The Release of Southern Cameroons’ Prisoners of Conscience as a Confidence Building Measure in the Canada-Led Mediation Process
Abdulkarim Ali,
Cell 23, Kondengui Prison,
11/8/2023.
Introduction
It would be analytically neat and conceptually fluid to conclude that a party to a conflict can truncate an agreed item in the process of negotiations without concordance from the other belligerent. Judging by the prism of the life cycle of conflicts, logic makes for the richness of opportunities and elusiveness of possibilities in conflict resolution. This paper explores this concept in the context of the 2022 talks in Canada between the Ambazonian Leadership and La Republique du Cameroun (LRC), focusing on the role of mediators and the life cycle of conflict.
The 2022 Talks in Canada
Many have reached out to me, questioning why the Ambazonian Governing Council (AGOVc) hampered the release of Southern Cameroons’ prisoners of conscience during the 2022 talks in Canada. The simple response to the query is that AGOVc could not, and cannot, stop La Republique du Cameroun (LRC) from performing such a Confidence Building Measure (CBM), even if it aspired to; primarily because AGOVc was and is only a movement within the coalition that represented Southern Cameroons (SC) in that particular process. The AGOVc, Interim Governments (IGs), African People Liberation Movement (APLM), and the Republic of Ambazonia Nationalists (RoAN), among others, were part of Team Ambazonia in Canada. Therefore, AGOVc didn’t have the lone authority to mandate or impose on LRC. Not even the coalition could stop LRC if LRC had the will, even as small as a mustard seed, to release Southern Cameroons’ Prisoners of Conscience. Judging by the prism of the life cycle of conflicts, logic makes for the richness of opportunities and elusiveness of possibilities in conflict resolution. In this short paper, I will try to discuss the main roles of the mediator/facilitator in mediation.
To have clarity on the role of the mediator in mediation, negotiations, and the duty of the conflict parties, it is worth stating the life cycle of conflict and its impact on leadership at the table of mediation/negotiations.
Conflict Life Cycle
The conflict life cycle can be thought of in terms of means. Means here could be expressed in terms of protest. Protest in conflict constitutes four phases, according to W. Zartman.
1. Articulation Phase: Regular activities of articulation of the problem and some demands by victims. For example, Endeley’s and Foncha’s articulations of the Southern Cameroons decolonization problem, inter alia, in 1960-61 and 1994 respectively. The articulation phase is basically a political exercise in persuasion for reforms. If it fails, the people move to a mobilization phase.
2. Mobilization Phase: A political exercise in persuasion for reforms that calls for action. The victims march, campaign, and demonstrate; but in an expressive rather than instrumental role. Here the victims are not trying to tear down a government but to impress those within it. For example, the emergence of the Social Democratic Front (SDF) and the Southern Cameroons National Council (SCNC) in 1990 and 1995 respectively.
3. Confrontation Phase: A violent phase which may be exercised as a guerrilla movement. At this point, articulation and mobilization leaders become obsolete and are pushed aside in favor of confrontation leaders, who can mobilize and galvanize small groups. This is exemplified with the creation and activities of the Southern Cameroons Youth League (SCYL) founded on May 28, 1995, by Doctors Akwanga Ebenezer and Cho Ayaba.
4. Conventional Military Violence Phase: A fourth phase may be necessary if the previous phases fail. This phase is by and large conventional military violence (war). At this stage, the protest is accentuating the shift from previous leadership. This stage too always requires different tactics and different leadership. The establishment of the SOCADEF, ADF, and the ARF exemplifies this phase in the Southern Cameroons struggle for independence.
Even though the passage from one phase to another is not absolutely clear, they all have one thing in common as a causation of passage, which is stalemate. The passage from one phase to another is triggered by a stalemate in the current phase. As long as there is hope that the current phase will work to success, there is no need to move to the next.
Each of the above ways of carrying out the protest always involves different leaders and their followers. The passage from one phase to another is usually accomplished by changes in leadership and by internal political conflict. This is why when mediation is proposed, a coalition of the critical mass is vital for the progress of mediation and negotiation. The mediator cannot impose on the belligerents because mediators are primarily concerned with the process and not its content. More so, the mediator has no decision-making authority. Given that the passage of phases introduces new leadership and inevitably produces internal political conflict, leadership at the mediation table is required to come to common terms with basic concepts and terminologies within the context of the goal of the protest in relation to the immediate needs of their people at that particular stage of the mediation process. From the inception of this mediation process in 2019 at Switzerland, the Southern Cameroons leadership had agreed on two substantial and consistent exercises to be done by LRC as CBMs. Without exception, the SC leadership stipulates that LRC should withdraw its military and free/release all prisoners of conscience, as proof of good faith. The two CBMs
requested by SC leadership demonstrate its recognition of the immediate needs (ceasefire and freedom from LRC dungeons) of its people. It is, however, important at this point to underline the significance/danger of outright rejection and wholesale acceptance of terminologies or concepts. Leadership must be capable of defining and assessing concepts and terminologies within the spectrum of negotiations. From what we gather, it appears the AGOVc, APLM, ACT, IG, and other representatives of the Southern Cameroons did well in the Canada pre-talks. On the one hand, the team demonstrated that Southern Cameroons isn’t afraid to dialogue and negotiate. While on the other hand, it showed that Southern Cameroons won’t accept every “rubbish” that will jeopardize its ultimate goal.
Terminologies and Concepts
a. Ceasefire
A temporary suspension of fighting. It is a period of truce that can be performed by both parties in conflict or by one party.
b. Confidence Building Measure (CBMs)
Confidence Building Measures are broadly defined as measures that address, prevent, or resolve uncertainties among states. Designed to prevent wanted and especially unwanted escalations of hostilities and build mutual trust. CBMs can be formal or informal, unilateral, bilateral, or multilateral, military or political, and can be state-to-state or non-governmental. They are particularly pertinent in addressing and working towards the resolution of long-term political stalemates.
c. Clemency
Basically, clemency is the disposition to be merciful and especially to moderate the severity of punishment due. It is the process by which a governor, president, or administrative board may reduce a defendant’s sentence or grant a pardon. Prisoners of Conscience are not criminals. Nobody has the legal authority to offer clemency to them. Southern Cameroons’ Prisoners of Conscience are not criminals, but freedom fighters of a just cause. Leadership cannot submit to wholesale acceptance, because that will amount to a logical fallacy and would mean that Southern Cameroons is begging to have its criminals pardoned and freed.
An acceptance that will relegate the underpinnings of its protest and goal. The Southern Cameroons leadership dismissed this terminology deployed by LRC during the pre-talks in Canada and insisted that its incarcerated people (prisoners of conscience) be unconditionally released.
d. Release
Release is defined as the process of setting free from restraint, confinement, prison, bondage, or servitude. In consideration of the demerits of outright rejection, the Southern Cameroons
Leadership accepted this as a CBM. It didn’t appear to outrightly reject the notion even though it articulated with explanatory power, why it should be “Unconditional Release.”
e. Unconditional Release
In International law, Unconditional Release means to release, discharge, or otherwise allow or require to leave an institution or confinement, under circumstances such that a return to the institution/confinement cannot be required by the operator of the institution. The Southern Cameroons leadership understands this and insisted that the Unconditional Release of its prisoners of conscience was and is the most appropriate thing to do. The wisdom in choosing this particular instrument cannot be appreciated by all, except by those with knowledge in the fields of conflict, mediation, and negotiations. I once more thank the Southern Cameroons leadership for mastering these concepts and ensuring that colossal or consequential errors are not made in a rush. The unconditional release of all Southern Cameroons’ Prisoners of Conscience held all over LRC in jails, cells, torture bunkers, etc., and in Southern Cameroons can only be ensured and assured by legal instruments enshrined in concepts like Unconditional Release.
Let me reiterate that if LRC wants to pardon, release, or unconditionally release anyone, no one can stop her. Some of the best brains and capable Southern Cameroonians in their prime are confined in jails and cells in Cameroun. Cameroun knows exactly what it is doing.
f. Amnesty
This is the decision by a government to allow political prisoners to go free. Hence, it isn’t appropriate to qualify prisoners held in the context of this conflict as political prisoners. They are Prisoners of Conscience.
g. Prisoners of Conscience
Amnesty International considers a Prisoner of Conscience (POC) to be any person imprisoned or otherwise physically restricted (like house arrest), solely because of his/her political, religious, or other conscientiously held beliefs, their ethnic origin, sex, color, language, national or social origin, economic status. Southern Cameroonians’ incarceration is because of who they are and not really what they have done. By virtue of the above, saying that an Ambazonian group impeded the release of prisoners of conscience is like saying the Jews in Israel had the power to prevent the
Holocaust.
Role of The Mediator
Mediation is a constructive conversation between people in conflict facilitated by a neutral third person, the Mediator. As highlighted above, participants, not mediators, control the outcome of mediation. Mediators simply help participants communicate their concerns and interests. Below are the major roles of a mediator or facilitator:
1. Provides participants with a safe space.
2. The facilitator is concerned with process and not content.
3. Enables constructive interaction and communication.
4. Helps to overcome deadlocks and difficulties.
5. Acts impartially.
6. The Mediator shall not make proposals to the parties to resolve the dispute, as Mediation should be determined by the agreement of the parties, unless otherwise requested. Confidentiality is the cornerstone of a mediation process, and it is the role of the mediator to ensure the confidentiality of the process.
Tasks of the Mediator
1. Supports the group in establishing “ground rules” and an agenda.
2. Feels the mood of a group and acts accordingly.
3. Mobilizes external expertise.
4. Visualizes and/or records.
5. Manages time.
6. Emphasizes the goal of dialogue and mediation.
7. Encourages all factions to participate.
8. Helps identify interests and needs behind positions.
9. Anticipates difficult situations and dissolves deadlocks.
10. Proposes adequate formats, tools, and methodologies.
Both the roles and tasks of the mediator are dependent on the duty and actions of the belligerents, chiefly of the dissidents. Southern Cameroonians’ leadership must and should come to terms with the brutal realities of these processes and quit constituting a mockery to our plight and efforts by casting aspersions on each other. As argued in my previous article on mediation, ripeness for mediation and steps within mediation are determined by a mutually hurting stalemate and crises bounded by a deadline (plateau and precipice). It is the duty of the dissidents to continually ensure the visibility and impact of stalemate. Oppressors never on their own walk into mediation rooms; they are forced into it by the actions and duty of the dissidents. Diligence, collaboration, and hard work are the cornerstones of success for the oppressed. Why will LRC talk on equal terms with SC and negotiate when they perceive military success, see its opponent utterly divided, and enjoy military/financial support from the West and East? For the oppressor, the only solution is its hammer (military violence and its military courts); hence, all Southern Cameroonians are nails.
Conclusively, it is safe to opine that conflict parties control the mediation but not the actions or inactions of their opponents. Meticulously coordinated teams play their cards close to their chest throughout the process of mediation and negotiations, without rendering elusive the progress of the process. However, authoritarian regimes play cards close to their chest but in fashions that often ensure the elusiveness of the process. By its impartial attribute, the mediator has no interest in the outcome but in the process. This attribute also offers them the latitude of accessing,
comparing, and understanding information from both camps. Hence, Canada is in the best position to declare why the prisoners of conscience were not released as was agreed by negotiating parties. Curiously, but comprehensively, Canada proceeded to announce the joint commitment to its mandate and endorsement of the process by both LRC and SC. Logic points to where bad faith came from. To see that which is not, gaze upon that which is. The duty of the oppressed belligerent is the anchor of progressive mediation and negotiation.
