Search results

Over a decade since the Special Criminal Court (SCC) was established in Cameroon, hundreds of individuals have been indicted, tried and convicted. Sentences have been imposed, most of which include a term of imprisonment (principal punishment/penalty) and confiscation as accessory penalty or punishment. Research focus has not been directed at the sentences which, as argued in this paper, are inconsistent, incommensurate with the amounts of money stolen and a significant departure from the Penal Code. This paper aims to explore the aspect of sentencing by the SCC.

To identify, highlight and discuss the issue of sentencing, the paper looks at a blend of primary and secondary materials: primary materials here include but not limited to the judgements of the SCC and other courts in Cameroon and the Penal Code. Secondary materials shall include the works of scholars in the fields of criminal law, criminal justice and penal reform.

A few findings were made: first, the judges are inconsistent in the manner in which they determine the appropriate sentence. Second, in making that determination, the judges would have been oblivious to the prescripts in the Penal Code, which provides the term of imprisonment, and in the event of a mitigating circumstance, the prescribed minimum to be applied. Yet, the default imposition of an aggravating circumstance (being a civil servant) was not explored by the SCC. Finally, whether the sentences imposed are commensurate with the amounts of monies stolen.

This research unravels key insights into the functioning of the SCC. It advances the knowledge thereon and adds to the literature on corruption in Cameroon.

The prosecution and judges at the SCC should deepen their knowledge of Cameroonian criminal law, especially on the nature of liberty given to judges to determine within the prescribed range of the sentence to be imposed but also consider the existence of an aggravating factor – civil servant. They must also consider whether the sentences imposed befit the crime for which they are convicted.

The paper is an original contribution with new insights on the manner in which sentencing should be approached by the SCC.

In total, 10 years since the establishment of the Special Criminal Court (SCC) in Cameroon to deal with a specific kind of corruption, one may wonder whether any achievements have been made so far in fulfilling its mandate and also assuaging the tense and toxic perception that the Court was established as an arsenal to witch-hunt political opponents. This study aims to look into the work done so far in this regard, and makes an assessment as to whether any accomplishments have been made in the first decade of its establishment.

This paper takes an evidence-based approach in seeking answers to what accomplishments, if any, have been made by the Court, explores the notion of corruption within Cameroon’s legislative and institutional landscape prior to the establishment of the Court and looks into the profiles of those who have been indicted by the SCC for that crime; the amounts that were misappropriated and for which they were convicted; the sentences imposed. It identifies some outstanding cases: where the amounts misappropriated exceeded a threshold and asks the question of what made it possible for these individuals to misappropriate such huge sums of money?

The inconsistencies and irrationality in the sentencing are a few findings made. Added to those is the timing of the establishment of the Court which, as most have perceived, is a political witch-hunting aimed at bringing credibility to a failed regime, as well as deal with a few political “irresponsibles” who were once the president’s buddies.

This research unravels key insights into the functioning of the SCC. It advances the knowledge thereon and adds to the literature on corruption in Cameroon.

The establishment of the SCC is commendable. However, as it deals with but a particular kind of corruption, it might be necessary to rethink the need of additional institutional mechanisms that have specialized jurisdiction to deal with the different kinds of corruption in Cameroon.

The paper highlights the entrenched nature of corruption in the social fabrics of Cameroonian society, and exposes the need for a much holistic approach in dealing with corruption, as the SCC offers but one institutional mechanism toward that direction.

This paper, given the issues discussed therein, and considering the dearth of literature on the topic, advances the literature on the SCC in particular and the problem of endemic corruption in Cameroon in general.

This paper advances the argument that misappropriation of public funds should be construed as illicit financial flows (IFFs) which, undoubtedly, have an adverse effect on the realisation of the right to development. Furthermore, by detailing the nature of IFFs, this paper aims to demystify the shallow understanding of what is IFF or what are IFFs and why misappropriation of public funds should be seen in that light.

This paper examines and interrogates the different judgements that have been delivered in cases tried and finalised by the special criminal court (SCC). With viewpoints that are backed by a theoretical understanding of Cameroonian criminal law in particular and criminal law in general, an analysis of the underlying intentions, motives and trajectories in the commission of misappropriation of public funds corroborate the view that the offence must be construed as IFFs. The data used in this paper are primary.

A few pertinent findings were made in the course of this research. Firstly, the offence of misappropriation of public funds and IFFs are not distinct, and any effort to limit the use of “funds” to finances will ultimately miss the point as property with financial value will definitely amount to funds. Secondly, through misappropriation of public funds/property, IFFs have been committed based on the trends and figures disclosed in the judgements of the SCC. Finally, the right to development requires resources and by stealing public funds, resources are deprived, thereby compromising the realisation of development and the right to development.

This paper examines the impact of IFFs on the right to development within the context of Cameroon. By diagnosing the definition of the crime of misappropriation of public property or funds, the paper argues that such an offence must be seen as IFFs given its nature, the motive and intention underlying its perpetration. By taking such perspectives, this paper not only adds to the literature thereon but further brings in new perspectives on those aspects of Cameroonian criminal law.

It is now generally recognised that, when investigating acquisitive crime, investigators must focus not just on obtaining evidence of the commission of the underlying crime itself, but also on what happened to the criminal proceeds. While there has been significant culture change in the UK so that investigators now focus to a greater degree on the proceeds of crime, this is usually from the perspective of tracing what remains of the proceeds so that the confiscation legislation may be applied. Even then such a focus is patchy and inconsistent and much work remains to be done to ensure that the confiscation legislation is applied in a rigorous manner.