Translate

Monday, May 31, 2010

Cameroon: Buea Council Prepares Stakeholders for Decentralization Challenges

By Chrsitopher Ambe Shu
Hundreds of stakeholders across all walks of life –from far and wide, were for two days- May 26 & 27, participants in a forum on “Participation-The Challenge for Decentralization in Cameroon.”
The public dialogue meeting was organized by Buea Council in partnership with the Freidrich Ebert Stitung(FES) in Yaoundé.

According to Mayor of Buea, Charles Mbella Moki(pictured above reading speech), the initiative was a manifestation of his council’s overriding philosophy of “putting People First”, He added that his Council believes in a people-driven approach to development.

The forum coordinator and project consultant, Tedd Eyong of GREMPCO Cameroon, noted that although 2010 is the start of decentralization in Cameroon, many people were skeptical about the process and how they could get involved in it to better their communities.

Opening the forum, Peter Nde, Secretary-General at Southwest Governor’s office, who sat in for Governor Koumpa ISSA, was particularly thankful to FES for what he said was their continued support to good governance in Cameroon. Mr.Nde stressed that decentralization is now a reality in Cameroon and urged concerned stakeholders to be more proactive.

The key note address was delivered by Ndiva Kofele Kale, University Distinguished Professor & Professor of Law from the USA.

Professor Kake, whose paper was titled” The Challenges & Opportunities of Decentralisation: Buea in the Year 2060” moved the large audience when he demonstrated a mastery of the subject matter. He distinguished, with examples, the various types of decentralization

The keynote speaker remarked:” Decentralization may not be the panacea that it is touted to be if it is only limited to the “deconcentrattion” of national authority and services to the local level, without the devolution of revenue-generating and decision-making authority necessary for true decentralization.”

Papers presented by other resource persons included: Development stakeholders and the decentralization process: who gets what? (By Professor Joyce Endeley of University of Buea), the 2012 municipal elections: Business as usual? (By George Ngwane, of AFRICAPHONIE).

Participants later broke into committees to brainstorm and come up with recommendations for  better development blueprints.

THE CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES OF DECENTRALIZATION: Buea in the Year 2060!

Being a keynote address presented by Ndiva Kofele KALE , University Distinguished Professor & Professor of Law(from USA), during a Public Dialogue on Decentralization Organized by the Buea Municipal Council of Cameroon, under the theme “Participation: the challenge for Decentralization in Cameroon” at Pan-African Institute for Development Buea, 26-27 May, 2010
Introduction
In the early hours of November 23 in the year of our Lord 79 A.D., the area around Mt. Vesuvius shook with a huge earthquake; as the mountain split open it released a mushroom cloud that rose upward to nearly 60,000 feet (18,000 meters), that is twice the cruising altitude of most commercial jet planes! Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus, aka Pliny the Younger, Roman senator, lawyer & amateur historian-- whose eye-witness account of the eruption the great Roman historian, Tacitus, relied on in writing the history of this period– described huge, billowing, gray-black clouds. Under this shroud of pitch darkness, the inhabitants of Pompeii, a prosperous Roman city situated at the base of Mt. Vesuvius, were showered non-stop with hot volcanic ash mixed with pumice-stones.

Ladies and Gentlemen, imagine, if you will, a powerful current of hot larva rushing toward you at breakneck speed, estimated at about 100miles an hour (160 kilometers per hour), hour after hour for nearly 18 hours. By the time it stopped, Pompeii & most of its citizens were buried under 22 meters (72 feet) of volcanic ash. And there they remained, forgotten for nearly 1600 years until the ruins were accidentally rediscovered in 1592.
Buea sits on the southeastern slope of Mt. Cameroon which like Mt. Vesuvius is an active volcano. Six times in the 20th century and once in this century, Fako has not disappointed. What if the next volcanic eruption produces consequences on the same scale as those of Vesuvius 1,921 years ago? What is the probability that our Buea could become the 21st century version of ancient Pompeii?
Ladies and Gentlemen, we cannot make projections on Buea fifty years from now without contemplating the possibility that Buea may cease to exist long before that. Fifty years is a long time and anything can happen. Certainly if anyone had told Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus in May 79 AD that Pompeii would be reduced to rubble and buried under its own weight in a matter of months, he would most likely have dismissed it as a tasteless joke. The disappearance of Pompeii would have been the last thing on his mind! Just as that of Buea is the last thing anyone in this audience is willing to contemplate.
However, in the firm belief that divine providence has reserved for Buea a fate far better than that which befell ancient Pompeii, let us now move on to the task I was commissioned to execute. A wise man once observed that: Only fools rush in where even angels fear to tread. But that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is precisely what I agreed to do when I accepted the Honorable Moki mo’Mbella’s invitation to address this distinguished assemblage on the topic: “The Challenges and Opportunities of Decentralization: Buea in the year 2060” which, if you note, is bifurcated: the first part invites us to critically review the challenges and opportunities of decentralization. I suspect you are asking the same question I have put to myself since I pronounced that fateful “yes” to the invitation: Who would be that foolish and reckless to accept to engage a topic of this kind in a conclave of elected mayors and municipal councilors. You, after all, are the men and women on the frontline who wrestle daily with the vagaries of this phenomenon. No one knows better than you the multiple challenges and promises of decentralization. So, I shall not presume to lecture you on a subject the intricacies of which you, undeniably, are the acknowledged experts.
The other half of the topic: Buea in the year 2060, presupposes a certain expertise in gazing at a crystal ball in order to foretell the future. Here again I have recklessly positioned myself on treacherous ground because this job of clairvoyance is one better left to the marabouts. And not just any marabout but only the grand marabouts! In my defense, I enter two pleas:
First, the Mayor of Buea was very persuasive in cajoling me into accepting this invitation and before I realized what I was saying it was already too late.
Secondly, I believe that in life a person should always strive to ensure that his reach exceeds his grasp; and there are times when one has to throw caution to the wind and proceed where even angels think twice before venturing in!

Ladies and Gentlemen, I submit that any discourse on the challenges and opportunities of decentralization makes little sense unless it is contextualized. For practitioners like you, a bland, sterile, academic discussion on this subject would hardly be engaging. I think it would be much more fruitful if we were to tackle this issue of decentralization by relating it to the concrete case of a municipality, one that is fixed both in time and space. Should you agree and I do hope you do, then I would like to put to you the following question: what would the municipality of Buea look like 50 years from now when, presumably, the process of decentralization would have reached its apogee? To answer this question requires me to work my way backwards:
First, I place Buea in its historical context, i.e., its past, present and future on the hunch that what Buea was, is and will influence the nature, the shape and form of its decentralization;
Next, I situate the concept of decentralization on the broader landscape of democratic local governance. One cannot separate “decentralization” from the democratic imperative, because historically the former has always been a response to the prodding of the latter and both, like Siamese twins, are inextricably bound;

Finally, I touch on the challenges decentralization presents and the opportunities it offers to municipalities like Buea.

PART I: BUEA IN HISTORICAL CONTEXT: Past, Present and Future
Fifty years from today Buea would be commemorating its 305th anniversary as home to an intrepid band of hunters led by Ey’a Njia Tama Lifanje who crossed Fako from the west, sometime between 1750 and 1755, heading southeastwards in pursuit of their quarry, finally settling in Buea. From its modest beginning Buea gradually developed into a powerful garrison state, with strong expansionist tendencies. Between 1755 and 1895, a period of almost 140 years, Buea was able to assert its independence and dominance over its immediate neighbors until it was conquered by German colonial forces in November 1895. At the height of its power, the population of this “Kingdom on Mount Cameroon” (Ardener’s felicitous term) hardly rose above 1,500.
Today Buea has an estimated population of between 200,000 and 300,000. This number would likely climb to between two and three million or more by the year 2060. Based on UN projections, population growth in general and urban growth in particular, in the next twenty years, is expected to be particularly rapid in Africa, averaging 5% per year. Interestingly, Cameroon’s annual urban growth rate is in line with the African average. So, we should expect the Buea population to continue to swell in the next fifty years and this growth will be the product of the same factors that account for urban growth elsewhere in Africa:
 rural–urban migration,
 natural population increase, and
 the geographic expansion of Buea’s current administrative boundaries through annexations (e.g., tacking on Ekona and Idenau to the Buea municipality).

Against this backdrop, it bears asking what the demographic profile of Buea would be fifty years from today? The small band of Bakweri-speaking hunters who accompanied Eye Njie to their new encampment in Buea in 1755 could not have numbered more than ten families. On the eve of the First Bakweri-German War in 1891 these first settlers had grown to between 1,000 and 1,500 inhabitants. Sixty-five years later, the number of Bakweri in all of Fako Division stood at about 16,000; hardly what one would consider an impressive rate of growth. Since Edwin Ardener’s pioneering 1953 study on divorce and fertility among the Bakweri, where he observed an alarming slump in this group’s fertility rates, anecdotal evidence confirms this decline to have continued unabated! So, for instance, by 1974 there were an estimated 17 non-Bakweri to every indigenous person in Fako Division. This trend raises some particularly troubling questions regarding the cosmopolitan character of Buea in the year 2060.
Fifty years from today, how many Bakweri will be counted among the population of Buea?
Who will the new migrants to Buea in the next fifty years be and where will they be coming from?
What face, complexion and accent will this new influx of people to Buea have?

What would Buea’s municipal government look like in the year 2060? Current electoral law stipulates that in confectioning a list of candidates for municipal council elections, political parties and the administration must “take into consideration the various sociological components of the constituency.”

How will this translate in a Buea, if those who constitute the majority population already control most, if not all, of the local governments in say, Donga-Mantung, Lebielem, Mezam and Momo Divisions?

How does one promote and protect “sociological sensibilities” in the case of an indigenous people who are vastly outnumbered by the immigrant population by, say, a ratio of ten to one?

As we approach the year 2060 are those halcyon days gone when it was simplistically assumed that the elected mayor of Buea as well as the parliamentarians representing this constituency would automatically be Bakweri?

Exponential growth and overwhelming pressure on municipal services
Brushing aside for the moment these sociological imponderables, what other problems await the citizens of Buea half a century from now? Cameroonian economist, Fondo Sikod, squarely identifies some of those problems and challenges:
Cameroon has no planned urban area. Towns grow haphazardly, covering surrounding rural neighbourhoods which become urban informal settlements as the poor colonize them. There is no zoning in these areas and population densities are usually very high. Houses are built in any shape, style and size and face any direction. The result is that some people's living rooms face other people's pit latrines or garbage dumps. There are no sewers in the poor neighbourhoods. Quite often, water for drinking and cooking comes from wells that are close to pit latrines.
Sikod is describing Buea, Kumba, Mamfe, Edea, Maroua, in short, the average Cameroonian town. But his cold and clinical assessment of the current state of urbanization in Cameroon unwittingly provides urban planners with a blueprint of what to avoid and what to pursue as they plan ahead for Buea’s future. Luckily for these designers they have fifty years to tinker around in order to get it right. Question: how far along would decentralization have gone to permit the population of Buea to take ownership of their metropolis and through a democratic process shape it the way that best serves their collective interests? This question can be better answered if we are all agreed on what decentralization is and what its reformist and transformative potentials are.

PART II: DECENTRALIZATION: Challenges and Opportunities

Cameroon like many African countries is in the process of decentralizing significant functions to local governments. Here we understand decentralization to mean the transfer of authority and responsibility from the central government to subordinate or quasi-independent government organizations or the private sector. Because decentralization is a hydra-headed creature, it is important to distinguish among the various types of decentralization. This is necessary because they have different characteristics, policy implications, and conditions for success.
• Deconcentration refers to the redistribution of financial and management responsibilities among different levels of the central government. Often considered the weakest form of decentralization, deconcentration is used most frequently in unitary states. Within this category, however, policies and opportunities for local input vary:

o deconcentration can merely shift responsibilities from central government officials in the capital city to those working in regions or divisions (essentially it is the assignment of specific functions and tasks performed by the staff of the headquarters of central administrations to staff posted in peripheral locations within the national territory), or

o it can create strong field administration or local administrative capacity under the supervision of central government ministries.

• Delegation is a more extensive form of decentralization. Here the central government transfers responsibility for decision-making and administration of public functions to semi-autonomous organizations not wholly controlled by the central government, though ultimately accountable to it.
o Governments delegate responsibilities when they create public enterprises or corporations, housing authorities, transportation authorities, special service districts, semi-autonomous school districts, regional development corporations, or special project implementation units. They may be exempt from constraints on regular civil service personnel and may be able to charge users directly for services.

• Devolution is the transfer of authority for decision-making, finance, and management to quasi-autonomous units of local government with corporate status. Devolution usually transfers responsibilities for services to municipalities that elect their own mayors and councils, raise their own revenues, and have independent authority to make investment decisions.
o In a devolved system, local governments have clear and legally recognized geographical boundaries over which they exercise authority and within which they perform public functions. It is this type of decentralization that underlies most political decentralization.
It is important that we understand the full implications of real devolution so as not to confuse it with inadequate devolution. The choice of devolution implies changes in the political and fiscal dimensions of government. Local governments to which authority and resources are devolved acquire the power of autonomous initiative and decision making with respect to setting their own rules, goals and objectives. They also acquire the power of elaborating and implementing their own policies and strategies, and of allocating resources to different activities within the domain assigned to them. In addition, they often are given authority to raise financial resources, through taxes, and in some cases, to borrow on the capital markets. When these critical elements are missing what we have instead is inadequate devolution.
• Fiscal decentralization. Financial responsibility is at the heart of decentralization. To carry out their decentralized functions effectively, local governments and private NGOs must have adequate revenues, either raised locally or transferred from the central government, as well as the authority to make expenditure decisions. Fiscal decentralization can take many forms, including:
• Self-financing or cost recovery through user charges;
o Co financing or co production, in which users participate in providing services and infrastructure through monetary or labor contributions
o Expansion of local revenues through property or sales taxes or indirect charges
o intergovernmental transfers of general revenues from taxes collected by the central government to local governments for general or specific uses;
o Authorization of municipal borrowing and mobilization of national or local government resources through loan guarantees.
Why decentralization? Several factors account for the current interest in decentralization? What has motivated countries to decentralize?
In response to a constitutional imperative. For example, article 1, paragraph (1)(2) of the Constitution of Cameroon describes the Republic as “a decentralized unitary State” while Part X-- articles 55-62-- enshrines the autonomy of sub national governments (see also the Constitutions of Ghana, Uganda, Senegal, Nigeria, Burkina Faso and South Africa). Such an entrenchment makes it more difficult for national institutions to erode the power and authority of local institutions;

As a response to pressures from regional and ethnic groups for more control and participation in political processes and in the process strengthening local democracy. Here decentralization could be nothing more than a desperate attempt to keep a country together in the face of centrifugal and centripetal pressures by granting more autonomy to all localities or by forging “asymmetrical federations;”—the case of Ethiopia.
As an outcome of internal unrest; for instance, in Uganda and Mozambique, decentralization allowed local participation and brought together warring factions;

In recognition of the limitations and the failure of central administration and the need to improve service delivery at the local level—a means of ensuring that infrastructure and service provision reach the greatest number of people;

In the absence of a meaningful alternative governance structure to provide local government services; in failed states (Somalia, Haiti come to mind) where there is no functioning central government, the enterprise of governance usually falls on private NGOs.
An involuntary response to external pressure—decentralization was one of the conditionalities in the World Bank structural adjustment reform package of the 1980s. Countries receiving structural adjustment loans were strongly ‘encouraged’ to deconcentrate their over-centralized government administration and to strengthen local governments through devolution of various functions previously entrusted to central government units.
Enabling Environment for Decentralization
Is there an archetypal political environment that is particularly receptive to the decentralization impulse? I ask because in our continent decentralization is being pursued in Anglophone, Francophone, and Lusophone countries. These countries have inherited the administrative and political traditions of the former colonial powers and their regimes, and these have in turn influenced how decentralization policies were developed and implemented.
Are Anglophone countries better wired to receive decentralization, weaned on, as they have been, to the British political tradition of “Indirect Rule” where the central government does not have direct power to discipline local authorities but can control through subventions (financial allocations) and judicial decisions? This system contrasts with the French and Portuguese systems of local government that are highly centralized and where the “prefect” is directly under the (disciplinary) control of the central government.
Colonial heritage aside, does a country’s political configuration advance or retard decentralization?
• Do federal systems, for example, facilitate decentralization and development better than unitary systems?
• Do the former have a better institutional framework and the basic capacity building tools supportive of decentralized governance?
It has been advanced in some quarters that local governments in unitary systems function largely as administrative units of the center, within legislative powers assigned to them by the central government. This is in sharp contrast to a federal system where different independent governments make public decisions and provide opportunities (more so than unitary systems) for the participation of the local population. You who travel around the world observing local governments in action, let me ask you: whether Accra, Ghana is managed differently from Dakar in Senegal? Better? Efficiently? How different are the municipal governments of Ikom or Calabar in Nigeria from those of Eyumojock and Santa? I suspect that Nigerian and Ghanaian municipalities are organized, managed and governed differently from their French-speaking counterparts. And I make bold the claim that these differences are not just limited to style and design but are quite fundamental!

The Challenges and Opportunities of Decentralization
Decentralization creates both challenges and opportunities. I limit myself here to three of the principal challenges:
The Lack of Political Will: Despite pronouncements to the contrary, central governments often do not want to devolve power to the local level. National political leaders and civil servants may resist decentralization for any number of reasons, from the narrow, parochial interest of retaining power to the broader concern of maintaining national oversight in the interest of uniformity.
The Management Challenge: As the process of decentralization, it will not take that long for reality to sink in that many local governments have limited financial and human resources and inadequate governance capacity to fulfill the mandate thrust upon them. Many of our municipal governments lack the necessary institutional capacity to manage their rapidly growing populations. As central administration shifts to untested local governments responsibility for, say, public health, education, shelter, waste management, and so on, few of them are equipped with the technical and managerial expertise needed to take on these new responsibilities. Will the next fifty years make a difference?

The Challenge of Unrequited Expectations: Decentralization may not be the panacea that it is touted to be if it is only limited to the “deconcentration” of national authority and services to the local level, without the devolution of revenue-generating and decision-making authority necessary for true decentralization. Absent this degree of autonomy from the central government, local governments may be circumscribed in their ability to track and account for local government funds and make wise decisions on how to spend the funds.
Decentralization is about the shifting of assignments and responsibilities and comfortably ensconced within this realignment of tasks and authority are boundless opportunities to be harnessed. Let me mention only two:

The Promise of Good Governance: decentralization helps to clean up government, improve services and improve local administration; it makes local governments more participatory, more accountable, and, consequently, more effective.

The Expansion of Political Space: decentralization can bring government closer to the people and can become a means to empower citizens locally. That is, beyond simply devolving administration or management of service delivery to sub national units, decentralization can also lead to the creation of sustainable democratic processes that guarantee popular participation in local governance through town meetings, public hearings on major issues, participatory planning and budgeting, and opinion surveys.

But these opportunities can only be exploited only when the necessary conditions for creating more transparent, accountable, responsive and effective local governments are in place. That is:
An appropriate legal and regulatory framework, especially one that supports market-oriented municipal finance

Allows access to private sector borrowing facilities becomes necessary when public sector resources are insufficient to meet all infrastructure investment needs;

A strong civil society, and increased opportunities for participation in the governance process, and

Local governments with the capacity to manage, finance and deliver services. At the end of the day, what matters most is that the Buea local government is able to deliver services to its residents and that citizens of this town have recourse through democratic means should their local government be unwilling or unable to deliver those services.
These crucial basics respond to both the supply of and demand requirements for good governance. If by the year 2060 the Buea municipal government is in a position to improve the delivery of key services (e.g., education, community health care, potable water), the tangible benefits that result can demonstrate the value of decentralized democratic governance.
Conclusion
Ladies and Gentlemen, I have rambled on for much too long and your patience is beginning to wear thin even though you are much too polite to say so. Let me now mercifully bring this to a close by offering this thought: when the population of Buea gathers in the year 2060 to celebrate three centuries of their city’s existence, many of us assembled in this room today will not be alive to behold that momentous event. But a few of you here would and it is to you then that I wish to extend a happy birthday in advance! I extend my heartfelt thanks to Mayor Moki mo’Mbella whose gracious invitation accounts for my presence here today; Sir, I hope it was all worth the trouble. To you, our municipal magistrates and distinguished guests, I say thank you for listening. Moderators, this concludes my presentation!

Cameroon :ELECAM Officials Told to Prove Their Worth To Gain Public Confidence

By Christopher Ambe Shu
Mohaman Sani, Director-General of Elections Cameroon (ELECAM), has commissioned into office the pioneer officials(pictured) of the body for the Southwest Region and challenged them to prove their worth to gain public confidence

During the installation, which took place last May 26, at the National Advanced School of Public Works Buea Annex, and was massively attended by people of all walks of life, the Director-General said ELECAM is an independent body “responsible for the organization, management and supervision of all election operations and referendums in the region”

The newly installed Southwest Delegation for ELECAM is headed by Njang Emmanuel Mbeng, a veteran High School teacher. He shall be directly assisted in the coverage of the region by six divisional branch heads and many council branch heads.

“You are responsible for the administrative coordination of all services of ELECAM in the Southwest and for all electoral operations and refendums in the region,” Mohaman Sani tasked the pioneer Southwest ELECAM boss.

“Your skill as field worker will be abundantly put to test on a daily basis. You must ensure a smooth functioning of various services under your authority and make sure in due time ,that voters are regularly registered, that voters ‘cards are properly distributed, that election material has reached final destination, that mixed electoral commissions are working properly, that polling stations have been organized and equipped…”

The newly installed were reminded of the public service mission of ELECAM and advised to welcome suggestions and advice.

In his New Year Message to the Nation on December 31, 2009, President Biya reiterated need for furthering Cameroon’s democratic process, adding that ELECAM might require adjustments.

"Ultimately, we will have an electoral mechanism that will make the results of upcoming polls unchallengeable,” he had told the nation.

But when finally the adjustments came through the amendment of certain provisions of the law setting up ELECAM, many critics still considered the election management body as far from being credible and reliable.

Tuesday, May 18, 2010

Cameroon:President Biya's Speech on 50th Anniversaries of Country's Independence & Reunification

On the occasion of the celebration of the Fiftieth Anniversaries of the Independence and Reunification of Cameroon, the Head of State, H.E. Paul BIYA, addressed the Nation.

Following is the his speech delivered on May 17,2010

Saturday, May 8, 2010

Population, Healthcare and Politics in Cameroon

By Mofor Samuel Che
The recent publication of the 2005 Population and Housing Census Results brought about the raising of eyebrows and a lot of mixed feelings among politicians, population experts, sociologists, academicians, social workers, indigenes of certain regions, residents and authorities of some urban municipalities as well as the common man on the street. They argue that the close to 19.5 million people do not reflect the true figures of Cameroon’s population. They think that the figures have been doctored for election purposes.

Healthcare is only one of four major determinants of health. The others are environment, heredity (in a wider sense “population”) and behaviour. They are interrelated. The organization of health services per se, will not ensure psycho-socio-somatic health. Special attention must be paid to health –related environmental issues, health-related behavioural issues and population issues.

By combining our national desire for playing the “ ostrich-head- in- the-sand” with every important aspect of our life-from deliberate ignorance of our true population figures, to our penchant for fabricating immunization coverage figures- health statistics have ceased to be of any value to Cameroon whether for planning, intervention or monitoring the state of health. The statistics have simply become instruments for looting national resources- the manipulative game for pillaging and raiding the national treasury by a combined team of civil servants, administrators, academic advisers and politicians. The Cameroon health system is sick, very sick and in need of intensive care. It is blind, lacking vision of goal and strategies; it is deaf, failing to respond to the cries of the sick and dying populations. We are a nation rejoicing in squalor, celebrating our sickness, exulting in our self-inflicted pain. We are a nation that is pleased and satisfied with our deplorable health situation, frolicking with unbridled joy in sewage of infirmity. This shows how low we stand in our respect for human life and the welfare of our nation.

Why are we neither able to prevent nor control even diseases for which a reliable vaccine is available? Our inability to control diseases is a classic example of ignoring our population figures as well as of conspiracy and collusion of the different arms of the society to participate in the national pastime of looting and pillaging, of fiddling with the national treasury, while diseases kill young and old all over the country. All this while the government, civil servants, some academicians and the society, worked hand in gloves to make Cameroon an example of shame and derision. Callous indifference wallowing in corruption, swam with greed and avarice in deliberate incompetence, supplanting truth in a calculated denial of self gain. On top of all these, public ignorance has been reeling and lurching in self pity.

Population growth is the difference between the annual number of births and deaths. Statistics show that the population of Africa projected for 2025 is 1.6billion. Half of this population would be infants, older children and adolescents- all dependent and requiring education, health care, food, water, housing, sports, recreational facilities and jobs etc. Cameroon falls within this sphere and must not be indifferent to this reality, as elements of population growth are very visible in Cameroon to the extent that if the powers that be do not sit up as far as population increase is concerned, things might well get off hand going by the 2008 food riots.

Cameroon is one of those African countries that have a negative imbalance between economic growth and population growth rates. Facilities for education, healthcare, housing, water supplies are now inadequate. There are not enough jobs and unemployment is breeding antisocial and unhealthy behaviours. High population aggravates poverty and perpetrates ignorance and disease as can be witnessed in most part of the country today.

Large overcrowded urban population has become targets for dietary deficiencies and malnutrition, unsanitary environment and substandard housing are common; viruses, bacteria, parasites and other pathogenic organisms abound. Epidemic and violence thrive in overcrowded conditions. Over crowded hospitals and large out patient clinics are a danger to their clients. Family planning services cannot meet up with the number of young fertile women.

Many health centres, general hospitals and specialized institutions are poorly maintained. Hospital beds are often old and uncomfortable, bed-linen a luxury, toilet not functioning, desk and chairs decrepit, instruments do not exist, essential drugs are unavailable and shelves in the hospitals and health centres pharmacies empty at least half the year, patients coming for surgery must bring surgical materials, relatives must donate blood (which could then be tested prior to transfusion), many health staff are living a nightmare, many have lost their skills through disuse and absence of refresher courses, many have no morale and avenge themselves on helpless patients and relatives, many hospitals have no budgets or so little money as makes no difference, and have no legal way of raising or securing funds for healthcare.

The future of Cameroon should not lie in the hands of tired, uninspiring, unpatriotic, untrustworthy, deceitful and treacherous leaders of the 1960s 70s and 80s going by the recently published figures of the Housing and Population Census of 2005.They claimed to have given their lives for our independence and are now taking our lives and the lives of our unborn children as payment. One of the dividends of democracy should be laying aside of these leaders, who wear the mantle of leadership like their underwear, underwear that has not been washed since independence and reunification.

Transparency International in the publication- Corruption Perception Index (CPI) has more than once rated Cameroon as the most corrupt nation in the world. Corruption is a two-way traffic; there is a giver and there is a taker. That is why we must read another publication- Bribe Payer Index (BPI). The CPI complements the BPI which addresses the propensity of companies and investors from Western countries to offer bribes in emerging markets. One of the latest BPI publications revealed high levels of bribery by firms from Russia, China, Taiwan, Japan, USA and France.
China stands out as the “new saviour” when it comes to south – south cooperation. Water shortages are a singsong in Yaounde and Douala as well as other urban towns. One begins to wonder how the getting of water from the River Moungo will curb the water crisis in Douala if the true population of the city is not known. AES SONEL is yet to guarantee continuous and constant power supply to the Cameroonian population that it cared less to know the real figures. By closing their eyes to a sensitive issue like the real population of the country to which they claim to help in the provision of basic necessities like electricity and water, only shows how corrupt some of these bribe givers who condemn us are.

We as a nation must be willing to change. It falls to the individual family to lay the foundation of honesty, probity, integrity, honour and consideration for other in every child. The future of Cameroon is too important to be left exclusively in the hands of our leaders. We, the people, must together, actively rebuild our nation and set it on the path of righteousness.

We should be asking our leaders the right questions relating to the problems of our society, based on our intimacy and identification with the society. How many are we? What can be done about AIDS? How can our populations be freed from the vicious circle of poverty, ignorance and disease?

Cameroon:Pantheon of Hypocrisy!

By Tazoacha Asonganyi in Yaounde.
In opening the 17th Ambassadors’ conference in Paris on 16 August 2009,Nicholas Sarkozy said “2010 will be an important year for the relations between Africa and France: fourteen former colonies will celebrate the 50th anniversary of their independence.

It will therefore be a year dedicated to faithfulness in friendship and solidarity. But I also want 2010 to signal the completion of a substantive overhaul in our relations with the continent…” This was like a sneeze that set various actions in motion in “former colonies”.

Probably considering Cameroon as one of the “former colonies”, Paul Biya jumped onto the bandwagon, and announced on 31 December 2009 that 1st January 2010 is the 50th anniversary of “Cameroon’s” independence, before adding that 2011 will see the celebration of 50 years of reunification!

For 13 years from 1976 to 1989, the USA celebrated the 200th anniversary of the U S Constitution: 1976 being the 200th year since their Declaration of Independence, and 1989 representing the 200th year of the adoption of their constitution. Rather than jump onto the Sarkozy bandwagon, Paul Biya who usually prides himself with a concept he calls national unity, and presents it as one of the main achievements of his 28-year reign, would have done something similar to that. He would have declared a unified celebration of the independence of Cameroon from January 1, 2010 to October 1, 2011.

His decision to rather declare 1 January as the day to be celebrated as Cameroon’s Independence Day only further polarizes the country, confirms him as a nationalist of the “Republic of Cameroon”, and again plays into the hands of nationalists of “Southern Cameroons”. Following the decision he created a 50th Anniversary Commission piloted by his civil cabinet;the commission has since announced on 22 February 2010 that a Pantheon would be built for “heroes” of the independence struggle!

If Voltaire wrote about “independence” rather than about “reason”, he would have probably written that many fought for independence, others did not at all, and others persecuted those who fought. This would have fitted the story of Cameroon very well. This decision to celebrate “heroes” vilified in the past,gives the impression that there is now a synthesis of the divergent views thatcharacterized our politics before and after independence.

Of course, it is nottrue.
The way in which Cameroonians came to understand themselves and their relations to one another was not the result of their own free choice – it was imposed on us.

First, upon gaining self-rule, the tension that always exists between the free individual in society and the autonomous society, and ultimately provides each citizen with opportunity and incentive to use common sense, imagination and their God-given talents to contribute to national advancement, was felt to be unbearable by those to whom the French handed the country. So Ahidjo quickly sought a synthesis between the free individual and the autonomous society, at the cost of loss of individual freedoms, and the autonomy of society; at the cost of the eradication of the culture of democracy.

One party and one man rule was instituted at the cost of the KNDP and its leaders, the UPC and its leaders,Bebbey Eyidi, Charles Okala, Andre Marie Mbida, Victor Kanga, Goji Dinka,Bishop Ndongmo, Albert Mukong, and many others.
The repressive mind-set that prevailed just after independence still prevails in our society today. Indeed, we are not yet vaccinated against the ills of the past that have kept us in the league of countries that are rich in all aspects,and yet are among the poorest countries in the world. We are daily reminded that like the one-party rule that was “given” us, “democracy” has also been“given” us by an all powerful “monarch”.

We should never lose sight of the factthat in such a culture of “giving” by strongmen, he who gives can take back at will, as we are witnessing with ELECAM.

The CPDM,like the CNU in the past is still the only source of new ideas, even if their new ideas are limited to designs to keep Paul Biya in power in perpetuity. This is unlike in open societies where the source of new ideas, especially long range goals and strategic paths towards them, originate mainly from outside government and outside a single political party. The Cameroon regime in power since 50 years has done its best to control grassroots organizations, and to make business and financial operators that are essential to the economy,members of the CPDM; the regime has co-opted and gagged scientific institutions and universities in which independent thinkers may threaten the power monopoly of the rulers.

The decision to build a Pantheon for “heroes” of the past requires that such“heroes” be identified by people. Invariably, such people will be members of the 50th Anniversary Commission, or some other such commissioncreated by the regime in place. What is clear is that such people cannot recognize in other persons the quality they do not have themselves!

Our society is still governed as a single, “unified” collective, orientedtowards the adoration of one man. It is not yet a democracy - a truly plural society - whose inherent divisions and tensions make it constantly open to the new. The recognition of “heroes of the past” is a statement against a past whose habits did not serve us, and yet there is as yet no rupture with that past. The Ngondas are still being murdered for selfish interests; the Fubes are still being arrested and locked up for their opinion; the Lapiroes are still being jailed for their opinion; public meetings and manifestations are still being banned at will and disrupted violently; students are still being killed in campuses, or banished from studying in state universities because of their effort to better their study environment…

The place of political culture in Cameroon is still occupied by populist “democracy”;the culture of democracy as epitomized by reflective public judgement has been subsumed under a culture of motions of support.
Creating a Pantheon for“heroes of the past” is nothing short of hypocrisy!

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Goodluck Jonathan sworn in as Nigeria's president

By JON GAMBRELL (AP)

LAGOS, Nigeria — Nigeria's acting leader Goodluck Jonathan(pictured) was sworn in Thursday as president of Africa's most populous country, as the body of the oil-rich nation's elected president was flown north for a traditional Muslim burial one day after his death.

Jonathan put on a sash bearing the green, yellow and white colors of Nigeria, signifying he had formally taken over for President Umaru Yar'Adua though Jonathan had served as acting president for months.


Late Thursday morning, soldiers escorted a stretcher bearing the body of Yar'Adua, wrapped in a Nigerian flag, onto a military cargo plane bound to his native Katsina state.

Yar'Adua, who long had suffered from kidney ailments and was recently hospitalized in Saudi Arabia because of heart inflammation, died Wednesday night after apparently succumbing to his ill health. Officials said he would be buried before sundown Thursday afternoon.


Jonathan now will serve as president through next year's vote, likely to be held by April 2011. He also will be able to select a vice president to serve underneath him, subject to Senate approval.

In a brief address, Jonathan promised that his administration would focus on good governance during its short tenure, focusing especially on electoral reform and the fight against corruption.

"One of the true tests will be that all votes count and are counted in our upcoming presidential election," Jonathan said.

An unwritten power-sharing agreement within Nigeria's ruling party calls for the presidency to alternate between Nigeria's Christians and Muslims. Yar'Adua, a Muslim, was still in his first four-year term though — meaning there could be a political fight brewing in the ruling People's Democratic Party over allowing Jonathan to contest the presidency.

"Jonathan must be interested in contesting for the presidency, but he still has not revealed his hand and he's still pretty hesitant about signaling what his intentions are," said Mark Schroeder, the director of sub-Saharan Africa analysis for STRATFOR, a private security think tank based in Austin, Texas.

"Jonathan will certainly keep his hat in the ring and that will ensure he remains an influence within Nigeria's political system. Whether he has enough support (to run for president) ... that's another big question."

Yar'Adua's death came almost three months after Jonathan had assumed control of Nigeria as acting president and less than a year away from the next presidential elections in a country once plagued by military coups. Some Nigerians who awoke to the news of Yar'Adua's death were initially skeptical, as the masses remained uncertain about the ailing leader's condition for months.

Yet the streets in Lagos, the country's spiraling megacity in the south, remained quiet as Jonathan declared the day a public holiday and the start of a seven-day mourning period in the nation of 150 million people.

The oil-rich Niger Delta, which has seen militant attacks throughout the impoverished region since 2006, remained quiet as well, allowing foreign oil companies to pump out the crude in relative security.

Schroeder said Nigeria's political leaders knew they needed to quickly swear Jonathan in as president to show the world there was no power vacuum. When Yar'Adua went to a Saudi Arabian hospital on Nov. 24 to receive treatment, he failed to formally transfer his powers to Jonathan, sparking a constitutional crisis.

Jonathan assumed the presidency Feb. 9 after a vote by the National Assembly while Yar'Adua was still in Saudi Arabia.

"The U.S. wants political stability in Nigeria so that's there's stability in the oil sector," Schroeder said. Nigeria was the No. 4 oil exporter to the U.S. in February, sending about 896,000 million barrels of crude a day to the U.S., outstripping even Saudi Arabia.

Jonathan said Thursday that peace in the Niger Delta, home to the country's oil industry, remains a priority. Attacks by militants there last year crippled oil production. Yar'Adua had tried to peacefully end the insurgency but those efforts frayed due to his increasing illness.

Jonathan said Yar'Adua left a "profound legacy" for him to follow.

"He was not just a boss, but a good friend and a brother," Jonathan said.

Associated Press Writer Bashir Adigun contributed from Abuja, Niger

Sunday, May 2, 2010

Cameroon:Chief Ngwana Takes War Against Condoms and Abortion to Bamenda

Cameroonian pro-lifer,Chief A.S Ngwana, was on 27 April 2010 in Bamenda,chief town of the Northwest Region of Cameroon,where he delivered an informed public paper on "THE EVILS OF CONDOMS AND ABORTIONS".
The public lecture,which held in the Women's Hall of Nkwen Baptist Center,brought together a cross-section of the inquisitive Bamenda Public- especially journalists and women.


The Bamenda talk came after same was delivered in the Cameroonian towns of Douala,Buea and limbe ,recently.


Chief A.S Ngwana was assisted by other pro-lifers such as Peter Nsanda Eba,a retired university lecturer and William Nforba of the Family life Office of the Arch Diocese of Bamenda.

Following is the presentation by Chief A.S Ngwana on April 27,2010 in Bamenda



Distinguished Ladies and gentlemen, I want us at this public gathering in Bamenda today, to discuss urgently some very serious problems “the evils of condoms and abortions.” These evils affect the lives and prosperity of most developing countries and especially those of Cameroonians. These evils are an affront to our economic, social, family, cultural and spiritual lives.

The gravity of the situation is that they are being promoted by powerful “Population Controllers.” Unfortunately they are spearheaded by the United Nations and it’s organs, (UNPFA, WHO, UNICEF, UNAIDS, and IMF), the American Government of Obama/Clinton, USAID and the European Union. They use powerful NGOs like IPPF(International Planned Parenthood Federation), some corrupt or ignorant governments and other organizations. They even use coercion and deceit. The aims and reasons of the population controllers are many and diverse. Some are economic, eugenics and political, others are the destruction of the family, traditional and moral values, and others are downright satanic. With almost unlimited money and power, they hope to achieve their global objectives, but they forget that God never loses a battle.

Most of the condoms used in Africa are made from latex rubber from Cameroon or Nigeria. Latex is the milky fluid (sap) from a rubber tree, which after vulcanization yields soft flexible rubber. The latex rubber condom was first manufactured about 170 years ago.
The latex condom was manufactured as a contraceptive for the prevention of pregnancy, by preventing the human sperm passing through to fertilize the egg. (see size in diagram above.)
The condom was not manufactured against the HIV/AIDS virus which only appeared in 1981.
Electron micrographs reveal voids (holes) in latex condoms 5 microns in size, (50 times the size of the HIV/AIDS virus)
The AIDS virus is 50 times smaller than these tiny holes which make it easy for virus to pass through them, about as easy as a rat through a fence to keep out cows.
Condoms create a false sense of security (they are not foolproof and have shown a failure rate of 10 to 20%) And may cause an increase in sexual activity or less careful choice of partners.
The Lancet published in Jan. 2000 the results of a research by London University Medical school, which showed that condom promotion could lead to an increase in AIDS. A University of Maimi Medical School Study, which used live couples to test HIV transmission, found “that 3 out of 10 women whose husbands are HIV positive and were always using a fresh condom for each intercourse, contracted AIDS Related Complexes (ARC) in an 18 month period”
The biggest condoms manufacturer, Durex, have stated clearly on their website that condoms do not stop the spread of AIDS
Condoms in fact promote the spread of AIDS for the following reasons: Condoms promote promiscuity. Promiscuity by its very nature, promotes the spread of sexually transmitted diseases and infections: once a sexually transmitted pathogen enters a promiscuous population, infection spreads like wildfire because the saying goes thus: if you sleep with someone who slept with someone who has slept with someone, you have slept with all.

THE EFFECTS OF CONDOMS ON POPULATION GROWTH.
Condoms prevent pregnancies and therefore stall population growth.
Condoms promote the Spread of AIDS which kill people thereby reducing the growth of the population.
The main purpose of condoms is to stop pregnancies. Prior to the wide use of condoms people controlled themselves for fear of unwanted pregnancies. Married people spaced out their children by using natural birth control methods. Girls married as virgins. With the promotion of condoms the fear of pregnancies disappeared and people became promiscuous. On the arrival of the HIV/AIDS in 1981, the promoters of population control saw this as an opportunity to control the African population. They lied that condoms stop the HIV/AIDS virus, just as it does with the sperm cell. This lie has caused Africa a great loss. Africa South of the Sahara, has 76% of all HIV/AIDS infected people in the world. The promoters of condoms know very well that condoms do not stop HIV/AIDS but rather promote the spread of HIV/AIDS, so they have decided to flood the Continent with free condoms, in order to infect and kill as many people as possible to stop the African population growth. The UNFPA and other interested NGOs are leading this onslaught on Africa. Free Condoms not free malaria tablets. The manufacturers and promoters of condoms are in big business.
Their agents concentrate on students and shamelessly advertise condoms on TV and the media. They kill our children physically and morally.

Parents must educate their children on the deadly effects of condoms and of their spiritual disaster. The surest way to control the spread of HIV/AIDS is ABSTINENCE before marriage and FIDELITY after marriage. Good African Governments must ban or control the distribution of condoms. If they cannot ban them, then they should impose a 500% duty on condoms. The more Condoms we import the higher the rate of HIV/AIDS infection. Even the HIV/AIDS rate has increased in Cameroon with the supply of more condoms.

Governments should invest in families and encourage couples to have at least 5 children. Our population will grow fast, our economic development accelerated and Cameroon will grow rich.

THE EFFECTS OF CONDOMS AND ABORTIONS ON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Economic development is by people for people. Where there are no people, there is no economic development. Condoms and abortion stall population growth and where there is no population, there is no development.
Condoms have become a multibillion dollar industry. The condoms manufacturers and promoters spend millions of dollars to promote them, not caring one minute the deaths they cause. They are mainly anti-life organizations and NGOs, headed by UNFPA and the International Planned Parenthood Federation.

For mainly political, eugenic and economic reasons some organizations and countries want to stop the growth of the populations of the developing countries, especially the growth of the African Population.

Scientific evidence and experience show that a decreased use of condoms also results in a decrease number of HIV/AIDS infections. IN Countries like Uganda, Ugandans infected with HIV/AIDS plunged from 21% in 1991 to 6% in 2002, applying the doctrine of FIDELITY AND ABSTINENCE, Kenya and Thailand also experienced that a decreased use of condoms resulted in a decrease of AIDS infections. The more condoms supplied to Africa, the higher the AIDS rates. Even the AIDS rate has increased in Cameroon with the supply of more condoms. Between 1992 and 2001 condom supplies here increased from 6 million to 15 million – while HIV prevalence tripled, from 3% to 9%.

Condoms promote casual sex, casual sex increases unwanted pregnancies, unwanted pregnancies encourage abortions.
Abortion is a crime punishable under section 337 of the Cameroon penal Code.

Abortion is a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. “Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person”

Abortion is against African culture and traditions.

Abortion is against Divine Positive Law. “Thou shall not kill”

Abortion is against our population growth, we remain under populated, undeveloped and poor.

Abortion is morally wrong, criminally punishable, Economically destructive and is a spiritual disaster

Cameroon with all its immense natural resources, has a density of only 40 people per km2, with an income per capita of $2,300.

France has a density of 114 people per km2, with an income per capita of $32,700.

Germany has a density of 236 people per km2, with an income per capita of $46,350,

Great Britain has a density of 250 people per km2, with an income per capita of $45,731.

Japan has a density of 336 people per km2, with an income per capita of $43,170. (2007)

Singapore has a density of 7,023 people per km2, with an income per capita of $39,500.

Monaco has a density of 16,923 people per km2, with an income per capita of $30,000

Simplistic as it sounds, development is by people for people. Where there are no people there is no Development. The quality of life is determined by people. People build schools, hospitals, universities, infrastructure etc and it is people who produce wealth. Where there are no people there is no economic development or any human development as such.

The majority of developed countries are suffering from population decline with the increasing problem of population ageing, and are doing everything possible to increase their population growth.

Why should we allow any person or countries to deceive us and try to stop our population growth under pressure or lies.

Mrs. Hilary Clinton has declared that “the full force of the US Government will be used to get governments to change their laws on abortion all over the world”. In Canada on April 5 she went further to declare that reproductive heath or family planning includes abortion and contraception. That is not all, in Washington on Monday this month, U.S. Secretary Hillary Clinton vowed to fight for the rights of homosexuals. (men sexing men and women sexing women). Homosexuality is an abomination for which God wiped out Sodom and Gomorrah from the face of the earth. Abortion and Homosexuality are criminal acts in Cameroon and we shall consider any person or country trying to corrupt our morals or stall our population growth as very unfriendly. Such people want us to remain unpopulated undeveloped, poor and ungodly.
Before, divorce was forbidden, adultery was an offence, abortion was an offence, contraceptives were forbidden, homosexuality was an offence, suicide was forbidden, euthanasia was forbidden. Prostitution, bestiality, necrophilia, paedophilia, pornography, and incest were forbidden, today most of them are legalized or allowed by many countries.

There are billions of good God-fearing people in Europe, America and throughout the world, they must rise up against the few misguided or evil people who manipulate public opinion, and control most of the governments of the world. We cannot be indifferent to the destruction of marriage, the family and the sanctity of life. We must rise up to defend them. The choice is between Good or Evil, Light or Darkness, Life or Death, God or Satan. GOD MUST REIGN.


Chief A.S. Ngwana,
National Chairman, Cardinal Democratic Party

Email: Ngwanasamba@yahoo.com

Tel (237) 77757173

27/4/10

SEARCH THIS SITE