CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background of the Study

       In developed countries, with relatively little reliance on imports as a source of government revenue, there is an increasing focus on border protection, with particular emphasis on the enforcement of import and export prohibitions and restrictions, including those arising from Free Trade Agreements. Nevertheless, the current trend towards global free trade and the recent heightening of international terrorism concerns have seen border security emerge as a priority across all economies.

A general indication of a government’s view of the role of their customs authority can often be gleaned from the manner in which administrative responsibilities are structured. For example, where revenue collection is the main focus, the customs administration generally forms part of the Treasury or Finance portfolio. Similarly, those administrations that are primarily seen to play a border protection role are likely to be aligned with other agencies that have a border management focus.

For example, prior to 12 December 2003, the customs authority in Canada formed part of the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency. At that time, it became part of the newly created Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA), which in turn formed part of the new portfolio of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (since renamed Public Safety Canada). This portfolio now combines the functions of customs, food inspection and immigration, together with those of emergency preparedness, crisis management, national security, corrections, policing and crime prevention. Consequently, while the traditional role of Customs is multifarious, the trend in recent times has been to assign regulatory responsibilities in a way which reflects government priorities, rather than tradition. While this is simply reflective of good governance, it brings with it a challenge to regulatory convention. Indeed, it is becoming increasingly evident that no two customs administrations necessarily look alike. What may be core business to one may fall outside the sphere of responsibility of another, and this is simply a reflection of differing government priorities, the way in which a particular country manages the business of government and the manner in which the associated administrative arrangements are established. In this regard, even some of the more traditionally core customs activities are occasionally the primary domain of another government agency. For example, in Hong Kong, due to its free port status, tariff classification and valuation are more relevant to the Census and Statistics Department than to the Customs and excise department

 Customs administrations vary from country to country, and are often the subject of regular review and modification to ensure their ongoing relevance in a constantly changing world. Traditionally, however, Customs has been responsible for implementing a wide range of government policies, spanning areas as diverse as revenue collection, trade compliance and facilitation, interdiction of prohibited substances, protection of cultural heritage and enforcement of intellectual property laws.

This breadth of responsibility reflects the fact that customs authorities have long been entrusted with administering matters for which other government ministries and agencies have policy responsibility, such as health, agriculture, environment, trade statistics and in some cases, immigration. This is generally achieved through the implementation of a diverse range of service level agreements, with Customs having regulatory responsibility at the point of importation and exportation. Such border management responsibilities stem from the more traditional customs role of collecting duties on internationally traded commodities, a common extension of which is the collection other forms of tax, such as Value Added Tax (VAT) and excise duties.

In many developing and least developed countries like Cameroon, import duties and related taxes represent a significant proportion of the national revenue. Because of this, the main focus for their customs administration is, understandably, revenue collection.

In Cameroon, as severally underscored by the President of the Republic of Cameroon and as we all know, a conducive economic environment is the prerequisite for an effective competitiveness of our national economy and its various stakeholders. Due to its mission at economic level, the Customs Administration plays a key role in measures put in place by the government to strengthen the competitiveness of our national economy. Efforts made till date by the said Administration have an international scope. Hence, incentives towards economic operators aim at contributing to their development by ensuring them a better exposure on international markets.

Simplifying procedures, facilitating trade and contributing to a secure trading environment are the mainstay of a major project embarked on over the past 10 years, through a vast reform plan aimed at strengthening the competitiveness of our domestic economy. The Directory General of Customs translates its support by developing an array of terms and conditions.

 The Automated System for Customs (SYDONIA) came into force in 2006 in Cameroon and is the major materialization of the Customs Administration’s ambition to simplify procedures. SYDONIA plays a key role in reducing transit times for goods and in implementing paperless procedures. In terms of perspective, SYDONI is being upgraded to CAMPASS, a new application developed in collaboration with Korean Customs Administration.

There was a measure put in place by the custom administration of Cameroon called comprehensive Scanning which was aimed to

have a comprehensive scanning of containers arriving in Cameroon’s ports. Into force since 2017 in the Port of Douala, comprehensive scanning will equally be applied in the Port of Kribi, for import and export activities. Beyond ensuring security, comprehensive scanning makes it possible to reduce intrusive visits in containers and by so doing, improve transit times.

Based on the ASYCUDA application and the Global Positioning System (GPS) technology, the NEXUS Cameroon system contributes to a geo-localized tracking of cargo and transport shipments to hinterland countries (Central African Republic and Chad).

This provides room for fighting against the fraudulent discharge of goods in transit through Cameroon. Tracking goods from their loading point to their crossing point results in significant productivity gains in terms of time and transit costs for goods in transit.

Securing the trade environment falls within the purview of the Customs Administration which can therefore filter at the country’s borders all goods from smuggling and illegal trafficking or goods non-compliant with current standards.

Operation HALCOMI (Stop illegal trade) conducted in collaboration with companies since 2006 has helped strengthening operations to combat fraud, smuggling and illegal trade in Cameroon. Tons of counterfeit and smuggled goods were seized and more than $1.5 billion in revenues collected as a result of outreach activities carried out as part of this mission. The Port of Kribi, a major infrastructure for Cameroon’s emergence project by 2035, is positioned as an essential logistics and port platform in Central Africa.

In reference to the President of the Republic’s will expressed on 31 December 2017, during his end-of-year address to the Nation, the commissioning of the Port of Kribi is a constant commitment for the Directory General of Customs. In addition, the seminar jointly organized by the Port of Kribi and the Customs Administration on the procedures of passage of goods through the Port of Kribi on 15 and 16 February 2018 are a milestone towards attaining such goal.

Illegal wildlife trade was a concern to many in the global community long before 80 parties signed Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in 1973 (Ayling, 2013). Nevertheless, the over-exploitation of wildlife, including through international trade, has primarily been vocalized by ecologists and conservation agencies. Recently, law enforcement agencies began giving heightened attention to crime against wildlife (Wellsmith, 2011; Wright, 2011) with recognition that it is as serious a crime as drug trafficking (Scanlon, 2013).

Despite the increasing attention of law enforcement agencies, research on illegal wildlife trade has been limited (Rosen and Smith, 2010; Schneider, 2008) and little is known about it (Rosen and Smith, 2010). Estimations about the magnitude of wildlife crime are done by rule of thumb. Many experts contend that to better protect wildlife a reliable monitoring system should be established to capture the extent and analyze patterns of illegal wildlife trade (Phelps et al., 2010).

Unlike some other law enforcement authorities, Customs administrations are well- positioned to analyze, detect and deter illegal wildlife trade that crosses borders. As the only intergovernmental organization regarding Customs matters, the WCO has long had a close working relationship with the CITES Secretariat and has raised awareness of the scourge of illegal wildlife trade. In addition, the WCO trains Customs officers on how to detect and deter CITES violations.

To help combat illegal wildlife trade, the WCO coordinated several international enforcement operations, such as GAPIN in 2010 and HOPE in 2012. The WCO’s Customs Enforcement Network (CEN) database contains detailed information of CITES violation cases submitted by Customs administrations (WCO, 2013; WCO, 2011).

In an effort to augment the limited knowledge regarding this topic, raise awareness, and ultimately to improve the performance of Customs enforcement, the WCO sought to gather information on the global Customs community’s perceptions and capacities to fight against the illegal trade. Thus, the WCO conducted in September 2013 a survey of member Customs administration on illegal wildlife trade.

1.2 Statement of Problem

 Resistance to change. Resistance to change can be a major stumbling block in the Custom administration of Bamenda. Among the many reasons, is that new practices can expose corruption Consequently, change can be seen as an attack on officials.

 Secondly the custom administration of Bamenda have laws and regulations which are out-of-date, confusing, and sometimes contradictory. The Custom administration of Bamenda are unable to establish clearly the regulatory basis for their modernisation efforts. Amendment of existing laws or adoption of new legal frameworks must be part and parcel of all customs modernisation programmes. 

Thirdly there is a failure of transparency within the custom administration of Bamenda .Laws and regulations are not easily accessible. This negatively impacts the process of administrative work as traders are unaware of their rights and obligations and therefore, unable to challenge the decisions that are made concerning them in a fair and open process.

 Additionally bribery and corruption is also a problem within the custom administration of Bamenda.Customs is considered one of the most corrupt government agencies. Customs modernisation proposes ways to mitigate the negative impact of this practice. Instilling in all customs officials a culture of integrity through various programmes (e.g. Ethics Codes) is a starting point.For example Buyonge and Kireeva suggest enhancing existing internal systems of control and enabling third party audits; restricting the freedom of action of officers and limiting their contact with their interlocutors by automating procedures. Klitgaard invites government to seek advice and assistance to draw lessons from successful anti-corruption strategies implemented elsewhere from which they can develop their own systematic approach in addressing the problem. Besides these recommendations, a strong partnership with the private sector to ensure more compliance; integrity reward programmes and decent wages are also important.

 Illegal or unsustainable wildlife trade (IUWT) affects numerous species, ecosystems, and human societies (Cardoso et al., 2021; Morton et al., 2021). IUWT can cause direct and indirect harm to target and non-target species, loss of ecosystem services, act as a conduit for potentially invasive species and a pathway for zoonotic diseases, and disrupt and corrupt local and global economies (Cardoso et al., 2021). It is a lucrative illicit activity: estimates range from 7 to 23 billion USD per year excluding logging and fisheries (Nellemann et al., 2016). IUWT permeates the Tree of Life – animals, fungi, plants, and their parts and derivatives, are traded worldwide to be used as food, fuel, for construction and furniture, as pets, medicine, for ornamentation or religious rituals (Fukushima et al., 2020). There is no “one-size-fits-all” strategy for tackling IUWT because the scales and drivers of trade are diverse, from basic subsistence in local communities to high-profit international business. A variety of disciplines and actors are needed for any counteractive approach to work effectively and to guarantee native species persistence, ecosystem function, and human well-being.

People’s demand for wildlife and derived products has grown substantially (Zhang et al., 2008) and the internet facilitates wildlife trade, especially illegal. The clear shift in wildlife trade from traditional physical markets towards online platforms (Lavorgna, 2014) has brought additional challenges to curb IUTW. The COVID-19 outbreak has not shown to diminish IUWT: for the pet trade, for example, there is no clear evidence that the volume of online trade decreased during the pandemic (Morcatty et al., 2021), and an increase in illegal hunting has been recorded in some parts of the world (McNamara et al., 2020).  

1.3 Research Questions

1.3.1 Main Research Question

What is the perception of custom administrators on illegal wildlife trade in Bamenda?

1.3.2 Specific research questions

What are the illegal wild life trading activities in Bamenda?

What are the effects of illegal wildlife trade on economy of Bamenda?

What are the challenges faced by the Customs administrators in curbing wildlife trading in Bamenda?

1.4 Research Objectives

1.4.1 Main objective

To examine the perception of custom Officials on illegal wildlife trade in Bamenda

1.4.2 Specific Research Objectives

1) To identify the illegal wildlife trading activities in Bamenda.

2) To find out the impact of illegal wild life trade on the economy of Bamenda.

3) To explain the challenges faced by the custom officials in curbing illegal wildlife trade in Bamenda.