Democratic Challenge to Biya
by Ben Mensah
The abortive coup attempt last April by a section of the Camerounian military has been proved to have been motivated by purely selfish and sectional interests. That it didn't succeed has been hailed by those who believe in the democratic route to powerIf the fifteen years in which president paul biya collaborated with president ahidjo blinded him to the need to review Ahidjo's mode of government, the events of the past year, culminating in the very bloody coup attempt last April should inspire him to chart a course different from his predecessor.
This proposition is made in the full knowledge of the measures that have already been launched to arrest the problems related to security and the decline in the economy. Such measures include new postings in the armed forces and the presentation of a budget that identifies inflation, low industrial output, falling exports and unemployment as the chief problems facing the Camerounian economy.
These measures geared at satisfying the material needs of Camerounians should be extended to affect the political atmosphere in the country which, more than anything else, needs to be improved.
Specific reference is being made here to the dictatorial nature of ex- President Ahidjo's twenty-three years rule during which all political parties but one, were banned. When Ahidjo resigned on November 6, 1982 and current President Paul Biya was appointed in his place, the succession arrangements did not give President Biya much room to chart a radically different political course.
With ex-President Ahidjo still occupying the chair of the sole political party, President Biya's hands remained tied until he boldly exposed plans involving Mr Ahidjo to change the status quo. The ensuing power struggle firmly put Mr Biya in charge not only as President but also as chairman of CNU, the sole party.
With so much power vested in him, coupled with his continued recognition of the CNU as the country's only legal political party, President Paul Biya does not yet portray an image different from ex-President Ahidjo.
It might be worthwhile to point out that fears of the vast majority of Guineans culminated in their armed forces staging a military coup d'etat. that was aimed at preventing a continuation of the obnoxious and dictatorial policies of the late President Ahmed Sekou Touré by his carefully groomed successors. That there was no such hiccup in the transition from Ahidjo to Biya should not be attributed to lack of disaffection for President Ahidjo's dictatorial rule by the people of Cameroun. It might rather have been due to the reverence for and confidence in Paul Biya to usher the country into a new era of democratic rights and press freedom. Such hopes are yet to be fulfilled by President Biya whose adherence to the one party system is reflected further in the law passed last year to compel any person wishing to run for the presidency to be sponsored by 500 senior members of the sole party (CNU).
That there was no such hiccup in the transition from Ahidjo to Biya should not be attributed to lack of disaffection for the President's dictatorial rule but probably due to the reverence for and confidence in Paul Biya.
President Biya may be tempted to question the need to liberalise his rule. be. What will liberalism be in aid of? Will it necessarily ensure the stability of his government? And did President Ahidjo, wielding an autocratic rule, not stay in power for over twenty years? Above all, there are many deposed African leaders who will be too willing to narrate their experiences and point out that the offer of opportunities for a possible change through the ballot box in a multi-party system did not prevent the soldiers from toppling them. President Shehu Shagari of neighbouring Nigeria is the latest in the long list of African leaders whose democratic governments could not be saved from military coups d'etat.
A second factor that militates against the multi-party system is the argument that has often been made that a developing country has no time for the time-consuming demands of multi-party parliamentary democracy. Finally what incentive is there for the African democrats from the avowed advocates of democracy in Europe and America when these same advocates are known to support certain autocratic regimes. Surely, it must take some other characteristics than the practice of the democratic principles in Africa for a regime to qualify for support from the democratic Americans and Europeans.
However, if President Biya is swayed by the points above and sticks to the one party rule, he stands the risk of his administration being labelled phase II of Ahidjo's autocratic rule. He also risks being challenged by underground opposition whose platform of struggle will be the introduction of multi parties and human rights, in Cameroun.
In such a situation, a recipe is being prepared for an overambitious soldier or group of soldiers to marry their selfish and vain motives into a cherished struggle for a free society and stage a coup. When that happens, like in Guinea, the soldiers will be hailed as 'liberators' even though they may not be.
The abortive coup attempt last April by a section of the Camerounian military has been proved to have been motivated by purely selfish, and sectional interests. That it didn't succeed has been hailed by those who believe in the democratic route to power. But the lessons for the attempt should encourage President Biya not to give the soldiers the faintest opportunity to be exploited. He should therefore lift the ban on the formation of opposition parties while at the same time applying the wand or charm that so far has helped him to prevent a military coup d'etat or crush an attempt.
It is only through this course of meeting the democratic challenge will President Biya project a different image from that of ex-President Ahidjo, and usher the country into an area of human rights and dignity which naturally will lead to meaningful progress for all Camerounians..
