Seven Cameroon athletes go missing

By Tansa Musa

 YAOUNDE (Reuters) - Seven Cameroon athletes have disappeared while in Britain for the London Olympics, the Ministry of Sports and Physical Education said on Monday evening.

The seven - five boxers, a swimmer and a football player - are suspected of having left to stay in Europe for economic reasons.

"What began as rumour has finally turned out to be true. Seven Cameroonian athletes who participated at the 2012 London Olympic Games have disappeared from the Olympic Village," David Ojong, the mission head said in a message sent to the ministry.

Ojong said a reserve goalkeeper for the women's football team, Drusille Ngako, was the first to disappear. She was not one of the 18 finally retained after pre-Olympic training in Scotland.

While her team-mates left for Coventry for their last preparatory encounter against New Zealand, she vanished. A few days later, swimmer Paul Ekane Edingue and his personal belongings were also not found in his room.

Ojong added that five boxers eliminated from the games, Thomas Essomba, Christian Donfack Adjoufack, Abdon Mewoli, Blaise Yepmou Mendouo and Serge Ambomo, disappeared on Sunday from the Olympic village.

International Olympic Committee officials said on Tuesday they had heard nothing about the missing athletes.

"We are unaware of it," IOC spokesman Mark Adams said when asked whether organisers had heard of it.

It is not the first time Cameroonian athletes have disappeared during international sports competitions.

At past Francophonie and Commonwealth games as well as junior football competitions, several Cameroonians have quit their delegation without official consent.

(Additional reporting by Karolos Grohmann, Editing by Nigel Hunt)

Paranoia and despair rule Cameroon

By Julie Owono*

President Paul Biya is slinging accusations of murderous conspiracies and imprisoning officials accused of embezzlement.

"You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. Depart I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!" - Oliver Cromwell to the "Rump Parliament" of 1653

Paris, France - It is not an everyday thing to read an address to the Rump parliament by Oliver Cromwell, the most famous signatory to the death sentence of King Charles I. It is less common to read it in a public letter written by a minister of a Central African state. Marafa Hamidou Yaya, formerly a senior official in Cameroon, recently delivered this warning to President Paul Biya, who has ruled the country for 29 years.

Cameroon has been in turmoil for the past two months. On April 16, Yaya and Chief Ephraim Inoni, a former prime minister and head of government under Biya, were placed under pre-trial detention in Kondengui prison in Yaounde, the nation's capital. The two were arrested on suspicions of embezzling public funds in order to purchase an aircraft for Biya - the jet has come to be referred to as "The Albatross" - in a country often criticised for corruption.

The arrests followed those of Jean-Marie Atangana Mebara, former secretary-general of the office of the president and minister of state, and Jerome Mendouga, Cameroon's former ambassador to the US. A popular joke ironically suggests that a parallel government could be formed in Kondengui prison, with all the top-level politicians currently held within it. Indeed, three of the country's four most recent secretaries-general have been placed in detention over the past 12 years. In Cameroon, the secretary-general plays an important position, in charge of relationships between the government and the president.

Among these famous prisoners, Yaya has been waging an unprecedented battle against Biya in the court of public opinion. In four different letters addressed to Biya, the president's former favourite son delivers the secrets of Cameroon's Mount Olympus. Some believe that Yaya, fearing that he would be arrested, wrote these letters before being jailed.

Worse, Yaya has dared expose to the world his political ambitions: to one day don the costume of President of Cameroon. A 2007 WikiLeaks cable revealed that the man was favoured by the United States, France, and other Western diplomats in the country. In other times, this would have probably been enough to get him to the sacred throne. But times have changed, and it will take Yaya more than international backing and four letters published in the press convince Cameroonians of his ability to rule.

The Albatross affair: A political plot?

A study of the Albatross affair is necessary to understand the arrest of Yaya and the consequences for Cameroonian politics. In 2001, according to another WikiLeaks cable, written in June 2008, Biya announced that he wanted a new plane for his personal and official trips. He informed his close entourage, including Yaya, who as secretary-general of the presidency was the second man of Cameroon at the time, and they decided on a Boeing Business Jet. Unfortunately, at that time, Cameroon was trying to reduce its debt under a World Bank and IMF programme, due to its status as a highly indebted poor country. The decision was then reportedly made to set up a financial package and buy the plane through what was then the national airline company, Camair, ostensibly in order to avoid suspicion from financial institutions on the purchase of such a luxury item.

According to the 2008 WikiLeaks cable, the money came from the account of the National Hydrocarbons Corporation, which transferred by wire the $31m needed for the purchase to US-based company GIA, which reportedly acted as an intermediary for Camair. Negotiations with Boeing were said to be handled by a US law firm specialising in aircraft transactions, airworthiness and registration, Zuckert Scoutt & Rasenberger, in the name of the Cameroonian state.

But the jet was never delivered to Cameroon. Instead, it was agreed that a pre-owned Boeing 767-216 - the Albatross - would be leased to Cameroon by the US aircraft company. But, during its inaugural flight to Geneva on April 24, 2004, in which the president was with his wife and children, the Albatross had to return to Douala after the pilot noticed a flap failure on the wings of the machine. Many believed that the plane's near-failure was an attempt on Biya's life, the leaked US diplomatic cable states. This episode, along with the fact that the $31m used to buy the plane appears to have disappeared, explains why the politicians in the president's entourage were arrested.

The Albatross affair raises many questions. If Cameroonian citizens are eager to know where the $31m went, another preoccupation may concern the head of state: who might have attempted to cause his death?

Biya's plane was reportedly issued a certificate of airworthiness by the US Federal Aviation Administration - yet it appeared to be affected by a mechanical problem that nearly cost the lives of the president and his entire family during its "inaugural flight". Could there have been foul play at work after the aircraft was given officials' permission to fly?

These images and details provided by amateur aviation enthusiasts purport to demonstrate that the plane was at least 15 years old before it was even delivered to the Cameroonians, and allege that it has since flown for several other companies, and is currently leased to the Government of Djibouti. Could an aging plane have been selected for Biya by nefarious agents with a wishful desire for a calamitous failure?

The vanishing of the $31m might have convinced Biya that the money had been used to prepare a criminal coup against him and his family. Indeed, the amount was paid to Oregon-based GIA, which later filed for bankruptcy after being sued by Indian Airlines for alleged fraud - and, according the the 2008 cable mentioned above, Boeing said it had returned whatever funds it had received to GIA.

These possible US financial implications pushed embassy officials to suggest that an investigation be conducted by US law enforcement officers. But despite this suggestion, neither the technical aspect of the incident nor the diversion of the $31m appear to have been examined. Yet this is the biggest political and financial scandal in Cameroon today, and may be having an effect on local politics: after the flight incident, the president decided to change the constitution and stay in power, and now has much of his cabinet and many of his senior ministers from the time in prison.

Oil in exchange for power?

It is an open secret now: each time an African politician who has his eyes on the presidency is backed by a foreign power, first make sure of what might have been dealt in exchange for the support. What has Yaya possibly done to deserve such glowing words from Niels Marquardt, former US ambassador to Cameroon?

"A dynamic, personable and energetic man, Marafa Hamidou Yaya has an excellent relationship with the U.S. Embassy - as well as the French, Japanese, British, and others. Like PM Inoni, Marafa's intelligence and effectiveness have raised his national profile and make him a possible presidential candidate - perhaps even the front-runner… He is also the likely preference of every Western Ambassador in town, including this one."

To get a possible answer, one should go back to 2002, when the International Court of Justice ruled in a territorial dispute that the Peninsula of Bakassi was part of Cameroon. Believed to be rich in oil, even though no formal commercial discovery had yet been made, the peninsula represented a hope for the Cameroonian government to increase its oil production. According to this cable from the US embassy in Yaounde, the Hydrocarbons National Company (SNH) boosted its exploration in the region with the precious help of foreign private companies, most of them US-based. Between 2006 and 2007, investment in exploration doubled, reaching $246.75m.

In that same period, Yaya chaired the SNH board, a company where he started his career as a petroleum engineer and as chief of the exploration and production department. Needless to say, Yaya is one of the few people who knows exactly how many barrels of oil leave the Cameroonian coast everyday, and the oil production capacity of the country. A battle is currently raging between Western and Chinese companies for exploration and exploitation contracts. It is well known that in the past few years Biya tended to favour his Chinese counterparts to those of France, Cameroon's historic economic partner. This has displeased the United States. Yaya, however, graduated from a US university and has always gotten along well with western parties.

Beyond his international supporters, what has Yaya actually done for the Cameroonian people during his 20 years in the Biya government? Did he renegotiate the unfair oil contracts that tie Cameroon to France? What did he do in October 2011, when his former boss won the presidential election under suspicion of fraud? As the minister of the territorial administration and decentralisation, he supervised the work of the "independent" electoral commission and presided over the adoption of the electoral code.

Finally, this affair is a sad reminder of something we have long known. Whether or not one sees conspiracy or simply corruption behind the Albatross incident, one thing is certain: African people, and Cameroonians in particular, continue to suffer both from other countries' opportunism and the disinterest and corruption of their own leaders.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/06/2012625131523261361.html 

*Julie Owono is a Cameroonian freelance journalist and international relations consultant based in Paris.

Follow her on Twitter: @JulieOwono

Source:

Al Jazeera

Cameroon Judicial Power: A tool in the hands of Executive Power!

By Tazoacha Asonganyi,Yaounde.

Justice emanates from the people, and is administered in the name of the people by the judicial power. The Cameroon constitution states that the judicial power shall be exercised by the Supreme Court, Courts of Appeal and Tribunals; the judicial power shall be independent of the executive and legislative powers; magistrates of the bench shall, in the discharge of their duties be governed only by the law and their conscience. It further states that the president of the Republic shall guarantee the independence of the judicial power; he shall appoint members to the bench and legal department; he shall be assisted in the task by the Higher Judicial Council which shall give him its opinion on all nominations for the bench and on disciplinary action against judicial and legal offices.

Magistrates of the bench exercise their role through the courts. The role of the law and the courts is to better the lot of mankind. Most constitutions state that the judicial power is independent of the executive and the legislative powers, thus referring to the separation of power with attendant checks and balances meant to ensure that no power can call the shots alone or become the master of the people it is supposed to serve. Such constitutional frameworks and judicial protections are necessary for democratic politics to function properly. An independent judiciary is vital to enforcing the law and ensuring accountability in all areas of government.  In the process, history is made by those who resist influences intended to buy their consciences, not by those who for cheap and transient considerations, usually struggle to please the powers that be.

The Ghanaian constitution defines “the law of Ghana” on which the judicial power bases its actions  to includes: this constitution; enactments made by or under the authority of the  Parliament established by the constitution; any orders, rules and regulations made by any person or  authority under a power conferred by the constitution; the existing law; the common law….This constitution shall be the supreme law of Ghana and any other law found to be inconsistent with any provision of this constitution shall, to the extent of the inconsistency be void.

Unlike in Cameroon where the president of the Republic – a self interested person - guarantees the independence of the judicial power, the constitution of Ghana guarantees the independence of the judiciary as follows: In the exercise of the judicial power of Ghana, the Judiciary, in both its judicial and administrative functions, including financial administration, is subject only to this constitution and shall not be subject to the control or direction of any person or authority;  neither the President nor Parliament nor any person acting under the authority of the President or Parliament nor any other person whatsoever shall interfere with judges or judicial officers or other persons exercising judicial power, in the exercise of their judicial functions; and all organs and agencies of the State shall accord to the courts such assistance as the courts may reasonably require to protect the independence, the dignity and effectiveness of the courts, subject to this Constitution.

Left to their own designs, human beings, because of their station in life, usually abuse the power of the state to get the better of their fellow men. It is the Rule of Law that preempts this Rule of Man, since state power is hemmed in with myriad restrictions concerning the relationship between the state and the sovereign individual. The Rule of Law, in its barest form, is the use of the law in securing the protection of the individual without exception. It is in the spirit of the rule of law that all human beings are equal and no one person, no matter their station in life, is more equal than others.

In general, the relationship between the state and the individual is an inherently unequal one in which the individual is confronted by a state that enjoys the monopoly of power and violence. It is the rule of law that protects the individual from the power of the state. And such protection depends on the independence of the law courts – the magistrates. The Rule of Law should not depend on the whims and caprices of strongmen; the protective wall of the Rule of Law built around the weak individual should never be broken. The individual in society must be able to act freely in order to use their talent, ingenuity, and intelligence to contribute to the progress of society. In so acting, the individual usually comes into conflict with other individuals, thus creating conflict; this is when the law and the state (the courts) come in to moderate, arbitrate, and adjudicate.

One-party rule was tantamount to totalitarianism and violated human rights, human dignity, and communal autonomy… Totalitarianism attempts to overcome opposition between the democratic individual and the community of which he or she is a member. It removes the space in which individuals can engage in autonomous self-interpretation or critical reflection. It comes about because of the tension between the free individual and the autonomous community; a synthesis is sought, but its cost is finally the loss of both freedom and communal autonomy… and the eradication of the culture of democracy. When in May 1962 four MPs: André Marie Mbida, Theodore Manyi Matip, Charles René Guy Okala, and Marcel Bebey Eyidi published a letter in which they criticized the impending one party project of Ahidho, they must have been aware of these weaknesses of the one party regime. Yet although it is Ahidjo that ordered their arrest under Ordinance 62-18-OF on the repression of subversion, it was the courts, not Ahidjo that in June 1966 sentenced them to three years imprisonment!

When Paul Biya ordered the arrest of Yondo Black and others in 1990 using the same Ordinance 62-18-OF because they dared to talk about multi-party politics, the court (even if military) that tried them was fully aware that the Constitution of 1972 authorised multiparty democracy in Cameroon; yet the court sentenced them to three years imprisonment!

These two cases show that the courts have been a tool in the hands of the executive, to repress freedoms in Cameroon. In most societies, law and litigation have been used effectively in test cases to advance basic rights. Not so in Cameroon where the courts have been unwilling to say what the law is in relation to some key issues. For example, in 1990 what came to be known as “liberty laws,” which were in effect the consecration of the overriding dominance of the administration over the judiciary were published. The “liberty laws” served as a screen for discriminatory intent; their terms looked evenhanded, but they became weapons of oppression all the same.

 “Freedom” of association (Law No. 90/053) was not free; “freedom” to hold public meetings and processions ( law n° 90/055) was not free; maintenance of law and order - arbitrary arrest and detention of “bandits” (Law no. 90/054 ) - became arbitrary arrest and detention of opposition militants; “sociological composition” of lists of candidates for municipal and legislative elections (law no. Law n° 91/20 of 16 December 1991; law n° 92/002 of 14 August 1992) was a changing concept from region to region, depending on the whims and caprices of the administrative authority! The courts were usually called upon to say what the law was in each instance, but the courts failed woefully to do so!

“Tell Magazine” of June 8, 2009, was a Special feature on 10 years of Democracy in Nigeria (1999 – 2009). In the Magazine, Justice Idrid Kutigi declared in an interview titled “The Judiciary, Blazing a Trail” that “Nurturing democracy has thrown up a lot of challenges: for the executive, for the legislature and the judiciary. The judiciary has shone like a million stars in Nigeria’s political galaxy, especially in the way that it came to the rescue of the nation following the 2007 general elections. Both the bar and the bench made patriotic contributions using landmark cases to make landmark judgments….”

Two members of the Bar were also interviewed. Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Wole Olanipekun declared in an interview titled “Democracy is our destiny” that “…Take the case of Governor Ladoja of Oyo state. Some members of Oyo state House of Assembly went to O’Rovan Hotel in the city and impeached the Governor. Nobody wanted to challenge it.  We took up the challenge with a good judiciary that could listen and reason. We asked the court to decide a lot of things like where is the legislative house? Can you exchange O’Rovan hotel in Ibadan with the sacredness of the legislative chambers at Agodi? If that could be done, it would mean that you could impeach the governor of Lagos state in a beer-parlour in Ikere-Ekiti…At the end of the day we got Ladoja re-instated. .. If Ladoja’s impeachment had not been successfully challenged, many governors would have gone the way of Ladoja…A lawyer is always a crusader in and out of court…We have been able to successfully defend the mandate of many elected officials throughout the length and breath of the country, cutting across all the geopolitical zones and political parties….”

SAN Yusuf Ali declared in an interview titled “Judiciary, the savior of Nigeria’s democracy” that “…I am not a politician. My commitment is to the law profession….Of the three arms of government, the judiciary has remained the most credible, the most consistent, and the savior of democracy. It is virtually the only institution of the three arms that has a self-cleansing mechanism that is viable, operational and working…”

The take away message from these interviews for the Cameroon judiciary is that when there is an injustice and there is no case before the courts to correct it, the response should not be the helplessness of “our hands are tied,” but an effort to exploit legal openings to put the case before the courts for redress.

The judicial power is facing a historical test of its credibility with the dozens of cases brought before it by the executive power. Most of the cases are only the exposed tentacles of the corruption that clogs the society. After all those jail terms being handed down left and right to please the executive power, the true evil – the bad control system instituted by the corrupt CPDM regime - will still be in place.  With the system in place, corruption will always be able to cast itself in ways that may appear benign, but are no less insidious!

The judiciary should enter the fight against corruption on its own terms. It should use all the shouting evidence of corruption and embezzlement in our society to institute test cases that require people to explain the source of their wealth. As for Paul Biya, he should borrow a leaf from the “West Cameroon Financial Instructions” and the “General Orders” to sanitise the management of taxpayers’ money he has left at the mercy of his surrogates during 30 years of his reign. He should stop playing fast and loose with CONAC, ANIF and other corruption screens he has erected around us.

 

Marafa Embezzlement case:The Persecution Not Prosecution

By *AYAH Paul ABINE, PAP National Chairman.

Cameroun was awash a few days back with press information that Mr. Marafa had been summoned up by two courts on the same day. Not any less was Cameroon! Mr. Marafa was to be before one of the courts to plead to a charge of defamation consequent upon a complaint lodged in 2008.

By the laws of Cameroun, prosecution is time-barred if a complaint on defamation is lodged more than four months from the publication of the defamatory material. Prosecution is equally time-barred if four months elapse between two actions in preparation (investigation) or in prosecution.

The summons must have issued on the legal ground that a complaint had been filed not later than June 2008 as the defamatory material is said to have been published during the “hunger strikes” of February, 2008. But what remains inscrutable is how the judge issuing the summons could have conducted investigation every four months at the least for more than four years for an offence least complicated. Is not it true that nothing was required beyond recording statements from witnesses and from the suspect? Necessarily therefore must the judge show that he recorded those statements every four months for over four years!

The judge in question knew or is, at least, presumed to know, that if the contrary is true, then the withdrawal of the complaint was nugatory. Surely does he know that it is a matter of law that even where the complaint is filed within the legal time frame, the lapse of four months without the judge performing an act in investigation or prosecution automatically leads to prescription. Was there any matter legally before that judge at the time the summons issued?

Let us begin by supposing that the judge recorded one statement a week, (which is quite a good record for a diligent Camerounese judge), then there should be at the least 200 witnesses for the prosecution. In that event, the learned judge must redefine the ingredient of corroboration that entailed the hearing of such an astronomical number of witnesses for corroboration to be found in a matter least complicated. Even that granted, one would not be apprehensive of being contradicted in suggesting that, by taking four years to record a statement from the suspect,such a judge has not done much honour to the Camerounese judiciary, on the ground that the prolonged delay smacks of apprehension.

Again, the coincidence between the trial of Mr. Marafa by the so-called Special Criminal Tribunal and the order for him to appear on the same day before a common law court does lead those familiar with the Camerounese judiciary to perceive instruction from the executive arm of government to the judiciary. That raises the whole issue of the independence of the judiciary in a country notorious for a domineering executive. It is an affront to common sense that the subjugation of the judiciary to the all-powerful executive over the decades has met with beneficial complacency from those calling themselves learned. It is all the worse that such is the situation in spite of the constitutional provision that the judiciary is an independent power, and, additionally, that the oath of office of a member of the judiciary enjoins the member, inter alia, “to do justice to all manner of people without FEAR or FAVOUR…”

One should easily understand that the oath absolutely precludes a member of the judiciary from operating under the apprehension of incurring possible adverse consequences from his acts. Submission to apprehension does equally contradict the legal duty to determine issues solely in accordance with the “law and (the) conscience” as stipulated in the oath formula. Few bold jurists would hesitate to read perjury into a judge’s compliance with unlawful orders from whosoever. It is immaterial that a member of the judiciary only indirectly seeks to curry favours because the President of the Republic determines his promotion, appointments and transfers.

A member of the judiciary must be a person of character: impartial, honest, fearless and disinterested. Anyone lacking in any one of these minimum prerequisites falls short of attaining just the threshold of the realm of the “learned profession”. If there can be no democracy without democrats as Mr. Paul Biya once declared, one could by analogy proclaim without fear or favour that there is no judiciary without judges. Assailing Mr. Marafa upon the foundation of extra-legal dictates inevitably leads to the conclusion that Cameroun, in the main, is still in search of judges – independent judiciary much more.

It is difficult in the circumstance to hold otherwise than that Mr. Marafa is being persecuted and not prosecuted. Verily my brother, was not he arrested on the same day with Chief Inoni Ephraim for the same offence? Why is Marafa’s case being rushed when even persons arrested close to five years earlier on are still awaiting trial? Could some learned lawyer explicate whether it is within the law these special expeditious actions by the Special Criminal Tribunal behind the celebrated international principle of “equal protection of the law”! Or is it one of the exceptions à la Camerounaise?

PERSECUTION! PERSECUTION! PERSECUTION!

* Ayah Paul Abine is not only the National President of People's Action Party(PAP),he is also an outspoken Member of Parliament and Chief of Akwaya Town.Above all, he is a Career Magistrate of Exceptional Class(called in Cameroon as Superscale magistrate)

UN: Legalize Prostitution, Drug Use and Homosexual Sex, to Stop AIDS

By Chief A.S Ngwana

Chief A.S  Ngwana

The United Nation is now controlled by Population Controllers and they want all the countries of the world to change our Criminal and Moral Laws to conform to their economic, Political, Eugenic and Satanic interests.

It is certain that many countries will pull out of the United Nation if the United Nations is controlled by Population Controllers who are mainly European and American countries who do not have the interest of the Developing Countries at heart.  African Countries must consider the United Nations as the instrument of the Population Controllers who are working against the economic, political, moral and spirit interest of Africa.

Population Controllers produce all types of excuses to subvert African interests, and we must be careful of their intrigues. They are not African friends  

“A new report issued by a UN commission established by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon claims that all nations must legalize prostitution as part of any successful effort to deal with the AIDS pandemic.  This report, titled “HIV and the Law: Risks, Rights & Health” also calls for the legalization and destigmatization of injection drug use and sexual relations between males—all in the name of AIDS prevention. 

Ironically, the report acknowledges that “sex workers” (the euphemism used for prostitutes), intravenous drug users, and “men who have sex with men” have the highest incidence of AIDS, yet the commission still calls upon nations to legalize and destigmatize these risky behaviors.  

We could have predicted the recommendations because the commission was stacked with committed “sexual rights” activists.  The report simply recycles the same discredited arguments that have been made for some time now by UNAIDS and other UN agencies, which are reflected in the UNAIDS “International Guidelines on HIV/AIDS and Human Rights.”  (Click here for our policy brief on the Guidelines and here to see our brief on failed UN HIV/AIDS policies.)

The argument the report uses for legalizing high-risk behaviors is a common argument used by sexual rights activists and goes something like this:In many countries, prostitutes, drug users and male homosexuals feel marginalized or fearful because their behavior is outlawed and not considered acceptable by the society in which they live.  As a result, they argue, these “vulnerable” individuals will not come forward for counseling, testing and treatment, and so they will continue to spread AIDS at a much higher rate than the general population.  Sexual rights activists claim that governments must not only legalize these high-risk behaviors but also destigmatize them through public campaigns and comprehensive sexuality education programs in the schools so that these high-risk individuals will not be discouraged from taking advantage of HIV-related services.

The problem with his logic is that it ignores the fact that these groups generally have much higher rates of HIV infections than the general population, not lower rates.  This is the case even in developed countries.  In France the HIV infection rate among MSM is said to be “out of control.” 

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control issued a fact sheet showing that the only group in the U.S. in which HIV infection rates are dramatically rising is in the population of men who have sex with men, even though homosexual sex is legal in the U.S. and is increasingly being “destigmatized.”  

The major reason for these outcomes is the simple fact that whatever behavior you legalize and destigmatize in society will likely increase, not decrease.  Therefore, wherever the recommendations in this UN report are implemented there will likely be more AIDS cases, not fewer.

Wouldn’t it be better to simply establish confidentiality laws and policies that would allow high-risk individuals to obtain HIV-related services without fear of being penalized for seeking help?  Wouldn’t it be better to set up programs that would provide counseling to help people change their high-risk behaviors rather than condone them?

What is really behind this push to protect these high-risk behaviors in the name of HIV/AIDS prevention?  It is a thinly-disguised manipulation of the AIDS pandemic and the UN system by sexual rights activists to mainstream promiscuous sexual behavior in societies around the world, regardless of the consequences. 

This commission revealed its bias when they cited the notorious Yogyakarta Principles in their report as a guide for promoting the sexual rights of “sexual minorities.”  (See our brief on this radical document here.)  Among other assertions, the Yogyakarta Principles, which was created by international sexual rights activists, is their claim that “sexual rights” trump free speech and religious liberty rights.  The Principles even claim that governments are obligated to help people with sex-change operations.

This UN commission report is just the most recent example of sexual rights advocates putting their agenda ahead of any other considerations including the safety and health of individuals as well as the larger society.” (By Sharon Slater, President, Family Watch International}  

African Countries must be vigilant to know that what is coming out from the UN, Europe and America today is not in the best interest of Africa. Christianity is the only good thing that ever came out from Europe.

Cameroon ex-minister tried in botched presidential jet buy

Marafa Hamidou Yaya (AFP/File, Reinnier Kaze)

YAOUNDE (AFP) — A Cameroon court has started the trial of former interior minister Marafa Hamidou Yaya who is accused of embezzling $29 million dollars intended as a downpayment on a presidential jet.

The trial began Thursday with two witnesses who gave evidence against Marafa, who is on trial with five co-accused. The hearing ran late into the night and{ continued} on Friday with ten more prosecution witnesses.

Marafa and his co-accused, including the head of the now defunct flag carrier Camair, Yves Michel Fotso, are accused of stealing 23.6 million euros allocated in 2001 as a first payment for a Boeing plane for President Paul Biya.

Cameroon then rented another plane called the Albatross but this proved defective during a first flight with the presidential family and was forced to make an emergency landing.

At the beginning of May, a former ambassador to the United States, Jerome Mendouga, was jailed for 10 years in connection with the same affair.

Biya, who has been in power since 1982, has launched a major drive against corruption, which has seen several of his former aides brought before the courts.

He won election to a sixth term of office in October 2011 in a vote widely criticised by the opposition and diplomats as riddled with irregularities and fraud.

Cameroon: Marafa Expected simultaneously in two courts this morning!

In one court, for hearing on embezzlement case and in the other for defamation lawsuit filed by  John Fru Ndi and the SDF

By Christopher Ambe

The embezzlement case pitting Marafa Hamidou Yaya and the people of Cameroon, which started last July 16 but was adjourned to today July 24 for trial, will be heard this morning.

 Marafa Hamidou Yaya, ex- SG at the Presidency of the Republic and former Minister of Territorial Administration, with others, is being prosecuted  in Mfoundi High Court Yaoundé for alleged  embezzlement of funds meant for the purchase  in 2003 of a Presidential plane for Cameroon 

But surprisingly, Mr.Marafa has also been summoned to appear this morning before the State Counsel of the Court of Frist Instance in Yaoundé “in order to be heard in connection with a law suit filed by the Social Democratic Front and John Fru Ndi against Marafa four years ago”, US-trained lawyer, Professor Ndiva Kofele Kale, Counsel for Marafa told reporters on Sunday in Buea.

 Following are two quick observations made by Professor kale on what he terms the latest assault on Mr.Marafa’s rights as a free citizen of Cameroon:

**  1^st the Govt wants to embarrass my party, the SDF, and its Nat’l Chairman, by trying to use them as a Trojan horse to penetrate Marafa’s ‘defense perimeter’ in order to neutralize him. But the Chairman is no dupe: John Fru Ndi is one of the most experienced and seasoned political leaders in this country and no one, especially not this Govt., is going to take him for a ride!

**  2^nd after failing to subdue Marafa through the contrived lawsuit filed by the convicted murderer, Bissong, some 3 weeks ago and defended by a Govt lawyer, it is now clear to any doubting Thomas that this Govt is determined to do everything within its power, even subverting its own laws, to keep Mr. Marafa behind bars!!    

Let’s leave everything in the hands of the Cameroonian people, for it is they who will deliver the final verdict!”

Concerning the embezzlement case, Professor Kale told the press that the Marafa defense was only handed an incomplete casefile barely four days ago. Below is Professor’s press statement on Sunday:

  

Marafa’s Defense Asks for Equality-of-Arms between the Parties: A Press Statement

 “Following their arraignment in the Mfoundi High Court, on Monday, July 16, a certain well known media organ, relying on the assurances given by the presiding judge, hurriedly announced to the Cameroonian public that copies of the case file in The People of Cameroon v Marafa Hamidou Yaya, Yves Michel Fotso et al. were already in the possession of the defendants. That announcement was premature because it was not until the late afternoon of Thursday, July 19 that an incomplete case file was delivered to the defendants. 

Less than two weeks ago, President Paul Biya, in response to a question put to him by a CRTV reporter, declared his complete confidence in our courts and promised to respect their verdict. When our Supreme Magistrate made this declaration, had he in mind the Mebara case where the accused was acquitted of several of the charges against him but is still being detained at the Yaounde Central Prison because the State Counsel chose to flee rather than sign the order releasing him? Or did the head of state’s confidence in our system of justice extend to the recent handling of the Titus Edzoa and Thierry Atangana file? It will be recalled that after 3 years of hearings in the Mfoundi High Court, on the day judgment was to be delivered, one of the three judges on the panel was suddenly transferred to a new duty post.

Would the treatment of the Marafa, Yves Michel Fotso and Nkounda Julienne case elicit presidential endorsement?  Informed in court on Monday, July 16 that their trial would begin on Tuesday, July 24, and that the record of the preliminary investigation was ready and copies would be made available to them, these defendants reluctantly accepted to prepare their legal defense in this short interval! The defendants would be served with the promised case file days later. But it was an incomplete file: the Examining Magistrate having conceded back in June that it would take the Chief Registrar about four months to assemble it!

It would be extremely difficult for the defendants to mount an effective defense without full access to the case file. We harp on this point because economic crime cases generally turn on documentary evidence. A paper trail must be established to demonstrate the movement of the misappropriated funds from the public treasury into the private account(s) of the accused. The defense is therefore within its rights in demanding access to the documents the State plans to rely on to establish the nexus between the accused and the purloined funds. Seven days, now reduced to four, to review a case file it took the State several months to assemble, which the defendants were seeing for the first time only a few days ago, do not afford the accused sufficient time to prepare an adequate defense in a case of this order!

Be careful what you wish for, an old proverb warns, as it may come true! For months Marafa and Fotso have been asking for their day in court to tell the truth, the whole truth concerning the abortive purchase of a mind-blowing $72 million Boeing Business jet aircraft for President Paul Biya. Now that the opportunity has presented itself, why are they still complaining? Their objections have nothing to do with their willingness to face their accusers but at the unseemly haste they are being dragged to court, without the slightest regard for their constitutionally-protected due process rights. They complain not because they are afraid to spend time in jail but because they are being forced to play on a playing field that is far from level. Not even Muhammad Ali, reputed to be the greatest professional boxer of all time, would have volunteered to step in a ring blindfolded to defend his championship belt against a Joe Frazier or a George Foreman! But this is precisely what Messrs Marafa and Fotso are being asked to do: to appear in court in a matter of days without having reviewed material information critical in preparing their defense! This violates all the rules of fair play inherent in our adversarial system of justice.

Members of the Press, a criminal trial in a democratic society, which Cameroon claims to be, should not be reduced to a medieval inquisition. After all, even those accused of a crime enjoy rights that must be protected. Foremost among which is the right to a fair hearing, guaranteed in our Constitution. Implicit in this right is the principle of “equality-of-arms” (egalité des armes) between the parties. The United Nations Human Rights Committee, the judicial body charged with monitoring State compliance with the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, has stated that a fair hearing requires that the Prosecution and the Defense be treated in a manner ensuring (a) that they have a procedurally equal position throughout the course of the trial, and (b) are in an equal position to make their case.

Equality of arms requires that the prosecution as well as the accused is afforded a reasonable opportunity to present its case, under conditions that do not place it at a substantial disadvantage vis-à-vis the opposing party. This is particularly important in criminal trials where the prosecution has all the machinery of the State behind it. It is in situations such as these that the principle of equality of arms takes on importance as an essential guarantee of the right to defend oneself. It ensures that the defense has a reasonable opportunity to prepare and present its case on a footing equal to that of the prosecution. Each side must be given adequate time and facilities to prepare a defense, including disclosure by the prosecution of material information. The State of Cameroon has not respected these safeguards in its case against Marafa et al. The defendants have not only been kept in the dark with respect to material information in the State’s custody but have been given less than a week to prepare their defense. This can hardly be considered adequate time especially in a case with such national significance. 

Let us not forget that Mr. Marafa’s stake in this trial is of immense importance, both because of the possibility that if found guilty he may lose his liberty for a long time and because of the certainty that he and members of his family would be forever stigmatized by the conviction. Respect for human dignity makes it incumbent on any competent court to establish with moral certainty an accused person’s guilt before punishment is inflicted. It is equally incumbent on the criminal process to proceed with extreme caution when prosecuting persons accused of any crime much less the one Messrs Marafa and Fotso have been accused of-- misappropriation of funds belonging to the people of Cameroon.

Members of the Press, we believe that the Cameroonian people, on whose behalf this trial is being conducted, have an interest in making sure that their system of criminal justice functions properly on the basis of internationally-recognized judicial principles.  It is also in their collective interest to make sure that the conviction and punishment of Mr. Marafa and the other accused persons follow from evidence which leaves no doubt as to their guilt. Without this assurance there is a reasonable possibility that innocent compatriots may end up being punished for a crime they did not commit!

Professor Ndiva Kofele Kale, Esq.,

Counsel for Marafa Hamidou Yaya ”

Hon Ayah’s party sees no justification in Cameroon’s projected abolition of fuel subsidies

                 Following is a PAP Communique on Fuel Subsidies in Cameroun:

In the protection of their interest, some Camerounese have been feeding wavelengths of late with deceitful counsel on the justification for the abolition of fuel subsidies by the government.

The most ridiculous are the assertions of the general manager of SONARA – the very refinery that Camerounese have been told in recent years did cease to refine Cameroun’s crude oil with the demise of President Ahmadou Ahidjo. One wonders whether SONARA has now replaced the government in the drawing up of Camerounese economic policies!

Be the situation as it may, the leaders of People’s Action Party (PAP) see no justification in the projected abolition of fuel subsidies. This is because the purpose is to enable a tiny minority of Camerounese to continue to swim in opulence from the pillage of our nation, and at the expense of ordinary people who are already languishing in misery: the vast majority. It would be no exaggeration to say that, in

Cameroun, less than 1% of the citizens possess 98% of the commonwealth.

May it be recalled that Ayah Paul, the national chairman of PAP, as far back as 2009, did decry the appropriation of some 103 billions in the budget of Cameroun for fuel and entertainment allowances to the benefit of a few public servants. Ayah has since pointed out, time without number, that more than 2.5 million a day for the secretary general at the Presidency of the Republic for fuel is more than just waste; and that it is unconscionable in the face of some other Camerounese lacking 10 francs for a magi cube for his survival. It is all the more immoral that the secretary general who hardly ever leaves Yaounde for any distant place should have that much for the sole performance of his official duty!

In recurring to those fantastic appropriations, one is not unaware that, since Ayah’s analysis,expenditure for fuel and entertainment has dropped from 103 billions in 2010 to 57 billions in 2012. But simultaneously has “depenses communes” soared from 134 to 164 billions. Some British economist is yet to be hired to explain to the ordinary Camerounese what “depenses communes” means. Lay understanding of the “complicated phrase”, however, is that not up to 30 of 164 billions appear to fall within the realm of proper appropriation. We challenge the Minister of Finance who is charged with the management of “depenses communes” to prove the contrary to the people!

Again, the beneficiary ministers and select public servants do not constitute up to o.ooo1% of Camerounese. Yet are all departmental vehicles at their disposal – at times up to a dozen for one person. As a matter of fact, the state of Cameroun has acquired more and heavier vehicles today than it did ever acquire prior to the economic crisis.

Such vehicles are heavy feeders; and they are used more for private transactions than otherwise. We do see them carrying produce and, at times, even firewood for private persons for whatever considerations.And we all know they run wholly at the expense of the state in reference particularly to fuel.

And so are we of opinion that it is enough for the government to reduce the number of departmental vehicles; buy smaller vehicles for lesser fuel-consumption; reduce by half expenditure on fuel and entertainment; cut “depenses communes” by 50%...and ordinary Cameroonian, would pay much less than the current fuel prices. For then, the savings from those measures would provide for even greater subsidies; and the surplus would build thousands of kilometers of roads per annum should embezzlement be checked! In consequence do we of PAP say, with vehemence, NO to the abolition of fuel subsidies!

Cameroun na soso suffer?!

Pregnancy is not a disease

* Chief A.S. Ngwana in Douala

Chief A.S Ngwana

The natural way by which human beings are conceived and born is through pregnancy.  Pregnancy occurs when the sperm of the man fertilizes the egg of the woman, normally during sexual intercourse.

The sexual act is one of the most pleasurable and enjoyable acts created by God for the purpose of multiplying and increasing the human race.

Puberty is the process of physical changes by which a child’s body matures into an adult body capable of sexual reproduction to enable fertilization. The major landmark of puberty for males is the first ejaculation (wet dreams) which occurs on average at age about 13. For females, it is menarche, the onset of menstruation, the beginning of womanhood, which occurs on average between ages of about 12 - 13. At puberty ovaries contain about 10,000 immature ova or eggs that are the female cells for reproduction. Once a month, throughout all the fertile period of life of a woman (average from 13-14 to 45-50 years of age) ovaries expel one egg at a time, once every 28 days. This process is called ovulation. Ovulation stops throughout the 9 months of pregnancy and starts again a few weeks after delivery of the child. Ovulation continues until menopause when the woman reaches 45-50 years and menstruation stops.

A woman can continue to have many children before she reaches menopause. In May 3 2003 the News of the World, a British newspaper reported that Nicola Pidhan, 40, was expecting her 20^th baby. She and her husband Kevin had had one child every year over two decades. 

Men have no time limit, and they can continue to impregnate girls even after 80, as the case of Scotty, the great-grandfather when his wife gave birth to his seventh child.

Once pregnancy occurs, the fertilized egg must be treated as a Human Being with inalienable rights of the person which must be recognized and respected by society and political authority. These human rights depend neither on single individuals nor on parents; nor do they represent a concession made by society and the state; they belong to human nature and are inherent in the person by virtue of the creative act from which the person took his origin. Among such fundamental rights one should mention in this regard every human being’s right to life and physical integrity from the moment of conception until death          

The discovery in the early 1950s by the American endocrinologist, Gregory Princus (1903-1967), that contraception could be reliably done by a pill containing female sex hormones, sparked off a revolution in contraception and revolutionized human sexual behavior.  The advent of the Pill ushered in the sexual revolution the sixties and set the stage for uncontrollable changes.   What the sexual revolution and radical feminism promised was that the pursuit of freedom, sexual equality, sexual pleasure and the rejection of traditional morality would bring individual happiness and build a more truly human society.

“Reproductive rights” and “anti-birth ideology” spread rapidly under the umbrella of the U.N. and the European Union.  Anti-life groups, population controllers and Governments took this up and started legalizing illegalities

They concentrated all their efforts on Artificial Birth Controls to reduce human population

 

NATURAL BIRTH CONTROLS are instilled by nature (the Creator Himself) in the human body so that the body can function correctly and naturally.

 

ARTIFICIAL BIRTH CONTROLS is an umbrella term for several techniques and methods used to prevent fertilization or to interrupt pregnancy at various stages. Artificial birth control techniques and methods include contraception (the prevention of fertilization), contragestion  (preventing the implantation of the blastocyst) and abortion (the removal or expulsion of a fetus or embryo from the uterus). Contraception includes barrier methods, such as condoms or diaphragm, hormonal contraception, also known as oral contraception, and injectable contraceptives. Contragestives, also known as post-coital birth control, include intrauterine devices and what is known as the “morning after pill”.

 

 Last Week 11^th July, was United Nation’s World Population Day.  The United

Nations Population Fund (NFPA) marked it by calling for more funds for family planning ( Artificial Birth Controls -  contraceptives, abortions, sterilizations etc).

The same day also was the closing day of a London summit organized by the British government and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, together with UNFPA and other partners.

“Participants at the summit committed themselves to provide $4.6 billion in funding for family planning in the coming years, according to a UNFPA press release.

“Contraceptives are one of the best investments a country can make in its future,” the Web site for the London Summit affirmed.

Not an opinion shared by Austin Ruse, who commented Wednesday on the summit in a post on National Review Online. Ruse is the president of the Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute (C-FAM), a non-profit institute that closely follows the United Nations and other organizations on family and population issues. Ruse said that fertility rates are falling off a cliff and that “the world faces a new reality of demographic winter.”

He also pointed out that “every dollar spent on coercive UN-style family planning will be a dollar lost to the real needs of poor women: basic medical care, skilled birth attendants, education, clean water, and nutrition.”

Winter

Ruse’s point about a demographic winter is well-founded. On July 3 Reuters reported that the number of births in Germany fell to a post-war low last year. This was despite government incentives designed to reverse the trend in what is the European Union's biggest economy.

Preliminary data released by Germany's Federal Statistics Office showed 663,000 children were born in 2011, down from 678,000 in 2010, said Reuters.

In fact, every year since 1972 the number of people who died was greater than the number of children born. In 2011 the difference amounted to 190,000 people.

While people commonly believe that Muslim families have many children, an article in the June issue of the magazine Policy Review by Nicholas Eberstadt and Apoorva Shah said that fertility levels are falling dramatically in the Muslim community too.

The authors admitted that reliable data on some Muslim states is lacking, for example Afghanistan, but they cited estimates of 1.42 to 1.57 billion Muslims, about 22%-23% of the world population.

All 48 Muslim-majority countries and territories have experienced fertility decline over recent decades, the authors pointed out. Moreover, the decline has been greater than the world average decline.

“The remarkable fertility declines now unfolding throughout the Muslim world is one of the most important demographic developments in our era,” the article affirmed.

The latest data confirms the arguments in a recent book, “Population Decline and the Remaking of Great Power Politics,” edited by Susan Yoshihara and Douglas A. Sylva, who both work for C-FAM.

The demographic decline in many nations may be so severe, they explained in the book’s introduction, that some countries might not be able to achieve economic growth, fund social welfare programs, or meet their security obligations.

In recent decades there has been a 60% drop in worldwide fertility rates and the number of people aged 60 or more has multiplied 3.5 times. The ratio of workers to retired people has fallen by 25% in the last 50 years and is expected to fall by another 55% by 2050.

Destiny

“Demographics is not destiny,” they acknowledged, “but it sets the boundaries of the possible.”

The working age population of all developed countries, with the exception of the United States, will stop growing within five years, Phillip Longman pointed out in his essay. Longman, a prominent writer on demographic issues, added that is it not just the richer countries that are affected. Brazil, Chile, and Mexico are likely to have older populations that the U.S. by mid-century.

The latest U.N. projections estimate that by 2050, 75% of all countries, even in underdeveloped regions, will not have enough children to avoid population decline.

Even so Europe is particularly affected, with 18 of the 20 countries with the lowest birthrate being in Europe. The European population, including Russia, is projected to decline by some 128 million by 2050.

Journalist and author Gordon G. Chang examined the consequences of demographic change in China.

The world’s most populous nation has created demographic abnormalities that cannot be remedied for decades, he argued. There are 51.3 million more males than females as a result of sex-selective abortion.

The country will also shortly be hit by an “age wave,” Chang noted. The age cohort of those aged 60 and more, currently at 12.5% of the population, will double by 2030.

China is already short of workers and the working-age population is set to fall from just under a billion in 2015 to 789 million in 2050. This will have serious economic consequences for both China and the rest of the world, Chang pointed out.

Yet, in the face of all that is happening, the United Nations and its friends continue to campaign for billions more to be spent on further reducing the number of children.”(By Father John Flynn, LC)

The organizers of the London Summit Conference - The British Government, UNFPA, Bill and Melinda Gate Foundation, International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and others, raised 4.6 Billion dollars to give poor women in developing countries, not to have children, while they know that countries in the developed world are facing declining populations and ageing problems.

Pregnancy is not a disease, the only reasons Population Controllers have are political, economic, eugenic, or satanic.

  * Chief A.S. Ngwana is a pro-lifer, Human Rights Crusader and National Chairman

Cardinal Democratic Party, Douala-cameroon

  (First Published In The Recorder Newspaper,Cameroon,of July 20,2012 )