Abstract

This work examines military justice system in Cameroon. The  military justice system has been organized to carry out justice, punish and acquit criminals who commit crimes like theft with the use of fire arms, acts of terrorism, military officials who go against the commands or disobey the commands of their bosses, and so on.

The main objective is to access the role of the military tribunal in the criminal justice system in Cameroon. The provision governing the military justice code in Cameroon is law no2017/012 of July 2017 on the military justice code; this law has established the various procedures that must be followed when administering justice at the military court and in situations where this provisions are not followed any judgment rendered will be null.

For the findings, it has been realized that the judicial system is not independent those when it comes to dispensation of justice this system is lacking. The absence of a real judicial power is an upshot of the wider problem. Judicial independence is highly needed in the conduct of criminal proceedings and in Cameroon the highly influential politicians can influence the conduct of criminal proceedings.

The objective of this research is to examine the role of the military tribunal in the criminal justice system in Cameroon.

The method used in this work is purely Doctrinal. This research adopts a qualitative research approach. This method is suitable for this research reason being that it analyses the problem and does not make use of statistical data. The sources of data collection here are primary and secondary data.

The very first recommendation will be on the aspect that the Cameroonian judiciary must be independent as it is an important part for separation of power as an independent judiciary is indispensable to enhancing executive respect for the rules of law.

Another recommendation will be on the fact that since the military tribunal does not have the competence to try civilians but mostly military service men but the military tribunal has gone against this principle countless times it will be necessary for the government to organize another judiciary to try civilians at the military court.

CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background Of Study;

The legal system like most in Africa is a relic of the colonial era. However, it is unique in that it consists of two distinct and often conflicting legal systems, the English common law and the French civil law operating in some sort of tenuous coexistence. This makes Cameroon one of the few examples of such a dual legal system in the world.

Four major periods can best explain the nature and evolution of the legal system namely; the pre-colonial, the colonial, the post-independence period until 1996 and the post In the pre-colonial Cameroonian society, the existed diverse indigenous laws and usages, which applied in varying degree to the different ethnic groups.The only exception was in the north where the Foulbe tribes, who originally invaded the territory from North Africa in the early 19th century, had introduced Islamic laws. Despite the differences in the structure, content, and institutions which applied this indigenous and Islamic laws as they are referred to today, there where many similarities.

A German attempt to ascertain  and codify the traditional laws was frustrated by the outbreak of the first world war, but the results from the six tribes that where studied showed that there were substantial similarities in basic concepts and practices. The traditional system of justice was administered by a series of ad hoc bodies ranging from family head, quarter head, chief and chiefs council. Perhaps the most remarkable and controversial aspect of this system of justice was the extensive use of trial by ordeal. Examples include; drinking of poisonous concoctions, putting the hands in boiling palm oil or water, if the accused come to no harm, then his innocence was considered as proven.

During the colonial period, a rudimentary system of administration was established.  Two parallel system of courts, one exclusively for Europeans where German laws were applied, and the other exclusively for Cameroonians, where traditional laws under the control and supervision of the Germans were applied. The league of nations agreement with the French and British conferred powers, in Article 9, full powers of administration and legislation, the two powers were authorized to administer Cameroon in accordance with their laws and as an integral part of their territory, subject to such modifications as may be required by local conditions.

This was the basis for the almost wholesale exportation of the English common law and French civil law to Cameroon. There were significant differences in the policies they pursued in introducing their respective system of justice. The British, like the Germans and French, also operated two parallel systems of courts, but unlike them, this was not separated on racial lines.

One sector was for the traditional sector of the population, mainly Cameroonians, and the other was for the modern sector, mostly Europeans or those Cameroonians who opted for it. The applicable law was based on section 11 of southern Cameroon High court law 1958 which provided for the application of the English common law, the Doctrines of equity and statutes, of general applications which where in England on January 1 1900. On the basis of this, a number of English statutes as well as Nigerian laws and ordinances were made applicable to southern Cameroons.

Through the system of indirect rule traditional institutions and laws were retained provided they were not repugnant to natural justice, equity, and good conscience or incompatible with any existing laws. In French Cameroon the French in line with their policy of assimilation made a strict distinction between citizens, who were defined as French nationals or Cameroonians who had been evolved and were honored with that status and the ordinary Cameroonians who were derogatorily referred to as sujets.

The federal system that came into existence in 1961 was based on the two state federations consisting of west Cameroon, made up of the former southern Cameroons and east Cameroons made up of the former French Cameroon. Until the country became the united Republic of Cameroon in 1972 when a unitary system of government was introduced, the two federated states had each retained their inherited colonial system of justice although this was under the control of the federal Ministry of justice.

By 1964 two federal law reform commissions had been created to draw up the penal code, the criminal procedure code and several other codes. Its only achievement was the 1967 penal code, which remains the only reasonable successful legislation that reflects the countries dual legal culture, although it was substantially based on French penal code. Based on the unitary constitution of 1972, ordinance no.72/4 of August 26, 1972 which has since be amended several times, created a civilian- style unitary system of courts to replace the different court structure that had operated in the two states. Despite the unified court structure, the two pre-independence legal systems continued to operate.

The fourth period in the development of Cameroon legal system can be said to have started on 1 September 1996 when the OHADA treaty signed in 1993 by fourteen Africa countries, including Cameroon came into force. Whilst in the constitutional perspective, the Cameroonian legal systems remain bi-jural in the sense that the two distinct legal districts continue to coexist. The coming into effect of the OHADA system seems to mark the beginning of a terminal decline of common law legal culture in Cameroon. It has brought about three significant changes to the nature of the legal system.

First, until the OHADA treaty came into force, the principle of English commercial law applied to all business and commercial matters in the Anglophone legal district whilst the French commercial code applied in francophone legal district. According to Article 10 of the OHADA treaty, the uniform acts automatically and directly repeals all existing legislation and supersede any future legislation on the same subject. Under this regime there are eight uniform acts that deals with commercial matters in Cameroon through general commercial law, commercial companies and economic interest groups, securities, simplified recovery procedure and enforcement measures.

1.2-Statement Of The Problem

When it concerns the role of the military tribunal in the Cameroon criminal justice system there are several problems that stimulate my research on this topic and these problems include;

The very first problem is that the Cameroon judicial system is not independent. Thus when it comes to the dispensation of criminal justice in the country it is lacking and it’s not that effective because the judicial system is not independent.

Also, depending on the role of the military tribunal in the criminal justice system in the country, there is equally a problem. Normally the military tribunal is supposed to effectively dispense justice within the criminal justice system, but the reality is that this military tribunal is been used by those in power, especially the Government in other to suppress political opponents and that is why the acts of political opponents are considered to be acts of terrorism and they are been tried under the military tribunal. So instead of the court dispensing justice it is used as a tool to suppress political opponents and even cause injustice.

More to that  the military tribunal was establish mainly to try military officials not excluding civilians but mainly military servicemen but looking at the military tribunal in Cameroon it mainly tries the civilians. As stated by the African commission on human and people’s right the military court should be in no way competent to try civilians as reminded in the guidelines and principles of the right to fair trial, but the situation in Cameroon is different and this situation needs to be analyzed because the military tribunal has competence to try mostly military officials and not often civilians as the case be. Now based on this principle the government should establish a judiciary that its main concern will be to try civilians who have cases in the military tribunal.

Another problem that stimulates this research is that; one of the main situations where justice is considered effective is when justice is being administered in the presence of the public and in default of this justice will be considered ineffective, but looking at the situation in which Ayuk sisikou and nine others where sentenced at the military court in Yaoundé that is without the public being present at the time of the sentence and behind closed doors and in the middle of the night even though the judges made use of cameras is another problem that is needed to be analyzed in this research.

1.3-Research Questions;

1. What are the procedures that are needed to be followed by the military tribunal in the administration of criminal justice?
2. How independent is the judiciary of the military justice system in Cameroon?
3. What is the jurisdiction and competence of the military tribunals?
4. Are there policy recommendations for the effective dispensation of criminals?

Check out: Law Project Topics with Materials