CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1Background to the Study

Gender-based violence (GBV) is still a serious social problem throughout the world today. For instance, UNICEF (2019) states that gender-based violence is the ‘most pervasive yet least visible human rights violation in the world.’ According to the WHO (2021), gender-based violence (GBV) affects men, women, and children worldwide, with global estimates finding that one in three women over the age of 15 have experienced some form of gender-based violence (WHO, 2021). On the other hand, UN Women (2020:13) asserts that ‘violence against women and girls remains pervasive and under-reported.’ The European Institute for Gender Equality (EIGE) (2024), states that gender-based violence is both a cause and a consequence of gender inequality. Violence against women continues to be one of the most severe human rights violations within societies. It is deeply rooted in systemic power imbalances between women and men. UN Women (2020) states that the world ‘remains a dangerous place to be a woman’ and that a quarter of a century after Beijing, ‘violence against women and girls remains a global human rights violation of vast proportions’ (2020:12). The persistence and high levels of gender-based violence is even more disturbing today because of the emergence of ‘new forms’ of GBV facilitated by information and communication technologies (ICTs). Digital spaces have ‘opened up a new front in gender-based violence’ (UN Women, 2020:13). Furthermore, ‘deep-rooted drivers of abuse persist, and the rapid advancement of technology has opened up new digital spaces where women are being threatened, intimidated and harassed’ (UN Women, 2020:12). However, it is important to note that certain measures have been adopted at national and international levels to combat gender-based violence. For instance, article 4 of the 1993 UN Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Violence against Women, provides that ‘states should condemn violence against women and should not invoke any custom, tradition or religious consideration to avoid their obligations with respect to its elimination.’ The Declaration also requires states to ‘pursue by all appropriate means and without delay a policy of eliminating violence against women.’ Secondly, the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action is another major milestone in the commitment of the international community to the fight against gender-based violence. According to UN Women (2022), the 1995 Beijing Platform for Action, identifies ‘specific actions for governments to take to prevent and respond to violence against women and girls’ and ‘ending violence is one of 12 areas for priority action.’ Finally, the UN (2015) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Goal 5, target 5.2 provides for the elimination of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres, including trafficking, sexual, and other types of exploitation. Furthermore, target 5.3 concerns ‘elimination of all harmful practices, such as child, early and forced marriage and female genital mutilation.’ In Cameroon, various steps or measures have also been adopted to prevent GBV. Firstly, it is important to note that Cameroon has ratified the ‘recommendations of international conventions aimed at eliminating various forms of violence against women’ and the girl child (Ndichia, 2010). Secondly, a ministerial department – the Ministry of Women’s Affairs – was established and vested with responsibility for the protection of the family and the woman (Ndichia, 2010:38). Cameroon has also adopted a number of laws aimed at preventing GBV. A good example here is the adoption of the Penal Code in July 2016[1]. The Penal Code contains a number of provisions such as articles 296, 279, 356 and 357 that are specifically aimed at combatting GBV. For instance, article 296 concerns rape. It provides for punishment by imprisonment, for a period of five (05) to ten (10) years, for any person found guilty of using physical or moral constraint to have sexual relations with a woman irrespective of her age. On the other hand, article 356 prohibits ‘forced marriage’ and article 357 prohibits any abusive requests for bride prize.

 In spite of all these developments gender-based violence (GBV) remains a serious social problem throughout the world today. In Cameroon for instance, The UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women provides empirical data on the prevalence and persistence of GBV in Cameroon. In its 2014 ‘Concluding observations on the combined fourth and fifth   periodic reports of Cameroon’, the Committee welcomed (inter alia) ‘the adoption of a national strategy to combat violence against women, the ongoing survey on violence against women and awareness-raising activities.’ However, the Committee raised concerns about (inter alia):

(a)The persisting high prevalence of violence against women, including rape, and the limited number of investigations and prosecutions in such cases;

(b)The pervasive levels of domestic violence, the use of mediation in cases of domestic violence and the lack of protection orders against perpetrators;

(c)The policy on “indecent dressing”, which may threaten women’s freedom to make personal choices and may expose them to abuse and violence in the course of its implementation (UN, 2014:5).

In her assessment of the implementation of the Beijing Platform for Action in Cameroon, Ndichia (2010:36) asserts that ‘violence against women and girls is highly prevalent, in particular within the family, and remains widely socially tolerated.’ Furthermore, victims of GBV generally ‘suffer from a culture of silence and impunity’ (Ndichia, 2010:36). Moussi (2020) states that violence against women (VAW) in Cameroon ‘has become more common, acceptable and has taken on more brutal forms’ and that prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, the ‘escalation in VAW in Cameroon can be linked to growing trends of militarization and militarism, prevailing unequal gender relations and economic upheaval’ (Moussi, 2020).

It is important to underline the fact that the phenomenon of GBV has persisted and spread spread to the education sector. For instance, one of the most common forms of gender-based violence – sexual harassment, that initially occurred mostly in work places, started spreading to academic institutions such as schools, colleges and universities in the beginning of the 1980s (Janice, 2015; Beyene et al., 2019). It is therefore no exaggeration to state that universities and other higher education institutions have been stricken by gender-based violence (GBV). Gwiza and Hendricks  (2023) state that the high prevalence of GBV within universities is clear evidence of attacks on educational settings  The ‘spread’ of GBV to universities must be viewed with some concern because of the negative impacts of GBV in universities and higher education institutions (HEIs) as reported in the literature. Warton and Moore (2024:7) state that the ‘experience of gender-based violence on campus can have multiple short and long-term negative consequences for survivors.’ These negative consequences include the emotional and psychological consequences to GBV victimization (Warton and Moore, 2024; Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007; Armstrong et al. 2006). Trauma and fear can result in heightened anxiety, low self-esteem, somatic symptoms and decreased concentration and productivity (Warton and Moore, 2024; Armstrong et al. 2006). Furthermore, sexual assault victims are at risk of ‘suffering from depression, struggling with suicidal ideation and using and abusing substances’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:8). It is important to note that,

‘in addition to the emotional and psychological consequences of sexual violence, many survivors of campus sexual violence suffer academically, in some cases this can lead to them having to take a leave of absence and for some it can result in them dropping out of university’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:8).  

Warton and Moore (2024:8) assert that females are more affected by sexual and gender-based harassment than men are.

‘While sexual harassment is often trivialized as a form of sexual violence, in some cases the negative psychological impact of the harassment is so severe that it results in Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder. Experience of sexual harassment can also negatively impact on female staff and students’ engagement in everyday activities, with them sometimes resorting to avoidance tactics to limit the likelihood of revictimization’, (Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007:10).

 Furthermore, for female students, experience of sexual harassment can result in decreased class participation, decreased concentration during lectures and even dropping out of courses (Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007:10).

Warton and Moore (2024) have identified some ‘risk factors’ that have contributed to the ‘spread’ of GBV on campus.’ These risk factors are at two levels – firstly, the individual level and secondly the institutional level.

Individual level factors

Individual level risk factors include previous victimization, age, gender-inequitable attitudes and beliefs and alcohol and drug consumption.   

(i) Previous victimization

This refers to a case where an individual had earlier been a victim of gender-based violence.  Warton and Moore (2024) state that previous victimization is an individual level risk factor for victimization and perpetration of GBV on campus.  In the case of South Africa for instance, Warton and Moore (2024) note that the high rates of sexual abuse against children in the country means that ‘many of the students enrolling in South African HEIs will have been exposed to or experienced violence prior to enrolment’ (Warton and Moore, 2024). As concerns male students, prior victimization ‘increases their risk for perpetrating GBV’ and for females, previous victimization ‘increases their risk for re-victimization’ (Warton and Moore, 2024).

(ii) Age

Age has been identified as one of the major individual level risk factors for sexual victimization and perpetration (Warton and Moore, 2024; Collins, 2014; Vasu et al. 2014). It is important to state here that younger females at Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in particular face increased risks of gender-based violence (GBV). On the other hand, Collins A. (2014) states that,

‘young men are overwhelmingly the perpetrators of most forms of violence, and the typical student age group (that is 18–23 years) is near the middle of the peak offending period … for many young adults, this is their first experience of living away from family care and supervision. The unfamiliar social environment – with fewer constraints and greater opportunities for experimentation – means that students are potentially more vulnerable to abuse and, because of their age and lack of experience, less skilled at protecting themselves’ (Collins, 2014:286).

(iii) Gender-inequitable attitudes and beliefs

Gender-inequitable attitudes and beliefs play a major role in the perpetration of certain types of crimes (Chauke et al. 2015; Collins, 2014; Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007). Gouws and Kritzinger (2007) state that social norms influence the reporting of such crimes. For instance, where particular forms of violent or criminal behavior are normalized, individuals are less likely to intervene when such incidents occur (Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007; Armstrong et al. 2006). In the case of South Africa, some gender-inequitable attitudes and beliefs prevalent within South African society seem to be reflected in the attitudes and behaviors of some of the students and staff within our HEIs (Chauke et al. 2015; Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007). These attitudes and values include such as ‘notions of male superiority’ and ‘male sexual entitlement’ (Warton and Moore, 2024).

(iv) Alcohol and drug consumption

Warton and Moore (2024) state that alcohol and drug consumption in addition to the issue of gendered norms related to drinking culture contribute to the increased risk of occurrence of sexual occur. Furthermore, the relationship between drinking culture and rape culture can be seen  in events such as ‘digs formals’ and house parties that can ‘create an atmosphere which increases the risk for non-consenting sexual encounters’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:5).   

Institutional level factors

Institutional level risk factors include institutional and social norms and institutional factors.

(i) Institutional and social norms

According to Warton and Moore (2024:5), institutional and social norms are important because they enable us gain a better understanding of the risk factors of gender-based violence (GBV) in HEIs. Institutional norms concerning for instance gender-equality and hegemonic masculinity, can contribute to the prevalence of GBV campuses. Furthermore, they can influence the approach adopted by these institutions respond to GBV (Collins et al. 2011).

(ii) Institutional factors

Warton and Moore (2024:5) state that institutional factors can influence the likelihood of victims/survivors reporting incidents of GBV. For instance, staff and students are less likely to report incidents of GBV in cases where an institution does not provide clear guidelines as to what constitutes GBV (Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007). In such situations, ‘incidents of GBV become normalised and accepted and are not perceived as necessitating reporting’ Warton and Moore (2024:5). Furthermore, victims of acts GBV are less likely to report such acts ‘when they perceive that their institution would not take their case seriously’ or respond ‘meaningfully and quickly to their report’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:5). Warton and Moore (2024:5) assert that the number of reported incidents or cases of GBV as well as ‘individuals seeking assistance post victimization’ can increase in institutions where ‘rape culture and norms around victim-blaming are challenged.’

(iii) Specific institutional risk factors

Warton and Moore (2024:5) have identified specific risk factors for GBV at institutional level. These include the lack effective policies and structures to prevent and respond to GBV, guidelines for prevention and assistance of victims, perpetration with impunity and the nature of campus spaces.  

(a) Lack of effective policies and structures to prevent and respond to GBV

Warton and Moore (2024:5) state that the lack of ‘effective policies and structures to prevent and respond to GBV are key institutional risk factors’ for GBV in HEIs. This underlines the need for all HEIs to adopt comprehensive policies to address GBV. These policies must be up to date with current legislation and best practice (Warton and Moore, 2024). Furthermore, these policies these policies must be unclear, unambiguous and easily accessible to the general campus community (Warton and Moore, 2024; Gouws and Kritzinger, 2007). These policies must also provide for clear reporting mechanisms for survivors of GBV as well as appropriate support structures to address and respond to cases of GBV (Warton and Moore, 2024). 

(b) Absence of strategies for prevention and assistance of victims

HEIs need to develop interventions for preventing and responding to GBV with clear and uncomplicated guidelines for seeking assistance. This would contribute to a decrease in incidents of GBV while ‘concurrently increasingly the number of survivors seeking assistance’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:6). 

(c) This perpetration with impunity

GBV in HEIs seems to be perpetrated with impunity (Warton and Moore, 2024:6). This is due to a number of reasons.  Firstly, students and staff may be involved in the perpetration of incidents or acts GBV ‘without even realising that what they are doing is against the law’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:6). It is important here to underline the fact that,

‘patriarchal and hegemonic masculine norms are so embedded across race and class groups within our society, that acts of GBV are often not even perceived as violence’(Warton and Moore, 2024:6).

This further underlines the need for ‘sustained and multi-faceted campaigns and strategies to challenge these norms and attitudes’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:6). Secondly, individuals may actually ‘understand that what they are doing constitutes GBV.’ However, due to ‘lax institutional policies and structures addressing GBV’, they continue to perpetrate these acts with impunity because they are not afraid of any significant reprisal (Warton and Moore, 2024:6). 

(d) The nature of campus spaces

The nature of campus spaces is one of the important institutional risk factors for GBV. The nature of campus spaces ‘relates to the environmental design of institutions and where incidents more frequently occur’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:6).

In terms of the ‘location of GBV’ on campus,

‘incidents of GBV can occur on campus grounds, in campus buildings (e.g. lecture venues, tutorial rooms), in residences, while students and staff are moving to and from campus, including in the immediate vicinity of the campuses; as well as during off-campus site visits, for example for students and staff in health sciences and social work who have off campus placements, as part of their studies’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:7).

Warton and Moore (2024:7) assert that the ‘international literature’ suggests that ‘sexual violence often occurs in university residences.’ The ‘environmental design’ of an institution can also be a risk factor in cases of GBV (Warton and Moore, 2024:7). This includes the risk of stalking, harassment and sexual assault (Warton and Moore, 2024:7).

1.2 Statement of Research Problem

Gender-based violence (GBV) is a serious social problem today in Cameroon. This is evidenced by the increase in the number as well as types of gender-based violence reported in the media, such as domestic violence (including femicide and incest), sexual harassment, bullying and breast ironing. It is important to note that gender-based violence in Cameroon has spread to the higher education sector. In fact, anecdotal evidence and media reports suggest that GBV is prevalent in universities and higher education institutions (HEIs) in Cameroon. For instance, Akana (2016) reports that three lecturers in the University of Yaoundé 1 were suspended for sexual harassment of students. More specifically as concerns the University of Buea (UB), the President of the International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA) (Cameroon), raised concerns in May 2020, about the failure of UB authorities to initiate criminal investigations into allegations of sexual harassment in the university (Azohnwi, 2020). This is an unfortunate and unacceptable development because universities and other higher education institutions (HIEs) are supposed to be safe places or ‘ivory towers’ (Fisher et al., 2009) with a zero tolerance for all forms of GBV. Secondly, GBV results in ‘multiple short and long-term negative consequences’ (Warton and Moore, 2024:8) for victims. Unfortunately, literature as well as empirical data on the different types of GBV in universities and other Higher Education Institutions (HEIs) in Cameroon is scanty. The main purpose of this study is to contribute to the literature on GBV in state universities in Cameroon, using the University of Buea (UB) as a case study. The study would focus on the dynamics of gender-based violence in UB firstly, in the context of interactions between students and secondly, in the context of interactions between students’ academic staff.   

1.3 Research Questions

This study would endeavour to answer the following research questions.

1.3.1 Main Research Question

What is the scope of the prevalence of GBV in the University of Buea?

1.3.2 Specific Questions

1.3.2.1 What are the different types of GBV prevalent in the University of Buea?

1.3.3 What measures or strategies have the University of Buea adopted to combat GBV in the institution?

1.4 Objectives of the Study

The objectives of this study were as follows:

1.4.1 Main Objective

To undertake the scope and relevance of gender base violence in University of Buea.

1.4.2 Secondary Objectives

1.4.2.1 To identify and analyse the different types of GBV prevalent in the University of Buea in the context of interactions among students.

1.4.2.2 To identify and critically analyse the strategies adopted by the University Buea (UB) to combat GBV.  

[1] See law no. 2016/007 of 12 July 2016.