and this ultimately will breed cynicism and resentment and even
heightened friction and tension that could all lead to unfathomable
consequences in terms of civil and political unrest.
It
will be remiss of me to give the impression that there are no other diversities
to be managed. Different groups have come up with memoranda about their
regions, what is the response? These are the cries of people who feel that they
have been left behind or in some cases left out totally.
Many
international reports have concluded that the economic predicament of the areas
attacked in the Central African Region, indeed facilitated the penetration by
the terrorists. Thus many regions do face discrimination in many subtle forms,
which are slowly contributing to disappointment and anger.
When
conflict is the unfortunate outcome, the “majority” or the group controlling
power will see and treat any incident as “isolated” when in fact the minority
just count it as another event in the pattern of oppression and injustice that
is imbedded in the system.
I
must hasten to add that there have been times when I have personally been
witness to the clear demonstration of political will to protect diversity and
ensure the respect of our constitution. When the very first OHADA laws were
promulgated, the then Minister of Justice, Mr. Laurent Esso, delayed the
application of the OHADA laws throughout the territory until they were
translated and duly gazette. He did this regardless of the coming into force
date as per the treaty. He insisted to the dismay of OHADA authorities that our
nation is bi-lingual and bi-jural. Further, the accommodation of our judicial
system is clear evidence of the fact that diversity can be accommodated.
In
the final analysis, we must avoid building a nation where dialogue is
assimilated to weakness and the strength of nation demonstrated by the use of
force against its own people. We must have a system that builds in horizontal
and vertical communication in the management of our diversity. We must unlearn
practices rooted in an old mind set, change the way we manage we manage
diversity in our nation, shift our culture, revamp our policies, redesign and
create new structures and emphasize the fact that the ultimate goal of any
Government is a better life for its citizens.
The
Swiss, Nigerians, the Belgians, the Canadians, the Tanzanians just to name a
few have all learned this. It is urgent that a high level Dialogue be
initiated.
So
heed to the cry of the Common Law lawyers we must, otherwise in the words of
Alan Paton in his revered book Cry the Beloved Country “I have one great fear
in my heart, that one day, when they are turned to loving they will find that
we are turned to hating”. Respecting diversity might well mean CRTV channels in
English, Cameroon Tribune reverts to having an English Edition as it once did
and Supreme Court having Common Law Benches sitting as it once was.
The
cultural assimilation of a people no matter how well disguised cannot be
successful and can ultimately only lead to disastrous consequences for the
concerned. The legal system of Cameroon is bi-jural constitutionally,
politically, socially, culturally and intellectually. Disregarding this fact is
an assault on the very foundation on which the nation is built.
No comments:
Post a Comment