CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.0. Introduction

The case in the past decade and a half, the effort to control corruption in the developing world has grown exponentially. It attracted support from major aid agencies and inspired hundreds of reform projects, action plans, anti-corruption agencies, and a growing class of in-demand experts (Heather & Caryn, 2015). Corruption exists in almost every society but varying degrees. The corruption level in Cameroon is endemic and manifested in diverse forms, with the most common being the misappropriation of public property, bribery, and abuse of public office.

1.1. Background to the study

Combating corruption in Cameroon has been among the fundamental governing policies of the current president of the country since his ascension to power in 1982 (Ngomba, 2006). Accordingly, he announced in that year that his guiding philosophy as Cameroon’s head of state will be rigor, integrity, and moralization (Ngomba, 2006). By this pronouncement, the president meant that he would not tolerate corruption in the country. But coming back after 3 decades to assess the situation on ground, it seemingly could be said that the president fell short of this vision, as public corruption is still wide spread in the civil service in Cameroon and the country still ranks amongst some of the most corrupt countries of the world (TI, 2017). The outstanding question that continues to linger is, what kind of anticorruption policies has the government agency responsible been implementing and what are their weaknesses? This is one of the background pillars upon which this study was constructed. The need to combat corruption in Cameroon became more apparent between the late 1990s and early 2000s, the period during which the toll of corruption on the society appeared to have accelerated (Fombad, 2003). Author argued that corruption was prevalent in Cameroon’s public services before the 1980s but that it was not widespread, generalized, or as deep-rooted as it became evident in the 2000s (Fombad, 2003). In another study, the author dubbed corruption in Cameroon endemic, explaining that corruption has permeated almost every aspect of Cameroonian daily life, meanwhile, public officials seem to have either severely underestimated, or completely ignored, the consequences of this epidemic (Fombad, 2000). According to Fombad (2000), high levels and vast scales of corruption remain among the main causes of Cameroon’s economic and political problems. In response, the government launched its first open national initiative against corruption in the country in 2006 with the creation of a NACC (NACC, 2008). This agency would now champion government’s anticorruption policy across the nation, leading the implementation of such policy, giving feedback to the president and the legislature for the crafting of laws that will enhance the agency’s activities, and also mandating and facilitating the prosecution of culprits of corruption in criminal courts (NACC, 2008). The Cameroon government’s anticorruption policy since the beginning of the 2000s was generally marked by complacency (Fombad, 2000). According to author, corruption in Cameroon was officially dismissed as nothing more than occasional acts of dishonesty and indiscretion by civil servants. However, the problem was much more serious, with a gravity that could only be compared to the devastation caused by AIDS on any fragile and depressed economy (Fombad, 2000). Developments in the fight against corruption in Cameroon by January 2018 included the continuation of Operation Sparrow hawk that was launched in the country about 11 years earlier by Biya head of state (Bechem, 2018).

Although several top-ranked government officials were arrested and incarcerated through this operation, such as the arrest of the former prime minister on April 16, 2012 (Regional Anti-Corruption Initiative, 2012), the Cameroonian population still harbored mixed feelings on how successful government anticorruption efforts had been in Cameroon. The approach to prevent corruption in Cameroon was said to be limited to the application of Article 66 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cameroon, which demanded that top-ranking government officials declare their assets before and after serving in a public office (Houmfa, 2012). The strict reliance on the preceding article as the sole major legal measure for curbing public corruption appeared to be insufficient to treat the corruption disease that had been rooted into the culture of the entire society.

The Cameroon head of state created a special criminal court that would try officials accused of embezzling public funds amounting to a minimum value of 50 million CFA francs (Houmfa, 2012). This action was being implemented alongside other anticorruption laws, some of which were dubbed defective by public opinion, especially parliament’s decision in December 2011, which stipulated that charges against individuals found guilty of corruption would be dropped if they paid back missing funds to the government (Houmfa, 2012). On the one hand, this measure sent a positive message to the public in the fight against corruption, as it might had entailed that the government wanted by all means to retrieve public funds from citizens who might have embezzled them by reason of the devil’s temptation or without premeditation and as such were willing to repent (Houmfa, 2012). On the other hand, this measure could result in serious negative consequences for the anticorruption effort in general, as it incentivized public officials to orchestrate embezzlements through money laundry and other investment schemes granted that their liability was now limited by the legislature to the starting capital misappropriated. The financial gain made from investing embezzled state funds was not censored in a piece of legislation rendered hapless by the absence of a preceding government white paper that would have enabled the public to identify loopholes and closure mechanisms.

1.2. Statement of the problem

Embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon has reached alarming levels, significantly undermining the nation’s socio-economic development and public trust in government institutions. Despite various anti-corruption measures and legal frameworks established by the government, the persistence and prevalence of embezzlement continue to hamper progress in key sectors such as healthcare, education, and infrastructure development. The diversion of public funds for personal gain not only deprives citizens of essential services and opportunities but also erodes the efficiency and effectiveness of governance. The challenge lies in the multifaceted nature of embezzlement, which involves complex networks of actors, systemic weaknesses, and insufficient enforcement of anti-corruption laws. Existing oversight mechanisms, such as the National Anti-Corruption Commission (CONAC) and the Special Criminal Court, have made strides in identifying and prosecuting cases of embezzlement. However, the impact of these efforts is often limited by inadequate resources, political interference, and a lack of comprehensive strategies to address the root causes of corruption. This problem is further compounded by a culture of impunity and limited transparency in public financial management. The lack of robust institutional frameworks to ensure accountability and the slow pace of judicial processes contribute to a climate where embezzlement thrives. Consequently, public confidence in anti-corruption initiatives remains low, and the socio-economic development of Cameroon continues to suffer.

1.3. Research Question

1.3.1. Main Research Question

How effective is the fight against embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon?

1.3.2 Specific Research Question

What are the legal and institutional frameworks for effectively fight against embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon?

What are the impacts of embezzlement of public funds on the socio-economic development of Cameroon?

What are the challenges and way forward for the effective fight against the embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon?

1.4. Research Objective

1.4.1. Main Research Objective

To examine the effectiveness of the fight against embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon.

1.4.2. Specific Research Objective

To analyze the legal and institutional frameworks for the fight against embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon

To evaluate the impacts of embezzlement of public funds on the socio-economic development of Cameroon

To identify and examine the challenges hindering and way forward the effective fight against embezzlement of public funds in Cameroon