By Tazoacha Asonganyi Yaounde.
Human history has shown that
authoritative rule invariably ends up in the backwardness of society, and
invariably, in resistance. It is only all-inclusive, democratic rule that
enjoys the adherence of all members of society, and releases their god-given
talents and abilities, that produce what according to Alexis de Tocqueville,
the ablest governments are usually unable to produce, namely, an all pervasive
and restless activity, a superabundant force, an energy, that produce wonders –
human and societal development; the feel good factor.
At every election, the CPDM is
always asking for “comfortable” majorities, or “large” majorities. During the
2007 elections they went home with 267 of the 360 Council seats, and 153 of the
180 parliamentary seats. They used these majorities to set the rules in every
domain of society; to define our basic rights; to limit the political
possibilities of the “minority” – the opposition - in such a way that, using
the rules, they would never get the chance of becoming the majority. They used
their majority to avoid compromise and consensus on major societal issues, and
at the least opportunity, they turned around and appealed for “harmony” and “peace”,
which, invariably, only serve the selfish interests of the “majority”!
Sometimes they enforce these using the brute force of the self-interested laws.
Further, they use their “majority” to create outfits like the National
Communication Council, and many others, which jump into the arena and play the
game like blind boxers!
In any case, this is not my main
concern here. There are some worrying issues that
the CPDM campaign is presently raising with some of their actions and
utterances.
First, there has been talk of the
mass circulation of “fake” voters’ cards in Kumba. Later, it was revealed that
they originated with Meme 1A Section president of CPDM and Mayor of Kumba 1
Council Area. This was a very important public issue. It is to the credit of many
stakeholders that public sentiment was calmed because they recognized the
importance of the demeanor, investigated it aggressively, and attributed blame
accordingly. Political party members are identified by their party cards. The
explanation that “barcode stickers” were established for use in identifying
members of the CPDM during primaries in “Meme 1A” is frivolous. The deformation
of voters’ cards with such stickers is a clear attempt to cause confusion and
to continue to campaign even on Polling Day; it is an unacceptable effort to
violate the consciences of the voters. If the barcodes are attached to
tee-shirts, caskets and other accompaniments on Polling Day, they will have the
same effect on onlookers like wearing the uniform of a political party on
Polling Day would have. Therefore the so-called identity barcodes of the CPDM
should not be allowed to be displayed on electors in any form on Polling Day.
Further, any effort to get voters to exit with ballot papers of the
“opposition” to surrender them with the identifying barcodes on them for
remuneration would be nothing short of violation of the spirit of the secrecy
of the ballot.
Second, contrary to what some CPDM
members may think, the voter’s card, like currency notes, the national identity
card and the passport, are national documents that can only be deformed at the
peril of the deformer. The voter’s card is a symbol of the power of the people.
The disrespect of the voters’ cards by deforming them with stickers is
indicative of the value the deformers place on the document. Their giving the
impression that the voter’s card is private property that can be sold, loaned
and abused in all forms is a reflection of the mindset of a party that wins
elections not because of the people but in spite of the people. Indeed, the man
increasing considered as the president of the CPDM Cell in ELECAM has been
causing confusion by giving the impression that those who want to, can ignore
the voter’s card and vote with the national identity card alone, thus feigning
ignorance of the effect it will have on the idea of the biometric system, and
the problems that such a practice will cause to the electoral process on
Polling Day.
Third, the Southern Cameroons
considered reunification as an all-inclusive affair. Defining events like the
All Party Conference in Mamfe in 1953, the various Constitutional Conferences,
the multiparty legislative elections in 1957, 1959 and 1961, the multiple
visits to the United Nations, the interactions in the Southern/West Cameroon(s)
House of Assembly, the Mamfe plebiscite conference of 1959, the plebiscite of
1961, the All Party Bamenda Conference of 1961, and the Foumban Constitutional
Conference of 1961, were all-inclusive events for the people of Southern
Cameroons – they included the “opposition” and “governing” parties; they
included all currents of opinion in the society. In doing this, Southern
Cameroons leaders looked forward to an all-inclusive future in the new Cameroon
they hoped for. Only those who understand the full dimension of this can
nurture the spirit of reunification.
The present noises being heard about
Tiko (the ‘gateway’ to Buea from Douala), and Buea (said to be readying to
receive Paul Biya) with respect to the possibility of the “opposition”
controlling those towns following the September 30 elections, and welcoming
Biya to Buea, are strange noises that are a betrayal of this all-inclusive
spirit of the reunification idea. The noises are an indication of how much Paul
Biya and his party, the CPDM, have betrayed the reunification idea. The CPDM
has had some thirty years during which they could have invited their leader to
Buea or anywhere of their choice, and feasted with him in any manner of their
choice. But to give the impression today that as a political party they can
betray the reunification idea by giving the impression that those of the
“opposition” belong to a different category as far as reunification is
concerned, is not only treacherous and unpatriotic; it may strengthen the SCNC
argument that the CPDM inspired law no.84-1 of February 4, 1984 abrogated the
union, and turned the former Southern Cameroons into a territory colonized by
the CPDM and its agents.
Fourth, part of the power of
incumbency is the power to control events and make things happen: using large
chunks of the state budget at will; using part of the national budget for
campaigns by initiating projects during campaign time. These can be done using
the "state’s pen" to sign decisions, as is being done for traditional
rulers, Maroua University institutions, and other acts. But to abuse the public
service and public property for party campaigns is gross abuse of power; to
camouflage as Head of state and descend to the arena as a party leader would
constitute a violation of the public trust. And if it is true that Aminatou
Ahidjo was given 400 million FCFA to carry out campaigns for the CPDM, and yet
the amount was not considered when 1.7 billion FCFA “from the public treasury”
was being distributed to political parties, it would be tantamount to theft of
public money by the CPDM.
Fifth, all development in Cameroon
today seems to be hinged on what the CPDM calls “greater achievements” (or has
it become “major accomplishments”?). This seems to have given way to (or
produced) what they call Vision-2035 and the growth and employment strategy
paper (GESP) which, they say, are products of an “all-inclusive stakeholder
consultative process” – meaning that they belong to all Cameroonians. Yet, we
still hear South West Chiefs and other CPDM sycophants claiming that “it is the
CPDM that is capable of bringing meaningful development like roads, schools,
hospitals, and infrastructure…” as if taxpayers’ money belongs to the CPDM!
According to them, the CPDM will be with us (where they are!), until 2035 and beyond.
I hope that they themselves believe this.
Virtues like peace, work,
fatherland, that constitute the motto of Cameroon are not absolute; they are
conditional on their satisfaction of other purposes, other aspirations, other
yearnings. The essence of development is not just the human and natural
resources available to a people, but how the resources are used. We are all
members of the same society who happen to have different currents of thought;
who happen to belong to different political parties or societal groupings. In
the ongoing electoral campaigns, small ideas, small acts, small utterances will
affect our thoughts and actions by the effect of the collisions they will cause
in our minds. They will impact us with the perceptions they create. So far, the
perceptions the CPDM seems to be leaving with us is that they abhor the
biometric system of elections, and they can even desecrate the reunification
spirit to win their “comfortable” majorities.
