Contentsrinoceros.org/IMG/pdf/Focarfe_anglais.pdf · 5. Me FANDOM Louise, Court Registrar; 6. Me...

ContentsSUMMARY

LIST OF PHOTOGRAPHS

LIST OF ACRONYMS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

FOREWORD

INTRODUCTION

HISTORICAL, POLITICAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL BACKGROUND

THE PEOPLES' TRIBUNAL OF CAMEROON

CONDUCT OF TRIBUNAL

LEGAL RATIONALE

TRIBUNAL RULING

OPEN LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON

CLOSING SPEECH

CONCLUSION

APPENDICES

Pages4 - 5

-

-

6

7 - 9

-

10

12

12 - 14

-

21 - 22

23 - 25

26 - 27

28

29 - 32

Page 3F O C A R F E - N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 5

Printed by:CEPER S.A (Elig-Essono)

P.O.BOX : 808 Yaounde - CameroonTel.: (237) 223 12 93 / 983 56 85

tttt able of contents

SSSS ummary

Page 4 F O C A R F E - N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 5

The Chad-CameroonPipeline project iscurrently the big-

gest private sector invest-ment in sub-SaharanAfrica. Widely praised asbeing a "model" for otheroil producing countries,the $ 3.7 billion high-riskproject managed by theExxonMobil, Chevron andPetronas Consortium wasso much talked about,with so many promisesmade.

But at the end of the cons-truction of the pipeline,many complaints lodgedby the people living alongthe pipeline right-of-wayare still pending, while onthe part of the Consortium,every thing seems to begoing on well, with theaward of work completioncertificates cheerfullysigned by World Bank(D'Appolonia) andgovernment monitoringbodies. The increasingwave of protests by thosepopulations triggerednational and internationalcivil society reaction,which consisted in a meti-culous field monitoringwith regard to the pro-blems raised.

One of the initiatives wasthe partnership establis-hed between FOCARFE, aCameroon-based NGO,and Both Ends, aNetherlands-based NGO,

Basso (1903-1978). The lat-ter took over from theRussel Tribunal (foundedby Bertrand Russel) thatwas called upon at thetime to express an opinionon the situation inVietnam and LatinAmerica. It refers to theUniversal Declaration ofPeoples' Rights, adopted atAlger in 1976. The docu-ment is based on two pro-posals:

1- This historical impor-tance of peoples' right topolitical self-determina-tion. Article 8 stipulatesthat "all peoples have anexclusive right over theirwealth and natural resour-ces. They have the right torecover such resources incase they are despoiled aswell as recover unjustlypaid compensations".2- The right to internalself-determination, i.e. theright for all peoples to livein a democratic regime. The Tribunal hears inpublic, the arguments pre-sented by the parties invol-ved and passes judgementor expresses an opinion(depending on whether itis working in session or incommission). It is then lefton social associations touse the judgement to maketheir rights known. TheTribunal believes that "it isby fighting for their rightsthat individuals build theirstrength". This position is

to carry out field identifi-cation of cases of non-com-pliance and other verythorny issues raised by thepeople as part of claimsrelating to the social closu-re. Such case study con-ducted by FOCARFE ledto the setting-up of the"Peoples' Tribunal ofCameroon", which is themain focus of this docu-ment.

Such initiative is in linewith the ideals of thePermanent Peoples'Tribunal, an internationalinstitution founded in 1979by various mostlyEuropean personalitiesincluding jurists, writersand other intellectuals,under the impulse of theLelio Basso InternationalFoundation for peoples'right and liberation, foun-ded in 1976 at the initiativeof the Italian resistancefighter and democrat Lelio

"IT IS BYFIGHTINGFOR THEIR

RIGHTSTHAT INDI-

VIDUALSBUILDTHEIR

STRENGTH"

F O C A R F E - N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 5

also due to the very natu-re of the institution.Without a police or a "gen-darmerie" force empowe-red to enforce its deci-sions, the Tribunal isreferred to as one of "opi-nion and not of power". The Peoples' Tribunal of

Cameroon which held itsfirst session in Yaounde,on 30 September 2005, lis-tened to 21 complaintsand its jury was com-posed as follows:

Chair: Me NGUI-NI Charles,Barrister;Members:1.Fr. BELL,N a t i o n a lE p i s c o p a lConference;2.P a s t o rNGUE JeanE m i l e ,S e c r e t a r y -General of theCouncil ofP r o t e s t a n tChurches ofCameroon;3. Cheikh OUMA-ROU MALAM DJIBRIL,Representative of theIslamic community;4. Me DANG Elise,Barrister;5. Me FANDOMLouise, Court Registrar;6. Me NGUEFACKMaurice, Barrister;7. Me DANGMEKOK Austin, CourtRegistrar;

environmental protection.

The Tribunal blames theState of Cameroon for itssilence in the face of viola-tions pointed out by thepeople living along thepipeline right-of-way.

The Tribunal recommends

- the carrying out ofa social and economic

audit of the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline

project;- the repara-

tion of all pen-ding casesmeticulous-ly identi-f i e da m o n gthe peo-ple livingalong thep i p e l i n er i g h t - o f -

way; - t h e

constitutionof a support

fund for all thecouncils crossed

by the pipeline incompensation for possi-

ble disasters."

Following this first ses-sion of the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon, thepeoples living along theChad-Cameroon pipelineright-of-way, supportedby the NGOs and others,wrote an open letter to thePrime Minister.

8. K U E N Z O BDupleix, EcumenicalService for Peace.

After listening to the com-plaints and experts andstudying the documentspresented by FOCARFE,the Tribunal made publicits judgement as follows:

" T h e

P e o p l e s 'Tribunal of Camerooncondemns theConsortium and its sub-contractors for non-respect of economic andsocial rights, especiallythe "previously" establis-hed standards in mattersof workers' rights and

THETRIBUNAL

BLAMES THESTATE OF

CAMEROON FOR ITSSILENCE IN THE FACEOF VIOLATIONS POIN-TED OUT BY THE PEO-

PLE LIVING ALONGTHE PIPELINE

RIGHT-OF-WAY.

S u m m a r y


They include specifically:

- Sjef Langefeld, Both Ends,- Marnix Becking, Both Ends,- Me NGUINI Charles, Barrister;- Père BELL, National Episcopal Conference;- Pasteur NGUE, Secretary-General of the Council of Protestant Churches ofCameroon;- Cheikh OUMAROU MALAM DJIBRIL, Representative of the Islamic community;- Me DANG Elise, Barrister;- Me FANDOM Louise, Court Registrar;- Me NGUEFACK Maurice, Barrister;- Me DANG MEKOK Austin, Court Registrar;- KUENZOB Dupleix, Ecumenical Service for peace;- Noah Ndjana, representative of the NDJORE II village;- Nanga ZO'O, representative of the NKOTENG village;- TCHOUNGUI, head of ANGOUANFEME village ;- NKOA OLINGA ROBERT, head of NDZANA village;- MEKADI François, head of NDOUMBA NKANGA village;- ETOUNDI Angelin, representative of the NKONGMEYOS III village;- FOUDA NDI Joseph, head of AKONGO III village;- BITANGA EKANI Célestine of NKOLTARA Village;- BOMBA ZOA Cyprien of OBOKOE I village ;- OMGBA BOMBA Martin, head of NKONGMEYOS I village;- NDONGO ETOUDI, head of NGOUMOU village;- BEUNDE EVILA LUDWIG, head of BWAMBE village;- NOUA Jeanne, representative of the native people ( pygmies);- MBIDA Sébastien of NKOMETOU I village ;- BENGONO Valentin of BIDOU I village;- YAMTHE Joseph from MEIGANGA;- BINELI of NKOMETOU II village.

HHiillddee-JJoossééee NNddoouummbbee NNkkoottttoo

FOCARFE wishes to extend its gratitude to all those who supported the organiza-tion of this first Peoples' Tribunal of Cameroon. Special thanks go to the operatio-n's financial partners (Both Ends - Netherlands), all members of the jury, and the

affected peoples who accepted to travel to give live testimonies.

AA cknowledgements

FFFF OREWORD


The displayed ambi-tion of the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline

project executed by theExxon-Petronas-ChevronConsortium was not to vio-late the rights of the peoplein its area of execution, andan arsenal of control meas-ures was put in place to thateffect. The project was evenamong those on which theWorld Bank extractiveindustries review wasbased.It is common knowledgethat multinational (or trans-national) enterprises takethe front stage in the newworld order that resultedfrom the demise of theSoviet Union and the col-lapse of the Berlin Wall.This increasing role on theinternational scene raisesissues of their new respon-sibility in the respect ofhuman, civil, political,social, economic, culturaland environmental rights. Multinational enterprisesmay be accountable eitherdirectly before the enter-prises concerned, or indi-rectly before States in whichthey operate and above allbefore those in which theirheadquarters are establis-hed. Such accountabilitymay be required throughcourt actions at the national,regional and internationallevels.There are however manyimpediments to suchactions, both those aimed atobtaining reparation forpassed or present abusesfrom multinational enter-prises and those aimed at

in order to escape their legalresponsibility in all thecountries in which theyoperate;

- WTO rules, which are ofvery meagre assistance tothe moving party and donot really cater for therights of workers;

- civil society limited accessto the WTO and other inter-national institutions;

- internal codes of conductwhich enable enterprises todevelop a good consciencewhile evading any legalresponsibility. Such codesdo not cater for victims'demands;

- ineffective implementa-tion mechanisms of moststatutory internationalinstruments;

- counter-offensives frommultinationals, e.g. defama-tion actions against organi-zations that campaignagainst them;

- the cost of lawsuits thatmay paralyse an NGO, at

ensuring greater accounta-bility in the future, notably: - the collusion between themultinationals and States,which lack the will or capa-city to enforce existing lawsor those that offer multina-tionals the possibility todepart from their nationallegal system, usually underpressure from their owneconomic needs;- laws and models of legalsystems from the North,where companies have theirhead offices, thereby tiltingpower toward the alreadypowerful party; - the practice by whichincriminated enterprisesstruggle to prevent the caseto be heard in a countryfavourable to the plaintiff(generally the country oforigin) and to send it to aplace that suits them (gene-rally the host country);

- enterprises' dissimulationtechniques: ambiguities inthe relationships enjoyed bymultinationals with regardto their nationality and thevery clear distinction theymake between the mothercompany and its branches,

Why a peoples' tribunal for the pipelineproject?

ALTHOUGH CRUDE OIL EXPLOI-TATION STARTED SINCE LATE

2003, MANY PROBLEMS INHERIT-ED FROM THE PROJECT CONS-TRUCTION PHASE ARE STILL

BEING RAISED BY THE PEOPLELIVING ALONG THE PIPELINE

RIGHT-OF-WAY


times even in the event ofvictory, especially where ithas to defend itself againstthe counter-offensive of anenterprise.Although crude oil exploi-tation started since late2003, many problems inher-ited from the project cons-truction phase are stillbeing raised by the peopleliving along the pipelineright-of-way. FOCARFEhas listed out close to 400cases in the 242 villagescrossed by the project. Theproblems raised are varied:over-billing of structuresbuilt in compensation to thepeople, destruction of waterresources (streams, wells,etc.), destruction of pre-project facilities, unpaidcompensations, contracts

not respected, workersrights baffled, etc.For 354 cases presented on30 June 2005 in COTCOpremises (Exxon) inYaounde in the presence ofa representative of the CPSP(State body responsible formonitoring the project inCameroon), the Consortiumgave the followingresponse:

- 19 cases for whichCOTCO did not honour itscommitments;- 111 cases for which

with the social closure in arather Pontius Pilate man-ner, whereas in the begin-ning of the project it stoodout as guarantor of equityand respect for good stan-dard.

To date, many rights havebeen baffled: right tohuman dignity, to a cleanenvironment, right topublic participation, right tofood, right to consent andinformed participation,respect for national sove-reignty, etc.

The impression one gets isthat the Consortium did notmonitor, in real time, theconstruction of structuresgiven in compensation tothe people, or turned ablind eye to the poor quali-ty of such structures, there-by leading to the distribu-tion of inappropriate equip-ment to the people, over-billing of structures, etc.

One can hardly understandwhy the Consortium isdragging its feet in lookinginto the reservations madeby the people and enteredin documents signed as partof the social closure, whe-reas such was the condition,given that the signatureobtained seems to havesounded the death-knell ofnegotiations.

As such, the impact of theConsortium's actions doesnot seem positive; it is evenvery negative.

The risks perceived andpointed out by NGOs at thebeginning of the projecthave been confirmed. Theproject turned out to be areal enclave, affecting thefragile economies of the

COTCO honoured its com-mitments but the people arenot satisfied and COTCOhas to seek mitigating solu-tions on a case-by-casebasis;- 205 cases for whichCOTCO is found accounta-ble;- 18 cases which donot concern COTCO.

By examining the databasemade available by theConsortium to justify itspositions, we found outmany arguments that werediametrically opposed tothose presented by theplaintiffs. The "recommen-dation" made by theInternational AdvisoryGroup (IAG) in its very

recent statutory missionreport (9th mission) is ofutmost importance. Itrecommends that the par-ties "should agree on whatthey agree on and whatthey do not, note down irre-concilable points of viewand sign the social closure",which gives the impressionthat World Bank's objectiveis merely to see to it that thevarious parties had satdown to exchange viewpoints, no matter the man-ner and outcome of suchdiscussion, and "do away"

THE IMPRESSION ONE GETS ISTHAT THE CONSORTIUM DID NOT

MONITOR, IN REAL TIME, THECONSTRUCTION OF STRUCTURES

GIVEN IN COMPENSATION TO THEPEOPLE, OR TURNED A BLIND EYETO THE POOR QUALITY OF SUCHSTRUCTURES, THEREBY LEADINGTO THE DISTRIBUTION OF INAP-PROPRIATE EQUIPMENT TO THE

PEOPLE, OVER-BILLING OF STRUC-TURES, ETC.

FFOORREEWWOORRDD


regions crossed, all endingin an effective impoverish-ment of the peoples concer-ned.

It was therefore necessary,more than ever before, tourgently examine/re-exa-mine the relevance of thepeoples' claims vis-à-vis thearguments in defence pre-sented by the Consortium,and to sample the variousopinions, in order to takefuture action satisfactory toall, because conceived follo-wing an upstream informa-tion/discussion process.Such was the objective ofthe "Peoples' Tribunal".

The idea was to seek redressfor the affected peoples andpersons in the face of thevarious violations commit-ted. Such action refers to theUniversal Declaration ofPeoples' Right adopted atAlger in 1976, and based ontwo proposals:

1- This historical importan-ce of peoples' right to politi-cal self-determination.Article 8 stipulates that "allpeoples have an exclusiveright over their wealth andnatural resources. Theyhave the right to recoversuch resources in case theyare despoiled as well asrecover unjustly paid com-pensations".

pipeline right-of-way, legalexperts and civil and reli-gious personalities, parlia-mentarians, representativesof ministries, theConsortium, World Bank,embassies, internationalbodies, etc. Expected results include thefollowing: prevent the pro-blems raised by the peopleabout forgotten spin-offs,establish the relevance ornot of claims, ensure thatlawyers, trade unions andNGOs work on behalf of therequesting party and in col-laboration with same, iden-tify the best authorities towhom evidence could besubmitted, pool resourcesand knowledge in order todevelop methods of collec-ting evidence from victimsor plaintiffs, as well asmethods aimed at usingresources and knowledgewhere needed, exchangeinformation between vic-tims/plaintiffs and legalsystems experts, accumula-te a maximum of jurispru-dence evidence, intensifycommunication and shareof information.Organizing a peoples' tribu-nal in Cameroon for theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject is in deed workingfor the well-being ofCameroonians.

Pierre Titi NwelNational Coordinator

National Committee onJustice and Peace in

CameroonCameroon Episcopal

Conference

2- The right to internal self-determination, i.e. the rightfor all peoples to live in ademocratic regime. The Tribunal hears inpublic, the arguments pre-sented by the parties invol-ved and passes judgementor expresses an opinion(depending on whether it isworking in session or incommission). It is then lefton social associations to usethe judgement to make theirrights known. The Tribunalbelieves that "it is by figh-ting for their rights thatindividuals build theirstrength". The Peoples'Tribunal is of course refer-red to as one of "opinionand not of power", with athree-fold objective:" write out the chargein terms of peoples' rightviolation chargeable to theChad-Cameroon Oil ProjectConsortium, Cameroonianparty;" bring out the techni-cal and legal means thatmay be used to obtain repa-ration for damages; " brainstorm onactions for social mobiliza-tion. The Tribunal actors areCameroon's civil societyrepresentatives who playedan active role in the pipelineproject, affected personsand representatives of com-munities living along the

THE RISKS PERCEIVED AND POINTEDOUT BY NGOS AT THE BEGINNING OF

THE PROJECT HAVE BEEN CONFIRMED.THE PROJECT TURNED OUT TO BE A

REAL ENCLAVE, AFFECTING THE FRAGI-LE ECONOMIES OF THE REGIONS CROS-

SED, ALL ENDING IN AN EFFECTIVEIMPOVERISHMENT OF THE PEOPLES

CONCERNED.

FFOORREEWWOORRDD

BBBB ackground

Page 10 F O C A R F E - N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 5

The IMF 2005report recalls thatafter a period of

strong economic expan-sion backed by thedevelopment of off-shore oil wells from1978, Cameroon wasplunged into a pro-found and prolongedeconomic recession inthe 1980s. Between 1986and 1993, the GrossDomestic Product drop-ped by one-third ormore than 50% on a percapita basis. This situa-tion was caused byseveral factors, inclu-ding the dwindling oilrevenue that started asfrom 1986.

The devaluation of theCFA franc in 1994brought backCameroon's competiti-veness. Despite anunfavourable growth interms of trade, the 25%depreciation boostedexports, particularly innon-oil sectors andGDP growth averaged2.75% in 1994-1997.

In June 1997, Cameroonsought a triennial arran-

case of electric powersupply and railtransport.

With regard to access topublic service, the ruralaspect remains substan-tially underprivileged.Although the countryexperienced a non-negli-gible economic growth(5% between 1997 and1997, 5.3% between 2000and 2001), and despiteits potential, it did notattain the 7% level thatwould have ushered inpoverty reduction. Onemay dread a drop ingrowth rate after thecurrently exploited oildeposits would havedepleted, and when thetemporary profits of theC h a d - C a m e r o o nPipeline project wouldhave been dissipated.

Export agricultural pro-duce are experiencing acrisis, and many wouldrequire substantialinvestments and favou-rable world markettrends to once morebecome a force of attrac-tion.

gement (ESAF) whichwas later converted intoa PRGF arrangement,and Cameroon reachedthe HIPC administrativedecision point inOctober 2000.

According to theB e r t e l s m a n nFoundation, an assess-ment of the democraticstatus and transforma-tions of the market eco-nomy of the country in 5years, from 1998 to 2003,instead shows thatdespite the flatteringreports of the BretonWoods institutions, theeconomic reform did notprogress fast enough.There are still severeshortcomings in humanrights protection, in par-ticipation and represen-tation and in the esta-blishment of sustainabledevelopment.

Privatization of Stateenterprises has progres-sed, with noted absenceof Cameroonian buyers.Meanwhile, the privati-zation of companies hasstill not led to betterservices as shown in the

HHIISSTTOORRIICCAALL,, PPOOLLIITTIICCAALL,, EECCOONNOO--MMIICC AANNDD SSOOCCIIAALL BBAACCKKGGRROOUUNNDD

Situation of Cameroon

RRRR eminder


An oil and pipeline proj-ect was designed andimplemented by the

Exxon-Petronas-ChevronConsortium. The project wasmade public in 1996 andapproved by the World Bankin June 2000.The $ 3.7 billion worth megaproject comprised the exploi-tation in Chad of 300 oil wellsin 3 oilfields, and transporta-tion of oil by undergroundpipeline over a distance of1070 km including 891 km inCameroon, and directly cros-sing 242 villages therein, dis-tributed into 5 provinces and12 divisions. The oil isconveyed to Cameroon'sAtlantic coast at Kribi, thecountry's tourist town parexcellence, to a floating termi-nal, a single-hulled shipinstalled some 11 km off thecoast to receive and exportthe oil. The project is current-ly the greatest private sectorinvestment in sub-SaharanAfrica.

A cost-benefit study carriedout by the Dames and Moorefirm, and including andassessment of the main areas

population and compensa-tions paid for some of suchcosts, is estimated at an actualnet value of about 300 billionCFA francs ($ 500 million).Considering the projectedtrend of the value of the dol-lar throughout the durationof the project, the Chadexportation project is expec-ted to generate a total econo-mic development value esti-mated at 540 billion CFAfrancs ($ 900 million) forCameroon.Many facilities directly rela-ted to the project were cons-tructed: camps, storage ormaintenance sheds, interna-tional airport reserved purpo-sely for the project, pumpingand pressure reduction sta-tions, etc.At the same time, more than5000 farms were destroyed,and various inconvenienceswere caused to the peoplesliving along the project right-of-way: many water coursesdisrupted, wells polluted bysoil and other products frompipeline construction works,dangerously threateningrural peoples' access to drin-king water, etc.

of income-generating orpotentially income-genera-ting activities (agriculture,stock breeding, forestry,multi-industries, oiltransport, etc.), showed consi-derable net profit for Chad,and to a lesser extent forCameroon.For the Republic of Chad, thetotal economic developmentvalue of the project, includingcosts incurred by Chad andits population and compensa-tions paid for some of suchcosts, is estimated at an actualnet value of about 780 billionCFA francs ($ 1.3 billion).Economists use the actual netvalue to estimate the value ofa long-term project in currentdollars. Considering the pro-jected trend of the value ofthe dollar throughout theduration of the project, theChad exportation project isexpected to generate a totaleconomic development valueestimated at 5 100 billion CFAfrancs ($ 8.5 billion) for Chad.For the Republic ofCameroon, the total economicdevelopment value of theproject, including costs incur-red by Cameroon and its

Brief reminder of the Chad-Cameroon Oil andPipeline Project

The Chad-CameroonPipeline project embo-died in the neighbou-

ring peoples the hope of abetter future: new of jobs,improvement of roads andbridges, access to drinkingwater, payment of compen-sations, etc.

The World Bank saw in thispipeline project a means oftriggering economic deve-lopment and alleviatingpoverty in the countries

construction company, theclamoured reparations arenot paid. The frequent strikeactions and upheavals by thepopulations are an obvioussign of the numerous mal-functions, and their forcefulsettlement is testimony of themeagre support they recei-ved. No permanent forumfor dialogue was accepted bythe CPSP despite the insis-tence of various parties. Oilexploitation began inOctober 2003.

concerned.What obtained on the groundwas rather sad: multipleenvironmental damages putunder clothe in the construc-tion company's reports andthose of official monitoringbodies; social claims are pou-ring in from all angles, wor-kers maltreated at variousproject sites, and althoughthe multiplicity of problemsraised undermine and discre-dit all the triumphalist pre-sentations of success by the

DASHED HOPES OF THE CHAD-CAMEROON PIPELINE PROJECTCONSTRUCTION PHASE

tttt ribunal


Rationale

Considering that the people living alongthe pipeline right-of-way were exposedto serious and systematic violations of

their fundamental rights for various reasons,FOCARFE whose duty is to promote therights of peoples, minorities and individuals,with the support of national public opinion,referred to the ¨Peoples' Tribunal of Cameroonin order to draw the attention of the govern-ment, political parties, trade unions and theinternational public opinion to the serious andsystematic violations of peoples' rights, and,in relation with such violations, those of therights of minorities and individuals, as well asto their economic, political and social causes.

Members of jury Chair: Me NGUINI Charles, Barrister;Members:Fr. BELL, National Episcopal Conference;Pastor NGUE, Secretary-General of theCouncil of Protestant Churches of Cameroon;Cheikh OUMAROU MALAM DJIBRIL,Representative of the Islamic community;Me DANG Elise, Barrister;Me FANDOM Louise, Court Registrar;Me NGUEFACK Maurice, Barrister;Me DANG MEKOK Austin, Court Registrar;KUENZOB Dupleix, Ecumenical Service forPeace.

Reference legal instruments

1. Statues of the Peoples' Tribunal ofCameroon, adopted on 20 June 2005;2. 1948 Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights;3. International Pact on civil andpolitical rights;4. International Pact on economic,social and political rights;5. African Charter on human andpeoples' rights;6. United Nations Conventionagainst corruption;7. ILO standards;8. United Nations standards onenterprises accountability in matters rela-ting to human rights ;9. 16 January 1996 Constitution ofCameroon;10. Civil Code;11. Penal Code;12. Environmental Management Plan.

PEOPLES' TRIBUNAL OF CAMEROON

Distinguished Guests,Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is in deed an honour forme and for the entireFOCARFE, to welcome youin this hall of the YaoundeChamber of Agriculture, forthe first session of what werefer to, in well chosenterms, as the Peoples'

reasoned and public opinionon situations or facts refer-red thereto. It is therefore atribunal of opinion and notone of power. The tribunalstands out as the free andresponsible expression ofCameroonian citizens in acountry where the rule oflaw prevails. Its duty is toexamine publicly and in an

Tribunal of Cameroon!

But what is the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon?

The Peoples' Tribunal ofCameroon is an initiative ofthe NGO FOCARFE. A jurycomprising variousCameroonian personalitiesis called upon to express a

CONDUCT OF TRIBUNALSession Opening Address by Mme Hilde-Josée Ndoumbe Nkotto,

30 September 2005

Page 12


adversarial manner all thecases of violations of humanand peoples' rights contai-ned in the complaints lod-ged by victims (or private orcorporate bodies supportingthem).

It is inspired from thePermanent Peoples' Tribunalfounded in June 1979 atBologna by jurists, writersand other intellectuals,under the impulse of theLelio Basso InternationalFoundation for peoples'right and liberation, foun-ded in 1976 at the initiativeof the Italian resistance figh-ter and democrat, LelioBasso (1903-1978). TheTribunal took over theRussel tribunals, which inthe 1960s and 1970s exposedthe war crimes committed inVietnam, presided byBertrand Russel, and laterJean-Paul Sartre and LelioBasso. The PermanentPeoples' Tribunal was firstpresided by FrançoisRigaux, professor at law inBrussels, and up to date, bySalvadore Senes, Italianmagistrate.

Shortly after its creation in1976, the Lelio BassoFoundation convened aninternational conference atAlger which, on 4 July 1976(200th anniversary ofAmerica's declaration ofindependence and the eve ofAlgeria's national day cele-bration), proclaimed the"Universal Declaration ofPeoples' Rights". Although itwas a private initiative andalthough the notion of "peo-ples' rights" was alreadymentioned in a number of

tigations. It applies the rulesretained in project conven-tions, but also general andconventional rules of inter-national law, and particular-ly the principles generallyadmitted in conventions andinternational practice onmatters relating to humanrights and the right of peo-ples to decide for themsel-ves.

I sincerely believe thatCameroon deserves to seesuch actions taken on its soil,and FOCARFE, by thisaction, is striving to contri-bute to the institution ofdemocratic discussion in ourcountry, while at the sametime helping to translate intoconcrete terms the takinginto consideration of newactors such as the civil socie-ty in decisions that influencethe life of Camerooniansparticularly, in line withWorld Bank and theCotonou Agreement recom-mendations.

The jury constituted fortoday's topic, namely theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject, is as follows:

Chair: Me NGUINI Charles,Barrister;Members:Fr. BELL, NationalEpiscopal Conference;Pastor NGUE, Secretary-General of the Council ofProtestant Churches ofCameroon;Cheikh OUMAROUMALAM DJIBRIL,Representative of theIslamic community;Me DANG Elise, Barrister;Me FANDOM Louise, Court

international instruments,such attempt was the first toenter peoples' rights in a sin-gle document.

With the 1948 UniversalDeclaration of HumanRights and the UnitedNations Charter, a charter ofinter-State relations, theAlger Declaration is conside-red today by many interna-tional jurists as a fundamen-tal document. Twenty-nineyears after its adoption, it isworth noting that this instru-ment still remains a topicalissue.

The Peoples' Tribunal ofCameroon comprisesCameroonian personalitiesacting independently. It maybe referred to through peti-tions written by associations,bodies or personalities. Suchpetitions should come fromtrust-worthy persons andstate the violations charged,the authorities, groups orpersons that the requestingparty deems should beaccused to stand trial.

The Tribunal gives itselfextended powers to appraiseand investigate in order toretain, hear or reject all orpart of the petition. It sum-mons all the parties concer-ned and offers the accusedparty the possibility todefend themselves. TheTribunal decides on thevenue and duration of thecase. It decides on the com-position of the jury.

The Tribunal decides onfacts brought thereto and onthose it can bring out orhighlight following its inves-

Conduct of tribunal


Registrar;Me NGUEFACK Maurice,Barrister;Me DANG MEKOK Austin,Court Registrar;KUENZOB Dupleix,Ecumenical Service forPeace.In view of documenting andcompleting the topics thatwould be developed duringthis session, FOCARFE hasprepared detailed thematicfiles, drafted by its membersor other structures, summa-rizing all the informationavailable to date. The filesinclude:

- the Chad-CameroonPipeline project independentmonitoring report (FOCAR-FE, CED, ERA-CAME-ROUN, SEP);- the impact analysis of

(FOCARFE);- Social Closure or SocialResponsibility Report(FOCARFE);- Monitoring bodies…(FOCARFE).- Appraisal of the consi-deration and implementa-tion of IAG recommenda-tions (FOCARFE);- Chad-CameroonPipeline project assessmentreport (Justice and PeaceCommission /FOCARFE);- Amnesty Internationalreport on the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline project;- What can one make ofthe remarks and declara-tions of ECMG with regardto persistent problems onthe field (FOCARFE)?

Thank you.

individual compensationson people living along theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject right-of-way(FOCARFE);- the environmentalaudit of the Chad-CameroonPipeline project (FOCARFE);- the Chad-CameroonPipeline project: field reports(FOCARFE);- the Chad-CameroonPipeline project in the lightof Agenda 21(FOCARFE);- Articles from the pipe-line Journal;- complaints depositedat the World BankInspection Panel by CED;- Panel Report;- World BankManagement response;- Brochure: SocialClosure in the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline project

FOCARFE thus referred tothe Peoples' Tribunal on 30July 2005, with the backingof several national and inter-national human rightsNGOs, to decide on theserious violations of therights of the people livingalong the pipeline right-of-way, committed by the proj-ect construction company,its branches, as well as byany group or structure thatfailed in its monitoring orequitable arbitration duty.

For FOCARFE, this impliedpresenting to the Tribunalan overview of these viola-tions, enlightened by thereminder of the evolution ofthe project situation since

should have preceded theissuance of the said certifica-te. Such was the case for aWorld Bank sponsored damproject in Lesotho, and inthis case, the signing of thecompletion certificate wassimply and logically defer-red until the settlement ofcases of non-compliance andother pending issues. Whyis it not the same in the caseof the Chad-CameroonPipeline project, and whythe double standard?

For along time now, notablythroughout the constructionphase, many complaintshave been lodged by themaltreated and floutedpopulation. Their claims

1996, and backed by the tes-timonies of 24 affected per-sons present in the hall.

It happened that the eventcoincided, with a few days'difference, with the organi-zation by the World Bank ofa pipeline project assess-ment session, to draw les-sons there from (as they clai-med), while many problemsthat had been raised a longtime ago by the people andNGOs were still awaitinganswers or being treatedrather too slowly. Instead,project completion certifica-tes had been issued to theConsortium, whereas thesettlement of pending pro-blems raised a long time ago

Referral to the Tribunal

Page 14

Conduct of tribunal


that were always echoed byNGOs were in fact neverseriously handled. Theirvoices have regularly beensuffocated by stronger for-ces, alliances of active orpassive complicity. A diffe-rent and diametricallyopposing clarion call wassounded against each oftheir assertions, despite theoverwhelming field eviden-ce that they have alwayshad. The wounds of theproject are far from scarring,but there is an attempt at"expediting" things by cir-cumventing the sufferingsinflicted on the people whowant nothing other thanbeing happy, and who wel-comed the project with out-stretched arms, with thecharacteristic conviviality ofCameroonians. It is therefo-re necessary, in order tohave an authentic reconcilia-tion of the truth, to hear thedifferent versions of such atragedy, and establish theresponsibilities of one ano-ther in these gloomy pagesof the history of the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline projectconstruction phase. In thisway, nobody shall remainuninformed and there shallbe appropriate reparation ofdamages.

That is why FOCARFE tookthe matter to the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon, inorder to judge violations ofthe rights of the peopleaffected by the pipeline proj-ect.

But why refer to an "opiniontribunal"? First, because ofthe failure of national and

documented survey reports,have made it possible togather a set of informationthat would have played avital role in clarifying proj-ect decision-making structu-res.

At the same time, they alsoencouraged more directactions aimed at accusingperpetrators to be started orprepared.

Although the complaint lod-ged by CED at the WorldBank Inspection Panel wasnot shelved aside by whomit may concern, it was trea-ted only too rapidly, withvarious types of considera-tions apparently playingtheir role.

In addition, the few recom-mendations made by thePanel led to very limitedeffects. Such legal procee-ding aimed at identifyingviolators of the rights of thepeople living along theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject right-of-way shouldcertainly not be abandoned.As a matter of fact, someprocedures based on the"independent assessment"principle will theoreticallymake it possible to continuethe fight for the reparationof damages committed. Andeven though their outcomeis uncertain, such actionsmay play a vital role in sen-sitizing and informing inter-national opinion, which isvery important in the case ofthe Chad-CameroonPipeline project, which isclaimed to be a model, butwhich is characterized, more

international mechanismsresponsible for piloting andmonitoring the project.

Despite the magnitude ofthe shortcomings, distor-tions and other abnormali-ties of the project since itwas made public in 1996,causing thousands of vic-tims and thousands of pau-pers, the announced revolu-tionary project controlmechanisms where not upto the task in shedding lighton responsibilities in thepoor execution of projecttasks, or in obtaining thedue reparations.

The victims' recourse tolegal procedures, be it at thenational or internationallevel (Inspection Panel), metwith considerable obstacles.It is true that the WorldBank Inspection Panel, as aresult of a complaint lodgedby the Cameroonian NGOCED, carried out a fieldinvestigation. Such decisionwas a significant step in thelong-standing fight initiatedby NGOs and human rightsactivists, both in Cameroonand abroad, to expose theresponsibilities of the trage-dy Cameroonians are livingas a result of problemscaused by the project formany years now. Manynational and internationalorganizations, particularlythe Catholic Relief Services,Environmental Defence,Bank Information Centre,AG erdol, NationalCommission on Justice andPeace, CED, ESP, ERA-Cameroon, GCA andFOCARFE, through several

Page 15

Referral to the tribunal


than others, by opacity andmisinformation, and is farfrom the often triumphantlyannounced success.

It should however be notedthat such is a fragile means,because this type of proce-dure requires that theinspection structure beauthorized to handle thecomplaint lodged, if ever itdeems it relevant, or that itsrecommendations be takeninto consideration by thedecision-making bodies,which is a huge constraint.

That is why, though withoutrejecting such a procedure,and falling in line with work

ty structures (grinding mills,grinding mill houses, com-munity houses, classrooms,harnessed water sources);2- Faulty or non-operationalcommunity equipment(grinding mills, grindingmill houses, harnessedwater sources);3- Pre-existing structuresdestroyed;4- Destruction of watercourses;5- Workers' rights baffled; 6- Farmlands destroyed as aresult of project works;7- Poorly restored lands;8- Poor waste management; 9- Defence sites destroyed;10- Natives' rights baffled(Pygmies);

continuity and actionsagainst long-standing proj-ect non-conformities andimpunity by national andinternational NGOs respon-sible for defending humanrights, FOCARFE, with thesupport of many of the lat-ter, decided to refer to the"Peoples' Tribunal" for theviolations of the rights ofpeople living along theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject right-of-way, inCameroon.

The human rights violationssubmitted to the apprecia-tion of the Tribunal are thefollowing:1- Over-billing of communi-

The Tribunal based itsdeliberations on the studyof documents preparedand supplied by FOCAR-FE::

the Chad-CameroonPipeline project independ-ent monitoring report(FOCARFE, CED, ERA-CAMEROUN, SEP);

the impact analysis ofindividual compensationson people living along theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject right-of-way(FOCARFE);

the environmental auditof the Chad-CameroonPipeline project (FOCAR-FE);

the Chad-Cameroon

(FOCARFE).Appraisal of the consi-

deration and implementa-tion of IAG recommenda-tions (FOCARFE);

Chad-CameroonPipeline project assess-ment report (Justice andPeace Commission/FOCARFE);

Amnesty Internationalreport on the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline proj-ect;

What can one make ofthe remarks and declara-tions of ECMG withregard to persistent pro-blems on the field(FOCARFE)?

Pipeline project: fieldreports (FOCARFE);

the Chad-CameroonPipeline project in thelight of Agenda21(FOCARFE);

Articles from the pipeli-ne Journal;

complaints deposited atthe World BankInspection Panel by CED;

Panel Report;World Bank

Management response;Brochure: Social

Closure in the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline proj-ect (FOCARFE);

Social Closure orSocial Balance Sheet(FOCARFE);

Monitoring bodies…

Documentation

Page 16

Referral to the tribunal


The Tribunal also based its deliberations on the testimonies of victims and expert interven-tions during the session, summarized as follows:

TT ee ss tt ii mm oo nn ii ee ss

“We have outstanding claims at COTCO about a motor pump thatwas supplied to us without pipes and a grinding mill which wor-

ked for only two weeks, all for a cost of 3 010 000 CFA francs,representing the total amount of our community compensation.”

(EDITOR'S NOTE: What about the warranty generally granted by sup-pliers for any equipment of a certain value?)

Testimony (summary) by Mr. Noah Ndjana, representative of Ndjoré II village

"Testimony by Mr. Nanga ZO'O, representative ofNkoteng village.”

“Nkoteng village received equipment which does notfunction, such as:

1. Cement block presses that ceased functioning after asingle use, 2. Two grinding mills worth 800 000 CFA francs each.Only one is still operational to date; the other workedfor only on week. The promised spare parts were onlypartly supplied and 20 litres of fuel were supplied totest the mills instead the promised 40 litres. The resthast not been supplied up to now.”

"Testimony by Mr. TCHOUNGUI, headof ANGOUANFEME village

“The amount for compensation of my villa-ge was 6 000 000 CFA francs; we wanted theroof of the school to be repaired. COTCObrought us a ready-made cost estimate thatwe deemed too high. When we presented acost estimate prepared by a contractor thatthe village itself had chosen, COTCO repliedthat our contractor had been approved bythem.”

" Mr. NKOA OLINGA ROBERT, traditional ruler of NDZANA village

“My village received the sum of 3 010 000 CFA francs as community compen-sation and we sought the construction of an 8m by 10m building. I already hadmore than 40 cubic meters of sand and structural timber, form lumber, stonesand eight exposed blocks. We agreed with COTCO on increasing the dimen-sions of the building since I had to give them all the material I had for free. Assuch, instead of the original 8m by 10m, we were supposed to have a buildingof 20m by 10m.

They asked me to provide a team of labourers and a few villagers who coulddo bricklaying and carpentry. I supplied them with 10 labourers of each category. They are stillowing 589 500 CFA francs to these labourers. The contractor in charge of the work raised the buil-ding haphazardly. You can send an expert there to examine the work done; it's a shame!”

BINELI, representative of NKOMETOU I village“An undeveloped spring that supplied drinking water to the entire village was damaged by pipelineconstruction works. After several complaints, the people (men, women and children) of NKOME-TOU staged an upheaval and stopped work progress in the locality. Instead of seeking a solutionto the problem, the Divisional Officer rather authorized the forces of law and order clamp down onthe people. That is how many people found themselves in hospital with serious wounds from clubs,machetes and other weapons. The village of NKOMETOU chose the harnessing of thirteen springsas community compensation. Today, only one spring is operating; the twelve others are not onlyun-operational, but do no longer exist.”

Page 17


TT ee ss tt ii mm oo nn ii ee ss

“My claims are on a number ofmaterials and the moneyCOTCO was supposed to payvillagers as community, regio-nal and individual compensa-tion. Talking about communitycompensation, there isn't muchto be claimed, just a kerosenelamp commonly known asAIDA lamp, which is non-func-tional, and a motor pump whichdidn't have a pipe.I don't have the cost of theAIDA lamp here, but the motorpump costs 231 000 CFA francs.It is there, but not functioning.Let's now talk of the regionalcompensation.This is heavy! Heavy, becausemany equipment are not func-tioning. There are 2 (two)cement block presses that cost200 000 CFA francs each.There are 5 (five) springs har-

nessed at the cost of 800 000CFA francs each, giving a totalof 4 000 000 CFA francs. The 4000 000 francs are a waste,because the first two harnessedsprings never functioned; theirtanks could not withstand theload as a result of low cementcontent. There was consequent-ly no water reservoir. The constructors were howeverasked to carry out a better watercollection structure. They saidthey would dig wells at theedges of water courses. Theybrought in their technicians anddug the wells at water edges.Nobody ever used those wells,because they stink. We complai-ned, but our complaints have

mapped out two gutters thatcrossed my fish pond, since thepipeline track was further up,just like you are up there at therostrum and my fish pond fur-ther down as I am here.In 2001, I drew their attention tomy fish pond that was alreadygetting engulfed because soilwas pouring therein, while theywere talking of planting lawngrass. There is therefore neitherlawn nor anything at all. I wroteand they sent a committee. Mr.Degui came accompanied byMr. Elie Park. They compiled afile to pay compensation for thefish pond, but nothing wasdone.A second committee came lateron and, after that, an expert, Mr.Belle André, accompanied bythe local representative, Mr.Mebenga Simon Pierre, was sentfor counter-expertise on the des-truction of the fish pond. A filewas compiled once more. Icontacted technicians, that is,the Delegate of Fisheries andStock Breeding who supportedme during the construction ofmy fish pond. He made anassessment of the constructionof the pond which in a lumpsum is evaluated at 12 375 000CFA francs, detailed out as fol-lows:Investment: 486.500 CFA francsRunning costs: 569.000 CFAfrancsAnnual production: 2830.000CFA francsI think I am the loser here. From2001 to 2005, that is four conse-cutive years, I have been clai-ming for loss of potential ear-nings, which stand at 2 830 000francs x 4 = 11 320 000 CFAfrancs which, added to the run-ning and investment costs givesthe total of 12 375 000 CFAfrancs, excluding, Mr. President,the moral damage. Since I am intotal despair, I no longer haveany fish pond. And COTO isreticent and unwilling to seewhat I have done, what I haveput in as means for the cons-truction of this fish pond.Such are the claims of NDOUM-BA NKANGA village. “

not been heeded to up to now. We ordered for a diesel grin-ding mill, worth 3 400 000 CFAfrancs. The mill is not functio-ning, because when we installedit, at the level of the mill, a partgot worn out after two days. Wesucceeded in getting a sparepart at Belabo, but the samething happened again.The grinding mill is thereforeparked, not functioning!Meaning that the 3 400 000 CFAfrancs have been wasted.Mr. President, this is a case ofover-billing. For the 3.400.000CFA francs, we have the delive-ry slips that were handed to us,but not the invoices, be it for theengine or the mill. This was thecase with the supply of the otherequipment such as the presses,wheelbarrows and others. Theargument of the supplier wasthat the engine was hard to find,and that they could not bring usthe invoice for an equipmentworth 3 400 000 CFA francs!Lastly, there was individualcompensation, with just one file,that of Mrs. MEKANI, my wife,née NOMO JULIENNE.This concerns the destruction ofa fish pond. Let me explain, Mr.President: when COTCO arri-ved to map out the pipelinereconnaissance track, theyfound that I had already cons-tructed the pool in 1998 becauseI did not know where the pipeli-ne would pass.Meanwhile, they diverted thecourse of the pipeline trackwhich no longer crossed the fishpond, which was fine by me.They started work, but sometime during tree-felling a treefell into my pond. They sent oneof their representatives, Mr.Degui, who assessed that thetree had destroyed 20 (twenty)kilograms of fish, including theedge of the pool, a few youngpalm trees and banana trees.They paid for the latter, "forget-ting" the 20 kilograms of fish. Icomplained, but to no avail. Iended up getting tired.After the works proper, the roadhad to be cleaned up and sha-ped. During the shaping, they

MEKADI François,NDOUMBA NKANGA

village head

Page 18


TT ee ss tt ii mm oo nn ii ee ss ETOUNDI Angelin, representative

of NKONGMEYOS III village

“The pipeline crossed a lake in our village, a lake whichwas poorly cleaned up after construction works. Theseworks transformed the lake into a standing pool and conse-quently a breeding ground for mosquitoes and a source ofmalaria. Concerning individual compensations, the bicyclessupplied were of poor quality. The COTCO bicycles didnot even last for six months.”

Mrs. BITANGA EKANICélestine of NKOLTARA

Village in the NKOMETOUgroup

“Before COTCO, I had no pro-blems living with eight children,since I was owner of a poultryfarm. When COTCO arrived, Ioffered them my compound topark their machines, truck andmaterials, informing them that Ihad just bought 500 day-oldchicks. They promised me thatthere would be no problem withmy poultry.

Three weeks later, I lost 380chicks because of the noise, dustand smoke from the exhaustpipes of trucks and machines. Forthe past three years I have beenclaiming reparation for thedamages I suffered. ”

“Pygmies arefacing a lot ofproblems afterthe laying of thepipeline. Theidentity cardsthat were prom-ised them have

not yet been provided up to now. We don't have any spin-offs from the nativepeople's scheme. A few textbooks were distributed to schools attended bypygmy children, but there is no follow-up on the use of such textbooks. Pygmieswere taken away from the forests where they lived peacefully and brought towards the centre,giving rise to numerous land problems with natives. The pygmies are obliged to provide agricul-tural manpower to major land owners in order to survive. Hunting, which was the main income-generating activity, has been abandoned as a result of the distancing of wild animals because ofnoise produced by the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline project machines.”

Mr. FOUDA NDI Joseph, traditional ruler of AKONGO III village

“I would like to talk of the case of destruction of existinginfrastructure because COTCO made movement on the pre-existing road more difficult in the village of ANGOUANFE-ME.COTCO wanted to get the road repaired to allow its machi-nes to pass through. But the road led to a rock which for longhad caused problems. COTCO had all the necessary equip-ment to blast the rock in order to improve movement on theroad. Instead of blasting the rock, COTCO rather covered itwith earth, thereby increasing the gradient of the slope.Today, in the rainy season as well as in the dry season, youdare not venture to take the road if you do not have theappropriate car. The hill has instead "grown" at that area.When asked they did not blast the rock and make things eas-ier for everyone, COTCO replied that they had not come toconstruct roads, and that it was the prerogative of thegovernment.The second case is that of another hill where COTCObrought the road practically to a precipice, to the extent thatduring the rainy season, any vehicle that skids at that areastands a high chance of falling into the valley. In ANDOCK,a village that is part of ANGOUANFEME, when you des-cend, you practically get down to valley, at the edge of theprecipice. The people of AKONGO want COTCO to comeand salvage the situation. In another village, ABANG-AKONGO, a water point wassimply blocked by soil dug up by COTCO to lay downpipes. This was pointed out, but COTCO never wanted tosolve the problem.“

Page 19

NOUA Jeanne,representativeof Bandevouri

village


TT ee ss tt ii mm oo nn ii ee ss BOMBA ZOA Cyprien (OBOKOE I)

“I placed my land of about 3 hectares, formerly used forfarming, at the disposal of WILLBROSS, for a period of11 months, as testified by the memorandum of unders-tanding signed between COTCO and me. Not only wasthe land returned to me after 18 months of usage, butworse still, nothing grows there any more. For the pasttwo years I have been running after COTCO for a clea-nup of the land which is my only source of income.”

NDONGO ETOUDI, NGOUMOU village head

“A market gardener, a sonof the soil, had dug 13wells from which waterwas collected to water hiscrops before the crossingof the pipeline there.Pipeline constructionworks destroyed 11 of hiswells, and COTCO cate-gorically refuses to com-pensate the damage thus

caused to the market gardener. I was part of thecommittee to make an inventory of the proper-ty of the people of my village living along thepipeline right-of-way. The committee forgot tocount the wells in question. Surveys weremade, but up till today nothing has been doneto regularize the situation. A last commissionwas there about a month ago, and they wereable to see the wells outside the pipeline right-of-way which were still there on either side ofthe pipeline track. I am referring to those thatwere not destroyed. This is evidence that thewells existed.”

LOCAL LABOURERS OF THEOBALA BASIN

“I am testifying here in my capa-city as COTCO worker at theOBALA basin and on behalf ofthe entire team of welders mal-treated during the events thatoccurred at Nkoltara on 17 and 18September 2002, at the Willbroswork site. So, I will tell you how Iwas recruited, treated and fired. Irepresent a group of 71 youngNKOMETOU villagers. COTCOused to recruit through basins,that is, per group of villages.Youths who were recruited hadto work on a given portion and,at the end of the portion, otherswere recruited. We already hadnews on the treatment receivedby preceding teams. We werethus prepared by the time wewere contacted. I worked in thewelding team. Before recruit-ment, there was a one-hour inter-view with the socio-economist,the person in charge of recruiting.At this level, we tried to unders-tand the working conditions andespecially the remuneration.With regard to working condi-tions, they promised proving uswith appropriate working equip-ment, i.e. goggles which protectus from welding rays. I wouldlike to remind you that this washigh-level welding. They told usthat we needed to have boots anda uniform, and be well dressed toprotect ourselves against sparks.With regard to remuneration,they said we had to sign acontract, but that time was alrea-dy running out and we needed tostart work. They promised giving

BEUNDE EVILA LUDWIG, head of BWAMBEvillage at the maritime terminal

“The people of my village lived mainly on fishing andbefore the floating terminal of the Chad-Cameroonpipeline, the quantity of fish they caught was abun-dant. But for the past few years now, our nets areconstantly torn by the maritime structures of thepipeline and the compensation process is painsta-king. This has increased poverty in my village as aresult of the drop in fishing activity..”

was the leader. We gave him acopy of our petition. After rea-ding it, he asked to know the opi-nion of COTCO General Manager,Mr. Poulard (in fact, he was theGeneral Manager of the subcon-tracting company, Willbros). Heonce more wave the issue aside.Then DO then called for a restric-ted working session at OBALA,with the six delegates. During theworking session the DO said: "Inmy territory of command, I willcivilize you. You will serve as anexample so that there would beno more disorders. I am going toplace you on a 10 days' adminis-trative detention immediately.Mr. Commander, these truantsare at your disposal".We were thus locked up in thecell. The paper you are looking atis my contract termination certifi-cate, which I signed while in thecell, around 10 p.m.! Our friendswho had stayed behind said: "Ourfriends have gone; we are stop-ping work too. If they are notreleased, we prefer to die here"!Some COTCO workers joinedthem. They kidnapped a fewwhite workers who worked withthem and said: "we are forgettingour friends; you too, forget yourwhite workers". The DO cameand freed us the next morningunder the pressure and publiclyfired us, in front of the entirevillage. The naked persons yousee in this newspaper are us. Sincewe were putting on our COTCOuniforms by the time we weretaken to the cell, they undressedus in public! That is how COTCOfired us. ”

us our salary situation in 48 hours.We therefore started welding andtwo or three days later, one of ourfriends lost his sight. For 72 hourshe was almost blind. Another onesustained a burn on the leg. In theend, we all had problems becausewe were putting on plastic shoesand working under heat. Since wewanted to benefit from the mista-kes of our friends, we decided toclaim for our rights!We wrote a petition to the COTCOGeneral Manager, requesting tomeet him. We asked among otherthings to have shoes suitable forheat as well as proper remunera-tion. When the General Managerarrived, he waved every thingwith the back of his hand askedasked us: "Since you seem to bemore enlightened than the others,what shall we do? You will notcomplete your work portion. Weare going to dismiss you verysoon." So, we decided to stopwork, especially as one or ourfriends had almost gone blind, andas I am talking to you now, he stillhasn't recovered his sight. On thatday, we were precisely at the villa-ge called NKOLTARA. And stillon that day, the spring of the villa-ge was destroyed. The people deci-ded to block the road. TheDivisional Officer came with atleast 100 gendarmes, armed to theteeth. The gendarmes molested thepeople properly. Meanwhile, westood apart, convinced that theproblem did not concern us. TheDO walked toward us as we wereseating at the worksite. He orderedthe forces of law and order toencircle us, before asking if we haddelegates. We were six of us, and I


PresidentMe NGUINI Charles

Members 1-Fr. BELL, NationalEpiscopal Conference;2-Pastor NGUE, SecretaryGeneral of the Council ofCameroon Protestant chur-ches;3-Cheikh OUMAROUMALAM DJIBRIL,Representative of the Islamiccommunity;4-Me DANG Elise, Barrister;5-Me FANDOM Louise, CourtRegistrar;6-Me NGUINI Charles,Barrister;7-Me NGUEFACK Maurice,Barrister;8-Me DANG MEKOK Austin,Court Registrar;9-KUENZOB Dupleix,Ecumenical Service for Peace.

RapporteurMe DANG Elise

After studying the complaintslodged by the people livingalong the Chad-Cameroon oilproject right-of-way,

The Peoples' Tribunal was for-mally referred to by the NGOFOCARFE (FondationCamerounaise d'ActionsRationalisées et de Formationsur l'Environnement) onbehalf of the people livingalong the Chad-CameroonPipeline project right-of-way,on 13 September 2005.

Considering the representa-tive nature of the complaints,the solidity of the documenta-tion compiled and preliminaryresearch, the consistency of thesubject of the complaint withthe lines of thought and workof the Tribunal itself, the com-plaint was deemed receivable.In accordance with the statu-tes, the complaint was com-

municated to the two mainparties involved in the case:

- COTCO and partners, repre-sented by their legal counsel; - the government ofCameroon represented by theCPSP (Pipeline Piloting andMonitoring Committee);

Both parties were notified oftheir right to be representedand to use their means ofdefence.

The Peoples' Tribunal ofCameroon met in a public ses-sion on 30 September 2005, inthe hall of the Chamber ofAgriculture, in the presence ofthe accused.

Its duty was to:

-hear the oral reports and testi-monies of the complainingwitnesses and of experts;-examine the written docu-mentation that accompaniedthe oral presentations.

This initial report shall becomplemented during thepublication of the final reportin the months ahead.

During the session, thePeoples' Tribunal made refe-rence to factual and legal sour-ces.

1. Oral testimonies on viola-tions of the rights of the peo-ple living along the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline projectright-of-way:

Full names :

1. BOMBA ZOA Cyprien

2. Beunde Evila Ludwic

3. NKOA Olinga Robert

4. NOUA Jeanne

IV - RULING OF THE PEOPLES' TRIBUNAL 5. Nanga Zo'o6. BAWA DINA Jean-Paul

7. NOAH NDZANA8. BITANGA EKANI Célestine

9. OMGBA BOMBA Martin

10. NDONGO ETOUNDIJoseph11. BALLA ONDOA Jean

12. AVOM AVOM 13. ADANG Benjamin14. MBIDA Sébastien 15. ETOUNDI16. BINELI17. MECANI Joseph 2. Counts

1- Over-billing of communitystructures (grinding mills,grinding mill houses, commu-nity houses, classrooms, har-nessed water sources);

2- Faulty or non-operationalcommunity equipment (grin-ding mills, grinding mill hous-es, harnessed water sources);3- Pre-existing structures des-troyed;4- Destruction of water cours-es;5- Workers' rights baffled; 6- Farmlands destroyed as aresult of project works;7- Poorly restored lands;8- Poor waste management; 9- Defence sites destroyed;10- Natives' rights baffled(Pygmies);

3. Reference legal instruments

-Constitution of the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon, adop-ted on 20 June 2005;-1948 Universal Declaration ofHuman Rights;-International Pact on civil andpolitical rights;-International Pact on econo-mic, social and political rights;-African Charter on humanand peoples' rights;

RRuulliinngg

Page 21


-United Nations Conventionagainst corruption;-ILO standards;-United Nations standards onenterprises accountability inmatters relating to humanrights ;-16 January 1996 Constitutionof Cameroon;-Civil Code;-Penal Code;-Environmental ManagementPlan.

Deliberations of the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon on theclaims of the people livingalong the Chad-CameroonPipeline right-of-way werebased on the above mentionedinstruments.

4. Facts. The facts concernthe following 10 counts:

1. Over-billing of communitystructuresFrom the testimonies concer-ning the villages of Njoré IIand Nkoteng, the equipmentmade available under commu-nity compensations were over-billed when compared withlocal market prices. Thisapplies to the price of grindingmills presented in the catalo-gue as costing 750 000 CFAfrancs, whereas the currentmarket price stands at 350 000CFA francs.

2. Faulty or non-operationalcommunity equipmentMotor pump without pipe,grinding mill, wheelbarrowand cement block presseswhich broke down only a fewdays after going operational.The Tribunal notes that theequipment were suppliedwithout any warranty.

3. Destruction of pre-existingstructures,Water courses and wells, brid-ges and roads and privateinvestment without compen-sation.

appropriate measures to pre-serve the rights of the peopleas prescribed in theEnvironmental ManagementPlan of the Chad-CameroonPipeline project.

It is legally right to commit theresponsibility of enterprisesbecause of their actions whichundermined human and envi-ronmental rights.

It was noticed that the State ofCameroon, signatory to theestablishment convention withCOTCO, did carry out a syste-matic close monitoring, there-by abandoning the people tothemselves without any priorinformation and real capacityto negotiate, and no form ofredress in the face of the otheractors.Consequently, the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon con-demns the Consortium and itsnumerous subcontractors fornon-respect of economic andsocial rights and especially the"previously established" stan-dards in matters of workers'rights and environmental pro-tection.

The Tribunal blames the Stateof Cameroon for its silence inthe face of the violationsdecried by the people livingalong the pipeline right-of-way.

The Tribunal recommends asfollows:

- The realization of a social andeconomic audit of the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline project;- The reparation of all pendingcases meticulously identifiedat the level of the people livingalong the pipeline right-of-way; - The constitution of a supportfund for all the councils cros-sed by the pipeline, in com-pensation for possible disas-ters.

4. Workers' rights baffledThe case of the people ofNkometou who were illegallyfired after being recruitedwithout a labour contract.Escape of responsibilities cha-racterised by the multiplicityof subcontractors.

5. Poorly restored land anddefence sites that were des-troyedThe case of Meiganga, the fis-hermen of Kribi and Akono,creation of mosquitoes bree-ding pools, flooding of cocoaplantations.

6. Natives' rights baffledDestruction of the Bipindi-Kribi forest which was theonly source of wealth andpharmacopoeia of the Bagyelypeople. Pygmies do not fullybenefit from the activities ofFEDEC, because of the poorexecution of its action planand the implementation ofdevelopment projects of theircommunity.

7. Refusal of the rights of theMbororo whose cattle herdsran into the bush, and destabi-lization of their environment.They were ignored by FEDECand denied the special com-pensation granted to the fis-hermen of the Kribi regionwhose fishing resources drop-ped as a result of constantwater pollution.

8. Poor waste managementwhich led to huge losses ofcattle and pigs and caused dis-eases. There was non-respectof the EMP strategies, absenceof a policy to monitor theconsequences of such wasteson the population and theenvironment.

LEGAL RATIONALE

From the testimonies receivedand the documentation produ-ced, it is clear that theConsortium did not take

Page 22

RRuulliinngg


practices we suffered,such as counting of plantsto be compensated in arather hasty manner,accepting a compensationscale that was not pre-viously explained to us,and procedures of doubt-ful flexibility such as thedefinition of adult andyoung plants that werecompensated at differentrates, given thatConsortium workers werethe only ones to know andunderstand the said defi-nition, and decide whichplant was young or not!

We shall rather talk ofwhat they accepted to giveus. The Consortium deci-ded to institute a com-plaint settlement procedu-re referred to as "socialclosure", in order to put anend to claims. We willin-gly accepted to respect it.

Your Excellency,

It is the disastrous outco-me of this process that wewant to report to youtoday.

Many cases of compensa-tion recognized by theConsortium are still notresolved. We wish toremind you that the pay-

To His Excellency, thePrime Minister, Head ofGovernment of theRepublic of Cameroon.

Your Excellency, thePrime Minister, Head ofGovernment,

We, representatives ofCameroonian populationsliving along the Chad-Cameroon pipeline right-of-way, having taken partat the session of thePermanent Peoples'Tribunal mentionedabove, take all the libertyto write you this letter,with the aim of clarifyingyou directly on the situa-tion we are experiencingas a result of the passingof the pipeline in our villa-ges.

Your Excellency, we dee-ply believe that youalways act in the trueinterest of the people thatwe are. You have demons-trated that in several occa-sions, and this is quitesoothing to us in ouroption to come to youwithout passing throughany middle party, convin-ced that you will alwaysdo all in your power tosafeguard our interests.

We welcomed the pipelineproject with open arms, asyou requested. We werepresented the benefits tobe reaped from the projectby the entire nation, thesister populations ofneighbouring Chad, andmore directly by us,inhabitants of the villagescrossed by the pipeline.That made us happy.

Some of us went toNigeria, thanks to someNGOs of our country, tovisit the Ogoni Land,whose disastrous post-oilsituation has always beenreported. Our fears wereallayed by the severalspeeches made by bothConsortium representa-tives and nationals. It wastherefore with all confi-dence that we brought inour contribution to thevarious operations of theChad-Cameroon Pipelineproject, to which we wereinvited.

But, Your Excellency,

Our disappointment canonly be matched to thehope we had in the proj-ect.

We shall not dwell muchon the almost unlawful

V- OPEN LETTER TO THE PRIME MINISTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF CAMEROON

Open letter from the representatives of the people living along the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline right-of-way supported by NGOs and others, following

the first session of the Peoples' Tribunal of Cameroon held this day, 30September 2005, at the Yaounde Chamber of Agriculture.

Page 23

OOppeenn lleetttteerr


ment of compensationsdates as far back as thebeginning of the project,in 1996. Almost ten yearsafter, the Consortium hasstill not totally settled theproblem, for which it hasalways been reminded.

We were granted commu-nity or regional compen-sations in kind. We thusreceived the following inour villages: classrooms,wells, various grindingmills, farm tools, etc.Without insisting on thefact that procedures forthe calculation of suchcompensations were esta-blished unilaterally andwith authority by theConsortium, unlike indi-vidual compensations forwhich the scale proposedby the Consortium wasdiscussed and its irrele-vance quickly pointed out,we simply wish to tell youthat in very many cases,the constructions werereally poorly done and thestructures abandonedbefore completion ofwork. Without beingexperts, one can see thatmany of the structuressupplied were by far of alower value or cost thanthe amount of compensa-tion that we were due.Agricultural implementswere supplied to us at pri-ces highly superior tothose in force in local mar-kets for the same productsand of the same make!

We did not choose thecontractors ourselves, asthis was the reserve of the

The Consortium's cons-tructions and structureson water courses haveoften modified the state ofsuch waters, and quietstreams that used to betransport routes havebecome death traps for us,as a result of the now fastcurrent leading to cons-tant drowning, or as ,aresult of the installation ofrocks in the water, theimpossibility for ourcanoes to sail through andthe slips and woundscaused to paddlers whotry to push their canoes.

In other cases, the damsand other structures onthe water now lead to per-manent floods in neigh-bouring farmlands. Whyshould these farmers losethe fruit of a whole life'slabour? Why should theylose their means of exis-tence, and even a heritagethat they could have han-ded down to their child-ren? Is it not right that rec-tification and/or compen-sation measures be taken?

After a few actions, thePygmy Plan seems to havelost its impetus. It wassaid that appropriatefunds had been freed forthe plan. Today we arebeing told that such fundsare "actively beingsought". The parks gran-ted as compensation arestill to be effectively esta-blished. The people livingaround the park are nolonger authorized to feedon the animals from the

Consortium. Is theConsortium not responsi-ble for the possible mal-functions and turpitudesof these contractors? Is itnot our right to claim forthe totality of what theyhad agreed to give us? Is itnot legitimate for us toinsist that the structuresdestined for us be cons-tructed in a manner com-mensurate to the amountallocated to us?

The issue of water hasbecome crucial for manyof us. Many wells werepolluted by pipelineworks. In compensation,wells were supposed to begranted to us. Such wasthe case, except that manyof the wells do no longerflow at all or flow withvery low pressure, or pro-duce poor quality waterthat leaves nauseatingodours.

Tombs were profaned,and the means sought toreconstruct them wererefused or ridiculouslylow. Women solicited toprovide catering servicesfor Consortium workerssaw their contracts termi-nated prematurely andunilaterally, without com-pensation of any sort,whereas the standardsrequired by theConsortium subcontrac-tors were so high thatthese women had to bor-row money to raise theirestablishments to therequired standards. Theircries of distress have so farnot been heeded to.

Page 24



park, and none of thepromised alternativeshave been implementedthis far. The disillusionedpopulations are power-lessly suffering fromassaults in their farms byanimals they are notauthorized to kill, as theyrun the risk of beingimprisoned. All their com-plaints have so far fallenon deaf ears.

Fishermen of the Kribiarea not only witnessedthe destruction of the rockmassifs that housed mostof their shoal of fish, butalso, the artificial rockmassif that was promisedthem and announced bythe Consortium has stillnot been installed. The fis-hermen have also seentheir nets torn regularlyby the Consortium's mari-time structures, and theircomplaints rejected ongrounds of "lack ofenough evidence".

Lastly, faced with the dif-ficulty of settling pendingissues through persistentwrangling, theConsortium has changedits strategy and henceforthtalks of "social responsibi-lity report" instead of"social closure". We wishto draw your attention tothe fact that these are twoquite different realities.Whereas social responsi-bility report refers to thenotion of examining theeffects of a project, andparticularly the negativeconsequences on its exe-cution environment at a

course.

The first session of thePeoples' Tribunal ofCameroon has just had apublic and adversarialexamination of the precisetestimonies and docu-ments to better circums-cribe the responsibilities.The arguments of eachparty were also heard.

We all know that the aimof this session was not tocondemn individuals,which could not be theprerogative of theTribunal, but to unders-tand and publicly qualifywhat has been happeningin Cameroon with regardto the project since 1996.For us, the voiceless, itwas an opportunity to airour views, seek defenceand take note, so thatauthentic justice shouldenable the people ofCameroon to benefit fromthe spin-offs of the projectwhich appears to bedenied them.

We therefore come to you,aware of the assistanceyou have always grantedus, as was the case in thematter concerning thebridge over River Lom,despite the result we allknow.

We are convinced of anappropriate reaction onyour part.

Please accept, YourExcellency, the assurancesof our highest esteem.

given frequency (yearly,for instance), social closu-re, as previously defined,is aimed at regularizingcases of non-complianceand other damages alrea-dy noted during the cons-truction phase, and requi-ring just the payment ofreparations.

That is why we can hardlyunderstand why theWorld Bank issued theConsortium theConstruction WorkCompletion Certificate,purportedly to enable thelatter be in good standingwith money lenders,without wanting to applythe same means of pressu-re for this project to obtainproper settlement of theissues raised at the sametime, as was the case for aWorld Bank sponsoreddam project in Lesotho.Instead, the Consortium isclearly showing signs ofextreme sluggishness inprocessing files, a slug-gishness which is tanta-mount to bad faith.

Your Excellency,

All the problems raisedabove have been largelyand abundantly broughtto the attention of theConsortium, with noresults. We could no lon-ger remain silent or limitourselves to those in char-ge of visiting the projecton a regular basis. Wewant that the lead panthat has fallen on the villa-ge be removed, and thatjustice should take its



Distinguished Guests,Ladies andGentlemen,

We have come to the end ofour deliberations. As younoticed, deliberations of thePeoples' Tribunal session onviolations of rights of peo-ple living along the pipelineright-of-way were based,among others, on theUniversal Declaration ofPeoples' Rights, which pro-claims their right to politicalself-determination andrecalls their economicrights, especially the right tocontrol their natural resour-ces and the respect of theirenvironment.

The case of pipeline projectmanagers turned out toexpose constant practicesthat impedes on the exerciseof such rights, thereby con-firming the failure of "laws"and treason to human aspi-ration to justice.

The violation of the right toself-determination mentio-ned above directly leads toviolation of economic, socialand cultural rights. Therights to minimum income(Article 11 of the PactRelating to Economic, Socialand Cultural Rights) and tohealth (Article 12) were notrespected in the implemen-tation of the Chad-Cameroon Pipeline project.

The rights to the environ-ment and to developmentwere not protected either.Oil exploitation may bedone here at the expense ofpollution of the areasconcerned and at the detri-ment of the people livingalong the pipeline right-of-

tional laws. This is the out-come of a legal order whereStates and institutionsconsider themselves ashaving the legal competenceto "rule the roost".

2. Failure to transcend thehistorical heritage of artifi-cial separation betweenpublic and private laws.This is the outcome of non-recognition that the State is,in fact, the manifestation ofthe convergence of the poli-tical and economic interestsof the national and interna-tional elite.

3. Failure to recognize thecriminal nature of violenceperpetrated by trans-natio-nal economic actors, as illus-trated at the InternationalCourt of Justice when nego-tiations failed to integratesuch offences.

A ruling such as that of thePeoples' Tribunal has itslimits no doubt, but it isbecause of the shortcomingsof the international laws inforce. Instead of sanctio-ning, the action of theTribunal is rather to encou-rage a long-term evolutionof political and democraticconscience in relations bet-ween peoples and States.There is an obvious contra-diction between the sup-posed "humanism" of theinternational order and thedamages that this sameorder provokes in mattersrelating to peoples' right toself-determination, deve-lopment and integrity.

The fundamental objectiveof trans-national companiesis to maximize profit at theshortest possible time. Such

way in particular, and theentire public in general,who do not reap any profittherefrom. Although beinga theoretical source ofwealth, it is, in effect, a fac-tor of impoverishment andincreased gap between therich and the poor.

Once more, attempt hasbeen made to conceal pasttragedies from the collectivemind, like that of the Ogonipeople, by replacing themwith mystifying promises offuture paradise.Unfortunately, memory ofsufferings may not disap-pear as a result of merepirouettes. The Peoples'Tribunal intends to be thevoice of the people and helpthem bring to justice suchfailures and acts of treason,re-imagining the prospectsof a peoples' jurisprudence,its substance and dynamics.

Faced with the persistentviolence of an imperialisticorder, FOCARFE intends tocontribute to the foundinglegality anew, and inven-ting new civil society judge-ment strategies for pro-blems that concern them. Itis looking forward to an endof the silence of the interna-tional legal order whichdefines violence as competi-tion, the situation of the vic-tim as resulting from ill-luck, and criminality as anatural behaviour.

The civil society has theduty to combat several fai-lures:

1. Failure to transcend thehistorical heritage of theconcept of polarization bet-ween national and interna-

VI - CLOSING REMARKS by Mrs Hilde-Josée Ndoumbe Nkotto

CClloossiinngg

Page 26


objective does not admitany obstacle and usesvarious methods in theworld, we are told: promo-tion of wars of aggressionand ethnic conflicts, corrup-tion of civil servants, humanrights violations, etc. Moreand more incidents relatedto the activities of trans-national companies havebeen pointed out, particu-larly since the privatizationsencouraged by the WorldBank, the InternationalMonetary Fund and theWorld Trade Organization.

On its part, the civil societyis active in the worldthrough the organization ofinformation campaigns,mobilization and lobbyingof consumers and politi-cians. We can cite twoexamples here:

- the "clean clothes" cam-paign, the campaign againstchild labour, against finan-cial crimes, against inhu-man working conditions,for the respect of tradeunion rights, peoples'rights, etc.;

- the activity of thePermanent Peoples'Tribunal which led tovarious condemnations ofcertain multinational com-panies by the civil society: *condemnation of seventrans-national companies(TNC) involved in sportswear (Nike, H&M, LeviStrauss, Otto Versand,C&A, Walt Disney andAdidas) in May 1998 atBrussels, for "overall infrin-gements on the right of wor-kers in the clothing industry(...), for forced labour..."; *condemnation of two oil-producing TNCs (Shell andElf Aquitaine and the Stateof France) in May 1999 inParis, for "violation ofAfrican peoples' rights"; *

working and living condi-tions as well as professionalrelations. At the same per-iod, the OECD adopted theGuiding Principles forInternational Enterprises(1976), which are equallyvoluntary and limited, sincethey concern only memberterritories and States. Inaddition, in 1974, the UnitedNations Economic andSocial Council (ECOSOC)created the Trans-nationalcompanies Committee andthe Centre for trans-nationalcompanies with the duty todraw up a code of conductfor trans-national compa-nies. The document neverwent beyond the shelves ofthe UN. Another initiativewas in July 2000, when UNSecretary-General, KofiAnnan, proclaimed theUNO-TNC partnership, theGlobal Compact. ManyNGOs qualified the agree-ment as a "sucker deal". As amatter of fact, its commit-ments are not backed by anylegal measures and themeans of verifying TNCrespect for principles arenon-existent.

TNCs can not escape theirresponsibilities for ever.

The verdict of the Peoples'Tribunal does not have onlya moral function; it is likelyto be followed by legalactions because it raises aseries of tortuous acts andeven criminals who are like-ly to be recognized as suchby existing courts.

This is therefore a first step;others will follow.

FOCARFE is not contentedwith just saying thank youfor your presence and parti-cipation; we effectivelythank you.

condemnation of three otherTNCs (Monsanto, UnionCarbide, Rio Tinto Zinc) inMarch 2000 at Warwick, for"embezzlement of Statefunds, failure to respect ofthe precaution principle,serious negligence leadingto the death of thousands ofpersons".

Such condemnations arepurely moral, but withouthaving the possibility ofinstituting a legal coercion,the civil society organizesboycotts, disseminatesinformation and hands outalternative reports to theUnited Nations committee,in view of countering thosedeposited by States, wherethey honour the obligation.

The social mobilizationsharpened the vigilance ofjudicial authorities. Lawsuits are under way in manycountries, but these arenational jurisdictions. Inorder to progress towardbetter respect for humanrights, it would be necessaryto set up a jurisdiction withinternational competence tojudge crimes, whose con-demnation is impossiblebefore internal jurisdictionsfor various reasons (materi-al, legal or political impossi-bilities).

It is worth noting that inter-national institutions also actwith their means and theirmethods. In 1976, the ILOAdministrative Counciladopted the TripartitePrinciple Declaration onmultinational enterprises.The non-bindingDeclaration is limited tomaking recommendationsto governments, employers'and workers' organizationsand trans-national compa-nies (TNC) to voluntarilyobserve principles relatingto employment, training,

Page 27

CClloossiinngg


8.1 The need to put anend to the double stan-dards observed in proj-ect operations

The pipeline project istoday at its exploitationphase. The Consortium incharge of the project cer-tainly had the interestingrole: not only does it gene-rate money from oil, it hasobtained all sorts of workcompletion certificates,which is actually good forits image and its future.Meanwhile, the peopleliving along the pipelineright-of-way are adverselyaffected, neglected orignored, despite theirincessant claims. Thisstate of affairs must chan-ge and the peoples' claimsmust at last be taken intoconsideration.

8.2 Measures neededto encourage a real pro-cess of equity in theproject

The first measure to betaken is to ensure respectfor the EnvironmentalManagement Plan, whichcan be considered withoutexaggeration as a mini-mum granted and recog-nized to the people.Furthermore, if we recallthat the plan was establishin anticipation to mitigatethe negative impacts thatmight come up during proj-ect implementation, andthat such studies arebased on scientific discipli-nes that are far from beingexact and having rather

the field, testimonies pre-sented at the Peoples'Tribunal of Cameroon, andmost of which had pre-viously been sent to theWorld Bank, confirm thatthe latter does not reactpromptly or not at all to"obvious facts" submittedto its appreciation. Thisgives the impression thatthe Bank's action is ineffi-cient or is taken intoaccount only at the projectdesign phase.

The Peoples' Tribunal ofCameroon wanted to sub-mit to actors who whereneutral and concerned atthe same time, whose jobis to be objective by relyingon rules decreed andaccepted by all, the situa-tions of non-compliance orproblematic situations thathave been presented tothe Consortium on severaloccasions and which it hasregularly rejected. Theirjudgement shows that thecivil society in Cameroon,far from engaging in emo-tional and personal deba-te, has simply pointed outrelevant facts which deser-ve reparation, with regardto the various laws retai-ned here and there. It isabsolutely necessary toevolve towards the consi-deration of case presentedtoday - because they havebeen identified - just likethose that might come upsubsequently.

poor forecasting ability,then we can understandthat the plan presents, withregard to the field reality,shortcomings that it wouldbe unwise to ignore. Suchshortcomings have fortu-nately been pointed out bythe affected persons andechoed by NGOs. Insteadof fighting them and sta-ging a resistance withoutrelevant arguments, com-mon sense would ratherrecommend dialogue inserenity, open mindednessand objectivity. It would benecessary to implementthe long proposed issue ofestablishing a project dia-logue platform comprisingthe civil society alongsideother actors operatinghorizontally, where onlythe relevance of argu-ments presented counts. Itis only then that we maytalk of equity in the treat-ment of pending cases.

8.3 The need for theWorld Bank to respect itsown commitments anddirectives

In its September 2002report, the InspectionPanel brought out manycase of non-respect ofWorld Bank policy, inclu-ding cases of non-com-pliance with regard toOperational Directives forthe environment, econo-mic assessment andpoverty reduction. Butapart from the fact that thePanel only timidly reportedor took into account thevarious problems raised in

VIII - CONCLUSION


News-papers� reactionAA ppendices


AUDIOVISUAL MEDIA ACTIVITIES

PPAAAA SSSS SSSS AAAA GGGG EEEE SSSS

CAMEROON RADIO AND TELEVISION (CRTV)

Comments on the conduct of thePeoples' Tribunal of Cameroon onTV news in English (7.30 p.m.) andFrench (8.30 p.m.) on 30 September2005.

CANAL 2 International

Comments on the conduct of thePeoples' Tribunal of Cameroon onTV news on 1st and 2nd October2005.

Radio SIANTOU

Live intervention by Mr. SemboungLang Firmin on the programme"Samedi Magazine" on 1st October2005 (12 to 1 p.m.). Comments onthe conduct of the Peoples' Tribunalof Cameroon on the 1 p.m. radionews broadcast on 3 October 2005.

Radio Campus

Comments on the conduct of thePeoples' Tribunal of Cameroon onthe 6 p.m. radio news broadcast on 3October 2005.

CRTV National Radio Station


Magic FM


RADIO FRANCEINTERNATIONAL (RFI)

Comments on the conduct of thePeoples' Tribunal of Cameroon andinterview of Barrister Nguini Charles,Chairman of the Tribunal, Mr. FoudaNdi, Akongo III Village Chief, and Mr.Nguiffo of CED, by David NdachiTagne, RFI correspondent inCameroon.

AA ppendices


ppendicesAA photos Album

Mr Ndongo Etoundi, chief of Ngoumou village

Mekadi Jean, chief of Ndoumba Kanga villageMr Mboka Pierre summarizing the social closure process

under the control of Cheick Oumarou, representative of theMuslim community

Celestine Ekani, of Nkoltara village

ppendicesAA photos Album

Noua Jeanne, representative of theBagyeli Pygmies community

Mr Noah Njana, representative of Ndjore II village

Mr Ombga Bomba Martin, chief of Nkongmeyos I village

Mr Semboung Lang Firmin quicklyrefreshing memories about the Chad-Cameroon pipeline project, under thecontrol of Cheick Oumarou, represen-

tative of the Muslim community

Mrs Ndoumbe Nkotto adressing thequestions of Canal 2 TV


Contentsrinoceros.org/IMG/pdf/Focarfe_anglais.pdf · 5. Me FANDOM Louise, Court Registrar; 6. Me...

Documents

Transcript of Contentsrinoceros.org/IMG/pdf/Focarfe_anglais.pdf · 5. Me FANDOM Louise, Court Registrar; 6. Me...