The bill tabled by the CPDM Government to amend the December 2006 law setting up Elections Cameroon (ELECAM),the so-called independent elections management organ, has been overwhelmingly adopted by the CPDM –dominated National Assembly.
It was adopted last Friday, despite powerful arguments advanced by the usually outspoken Hon Ayah Paul,(pictured) CPDM MP for Akwaya Constituency of the Southwest Region, against its amendment.
If the bill is finally enacted into law by President Paul Biya in the days ahead, political pundits say, then the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralization (MINATD) will take back the management of elections from ELECAM.
Only recently, MINATD which previously managed elections in Cameroon and was widely accused of irregularities and rigging in favor of the ruling CPDM, had handed over elections management to ELECAM, whose independence as an electoral body was highly questioned by opposition parties especially the SDF and Cardinal Democratic Party, civil society leaders, diplomatic representations and even some CPDM bigwigs such as Hon Ayah.
“We strongly applauded the government’s decision in 2006 to create an independent body Elections Cameroon (ELECAM) to manage elections in the country, believing that this would be the end of flawed polls that has almost resulted in social unrest many times, and a major step forward in the democratization process,” Javier Puyol, head of the European Commission delegation in Yaoundé had told a press conference in Yaounde last November.
“But we were very disappointed … when the authorities appointed the 12 board members of ELECAM and 11 of them were members of the central committee and political bureau of the ruling party. In other words, this simply meant transferring the task of elections organization from MINATD to one of the parties in contest, actually making it a player and referee at the same time. This was a missed opportunity to advance the democratization process. This is regrettable. It’s a pity. It is already a false start for the 2011 presidential poll which is just by the corner. That election has already lost its credibility.”
Hon. Ayah while advancing his arguments ,last Friday March 26,against the amendment in the National Assembly before he was cut short by the House Speaker, questioned: “ How can anyone claim to see the independence of ELECAM when the Bill provides for the mandatory membership of administrators in all the “commissions for the revision of registers of electors, commissions in charge of controlling the establishment and distribution of registration cards, local polling commissions as well as council supervisory commissions…?”
“How dare we talk about the independence of ELECAM when “Divisional supervisory commissions, regional supervisory commissions and the National Commission for the Final Counting of Votes shall be chaired by a Judicial Officer (appointed by the President of the Republic as the head of the Higher Judicial Council)”?
The SDF, the leading opposition in Cameroon has insisted that ELECAM is an incredible election management body.(Read Hon. Ayah’s arguments in Parliament below)
Verbatim:
Hon. Ayah’s Address in Parliament against ELECAM Amendment Below:
Mr. President of the National Assembly;
Thank you for recognizing me.
Honourable Members;
I was at the forefront of those who campaigned in favour of the adoption of the substantive Bill on Elections Cameroon – ELECAM – in 2006. A local newspaper even accused me of having been influenced by the Minister of State for Territorial Administration. But in support of the Bill I did stand without wavering; having satisfied my conscience that it was good law.
In supporting the Bill then, I drew inspiration essentially from the fact that there were provisions that made ELECAM independent from, among other bodies, the Administration. I was equally urged on by the fact that ELECAM would henceforth be in charge of all electoral processes in our dear fatherland. Additionally, there was the provision on the financial autonomy of ELECAM.
But when appointments for ELECAM were made, I felt betrayed in that the legal condition precedent of “reputed for” neutrality was illegally transformed into condition subsequent. The law had fallen from its celebrated characteristic of universal application to an instrument of presidential discretion. What a cherished vindication then when on December 31, 2009, the President of the Republic acknowledged before the whole world that ELECAM had deficiencies that warranted correction; and promised to correct them!
But contrary to the high expectations of all and sundry consequent on that presidential confession and the vow to do good, here now is a Bill that seeks to make ELECAM more of a department of the Ministry of Territorial Administration than “an independent electoral body”. What a devastating blow to trust, faith and humility that ELECAM is being subjugated to the very ministry that had previously managed elections with mountainous irregularities warranting the creation of that very electoral body!
How can anyone claim to see the independence of ELECAM when the Bill provides for the mandatory membership of administrators in all the “commissions for the revision of registers of electors, commissions in charge of controlling the establishment and distribution of registration cards, local polling commissions as well as council supervisory commissions…”?
How dare we talk about the independence of ELECAM when “Divisional supervisory commissions, regional supervisory commissions and the National Commission for the Final Counting of Votes shall be chaired by a Judicial Officer (appointed by the President of the Republic as the head of the Higher Judicial Council)”?
Few simpletons there are who would see independence in ELECAM when the amendment provides that the number of the “representatives of Elections Cameroon appointed by the Director General of Elections (to the last-mentioned commissions)…shall be equal to that of the representatives of the Administration”. Is it not a matter of commonsense that the judicial officer who automatically has a casting vote as president will, by the allegiance he owes to the President of the Republic who has appointed him, vote necessarily with the “Administration”?
Would any man with unimpaired reasoning faculty support this power-sharing Bill in the face of the existing substantive law that grants ELECAM exclusive jurisdiction in the management of elections in Cameroon when the said substantive law has not been repealed, not even by an express provision of the amendment Bill currently under debate?
Honorable Members;
It is a contradiction in terms to state that ELECAM is “an independent electoral body” in the face of the provision in the amendment Bill that ELECAM “shall submit to…The Minister in charge of Territorial Administration (who ensures) constant liaison between the Government and Elections Cameroon…copies of minutes of (its) meetings and progress reports”. Can this obligation to report be anything less than servant-master relation? I beg to opine that enacting good laws is of universal benefit. I am helped to that opinion by a recent celebrated example. Some decades ago, Mr. Ian Smith enacted an anti-terrorism law with intent to prop up the unilateral declaration of independence for Southern Rhodesia. He boasted then that there would be no majority rule in that country for a thousand years to come. When majority rule did come within three years, Mr. Smith, feeling the pinch of the law in question, urged the new government to repeal the law. The reply was that, as that was Mr. Ian Smith’s law and not that of the contemporary government, Mr. Smith would repeal his law whenever he formed the next government.
Is it not a fact most notorious that every beginning is an end? It goes without saying then that the laws we enact today could apply to us tomorrow when our party loses majority and we find ourselves in the opposition. No detriment therefore do we suffer in enacting good laws. On the contrary, it is to our eventual benefit.
We certainly cannot claim that we have no skeletons in our cupboards when we rush important legislation through parliament like the rehearsal of vapid rhymes in a nursery school. Common knowledge it is that free, fair and transparent elections have been a constant bone of contention on the African continent. Working for a peaceful future is inconsistent with trifling with matters of elections. It follows that tabling a Bill on elections at noon as it is the case with the instant Bill; having the Bill debated in the relevant committee four hours later, followed by the adoption of the committee report within hours; and then procuring parliament to debate the said Bill on the floor of the House within twenty-four hours of the tabling is at the most jesting.
Where is our seriousness, honorable Members, in our threadbare cloaks of the representatives of the people? Is not it our bounden duty to protect the general interest? In the pursuance of that goal then am I of the settled opinion that we must see beyond the tips of our noses. I should consequently like to think that we ought to be most reluctant to identify with this amendment Bill that compromises good conscience, equity and sane judgment!
Thank you honorable Members for lending me your ears; and thank you Mr. Speaker for recognizing me. May I beg to regain to my chair, Sir?
No comments:
Post a Comment