|
Cameroon appeared before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on 22 and 23 February 2010. The delegation was led by Mr Joseph Dion Ngute, the Minister of Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and also included the Director of the United Nations and the Decentralised Cooperation Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ambassador of the Permanent Mission of Cameroon in Geneva, and the Deputy Director of the Ministry of Justice.
The head of the delegation stressed in his initial presentation that Cameroon submitted a consolidated report covering the period between August 1997 and September 2008 and incorporating the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th reports. He apologised for the delay in submitting the present report and for the discontinuity this may cause in the follow-up. Mr Dion Ngute further emphasised that civil society and all concerned Government structures were involved in the drafting process of the report. In addition, he underlined that Cameroon has made particular efforts to ensure an effective implementation of the Committee’s previous concluding observations.
The country rapporteur, Mr Ewomsan, welcomed the establishment of a National Commission of Human Rights and Freedoms in 2004 in Cameroon. However, he encouraged the State to double its efforts in strengthening the Commission on the principles of parity and independence. Regarding the justiciability of the provisions of the Convention, the Committee pointed out that the report highlighted the supremacy of international law over domestic law; nevertheless it did not provide any jurisprudential case in this respect.
Of particular concern to the Committee was the status of the different ethnic groups in Cameroon, according to State’s estimations amounting to more than 230. Several Committee members raised the question of the terminology used by the Government to define the ethnic communities living on Cameroonian territory. In this context, Mr Prosper warned the State that the various definitions it employs interchangeably to refer to ethnic groups might lead to serious ambiguity.[1] The head of the delegation replied that the Government favours the term ‘marginalised population’, which is semantically the broadest; however, he clarified that this term is not being used at the official level in a precise, legalistic manner.[2] Furthermore, discussion on the protection of the ethnic groups in Cameroon focused on the following issues: the absence of data and statistics broken down by ethnicity; the question of their access to education and justice free of charge; the protection of landownership for nomadic ethnic groups and the compensation plans adopted by the State in response to economic projects with negative impacts on their lifestyle; the question of the representation of ethnic groups in State bodies; the establishment of development projects for the Pygmy people with support from international partners; and the involvement of Cameroon in the elaboration of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Other topics addressed by the Committee during consideration of Cameroon included: the need to preserve bilingualism as an asset for the country; the penalisation of racial discrimination under the 2005 Code of Criminal Procedure and the need for a uniform interpretation of racial discrimination in courts in order to enforce equal treatment before the law; allegations of differentiated practices in terms of wages on the basis of ethnic origin; the treatment of undocumented migrants of Nigerian origin; the access of refugees to health care, housing and employment and the urgent need for the State to elaborate national regulations for the application of the 2005 law on refugee status ; the considerable efforts made by the State in the area of education and the high literacy rate; the generalisation of the use of uniforms in school as an egalitarian measure, aiming at removing complexes due to ethnic origin; the integration of albinos into society; the removal of details on ethnic origin from identification documents as a positive development in the context of the African countries; and access to antiretroviral treatment for foreigners.
The Committee appreciated the frankness of the delegation’s answers. Moreover, it commended the State for exhibiting genuine political will to bring about justice for all ethnic communities present in Cameroon. The Committee members expressed their appreciation with regard to the bilingual answers (French and English) given by the head of the delegation, reflecting the bilingual nature of his country.
[1] Mr Prosper refers to the terms 'indigenous, marginalised, vulnerable and cultural groups'.
[2] The Head of the delegation further explained that the two groups generally accepted as indigenous populations nowadays in Cameroon are the Pygmy and the Mbororo.
Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 
Cameroon appeared before the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination on 22 and 23 February 2010. The delegation was led by Mr Joseph Dion Ngute, the Minister of Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs and also included the Director of the United Nations and the Decentralised Cooperation Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Ambassador of the Permanent Mission of Cameroon in Geneva, and the Deputy Director of the Ministry of Justice.
The head of the delegation stressed in his initial presentation that Cameroon submitted a consolidated report covering the period between August 1997 and September 2008 and incorporating the 15th, 16th, 17th, and 18th reports. He apologised for the delay in submitting the present report and for the discontinuity this may cause in the follow-up. Mr Dion Ngute further emphasised that civil society and all concerned Government structures were involved in the drafting process of the report. In addition, he underlined that Cameroon has made particular efforts to ensure an effective implementation of the Committee’s previous concluding observations.
The country rapporteur, Mr Ewomsan, welcomed the establishment of a National Commission of Human Rights and Freedoms in 2004 in Cameroon. However, he encouraged the State to double its efforts in strengthening the Commission on the principles of parity and independence. Regarding the justiciability of the provisions of the Convention, the Committee pointed out that the report highlighted the supremacy of international law over domestic law; nevertheless it did not provide any jurisprudential case in this respect.
Of particular concern to the Committee was the status of the different ethnic groups in Cameroon, according to State’s estimations amounting to more than 230. Several Committee members raised the question of the terminology used by the Government to define the ethnic communities living on Cameroonian territory. In this context, Mr Prosper warned the State that the various definitions it employs interchangeably to refer to ethnic groups might lead to serious ambiguity. The head of the delegation replied that the Government favours the term ‘marginalised population’, which is semantically the broadest; however, he clarified that this term is not being used at the official level in a precise, legalistic manner. Furthermore, discussion on the protection of the ethnic groups in Cameroon focused on the following issues: the absence of data and statistics broken down by ethnicity; the question of their access to education and justice free of charge; the protection of landownership for nomadic ethnic groups and the compensation plans adopted by the State in response to economic projects with negative impacts on their lifestyle; the question of the representation of ethnic groups in State bodies; the establishment of development projects for the Pygmy people with support from international partners; and the involvement of Cameroon in the elaboration of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Other topics addressed by the Committee during consideration of Cameroon included: the need to preserve bilingualism as an asset for the country; the penalisation of racial discrimination under the 2005 Code of Criminal Procedure and the need for a uniform interpretation of racial discrimination in courts in order to enforce equal treatment before the law; allegations of differentiated practices in terms of wages on the basis of ethnic origin; the treatment of undocumented migrants of Nigerian origin; the access of refugees to health care, housing and employment and the urgent need for the State to elaborate national regulations for the application of the 2005 law on refugee status ; the considerable efforts made by the State in the area of education and the high literacy rate; the generalisation of the use of uniforms in school as an egalitarian measure, aiming at removing complexes due to ethnic origin; the integration of albinos into society; the removal of details on ethnic origin from identification documents as a positive development in the context of the African countries; and access to antiretroviral treatment for foreigners.
The Committee appreciated the frankness of the delegation’s answers. Moreover, it commended the State for exhibiting genuine political will to bring about justice for all ethnic communities present in Cameroon. The Committee members expressed their appreciation with regard to the bilingual answers (French and English) given by the head of the delegation, reflecting the bilingual nature of his country.
|
