Marafa Hamidou Yaya Nakeds the Yaounde Dictator: How Biya Goofed. Time for Biya to Go;

Open letter from Mr. Hamidou Yaya Marafa to President of the Republic of Cameroon.
Mr. President,
Monday 16 April 2012, I was summoned by the investigating judge of the High Court of Mfoundi and imprisoned at the prison Kondengui, without further ado.
You certainly had to learn that I have requested the disqualification of the judge who came to see me on his own and, earnestly, asked me to we “arrangions” so that it instruct the file in a way that would support me! I naturally refused his proposal.
I realized you had at the time, thinking that the Chairman of the Judiciary would be moved.
Need I remind you, Mr. President, it is I who have sought, by correspondence dated May 7, 2008 addressed to you, to be heard by the competent judicial authorities, in order to contribute and give my testimony to the truth in this scandalous affair that you know better than anyone else because it regularly informed of the process of acquiring your plane that you follow daily.
You know that my incarceration has nothing to do with this case for which I am guilty of no crime, and especially not the one you learned that imputed to me. I hope that future debates will allow our compatriots to know what is the role played by all stakeholders and at all levels. You also know what I think some of these spectacular arrests. Wikileaks is also made wide coverage.
Mr. President,
November 06, 1982, I ran behind your procession Warda junction to the roundabout of the school of Bastos. I was a young top executive of the Snh, and at that time, I was proud of my country. Subsequently I was seduced by your speech and I am committed heart and soul behind you, convinced to participate in building a society of peace and justice. I tried with all my strength to work in this direction. And you know. Our compatriots also learn it.
You gave me the opportunity to serve our country at a very high level. I did it with enthusiasm, commitment and I hope modestly, with some skill. As I have said in the message of New Year greetings that I sent you on December 30, I will continue to serve in the place where you will assign me to help make our country a country of peace andof Justice. And where I am, I can assure you that my enthusiasm and commitment to these noble causes remain intact.
I was your aide for seventeen (17) years continuously. First as a special adviser, then as Secretary General of the Presidency of the Republic and finally as Minister of Territorial Administration and Decentralization for nearly a decade…I served you loyally, honestly and without prejudice. As you well know, all these years, I have always refused to be a courtier. (For example, I have consistently refused to join in the folklore of the various editions of “Call of the people”). I always preferred to keep a freedom that allowed me to give you, the independent-minded, advice you to manage state affairs in the best interest of our country.
It was not an easy position to take for me, in a context and environment that are ours, because I was not a loved a long time, or your native culture area. However, I felt that this position, even if you sometimes annoyed, was still appreciated by you, which would justify the exceptional length and I would say the intensity of our cooperation.
This independence of mind enabled me to tell you, after the 2004 presidential election, this seven that should be the last for you and we should all mobilize to the success of “great ambitions” so that your output politics takes place with fanfare, that you enjoyed a well deserved rest, inside our country.
Was it a crime of high treason? It is possible! But honestly I expressed what I thought at the time be in your interest and that of our country. My belief at the time was an additional term would mandate too. As we shall see, harassment and vindictiveness towards me date from that time and now I’m paying perhaps for this lucid frankness.
This freedom also allowed me to express an honest opinion, as illustrated by the following three examples, concerning the government of the Republic:
a) After the formation of the government resulting from the 2004 presidential election, you have given me a hearing at which you asked me what people think of the government.
I told you they think that with a staff of about seventy-five (65) and related ministers, the government is bloated and lack of efficiency.
Between annoyance and irritation, you made the remarks: “… Minister of State, you are how many ministers in this government? Maybe ten (10) or fifteen (15) at most. The rest are officials to whom I gave the title “.
I answered: “… That may be true, Mr. President. But the problem is that these officials themselves, of themselves as ministers. ”
Dialogue about it stopped there.
b) Similarly, on the eve of a reorganization, you did me the honor, during a hearing, wondering about a compatriot. I told you that this gentleman did not deserve to sit on the Government of the Republic. You have developed arguments that convinced me that your decision was already made. I have then said, “… Mr. President, in case you nommeriez the government, do not entrust to a particular ministry.” We know the rest.
c) Finally, after the formation of government in which Mr. Issa Tchiroma became a minister (to thwart my ambitions, according to some), you have given me a hearing at which you asked me what People think of the new government. I told you that Mr. Issa san detour Tchiroma does not deserve to sit on the Government of the Republic. You and I and others (including himself) to know what I mean. I told you also that I never will work with him.
Until now, people think that our “enmity” is political because we are rivals in the same constituency. It has nothing to do and the future will prove it.
Mr. President,
When vindictiveness towards me started, I treated with indifference gossip reports of my disloyalty to you and I have refrained from bothering you. But when your closest entourage returned to the dance, I thought it every time I open to you.
Thus, when in November 2007, he was asked the prefect of the department Mfoundi to “extend to custody for administrative fifteen (15) days, renewable” for twenty (20) people including eighteen (18) soldiers of various ranks, I have instructed the Governor of the Central Province and the prefect of the department Mfoundi not to execute and comply strictly with the provisions of the law. I’ve realized by note dated November 21, 2007. They were reportedly released a few months later on your instructions.
A few days after the refusal of the territorial administration to endorse this masquerade, I learned that you were reports that those involved would be my accomplices in an attempt to undermine the institutions of the Republic.
Faced with this very serious accusation and before the réccurrence reports that you were able consistently negative about me from some pharmacies and on which you do not tell me anything, I had to listen carefully to one of the many offers of use to me were made regularly at international level. I hoped that my departure would preserve the quality of the relationships I have had the honor to speak with you. I have expressed as well as my desire to leave the government during a hearing on 30 November 2007. You explained to me that you still need me and that what concerned you, yet you made me complete confidence.
However, I must remind your attention the following facts, among others:
a) After the riots of February 2008, the negative reports against me intensified. To my detractors, my constant refusal to ban or seize the papers and my approach to the problems of avoiding an overly and unnecessarily violent response and a systematic repression, sufficiently proved my lack of loyalty to you.
Again, I’m struck by memorandum dated March 5, 2008 to remind you that the government department headed by I, is too delicate to be headed by someone who would not enjoy your confidence.
I also took the opportunity of this note to draw your attention to the incestuous relationships that tended to develop between the state and the CPDM party, in light of correspondence relating to me from the Minister of Justice to the Secretary General of the party.
b) In a report sewn with white thread, dated July 24, 2008, the Assam Mvondo MP, Vice-President of the Commission of Defence and Security in the National Assembly and also your nephew, referring to “different notes earlier, “you said” the ambition of a great national destiny “that drives me and my” strategy of conquest of power “.
I grabbed a note dated 17 September 2008 to “respectfully request the opening of an investigation into these serious allegations.”
During a subsequent hearing, I discussed the need to expedite this investigation, you said that your nephew does not know what it does, you have me warmly renewed your confidence and you asked me to ignore the incident.
Did I thank you all by saying that if the member Mvondo Assam does not know what he does, he should not occupy a sensitive position in the National Assembly.
c) In February 2010, I have been banned from leaving the country. This illegal action was released roughly when I chaired the Joint Committee in Bertoua security between Cameroon and the Central African Republic, at the head of a Cameroonian delegation of five (5) members of the government to seven (7) members CAR government. I stoically facing my responsibilities.
On my return to Yaounde, I requested a hearing at which I’ve submitted my resignation again. On this occasion, I have reiterated the urgent need to appoint to head the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralization someone who would enjoy not only your confidence but also that we would leave with peace of mind. Again you have refused my resignation and you gave me renewed your confidence.
d) Prior to the convening of the electorate in the presidential election on October 9, you made me get by the Director of Civil Cabinet. A first! It told me that I received on your behalf and you wanted to know if I would introduce myself against you in this election. I was shocked because in doing so, you give credence to the rumor that you had been reported many times that I would have created a clandestine political party.
I told the director of civil cabinet to tell you that I was hurt both by the content of the message by the way it was issued. I told him also to reassure you, as a matter of responsibility and to avoid untimely crisis, I will do my duty during the sensitive period before, during and after elections, so that peace is preserved in our country. But after this election, given the continuing erosion of trust for nearly (07) years and finally the apparent loss of it, I could hear my work with you to continue in government.
I expressed to my family from the injury and the decision not to include the government after the presidential election.
After the close of the filing of applications and have found that mine was not among them, the director of civil cabinet received me again to tell me not to overinterpret your message that went beyond your thoughts and soon you would get me to remove any ambiguity. I replied that I was not requesting a hearing and that my decision not to join the government after the presidential election was not negotiable. I then measured the full import of these words of Fenelon to Louis XIV: “You were born, Sir, with a heart right and fair, but those who raised you do not you have given to science of government, that distrust” .
e) After I left government, a newspaper in fury and orders, began to prepare public opinion (as is now usual) for my incarceration ahead, ignoring the passage of our country’s interests.
Thus the whole world will learn that I am the head of an army of 6,000 rebel! To date, I have not been asked about this stated aim of destabilization that would have been gutted. To my knowledge, those who have posted this rudeness had not been either. It limited itself to saying that vulgarity is the argument to stupidity if not it is our country suffering the image pre-insurgency.
Similarly, this obsession to link me to France, while it is in Cameroon it is! Notes of information you come by which France’s ambassador in Yaounde often come to my home in secret, in an unmarked car, so that we develop plans to destabilize our country.
Also, information is distilled in the public about my alleged relationship with a French industrialist who would often meet me clandestinely in Garoua for the same purpose.Our country would have become a sieve so that one enters without a visa or make a landing aircraft without prior authorization of overflight?
Mr. President,
You know me very well. I do not hide my views or my actions. So you understand that having regained my freedom of speech as being no longer bound by any obligation of solidarity or reserve, I can expose, exchange and share with all our compatriots my ideas and thoughts that I reserved for you in our sole or that I was developing that during the closed meetings. These ideas and thoughts relate particularly to the peace and justice.
And before concluding, let me assure you that the bottom of my dungeon, I have neither hatred nor regret, and I do not fed or melancholy or bitterness. Above all, I have no suicidal impulse. If anything happened to me accidentally, it would not be my doing, nor for any meal that I am delivering to my family. Although it did not particularly afraid of death, I would like if this unfortunate event occurred, the responsibilities are well established.
Marafa Hamidou Yaya
Courtesy of Google Translation

The Chinese-African Union Why is China spending $200 million for this new over-the-top headquarters for the African Union

 
The choice of words by Foreign Policy is very telling. “Over-the-top headquarters”, the magazine writes. FP is dropping a clear hint: Africans don’t deserve such a modern HQs. Get the drift? Ain’t they supposed to be living on tree tops?
 
China’s coming into donor status has been unsettling for so-called traditional donors especially because the Chinese are proving they are “doers” not just “talkers”. The money spent on so-called studies to establish that hospitals in Africa don’t work as they should would have modernized or built many new, sophisticated hospital from scratch.
 
Take any African country and the Chinese are making a rather big development statement. They have no obligation to do so, given our leaders are willing to “sell us on the cheap”. Chinese funds, contractors and, yes, Chinese laborers have transformed not only the AU HQs but major road networks across Addis, Nairobi and Malabo, among other major African cities. In Equatorial Guinea, they have helped transform an entire nation almost overnight; a feat ex-colonial power Spain could not achieve. They have overtaken the debt-burdened, cash strapped Portuguese in the transformation ongoing in Angola.
 
Unlike the exorbitant, gpod-for-nothing European technical assistance and the cohorts of assistants they have deployed across Africa for at least 50 years; unlike European technical assistants who have assisted themselves to African resources, ensuring that the bulk of aid has been either ineffective or has just been “back to sender”; unlike those technical assistants who rode luxury cars, lived in five-star hotel suits, loitered nightlong with the hottest ladies in town (sometimes underaged, sometimes just ladies of the night); unlike these technical assistants who spotted the best Italian suits even to go into dusty public works sites; unlike them, the Chinese who love in shacks, work ungodly hours… the Chinese are clearly a different breed – and truth be acknowledged- yes, they too have their shortcomings of course.
 
I’m sure the French technical assistants who never bothered to build a facility like the Madagascar Sports Complex in Yaounde, must be looking at the indoor complex the Chinese built at the entrance to the Briqueterie neighborhood as a bit “over-the-top” for Cameroonians. I remember hearing non-African sports commentators during the 1987 4th All Africa Games in Nairobi describe the Chinese-funded, built and Chinese-gifted Kasarani Stadium in Nairobi as “over-the-top”. 
 
As for Chinese workers developing Africa, we need to blunt any xenophobia on that front. African slave labor (in chains for hundreds of years by the Arabs) laid the foundations of the modern Arab states. Then, African slaves helped build Europe and the USA. Droves of predominantly Mexican labor continue to be at the heart of today’s labor force in the USA. At least the Chinese are not shipping millions of Africans into slavery to help sustain economic growth in China.
 
Africans are fully capable of finding out and I’m ready to swear they know what is wrong with the current Sino-African cooperation. The reason, I guess they are not complaining as much as Foreign Policy is about the “i
“over-the-top” Chinese “gifts” is that Africans know how much worse the alternatives are or have been.
 
Boh Herbert
 

Boh Herbert’s Reaction to:The Chinese-African Union Why is China spending $200 million for this new over-the-top headquarters for the African Union

Boh Herbert’s Reaction to:The Chinese-African Union Why is China spending $200 million for this new over-the-top headquarters for the African Union

 
The choice of words by Foreign Policy is very telling. “Over-the-top headquarters”, the magazine writes. FP is dropping a clear hint: Africans don’t deserve such a modern HQs. Get the drift? Ain’t they supposed to be living on tree tops?
 
China’s coming into donor status has been unsettling for so-called traditional donors especially because the Chinese are proving they are “doers” not just “talkers”. The money spent on so-called studies to establish that hospitals in Africa don’t work as they should would have modernized or built many new, sophisticated hospital from scratch.
 
Take any African country and the Chinese are making a rather big development statement. They have no obligation to do so, given our leaders are willing to “sell us on the cheap”. Chinese funds, contractors and, yes, Chinese laborers have transformed not only the AU HQs but major road networks across Addis, Nairobi and Malabo, among other major African cities. In Equatorial Guinea, they have helped transform an entire nation almost overnight; a feat ex-colonial power Spain could not achieve. They have overtaken the debt-burdened, cash strapped Portuguese in the transformation ongoing in Angola.
 
Unlike the exorbitant, gpod-for-nothing European technical assistance and the cohorts of assistants they have deployed across Africa for at least 50 years; unlike European technical assistants who have assisted themselves to African resources, ensuring that the bulk of aid has been either ineffective or has just been “back to sender”; unlike those technical assistants who rode luxury cars, lived in five-star hotel suits, loitered nightlong with the hottest ladies in town (sometimes underaged, sometimes just ladies of the night); unlike these technical assistants who spotted the best Italian suits even to go into dusty public works sites; unlike them, the Chinese who love in shacks, work ungodly hours… the Chinese are clearly a different breed – and truth be acknowledged- yes, they too have their shortcomings of course.
 
I’m sure the French technical assistants who never bothered to build a facility like the Madagascar Sports Complex in Yaounde, must be looking at the indoor complex the Chinese built at the entrance to the Briqueterie neighborhood as a bit “over-the-top” for Cameroonians. I remember hearing non-African sports commentators during the 1987 4th All Africa Games in Nairobi describe the Chinese-funded, built and Chinese-gifted Kasarani Stadium in Nairobi as “over-the-top”. 
 
As for Chinese workers developing Africa, we need to blunt any xenophobia on that front. African slave labor (in chains for hundreds of years by the Arabs) laid the foundations of the modern Arab states. Then, African slaves helped build Europe and the USA. Droves of predominantly Mexican labor continue to be at the heart of today’s labor force in the USA. At least the Chinese are not shipping millions of Africans into slavery to help sustain economic growth in China.
 
Africans are fully capable of finding out and I’m ready to swear they know what is wrong with the current Sino-African cooperation. The reason, I guess they are not complaining as much as Foreign Policy is about the “i
“over-the-top” Chinese “gifts” is that Africans know how much worse the alternatives are or have been.
 
Boh Herbert
 

February 11 and the Southern Cameroons: The Betrayal of too Trusting a People. By Prof. Carlson Anyangwe

I. The Betrayal of too Trusting a People

The people of the British Southern Cameroons had absolute faith in the UN and trusted the Administering Authority, believing that both would always act in the best interest and for the wellbeing of the territory. This turned out to be a monumentally misplaced faith. In breach of the legal, moral and human rights foundations at the root of the trusteeship system, in breach of obligations assumed under the Charter of the UN, and in breach of the undertakings in the Trusteeship Agreement for the British Cameroons the UK betrayed the people of the British Southern Cameroons. The UN itself failed to stand up for the people of the trust territory.

A. The Betrayal by the UN

The UN failed to secure statehood for the people of British Southern Cameroons. By this failure the UN acted in breach of its own Charter (Article 76 b), in breach of its own 1960 Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples, and in breach of the right of self-determination of peoples. The plebiscite and its timing were a UN imposition. The political leadership of the territory requested its deferment to 1962 but the request was ignored. The plebiscite questions, framed with the greatest opacity, in effect demanded the hapless people of British Southern Cameroons to choose between colonial rule by Nigeria and colonial rule by Cameroun Republic, the UK Government having indicated it was no longer prepared to continue to assume responsibility for the administration of the territory.

The plebiscite was in fact uncalled for and the alternatives presented to the people amounted to a violation of the right of all peoples to existence. A people cannot achieve independence by offering themselves for domination and their territory for annexation, by another country. The British Southern Cameroons had already achieved full self-government status and was poised for and had the right to accede to the ultimate status of independence as a sovereign state. Given this fact the plebiscite was unnecessary. The phraseology of the plebiscite question was itself a gross deception and an unconscionable fraud on an essentially illiterate population who, as the Plebiscite Commissioner rightly pointed out, may not have fully grasped the full implication of what they were invited to vote on.

Further, the UN did not present the people with the internationally recognized self-determination political status option of emergence as a sovereign independent state. There was, and there can be, no good reason why this option was withheld from the people. The very representative conference of all stakeholders held in Mamfe Town had resolved that given the UN’s insistence on a plebiscite in the territory the questions to be put to the people should be the following clear, sensible and straightforward questions: Do you want integration into Nigeria? Do you want secession from Nigeria? The British Southern Cameroons though internationally a separate territory from Nigeria was at then still administered by the UK as if it was an integral part of Nigeria. The questions therefore made great sense. There was no need bringing in French Cameroun into the equation as that country was foreign land. It was clearly understood by all the stakeholders at the Mamfe conference that a vote for secession from Nigeria would necessarily entail the emergence of the British Southern Cameroons into statehood. Mr. JN Foncha, Premier of the British Southern Cameroons, painstakingly outlined to the UN the proceedings and outcome of the Mamfe conference. But for reasons that have never been stated the UN ignored all of that and went ahead to impose an unwarranted plebiscite with vaguely framed questions and dead-end alternatives. It is still a mystery how the UN could have believed and taken the attitude that the destiny of the people of the British Southern Cameroons was necessarily tied to that of either of its two neighbours.

The UN betrayal did not end there. The Organization even failed to see to it that the very process of what it called ‘independence by joining’ and which it had initiated was carried to its completion. It did not call for four-party talks (UN, UK, British Southern Cameroons, Cameroun Republic) to satisfactorily iron out any outstanding issues and to ensure that there was indeed genuine de-colonization of the British Southern Cameroons. It did not participate in any post-plebiscite talks, whether bipartite between British Southern Cameroons and Cameroun Republic or tripartite between the UK, the British Southern Cameroons and Cameroun Republic. It did not even bother to ensure that any such talks took place under its auspices in the same way the plebiscite had been conducted under its auspices. It did not ensure that the Administering Authority participated effectively, meaningfully, in good faith, and in the best interest of the British Southern Cameroons, in any talks or dealings with Cameroun Republic that had a bearing on the future of the people and territory of British Southern Cameroons. Resolution 1608 of 21 April 1961 failed to include safeguards designed to show conclusively British Southern Cameroons as a de-colonized territory. The resolution was in fact a dangerously watered down version of the robust resolution earlier recommended by the Trusteeship Council for adoption by the General Assembly. The Trusteeship Council resolution had called for the UN involvement in the post-plebiscite de-colonization process and for the UN to make available to the Government of the British Southern Cameroons administrative, financial and constitutional expertise. The UN should responsibly have done so, but it failed to. The assistance to British Southern Cameroons recommended by the Trusteeship Council would have, on the reckoning of the UN Secretary General, cost a mere US$46, 000. Discriminatorily, the UN considered that paltry sum too large an amount to spend in order to secure and safeguard the integrity of the territory of the Southern Cameroons, however spatially small, and the dignity and worth of its people, however demographically small. It would seem the UN even appeared to have adopted the suspect attitude that the British Southern Cameroons was a returned part of the territory of Cameroun Republic.

Mola Njoh Litumbe Emerges as New Southern Cameroons Home Front Leader

Mola Njoh Litumbe Emerges as New Southern Cameroons Home Front Leader The Frontline Liberation Movements of the Southern Cameroons ( The
Patriotic Coalition Front) has finally designated the erstwhile, cold headed Bakweri icon, Mola Njoh Litumbe as its new leader. Mola Njoh Litumbe was chosen at a meeting of various Liberation Movements, the Southern Cameroons National Council ( SCNC) of Chief Ayamba and Nfor Nfor, as well as that of Justice Ebong /Kongnso Stephen Thomas Nwancham, the Southern Cameroons Peoples’ Organization ( SCAPO) of
Dr. Kevin Ngwang Gumne and Pa Augustine Ndangam, the BRICAMIAG( a group advocating for the liberation of both the Southern and Northern Cameroons…the British Cameroons) of Vincent Feko and Prof. Chia, the Civil Society led by Mola Litumbe , the Southern Cameroons Youth League ( SCYL) of Akwanga Ebenezar and Cho Ayaba, the Liberal
Democratic Alliance ( LDA) of Mola Njoh Litumbe and Barrister Ekontang Elad and the Restoration Government of Prof. Carlson Anyangwe.
According to a Press Release signed by Mola Njoh Litumbe in Buea on
September 11, 2011, a core Executive was elected from amongst these groupings after a long and intensive deliberation. The release states that this Home Front Coordinating Unit will be charged with the tasks of overseeing and guiding the various strategic activities of the Southern Cameroons struggle towards the realization of the ultimate
objective of the territory.
The Coordinating Unit will as well carry out policy formation and implementation for the various sub-committees created alongside the
coordinating unit. In the same light, the unit will coordinate, monitor and control effective fund-raising on the Home Front and see
to it that intensive mobilization is carried out throughout the
national territory for massive participation in the manifestations on
October 1, 2011, all over the Southern Cameroons.
On the forth-coming announced Presidential elections in the Cameroons,
the communiqué simply states that it will carry out “intensive
sensitization of all Southern Cameroonians to understand the significance of the presidential Elections being organized in La Republique du Cameroun.”

Election Rigging Strategy: Biya regime bans Twitter in the Cameroons

MTN Cameroon Instructed to Block Twitter Text Messages

By: Ian Mansfield | 10th Mar 2011

­Twitter’s SMS based messaging service has been banned on MTN Cameroon following an order from the Cameroonian government, Twitter announced yesterday over its own messaging platform. The company advised customers to contact MTN for more details.

There were reports that the country’s political opposition were Planning another series of protests against the long-serving President Paul Biya after earlier Egypt inspired protests were put down by the country’s military last month.

Like many countries facing political uprisings, the Cameroon government has been increasingly clamping down on internet services, especially ones accessible over mobile phones.

Cameroonian blogger Dibussi Tande told Foreign Policy magazine, if President Biya didn’t have a problem with Twitter activism before, he likely does now:

“Before today’s ban, very few Cameroonians were even aware that Twitter was available in Cameroon via SMS, and the majority of those who were did not even grasp its potential as a tool for political activism.”

As he also noted: “Obviously, the government has failed to learn the lesson from North Africa, particularly in Tunisia where the Ben Ali regime was still toppled even though it had banned all social media sites for years and had engaged in a sophisticated cyber-war with Tunisian digital activists.”

President Biya has been in power since 1982. In 2009, Biya was ranked #19 in Parade Magazine’s Top 20 list of The World’s Worst Dictators.

Opportunity in Community Empowerment

We pay YOU..Usd 100 Free for Membership and usd 25 Free per referral
FOLLOW THE LINK
CLICK ON IT
http://www.virtapay.com/r/citybusinessnet