Total Pageviews

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

J.J Ndoudoumou, J.Tabi Manga, Samuel Lifanda, Iya Mohamed, Bruno Bekolo… Sanctions: Right Path To Anti Graft Fight


The long and interesting history of the fight against corruption in Cameroon has taken a new twist. Instead of arresting culprits of embezzlement and throwing them in jail without recovering the stolen funds, government has adapted a new method of forcing those found guilty of financial mismanagement to immediately cough out the money. This move was further institutionalized and legalized by the creation of Administrative Tribunals in all the Regions and the creation of the Special Criminal Court for the trial of white collar robbers and the recovery of what they have unduly stolen.
The first culprits amongst so many others to face the new music include, Jean Jacques Ndoudoumou, Director General of the Public Contracts Regulatory Board, ARMP that has been found guilty of financial mismanagement and asked to pay FCFA 64 million just like Jean Tabi Manga, Rector of University of Yaounde II Soa who has to pay FCFA 63 million while his Dean of the Faculty of Political Sciences, Emmanuel Bokalli has to pay above CFA 162,671,100 being money he mismanaged between 2006 and 2009. Equally, the former Government Delegate to the Limbe City Council, Samuel Lifanda is to reimburse the sum of more than FCFA 165 million to the Limbe City Council just like some of his closest collaborators that have to regurgitate sums they either swallowed willingly or caused others to swallow. On the firing lines are Iya Mohamed of SODECOTON, Bruno Bekolo, Rector University of Douala, and Humphrey Ekema Monono, Registrar of the Cameroon GCE that have to appear in front of the Budgetary and Financial Disciplinary Council. The verdict of the Budgetary and Financial Disciplinary Council has fallen as a bomb and Cameroonians have applauded the decisions arguing that it is the right path to the anti-graft fight. The Budgetary and Financial Disciplinary Council is an inter-ministerial organ chaired by Henri Eyebe Ayissi, Minister Delegate at the Presidency in charge of Supreme State Audit. Its decisions were made public on Monday June 11 and Wednesday June 13, 2012 indicting some state functionaries and inviting others to face the organ in the days ahead. The Budgetary and Financial Disciplinary Council is an inter-ministerial structure with members from the Presidency of the Republic, the Ministries of Finance, Justice, Public Service and Administrative Reforms, and the Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralisation. These sanctions emanate from scrupulous work done by members of the structure that has held four sessions between April 15 and June 11, 2012 and has come out with a final decision that has condemned and imputed sanctions on some public vote holders for mismanagement and financial impropriety.
It is worthy to recall that when the opposition political parties started crying foul in the early 90s that some Cameroonians entrusted with the public purse were dipping their hands too deep into the public purse and confusing between their private pockets and public pockets, the powers that be asked for proofs. And it came to pass that the SDF MPs in parliament pointed at the proofs and the Mounchipou gate kick-started what was going to be a long and sustained effort by government to fight corruption and embezzlement of public funds. A National Anti Corruption Observatory was created and placed under the Prime Minister. Yet corruption accentuated despite the fact that some government ministers and General Managers of public and para-public structures were indicted for corruption and thrown into prison.
The Head of State, President Paul Biya took the bull by the horns and signed a Presidential Decree o Saturday, March 11, 2006, creating a National Anti-Corruption Commission, NAC, with him at the helm. Members were appointed in March 2007. NAC that was thus created replaced the National Anti-Corruption Observatory, hitherto headed by the Prime Minister that had its tentacles in all ministerial departments. NAC was given independence and mission and responsibility of fighting against corruption.
NAC held seminars and partnered with numerous Civil Society Organizations, associations, churches and traditional leaders in a bid to kick out corruption in Cameroon. It even paid missions abroad and curried foreign support to fight corruption. For instance in 2010 NAC received and treated 723 cases of corruption, 132 cases of embezzlement of public funds and property, 41 cases of the violation of the dispositions governing public contracts, 38 cases of interest in an act, 21 cases of favouritsim, 15 cases of misappropriation of public funds, 27 cases of influence peddling, 13 cases of abuse of function, 5 cases of conflict of interest, 4 cases of unjustified enrichment and 1 case of participation in an act.
However, NAC remained at the level of denunciation and no concrete action was taken. Those accused of embezzlement were thrown in jail without the funds being recovered. The Head of State even recruited foreign expertise to recover the embezzled funds. Yet the VIP criminals were enjoying the money in prison at the expense of Cameroonians.
According to Marc Mendouga Alima, the Secretary of the Disciplinary Council, the state is interested in recovering the money lost. This is when it is realized that the vote holder caused a prejudice that caused the state to incur a loss in monetary terms or services. He adds that when the Disciplinary Council has to investigate any ministerial department or government structure, or even a local collectivity, a representative of that structure is co-opted into the board to defend the interest of that institution or ministerial department. There is also an inter-ministerial organ charged with professional discipline that has its headquarters in the Ministry of Public Service and Administrative Reforms.
Embezzlement is punished by the penal code as public funds are used for personal ends, while mismanagement is when a vote holder causes a prejudice by using the credits allocated for a project for another project that might not have any bearing with what the credits were destined for contrary to the law of 1974.
However, he added that mismanagement can amount into a crime if the vote holder deliberately institutes procedures that are not found in texts. For instance he said, a vote holder can institute a bonus of 100% that the texts do not prevue, and then collects 80% of that bonus or advantage. That amounts to embezzlement and not simple mismanagement, he added. He said the interest of the State was to recuperate money it has lost through her own means. It is still administrative not yet judiciary. People not satisfied can proof their innocence in front of an administrative judge, but this is done only after the State has already collected the money. The SG reiterated that the decisions apply immediately. Salary and property can be seized by sheriff/bailiffs for the state to recuperate the money. A mixed commission of DGSN, MINATD, MINFI, CONSUPE has been put in place to immediately recover the money. If after seizure the administrative judge states that the person is not guilty the state reimburses.
There is no gainsay that the decision of the Budgetary and Financial Disciplinary Council has sent hot sweat running down the spines of many public administrator as nobody knows for sure who next will face the music. The public has applauded the decision because instead of throwing people in jail while they still starch in foreign accounts what they have stolen makes no sense. It becomes more evident that many public managers are afraid of the unknown given that the Budgetary and Financial Disciplinary Council intends to shine its searchlight into the darkest cupboards and bring out all cases of financial impropriety. Chances are that even some death people may be found guilty and asked to repay, in which cases their properties may be seized and auction to recover what they embezzled.
What is making news is that those caught in the corruption trap are those who are normally supposed to serve as examples in the fight against corruption. Since there are only 100 days, the thief may have 99 days but the one day left for the owner is the great day of reckoning for the thief. Their names are being read over the radios and carried on newspapers pages. What a way to study in the castle and graduate in the toilet.

No comments:

Post a Comment