Punishment before trial: The case of Félix Ebole Bole & Rodrigue Tongue

The preamble of the 1996 Constitution of Cameroon provides that every individual must undergo a fair trial in a competent court of law before punishment.

The Penal Code and the Harmonised Criminal Procedure Code also provide for such measure. The violation of such legal provision could tantamount to stringent sanctions on the part of the authority infringing the law. That is if Cameroon were a state of law.

But in Cameroon most authorities, including judicial officials who should normally sanction defaulters of the law turn to give to reasoning that the laws in place were not better designed; or should have been designed to rather suit their whims and caprices.

These judicial fellows strife to apply the law as it ought to be (natural law) and not the law as it is (positive law).

In effect, naturalists are wont to have a place in the society owing to their rigorous innate believes. But the position advocated by positivists is that of consideration of human fallibility and individual frailty. The triumph of the latter over the former therefore gives birth to a humanly made set of rules which govern human society. Such rules are therefore subject to application stricto senso.

However, the law authorizes a judicial authority to at some moments use his discretion to keep aside the law and act on his conscience or religion to render a judgment. This lacto senso position of the judge is however required to be applied only in mitigating circumstances.

Therefore, such law can only be applied to lessen rather than harden a sanction provided by the law.

The recent decision by the Yaounde military tribunal to ban them from practising and from leaving the country is a clear contrast to the above analysis. Primo, Rodrigue Tongue of Le Messager and Félix Ebole Bole of Mutations were issued punishment while still awaiting trial.

This was in total violation of the preamble of the constitution and the Harmonised Criminal Procedure Code which both require everyone residing within the territory of the republic to be given a fair trial before punishment; secondo, the provision to use discretion if really it was, was not well applied, given that discretion was rather applied to harden up rather than lessen the situation of the suspects.

Prohibiting the journalists from practising also amounts to two major crimes: apart from gagging them, the military tribunal has deprived them from where their daily milk and honey flow. That implies that neither Rodrigue nor Felix would be entitled to their monthly salaries until the tribunal decides other-wise. What a shame!

One thing the military tribunal must know is that any attempt to muscle the journalist draws attention from all nooks and crannies of the world. The journalist is the public’s eye and mouth-piece and the public looks upon him as the only bed fellow in times of uncertainty.

If reports that a certain civil society organisation has in reaction to the tribunal’s restriction, put an embargo on Biya’s ministers from visiting Europe are anything to go by, then Mr. Biya and his cohorts need to start thinking out of their brain boxes.

The military tribunal should understand that most regimes have been brought down as a result of unkempt attempts to sacrifice the journalist for being the messenger.

Footnote: Burkina Faso is on fire. President Blaise Compaore has been forced out of the throne by people’s power. The military tribunal should therefore understand that when a house is on fire, neighbours begin to do away with gas bottles and other inflammable objects in their houses so as to evade a similar situation on their rooftops.