Cameroon--2011 Global FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report

2011 FDA Electoral Fairness Audit of Cameroon’s Republic Presidential Electoral

System

Electoral Fairness Audit Completed August 17, 2011

Executive Summary: Cameroon received an overall failing score of 2.5 percent for electoral fairness. A passing score is 50 percent. The score of 2.5 percent means that the constitutional and legislative basis for Cameroonian democracy is almost completely unfair. Although there are elements of fairness such as special air time for political parties, these elements are canceled out by overall electoral unfairness. The Cameroon government and state has a tight grip on political society, and they have engineered the electoral and media laws so that they favor significantly state candidates and parties. With restrictions on political content and assembly, and unfair electoral finance laws, the Cameroonian political opposition has no reasonable hope of forming government.

About the Foundation for Democratic Advancement:

The Foundation for Democratic Advancement ("FDA")'s mission is to advance fair and transparent democratic processes wherever elections occur. The FDA believes that fairer electoral systems and a more informed public will help ensure the election of candidates who truly represent the will of the people. The FDA fulfills its mission by performing detailed electoral audits on political candidates and parties to inform the public, objectively and impartially, about their electoral choices. Also, the FDA audits electoral legislation in terms of fairness and equity, and conducts ground level assessments of democratic processes. (For more information on the FDA visit: www.democracychange.com)

Purpose of Electoral Fairness Audit:

The purpose of the FDA’s electoral fairness audit (the “Audit”) is to determine a grade and ranking for electoral fairness in Cameroon at the presidential and assembly levels of government. (This Audit is part of the FDA’s global audit of electoral fairness involving all countries which hold political elections.)

This non-partisan, independent determination aims to give the citizens of Cameroon an informed, objective perspective of the fairness of the Cameroonian republic presidential electoral system. The views in this electoral fairness audit are the views of the FDA only.

The FDA’s members and volunteers are in no way affiliated with the Comeroon Electoral Commission or any of the Cameroonian registered/non-registered political parties.

The Audit is an independent assessment based on objectivity, transparency and non-partisanship. The FDA assumes no responsibility or liability for any errors in the calculation of its audit results or inaccuracies in its research of relevant Cameroonian legislation.

Methodology of the Electoral Fairness Audit:

The FDA focuses on four key areas of electoral fairness:

1) Laws and regulations on the political content of media including newspapers, broadcasters and online media before, during, and after elections;

2) Laws and regulations on the equality of candidates’ and parties’ influence before, during and after elections, such as national televised debates, restrictions on candidate nominations, party registration requirements, etc.;

3) Laws and regulations on electoral finance, such as party and campaign donation limits, third party spending limits etc.; and

4) Laws and regulations on the equality of voter say before, during, and after an election. The FDA auditors looked at how Cameroonian laws and regulations promote equality of voter say in the media, at the polling booth, through electoral finance and constitutional laws etc.

Foundation for Democratic Advancement

http://www.democracychange.com/

The FDA decided to audit these four areas of electoral fairness because, in our opinion, they are often ignored or overlooked by the international community in determining electoral fairness.Moreover, these four areas cover broad aspects of the electoral process in which fairness could be compromised significantly.

The FDA acknowledges that electoral laws and regulations may not necessarily correspond to the implementation of those laws and regulations or the public’s response to them. The implementation and response could be positive or negative, in terms of electoral fairness.

Nevertheless, laws and regulations provide the foundation for democracy, framework for the electoral system, and an indication of electoral fairness. Also, a country's constitutional and electoral laws are part of the reality of its democracy.

A further study which tracks the actions of mainstream media and the enforcement or non-enforcement of electoral laws and regulation, for example, would provide a more reliable overall determination of electoral fairness.

The FDA researched current Cameroonian legislation, in relation to four areas of electoral fairness being examined. Following which, the FDA audited the research results via the FDA electoral audit team and established FDA scoring scales for the four areas of electoral fairness being audited.

Weighting and Scoring:

Overall, the FDA scoring is guided by an inherent valuation of the concepts of soundness and relevancy.

Each area of electoral fairness has a score range between 0 and 10, and each area is counted equally. The FDA auditors allow for overlap of electoral fairness areas, due to the interconnectedness of the areas. For example, electoral finance will be factored into the score for voter say and candidate and party influence if it is relevant to these areas.

The total averaged score will provide an indication of the electoral fairness in Cameroon.

The FDA electoral audit team deliberated on the research on each area of electoral fairness, and then attempted to reach consensus on the final score. Where no consensus could be reached, the individual scores of the team were averaged.

The final score for each area must be supported by more sound reasons and correspond to the established FDA scoring scale.

FDA Researchers:

Mr. Stephen Garvey, FDA founder and executive director, bachelor degree in Political Science (University of British Columbia) and Masters degree in Environment and Development (University of Cambridge).


Mr. Vincent Lemieux, FDA researcher, surveyor, and resident of Quebec.

FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Team:

Chief Electoral Auditor:


Electoral Auditors:

Mr. Torben Attrup, FDA researcher and auditor, bachelor degree in History (University of London), and United Kingdom citizen.Mrs. Linda Dassin, FDA researcher, Law degree (Université Paul Cézanne), lawyer, and Lebanese citizen.Mr. Benjamin Felix, lawyer, human rights and immigration specialist, FDA volunteer, Congolese citizen, and bachelor in Laws (University of Ottawa), bachelor in Civil Law (University of Geneva), masters in Law (University of Geneva)Mrs. Tina Frimpong, FDA researcher, legal assistant, and 2nd year university student (University of Calgary).Mr. Vincent Lemieux, FDA researcher, surveyor, and resident of Quebec.Mr. Aurangzeb Qureshi, FDA Director of Marketing, bachelor degree in Political Science (University of Alberta), and bachelor degree in Journalism (University of King's College).

Report Writer:



Information Sources:

The following information was consulted and utilized in this audit report:

Cout Candidathttp://pajec.mini-site.org/spip.php?article9

Don aux partie politiquehttp://etudesafricaines.revues.org/5?&id=5

ELECAMhttp://www.cameroon-info.net/stories/0,28205,@,elecam-l-onu-exige-le-changement-du-conseil-electoral.htmlhttp://ccdhr.org/cameroon-laws/Law%20on%20the%20Creation%20of%20Elections%20Cameroon%20(ELECAM).pdfhttp://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/1/35/48/78/Cameroun/Cameroun-Loi-elecam.pdf

Electoral lawshttp://www.thecommonwealth.org/shared_asp_files/uploadedfiles/C566DF60-FE3D-4E15-A562-195D5E2C952F_PaperbyHenryEyebeAyissi.pdf

Electoral system“Cameroon's Electoral System: Current Organization, New Challenges, and Prospects”, Mr. Henri Ayissi, Inspector General for Election Matters Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralization—Cameroon, New Dehli, February 24, 2005.

Financehttp://www.cameroon-info.net/stories/0,16445,@,ombres-et-lumieres-sur-l-argent-des-partis.html

Gini Index for Cameroonhttp://www.indexmundi.com/cameroon/distribution_of_family_income_gini_index.html

Internet (twitter)http://news.cameroon-today.com/cameroon-governments-ban-placed-on-twitter-is-estimated-to-put-a-serious-control-on-innovative-efforts/4904/

Kal walla (beaten)http://globalcitizenblog.com/?p=3213

Legislation laws and the constitutionhttp://www.lexadin.nl/wlg/legis/nofr/oeur/lxwecmr.htm

Mediaaceproject.org/ace-en/.../media...elections/mec


http://ddata.over-blog.com/xxxyyy/1/35/48/78/Cameroun/Cameroun-Loi-elecam.pdf

Mediahttp://public.unionky.edu/fulbright/files/2009/07/cameroonmedia_lecture.pdf

Mediahttp://www.unhcr.org/refworld/country,,CPJ,ANNUALREPORT,CMR,456d621e2,47c566cdc,0.html

NEO organizationshttp://www.camerpages.net/en/detail/neo--national-elections-observatory-of-cameroon-151.html

Political parties“Cameroon: Why So Many Political Parties (207)?”, Dibussi Tande, June, 2007.

UN data on Cameroonhttp://data.un.org/CountryProfile.aspx?crname=Cameroon

Wikipedia on Cameroonhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameroon

© 2011, Foundation for Democratic AdvancementAll rights reserved.Foundation for Democratic Advancement728 Northmount Drive NWPO Box 94Calgary, AlbertaCanada, T2K [email protected]


Table of Contents:

Political Background on Cameroon 9

Chapter 1: Political Content of Media 11

Executive Summary 11

Research Excerpts 11

Score 15

Rational 15

Chapter 2: Candidate and Party Influence 17



Score 18

Rational 18

Chapter 3: Electoral Finance 19



Score 20

Rational 20

Chapter 4: Voter Say 21



Score 23

Rational 23

Chapter 5: Overall Audit Results 24

Chapter 6: Analysis 25

Chapter 7: Conclusion 26

Chapter 8: Recommendations 27

Appendix: FDA Global Audit Results 28

Political Background on Cameroon

Overall, the Cameroon electoral system is a raw power system based on democratic rules and laws (based on French civil law with common law influences) but with inconsistent application and corruption prevalent everywhere in society. Cameroon is a country which is comprised by the language, religion, regions and their culture. Although power lies firmly in the hands of the authoritarian president since 1982, Paul Biya, and his Cameroon People's Democratic Movement party, the government recognizes the authority of traditional chiefs, fons, and lamibe to govern at the local level and to resolve disputes as long as such rulings do not conflict with national law.

Source: Foundation for Democratic Advancement

According to the political system of Cameroon, the government is a republic multiparty presidential regime which is structured on the French model. Under this model, power is distributed among the President who is the Head of State, the Prime Minister, the head of government and the Cabinet ministers. Under the political system of Cameroon, the Republic is divided into ten regions which are Amamaoua, Northwest region, East region, Far north region, Littoral, South region, Center region, Southwest region, North region, and West region. All of these administrative regions are supervised by a Governor, who co-ordinates Divisional officers, and subdivision officers.

A meeting by the National Assembly is held on a regular basis at the National capital in Yaounde, where major decisions are taken.

The Executive

The executive power in Cameroon lies with the President, the chief of state who is elected by popular vote for a term of seven years and is eligible for re-elections for a second term. The Government is headed by the Prime Minister who is appointed by the President. Under the executive branch the Cabinet consists of a council of ministers appointed by the President on the recommendations of the Prime Minister.

The current President of Cameroon is Paul Biya and the Prime minister is Philemon Yang while the Deputy Prime Minister is Amadou Ali. The next presidential elections will be held by the year 2011.

The Legislative

Under the legislative branch is the Unicameral National Assembly comprising of 180 seats where members are elected by popular vote for a five-year term. It is to be notes that the President has the authority to lengthen or shorten the tern of the legislature.

The last National Assembly elections were held on 23 June, 2002 and the next is due on June 2008.

Foundation for Democratic Advancement Page | 9

Judiciary

The judicial system in Cameroon is based on the on French civil law system and consists of the Supreme Court and High Court. Judges of the Supreme Court are appointed by the President while the High Court judges are appointed by the National Assembly. The High Court consists of 9 judges and 6 substitute judges.

It is to be noted that the judiciary in Cameroon is subordinate to the Ministry of Justice of the Executive branch. The constitutionality of a law can be reviewed by the Supreme Court only on the request of the President.

Source: 123independence


Chapter One: Political Content of Media

Chapter one will focus on the research and audit results of Cameroonian laws and regulations with respect to the political content of media, including newspapers, broadcasters and on-line media, before, during and after elections.

Executive Summary: Cameroon received a 0 percent score for the equality and fairness of Cameroon media's political content. The score means that based on Cameroon's media legislation, the political content of media and broadcasters is completely unfair. Cameroon has no freedom of information available to the public, and the state controls Cameroonian media and broadcasters. Political content must conform to the principles of public policy. Also, there are expensive licensing fees for TV and radio networks. Further, there is no mention of fairness, equality, plurality, or balanced, broad electoral coverage in Cameroonian media laws. Private broadcasters are required legally to disseminate news items on political speeches and official ceremonies.

Research Excerpts:

The following excerpts were identified by the FDA researchers as relevant. The FDA researchers made some excerpts bold to emphasize high relevance:

TRANSPARENCY IN TERMS OF ORGANISING ANDFINANCING ELECTIONS IN CAMEROON:INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISM, EVALUATION AND PROSPECTSD) ACCESS TO PUBLIC MEDIA AND TO THE ELECTORATES

1- According to the provisions of Law No. 92/030 of 13 February 1992 bearing conditions ofaccess by political parties to public audiovisual media:- “the public audiovisual media is expected to ensure that their programmes reflect ahonest, balanced and complete pluralistic expression of the various political thoughts andopinions” (Article 3);2- during elections, any enrolled political party has a right to regular airtime in the publicaudiovisual media in order to spread its propaganda”; the airtime shared amongst runningmates as part of campaign programmes is fixed by an order of the Minister ofCommunication, once the electoral college is convened.3- Access to the electorate by candidates is guaranteed by all means, with respect to theexisting rules and regulations:- advertising: advert can be published as the case may be, in newspapers orbroadcasted on special airtime created in the public or private radio;- public political rallies or meetings: according to the provisions of Law No. 90/055 of 19December 1990 on public meetings and manifestations, the Cameroonian lawmaker optedfor the declaration system in this domain, as opposed to the prior authorisation system, whichobtained since the previous Law of 1967, organisers of campaign meetings or rallies musttender a declaration to the territorially competent Sub-Divisional Officer at least three (3) days


before the projected event.

Media analysis:

Media regulation is not independent from the state.There is provision for community and alternative media.State-owned media outlets are perceived to lack independence and to support thegovernment.Journalists are required to register in order to get a press card to cover state events, butdo not have to be part of a professional body, or be licensed.Pay for non-state journalists is low, prompting private journalists to seek payments fromthe people and organisations on which they report

US State Department on Cameroon

Since the issuance of the decree authorizing the creation of private radio and television on April 3, 2000, only two stations have received a license from the government. Licensing fees are more than $100,000 for radio stations and $200,000 for television stations, which many in the press consider exorbitant. On April 9, 2008, the Minister of Communication gave two television stations and one radio station until July 2008 to pay the remainder of their license fee or be shut down. Previously, most media houses applied for their licenses and operated under what the government called “administrative tolerance” while their applications were pending and they raised the necessary funds for licensing fees. However, in January 2010, the Minister of Communication indicated that the government was ending “administrative tolerance” and would crack down on stations operating without a fully-paid license.

There are a dozen community radio stations created and supported by the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and local councils, which are exempted from licenses and have no political content. Radio coverage extends to about 80% of the country, while television covers 60% of the territory.

MASS MEDIA IN CAMEROON. PREPARED BY THE NICO HALLE & Co. LAW FIRM

B.P.: Despite the fact that the 1990 laws made mass media liberal in Cameroon, the question one may be tempted to ask is how liberal are these mass media organs in Cameroon. Of course it is true that media organs are liberal in Cameroon but only to a certain degree. For example, press organs are obliged to submit copies of their papers to the various authorities in charge of the jurisdictions in which they find themselves some hours before distribution for scrutiny. This is in a bid to censor the type of information that goes to the public. Their aim is to ensure that the information that goes out to the public favours the regime in power. This act is known as press censorship. In spite of the 1990 laws that gave press freedom, there is some degree of press censorship.


Also in the field of bill posting, it is still State-owned. Posting of all bills especially advertisements on strategic points around the country determined by the State are still controlled and managed by the government. Private individuals do not yet own and control bill posts in the country. As a result, all advertisements and postings must pass through the State and most often it is pretty expensive since it is still monopolised by them.

3. Media Health3.1 Status of the laws regarding rights and access to informationArticle 1 of the general provisions of Cameroon’s 1990 Freedom of Social Communication lawand the 1996 revised constitution, both guarantee freedom of the press. Article 2(1) of the1990 law stipulates that freedom of communication applies to all forms of communication.However, at present there is no specific law mandating access to information (Republic ofCameroon, 1990b; 1996b).3.2 Status of the laws regarding criminal defamation and insultThere are no criminal libel or insult laws in Cameroon. The Freedom of Social Communicationlaw outlines civil remedies for cases of defamation by the press, stating in Section 1, Article52, that “the Publisher of a Press Organ is obliged to publish, in the next issue of his journal,every rectification addressed to him by a depositary of public authority in relation to his dutieswhich were wrongly reported” (Republic of Cameroon, 1990b). Article 53 of the same lawoutlines newspapers’ obligations to provide a right of reply. Article 57 outlines broadcasterobligations to provide a right of reply (Republic of Cameroon, 1990b).3.3 Status of the laws that exist to enable media regulatory bodies tofunction independentlyA number of provisions exist in Cameroon in relation to media regulation, but there is noprovision for an independent media regulator. The main regulatory bodies are the CameroonMedia Council (CMC) and the National Communications Council (NCC). While the former isanswerable to the Minister of Communication, the latter answers to the Prime Minister.3.4 Current provisions that aim to secure the independence ofpublicly-owned mediaThere are no current provisions that aim to secure the independence of state-owned media5.

The general tendency is that the state media is pro-government.

Key findings

Freedom of the press is protected by a 1990 law and the 1996 revised constitution, butthere is no specific access to information law.

There are no criminal libel or insult laws.

3.5 Current provisions to support community or alternative mediaThe 2000 Decree on Private Audio-Visual Communication Enterprises (private media)authorised the creation of both community and alternative media (Republic of Cameroon,2000a). A 2002 Ministerial Order further supported development of a community sector byproviding for public assistance to private communication (Republic of Cameroon, 2002b).


These two legal texts are a sign that the government encourages and acknowledges theexistence of both community and alternative media in Cameroon. It should be noted that theassistance given by the Ministry of Communication to private media houses has not beenaccompanied by attempts to exert government control.

3.6 Regulatory obligations for public or state broadcasters to fulfill apublic-service broadcasting remitState broadcasting outlets in Cameroon are not subject to public-service broadcasting (PSB)obligations. The editorial line for state radio and TV broadcasters is set by the state-ownedCameroon Radio and Television Corporation (CRTV). While there is some difference ofopinion among media observers, the general feeling is that the state radio and TV outlets sidewith the political grouping in power6.

3.7 Regulatory obligations for private broadcasters to fulfil a public-servicebroadcasting remitOne public-service obligation imposed on private broadcasters is the requirement, in terms ofthe 2000 Decree (Republic of Cameroon, 2000a), that 51% of daily radio air-time should bereserved for local production, while for television the quota is 30%. There has been no studyto find out if these quotas are respected by the private media.

3.8 JournalismAccording to the Cameroon Union of Journalists (UJC), there are 874 practising journalists inthe country: 183 women and 691 men (UJC, 2005). This means that 21% of the country’sjournalists are female, and 79% male. Practising journalists are expected to register with thegovernment, and a 2002 Decree established a press card system for registered journalists(Republic of Cameroon, 2002c). Only journalists who own a press card are allowed access tocover public events related to the state. For a journalist to obtain a press card, he or she mustprove that he or she belongs to a legal media house or a media organisation. There is,however, no legislative provision for the licensing of journalists. Neither are there anyprovisions for journalists to belong to a professional association. For this reason, there is nodata on the number of journalists who are registered with trade unions. A number ofprofessional journalists’ associations exist, but there is no single forum that brings togetherall associations.

State media employees are categorised as ‘A2 state workers’, getting an average monthlysalary of F.CFA 165,500 (US$300) (Republic of Cameroon, 2000b)7. An average monthly salaryfor a teacher is also US$300. It is difficult to estimate the wages of independent journalists inCameroon. Private media employers generally pay low salaries. Thus, there is a tendency fornon-state journalists to expect payments from individuals or organisations covered in theirreporting.

There is one vocational journalism school, the Advanced School of Mass Communication,based in Yaoundé. There are also three university departments offering journalismprogrammes, two of which are private institutions (Siantou Superieure and Institut NdiSamba), and the third a public institution (Department of Journalism and Mass


Communication, University of Buea). There are also NGOs that provide journalism training,such as UNESCO, Friedrich Ebert Stiftung (FES), and the British Council in collaboration withthe Thompson Foundation.

Electoral Fairness Audit Results for Media and Broadcasters:

Score:

The FDA electoral fairness audit team reached consensus on a score of 0/10

Rational for Score:

The state can deny public access to information.

The state controls the media and broadcasters. Political content cannot “conflict with the principles of public policy.”

The state imposes very high licensing fees for TV and radio networks. ($100,000 USD for radio networks and $200,000 USD for TV networks.)

There is no mention of fairness, equality, balanced electoral coverage or equivalent in Cameroon's media laws.

Private media and broadcasters can operate in Cameroon; however, the state controls strictly their political content.

Private broadcasters must disseminate news items of political speeches, official ceremonies etc.

Private media must observe: 51 percent of daily radio air-time for local production, while for television the quota is 30 percent.

State broadcasting outlets in Cameroon are not subject to public-service broadcasting (PSB) obligations. The editorial line for state radio and TV broadcasters is set by the state-owned Cameroon Radio and Television Corporation (CRTV).

“There are a dozen community radio stations created and supported by the UN Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and local councils, which are exempted from licenses and have no political content. Radio coverage extends to about 80 percent of the country, while television covers 60 percent of the territory.” (US State Department)

The state censors, threatens, harasses, and attacks media persons who act contrary to the goals of the Cameroonian state.

The state has blocked public access to Twitter after the uprising in the Middle East.


The score of 0 percent means that the media's political content is completely unfair. Although there is an element of press freedom in Cameroon, that freedom is completely offset by the state's control of media. Journalists and media networks who act contrary to the principles and goals of the state, face censorship, threats, and attacks. State force and intimidation against private media coupled with unfair media laws and a partisan state TV and radio eliminate any elements of fairness.


Chapter Two: Candidates’ and Parties’ Influence

Chapter two will focus on the research and audit results of Cameroonian laws and regulations with respect to the equality of candidates and parties’ influence before, during and after elections.

Executive Summary: Cameroon received a failing score of 0 percent for candidate and party influence. The score means that the constitutional and legislative basis for candidate and party influence is completely unfair. The political content of media and broadcasters favors significantly state candidates and parties. Although the state allows special air times for parties, these air times are irrelevant due to the restrictions and censorship on political content. Also, the state controls political advertisements, and impose very expensive candidate and party registration fees. Further, the 5 percent level for return of registration fees and other electoral finance laws favors significantly state candidates and parties.

Research Excerpts:


The equality of candidates does not exist at all before, during and after an election. According to the constitution the freedom of expression, the freedom of the press, the freedom of assembly, the freedom of association, and the freedom of trade-unions are guaranteed under the conditions fixed by the law.

President Paul Biya's Cameroon People's Democratic Movement (CPDM) was the only legal political party until December 1990. Since 1990, there were 4 elections with several political parties and the government suppressed the freedoms of opposition groups by preventing demonstrations, disrupting meetings, and arresting opposition leaders.

For example, Jean Jacques Ekindi has been beaten when he was attending for a radio interview and Kah Walla (who is running for the 2012 Cameroon presidency) was among the protesters in the capital city Douala who were beaten during the protests again the Cameroon regime on February 23, 2011.

The state claims that there are almost 200 political parties in Cameroon. Only 5 of them are represented in the national assembly. The opposition parties possess only 27 seats of a possible 180.

On 10 April 2008, the National Assembly voted overwhelmingly for a bill to change the Constitution of Cameroon to provide the President of the Republic with immunity from prosecution for acts as President and to allow unlimited re-elections of the President. (The presidential term limit was previously two terms of seven years).


The President can launch an election when he wants. The next election will be held this fall between September and October, and there is no date at this point.

Also in the field of bill posting, it is still State-owned. Posting of all bills especially advertisements on strategic points around the country determined by the state are still controlled and managed by the government. Private individuals do not yet own and control bill posts in the country. As a result, all advertisements and postings must pass through the state and most often it is pretty expensive since it is managed by the state.

There are no regulations on political debates. State television is biased to the state.

It cost 1 500 000 FCFA for the registration of a presidential candidate and 500 000 FCFA for the registration of a deputy candidate. The registration fees are refundable if the candidate receives 5% of the votes.

Electoral Fairness Audit Results for Equality of Candidates and Parties:

Score:

The FDA electoral fairness audit team reached consensus on a score of 0/10.

Rational for Score:

Parties and candidates must inform the state of political events, three days before they occur.

Special air times for parties are irrelevant, because political content must conform to the goals of the state.

The state regulates political advertisements such as bill postings.

Although the Cameroon Constitution supports freedom of speech and press etc., the state restrictions and censorship on political content undermine these freedoms.

The financial barrier of 1 500 000 FCFA ($3,210 USD) for presidential candidates and 500 000 FCFA ($1070 USD) for assembly candidates to be registered favors wealthy candidates. The level of 5 percent of vote for return of registrations fees favor dominant parties and discourages political participation. (A more reasonable level would be 2.5 percent which is used, for example, in Norway and France, and a stratification of available public funds based on popular support over time or even better an equality of public funds to all registered parties.)

The score of 0 percent on candidate and party influence means that based on Cameroonian legislation there is complete unfairness. Political content and assembly restrictions, excessive candidate and party registration fees, and public electoral funds favoring state parties undermine any elements of fairness such as special air times for parties.


Chapter Three: Electoral Finance

Chapter three will focus on the research and audit results of Cameroonian laws and regulations with respect to the equality and fairness of Cameroonian electoral finance laws and regulations.

Executive Summary: Cameroon received a failing score of 10 percent for equality of electoral finance laws. Although there are no limits on donations or candidate and party spending except for foreign donations, and due to the low incomes of Cameroonians, these lack of limits favor state candidates and parties. Most of Cameroon's wealth is with the state and connected to it. Also, public electoral funding laws favor the dominant state parties. The 10 percent score is reflective of the freedom to donate and spend electorally, within the confines of state restrictions on political content and assembly.

Research Excerpts:


C) PUBLIC FUNDING OF POLITICAL PARTIES AND CAMPAIGNS OF CANDIDATESPublic funding of political parties and election campaigns was institutionalised by Law No.2000/015 of 19 December 2000. It comprises precise provisions and is comprehensive innature, allowing the various rival candidates to benefit from the public funding put in place fora given election. These basic provisions are as follows:1- “Legalised political parties can benefit from public funding as part of their participation inelections”.2- “Public funding also concerns expenditure on the regular activities of political parties aswell as organisation of campaigns”.3- “Each year the Finance Law contains a subvention destined to contribute to certainrecurrent expenses of legalised political parties”, “broken down into two equal instalments,the first is destined for parties represented in the National Assembly and the second forpolitical parties commensurate to their results in the last parliamentary elections”.4- The State participates in funding election campaigns by assuming certain expenses ofpolitical parties during elections”: charges incurred from the organisation of rallies and relatedlogistics.5- Public funds destined to fund campaigns are broken down as follows into two equalinstalments to parties running: (i) those that took part in the last parliamentary electionsproportionate to the number of seats obtained (ii) all other parties proportionate to thenumber of lists presented and approved in the various electoral districts.6- A Control Commission has been instituted to audit documents to ensure that the fundswere effectively used by the running parties for that purpose and as a matter of fact, theseState subventions constitute public funds.The provisions in force do not focus on the nature or origin of private funds that runningpolitical parties or candidates can receive, or the ceiling of campaign expenses of the latter.


Electoral Fairness Audit Results for Cameroonian Election Finance:

Score:


Rational for Score:

There are no limits on private electoral funding, barring no foreign funding.

The lack of cap on donations favors wealthy citizens and legal entities.

Public funding of parties favors significantly dominant, established parties, because based on success in previous election and number of seats in the Assembly.

The 5 percent level needed for the return of candidate registration fees favors dominant, established candidates.

Public funding is significant in Cameroon because of the low income level of Cameroonians.

Public and private funding sources are not entirely transparent. Whatever the party in question, it is difficult to get a clear answer from where the money comes from.

The score of 10 percent means that Cameroon's electoral finance laws are bordering on complete unfairness. FDA auditors acknowledge that Cameroonians have the freedom to donate and spend electorally with no limits. Yet at the same time, the state restricts political content and assembly, and has unfair public electoral finance laws. Also, due to the concentration of Cameroonian wealth with the state and its supporters, the lack of limits on electoral finance and the 5 percent level for return of registration fees favors state candidates and parties.

Cameroon's per capita income in 2008 is $1217.9 per year. (UN Data on Cameroon)

The fee to be an assembly candidate is equivalent to almost one year's family income. ($1070 USD)

The fee to be a presidential candidate is equivalent to almost three times one year's family income. ($3,210 USD)

The Gini Index for distribution of family income was 44.6 percent in 2001, which means there is severe inequality in distribution of family income. The lower the percentage, the more equality of family income.


Chapter Four: Voter Say

Chapter four will focus on the research and audit results of Cameroonian laws and regulations with respect to the equality of voter say laws and regulations before, during and after an election.

Executive Summary: Cameroon received a 0 percent for equality of voter say. The score means that based on Cameroon's constitutional, electoral and media legislation, voter say is completely unfair. Although freedom of expression, assembly, and press is enshrined in the Cameroonian Constitution, these laws are contradicted by the state's restrictions on political content and assembly. Also, like the high cost of candidate and party registration, the state imposes an expensive ID card registration fee, which discourages less wealthy Cameroonians from voting. Further, with no limits on electoral donations, wealthy Cameroonian voters are favored significantly over less wealthy Cameroonian voters, and legal entities are favored over voters.

Research Excerpts:


Cameroon Constitution (excerpt)

We, people of Cameroon,Declare that the human person, without distinction as to race, religion, sex or belief, possessesinalienable and sacred rights;Affirm our attachment to the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Charter of the United Nations and The African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, and all duly ratified international conventions relating thereto, in particular, to the following principles:- all persons shall have equal rights and obligations. The State shall provide all its citizens with the conditions necessary for their development;- the State shall ensure the protection of minorities and shall preserve the rights of indigenouspopulations in accordance with the law;- freedom and security shall be guaranteed to each individual, subject to respect for the rights of others and the higher interests of the State;- every person shall have the right to settle in any place and to move about freely, subject to the statutory provisions concerning public law and order, security and tranquillity;- the home is inviolate. No search may be conducted except by virtue of the law;- the privacy of all correspondence is inviolate. No interference may be allowed except by virtue of decisions emanating from the Judicial Power;- no person may be compelled to do what the law does not prescribe;- no person may be prosecuted, arrested or detained except in the cases and according to the manner determined by law;- the law may not have retrospective effect. No person may be judged and punished, except by


virtue of a law enacted and published before the offence committed;- The law shall ensure the right of every person to a fair hearing before the courts;- every accused person is presumed innocent until found guilty during a hearing conducted in strict compliance with the rights of defence;- every person has a right to life, to physical and moral integrity and to humane treatment in allcircumstances. Under no circumstances shall any person be subjected to torture, to cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment;- no person shall be harassed on grounds of his origin, religious, philosophical or political opinions or beliefs, subject to respect for public policy;- the State shall be secular. The neutrality and independence of the State in respect of all religions shall be guaranteed;- freedom of religion and worship shall be guaranteed;- the freedom of communication, of expression, of the press, of assembly, of association, and of trade unionism, as well as the right to strike shall be guaranteed under the conditions fixed by law;- the Nation shall protect and promote the family which is the natural foundation of human society. It shall protect women, the young, the elderly and the disabled;- the State shall guarantee the child's right to education. Primary education shall be compulsory. The organization and supervision of education at all levels shall be the bounden duty of the State;- ownership shall mean the right guaranteed to every person by law to use, enjoy and dispose ofproperty. No person shall be deprived thereof, save for public purposes and subject to the payment of compensation under conditions determined by law;- the right of ownership may not be exercised in violation of the public interest or in such a way as to be prejudicial to the security, freedom, existence or property of other persons;- every person shall have a right to a healthy environment. The protection of the environment shall be the duty of every citizen. The State shall ensure the protection and improvement of the environment;- every person shall have the right and the obligation to work;- every person shall share in the burden of public expenditure according to his financial resources;- all citizens shall contribute to the defence of the Fatherland:- the State shall guarantee all citizens of either sex the rights and freedoms set forth in the Preamble of the Constitution.

Based on the Constitution, the vote shall be equal and secret, and every citizen aged twenty-one (now twenty) years or over shall be entitled to it. Everyone who get their electoral card can vote but you must have your national identity card (not free) if you want your electoral card and be on the electoral list. With 30% (2003) of the population without a job and which the poverty is an enormous fact, it is hard on the poor to vote.

ELECAM (Election Cameroon) is an independent body responsible for organizing,management and supervision of the entire electoral process and referendum. But in fact, it is managed by the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralisation (MINATD). (Chairperson and vise-chairperson appointed by President; unclear who appoints other 10 members are chosen.) Most members (10 out of 12) are from the President’s CPDM party, thus


ELECAM is not seen as independent or impartial. (US State Department)

ELECAM goes in the towns for registering the people who want be on the electoral list without giving any prior information to the public, so nobody knows exactly where and when they are in their town.

Depending to the region, ELECAM's worker are still in their office whereas in the other region they are actually registering the people.

Only 3 millions (2007) are registered on the electoral list upon a population of 19 millions

In 1996, The CPDM gave money to people in the purpose for having their vote.

Electoral Fairness Audit Results for Equality of Voter Say:

Score:


Rational for Score:

There is no mention of equality of voter say in Cameroonian legislation except for the Constitution

The cost of ID cards is high for low income Cameroonians, and therefore, it is an impediment to some Cameroonians voting.

The state controls Election Cameroon.

The state controls and restricts political content of voters and the media.

There is unlimited third-party electoral spending, which favors significantly wealthy voters and legal entities.

There is unlimited electoral donations, which favors significantly wealthy voters and legal entities.

The score of 0 percent means that voter say is completely unfair. FDA auditors could find no element of fairness in Cameroon's laws and regulations on voter say. Similar to the candidates and parties section, voters who oppose the state are restricted severely in their say. Also, wealthy voters have the means for disproportionate say over less wealthy voters, and legal entities have the means for disproportionate say over most voters. The political restrictions on opposition candidates and parties carry over to opposition voters.


Chapter Five: Audit Results

Chapter five will set out the FDA’s scores for each of the areas of the Cameroonian electoral system as set out above.

1. Research and audit results for Cameroonian laws and regulations on the political content of media including newspapers, broadcasters, online media, before, during, and after elections.

0/10

2. Research and audit results for Cameroonian Laws and regulations on the equality of candidates and parties influence before, during and after elections.

0/10

3. Research and audit results for Cameroonian laws and regulations on electoral finance.

1/10

4. Research and audit results for laws and regulations on the equality of voter say before, during, and after an election.

0/10

Total score: 1/40

2.5 percent


Chapter Six: Analysis

Chapter six will provide a brief analysis of the FDA’s findings.

Cameroon's overall electoral fairness score of 2.5 percent is bordering on complete electoral unfairness.

The political content of media, candidate and party influence, and voter say are all completely unfair. Electoral finance, with a score of 10 percent, borders on complete unfairness.

Despite freedom of expression, assembly, and press written into the Cameroon Constitution, electoral and media laws limit severely these freedoms.

The foundation for Cameroon's democracy is undemocratic. Any elements of fairness such as special air time for political parties is canceled out by unfairness.

State oppression via intimidation and physical attacks coupled with laws favoring significantly state candidates and parties, undermine Cameroonian democracy.

Cameroon's overall score is similar to the overall scores for Egypt, Iran, Libya, Yemen, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Syria, and Tunisia:

Tunisia (under Ben Ali) 10% (F) Cameroon 2.5% (F) Yemen (under Saleh) 1.25% (F) Bahrain 0% (F) Egypt (under Mubarak) 0% (F) Iran 0% (F) Libya (under Gaddafi) 0% (F) Saudi Arabia 0% (F) Syria (under Bashar al-Assad) 0% (F)

(All these countries are in the failing zone for electoral fairness, and either are bordering on complete electoral unfairness or have complete electoral unfairness. 50 percent is a passing grade.)


In the research of Cameroon, the FDA researchers uncovered state electoral documents purporting for example the highly pluralistic political fabric of Cameroon. FDA researchers and auditors viewed these documents as state propaganda. For example, the claim that there are over 190 political parties in Cameroon is overshadowed by the significant legislative bias to state parties and the dominance of the Assembly by five state parties. (See this government document as an example; it claims over 190 Cameroonian political parties: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/shared_asp_files/uploadedfiles/C566DF60-FE3D-4E15-A562-195D5E2C952F_PaperbyHenryEyebeAyissi.pdf ) See this article as refutation of the number of Cameroonian political parties: “Cameroon: Why So Many Political Parties (207)?”, Dibussi Tande, June, 2007.)


Chapter Seven: Conclusion

Chapter seven will provide a summary of the FDA’s findings.

Cameroon is an oppressive society through systematic control, censorship, and intimidation of political opposition to the state. The basis for Cameroonian democracy is undemocratic.

Cameroon is an authoritarian society within the shell of a democracy.

Cameroon needs significant reform in all four areas of electoral fairness. Due to the oppressive nature of the society, it is unclear to the FDA how such a reform may be initiated, barring a revolution.

In the FDA's opinion, international pressure on Cameroon to improve its democracy piecemeal has proven to be ineffective, and if anything detrimental, by helping to create an illusory democratic gloss over the authoritarian society.

The will of Cameroonians as a whole is likely not represented by the Cameroonian government and state.


Chapter Eight: Recommendations

Chapter eight will set out the FDA’s recommendations on how Cameroon can improve its electoral fairness score and thereby its electoral fairness.

Cameroonians need to decide what kind of society they would like exist in, and then strive for the creation of that society through social and political movements.

The Cameroonian government and state needs to examine its motives, and ask whether or not in the long-term, the current status quo is in the better interests of Cameroonians as a whole?

Also, the Cameroonian government and state needs to realize that an authoritarian society is less beneficial to the people as a whole than a united and free society. Only by realizing this basic idea will the Cameroonian government and state be able to participate in the the progressive development of Cameroon.

The FDA does not support authoritarian societies unless the people truly support that type of society.

The FDA thinks that there is no equating value in an authoritarian society with a united and free society, in terms of the well-being of the people as a whole.

In the FDA's opinion, if the people do not support an authoritarian society, then there is no justification for the society except through a form of tyranny.


Appendix

FDA global electoral fairness audit results as of August 17, 2011:


0 % 1 0 % 2 0 % 3 0 % 4 0 % 5 0 % 6 0 % 7 0 % 8 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 %

F r a n c eV e n e z u e l a

N o r w a yN e w Z e a l a n d

F i n l a n dL e b a n o n

D e n m a r kR u s s i a

S w e d e nA r g e n t i n a

U n i t e d S t a t e sC a n a d a

A z e r b a i j a nM e x i c oT u n i s i a

C a m e r o o nY e m e n

B a h r a i nE g y p t

I r a nL i b y a

S a u d i A r a b i aS y r i a

O v e r a l l E l e c t o r a l F a i r n e s s A u d i t S c o r e s< - - f a i l i n g r a n g e | p a s s i n g r a n g e - - >

F D A G l o b a l E l e c t o r a l F a i r n e s s A u d i t R e s u l t s


0 % 1 0 % 2 0 % 3 0 % 4 0 % 5 0 % 6 0 % 7 0 % 8 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 %

R u s s i aV e n e z u e l a

F r a n c e N o r w a y

L e b a n o nA z e r b a i j a n

D e n m a r kF i n l a n d

S w e d e nU n i t e d S t a t e s

C a n a d aA r g e n t i n a

T u n i s i aN e w Z e a l a n d

Y e m e nB a h r a i n

C a m e r o o nE g y p t

I r a nL i b y a

M e x i c oS a u d i A r a b i a

S y r i a

L a w s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s o n t h e e q u a l i t y o f p o l i t i c a l c o n t e n t o f t h e m e d i a a n d b r o a d c a s t e r s b e f o r e , d u r i n g , a n d a f t e r a n e l e c t i o n

< - - f a i l i n g r a n g e | p a s s i n g r a n g e - - >



0 % 1 0 % 2 0 % 3 0 % 4 0 % 5 0 % 6 0 % 7 0 % 8 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 %


N e w Z e a l a n dN o r w a yF i n l a n d

L e b a n o nS w e d e n

U n i t e d S t a t e sA z e r b a i j a n

A r g e n t i n aD e n m a r k

R u s s i aC a n a d aM e x i c o

B a h r i a nC a m e r o o n

E g y p tI r a n

L i b y aS a u d i A r a b i a

S y r i aT u n i s i aY e m e n

L a w s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s o n t h e e q u a l i t y o f c a n d i d a t e a n d p o l i t i c a l p a r t y i n f l u e n c e b e f o r e , d u r i n g , a n d a f t e r a n e l e c t i o n




0 % 1 0 % 2 0 % 3 0 % 4 0 % 5 0 % 6 0 % 7 0 % 8 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 %


N e w Z e a l a n dF i n l a n dN o r w a y

A r g e n t i n aD e n m a r kL e b a n o n

S w e d e nT u n i s i a

A z e r b a i j a nC a m e r o o n

C a n a d aM e x i c o

U n i t e d S t a t e sB a h r a i n

E g y p tI r a n

L i b y aR u s s i a

S a u d i A r a b i aS y r i a

Y e m e n

L a w s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s o n t h e e q u a l i t y o f e l e c t o r a l ( c a m p a i g n ) f i n a n c e< - - f a i l i n g r a n g e | p a s s i n g r a n g e - - >



0 % 1 0 % 2 0 % 3 0 % 4 0 % 5 0 % 6 0 % 7 0 % 8 0 % 9 0 % 1 0 0 %


A r g e n t i n aM e x i c o

C a n a d aD e n m a r k

F i n l a n dN e w Z e a l a n d

U n i t e d S t a t e sS w e d e n

L e b a n o nN o r w a y

R u s s i aA z e r b a i j a n

B a h r a i nC a m e r o o n

E g y p tI r a n

L i b y aS a u d i A r a b i a

S y r i aT u n i s i aY e m e n

L a w s a n d r e g u l a t i o n s o n t h e e q u a l i t y o f v o t e r i n f l u e n c e b e f o r e , d u r i n g , a n d a f t e r a n e l e c t i o n



News & Politics

Cameroon--2011 Global FDA Electoral Fairness Audit Report