Miss-Delectable
New Member
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2004
- Messages
- 17,160
- Reaction score
- 7
allAfrica.com: Cameroon: Deaf-Mute SDF Militants, Language Hinder Fru Ndi Murder Case (Page 1 of 1)
The poorly lit and cobwebbed Mfoundi High Court in Yaounde was, August 19, the venue for the first hearing of the case pitting the State against some 22 SDF militants suspected of murdering one of the party's militants, Grègoire Diboulé.
Later, the National Chairman of the Party, John Fru Ndi, was accused of complicity in the murder.Diboulé was reportedly killed on May 26, 2006, after a confrontation at a controversial Convention of the party that was called up in Yaounde by a faction leader and the then Chairman of the National Advisory Council, NAC, late Prof. Clement Ngwasiri, who was backed by Barrister Bernard Muna.
Since then, the arrested SDF militants were moved across a number of police and gendarmerie cells in Yaounde and, finally, placed under pre-trial detention at the Kondengui Maximum Security Prison. Of the original 23 militants arrested, John Ngu Mbahaning has since died in detention.
Some victims of the confrontation who were allegedly brought to the SDF Centre Provincial Secretariat - where the fight broke out - by the organisers of the May 26, 2006 Yaounde Convention, were in court. So, too, members of the late Diboulé's family who stood in as the civil party.
According to Ordinance No 1275-SOG-07 bearing preliminary investigations from the Chambers of the Examining Magistrate of the Court prepared by Charles Remy Manga Foe, retired Col. James Chi Ngafor, Coordinator of the SDF in the Centre Province, and John Fru Ndi are charged as being at the head of the complicity in the murder of Diboulé. Other charges levied against them include the infliction of simple and light injuries.
When the Presiding Judge, whose name The Post simply got as Batoum, carried out the preliminary court processes which had to do with verifying the presence of the defendants and the prosecutors as well as the defence and prosecuting lawyers, Barrister Innocent Bonu, lead Counsel for the prosecutor raised an objection.
Bonu argued that, Hon. Joseph Mbah Ndam, a Vice President at the National Assembly, is mentioned in the Ordinance to the Court as one of the witnesses and can, therefore, not be one of the defence lawyers. This motion was immediately counteracted by Barrister Augustin Mbami who read out the portion in the Ordinance purportedly implicating Mbah Ndam. The Presiding Judge saw reason in Mbami's argument and overruled Bonu's objection.
Barrister Joseph Mbah Ndam, with reference to the Preamble of Cameroon's Constitution, stated that the SDF detainees have a right to fair trial where a language best understood by those concerned must be used. This was in opposition to the French language which is the working language of the Court.
One of the defence lawyers also raised another issue claiming that two of his clients are deaf and dumb and are, therefore, lost in the whole proceedings. He said for Mbah Mbatt who is deaf and dumb and Dieudonné Fopa who is deaf to receive a fair trial, an interpreter must be brought to Court.
This issue drew a wave of murmurs from the audience as some observed that if the detainees in question have never been to the school of the deaf and dumb, then the interpreter may not help matters.
In the face of such objections, the judge rhetorically questioned how the deaf and dumb detainees were interrogated in the first place. He said it is the legitimate right of the detainees to be provided with an interpreter before the case can be heard.
Requesting both parties to propose a date for the next hearing, he said the length of the process and difficulties of getting the interpreter must be taken into consideration. When the prosecuting lawyers proposed October 13, as against September 16 by the SDF Counsels, this stirred an outrage from the defence lawyers who argued that their clients have been undergoing undue detention for more than two years now.
After some explanations, the Judge announced that the next hearing is billed for October 13, 2008 at 10:00 am in the Mfoundi High Court.Meanwhile, reacting on why the case took so long to come up, Prof. Ndiva Kofele Kale, told reporters that it is the Prosecutor who determines the agenda.
Kale noted that it is only when the Prosecutor is thoroughly through with preliminary investigations that the case is called up. He said the problem with the case is the length of time the suspects have spent in pre-trial detention. "Justice would appear to have been rendered if the case was heard two years ago and not two years later," he said.
Prof. Kale further noted that, in criminal cases like the one in which the SDF is involved, it is the Prosecutor who carries the burden of proving how the crime was committed while the defence lawyers are there to raise doubts.
In a briefing at his Yaounde Omnisport residence, immediately after the adjournment, Fru Ndi told the press that he was in Court as an accused to tell Cameroonians and the world that no one is above the law.
Going by the declarations in the Court, he said the services of judicial translators and experts in sign language would be sought by the Court for the case to proceed. He said from what he gathered in Court, when effective hearing would have started by October 13, the delivery of the ruling would not take long.
On whether he was not frightened by the over 100 armed gendarmes deployed at the Court premises, Fru Ndi said when the party was being launched in 1990, the entire military armada was mobilised. Yet, he remained unperturbed. He, however, refused to comment further stating that he is confident justice would take its course.
Members of the SDF Shadow Cabinet, Parliamentarians, Mayors and militants jammed the court premises as well as curious onlookers including pickpockets who spent time searching members of the audience for booty.
The poorly lit and cobwebbed Mfoundi High Court in Yaounde was, August 19, the venue for the first hearing of the case pitting the State against some 22 SDF militants suspected of murdering one of the party's militants, Grègoire Diboulé.
Later, the National Chairman of the Party, John Fru Ndi, was accused of complicity in the murder.Diboulé was reportedly killed on May 26, 2006, after a confrontation at a controversial Convention of the party that was called up in Yaounde by a faction leader and the then Chairman of the National Advisory Council, NAC, late Prof. Clement Ngwasiri, who was backed by Barrister Bernard Muna.
Since then, the arrested SDF militants were moved across a number of police and gendarmerie cells in Yaounde and, finally, placed under pre-trial detention at the Kondengui Maximum Security Prison. Of the original 23 militants arrested, John Ngu Mbahaning has since died in detention.
Some victims of the confrontation who were allegedly brought to the SDF Centre Provincial Secretariat - where the fight broke out - by the organisers of the May 26, 2006 Yaounde Convention, were in court. So, too, members of the late Diboulé's family who stood in as the civil party.
According to Ordinance No 1275-SOG-07 bearing preliminary investigations from the Chambers of the Examining Magistrate of the Court prepared by Charles Remy Manga Foe, retired Col. James Chi Ngafor, Coordinator of the SDF in the Centre Province, and John Fru Ndi are charged as being at the head of the complicity in the murder of Diboulé. Other charges levied against them include the infliction of simple and light injuries.
When the Presiding Judge, whose name The Post simply got as Batoum, carried out the preliminary court processes which had to do with verifying the presence of the defendants and the prosecutors as well as the defence and prosecuting lawyers, Barrister Innocent Bonu, lead Counsel for the prosecutor raised an objection.
Bonu argued that, Hon. Joseph Mbah Ndam, a Vice President at the National Assembly, is mentioned in the Ordinance to the Court as one of the witnesses and can, therefore, not be one of the defence lawyers. This motion was immediately counteracted by Barrister Augustin Mbami who read out the portion in the Ordinance purportedly implicating Mbah Ndam. The Presiding Judge saw reason in Mbami's argument and overruled Bonu's objection.
Barrister Joseph Mbah Ndam, with reference to the Preamble of Cameroon's Constitution, stated that the SDF detainees have a right to fair trial where a language best understood by those concerned must be used. This was in opposition to the French language which is the working language of the Court.
One of the defence lawyers also raised another issue claiming that two of his clients are deaf and dumb and are, therefore, lost in the whole proceedings. He said for Mbah Mbatt who is deaf and dumb and Dieudonné Fopa who is deaf to receive a fair trial, an interpreter must be brought to Court.
This issue drew a wave of murmurs from the audience as some observed that if the detainees in question have never been to the school of the deaf and dumb, then the interpreter may not help matters.
In the face of such objections, the judge rhetorically questioned how the deaf and dumb detainees were interrogated in the first place. He said it is the legitimate right of the detainees to be provided with an interpreter before the case can be heard.
Requesting both parties to propose a date for the next hearing, he said the length of the process and difficulties of getting the interpreter must be taken into consideration. When the prosecuting lawyers proposed October 13, as against September 16 by the SDF Counsels, this stirred an outrage from the defence lawyers who argued that their clients have been undergoing undue detention for more than two years now.
After some explanations, the Judge announced that the next hearing is billed for October 13, 2008 at 10:00 am in the Mfoundi High Court.Meanwhile, reacting on why the case took so long to come up, Prof. Ndiva Kofele Kale, told reporters that it is the Prosecutor who determines the agenda.
Kale noted that it is only when the Prosecutor is thoroughly through with preliminary investigations that the case is called up. He said the problem with the case is the length of time the suspects have spent in pre-trial detention. "Justice would appear to have been rendered if the case was heard two years ago and not two years later," he said.
Prof. Kale further noted that, in criminal cases like the one in which the SDF is involved, it is the Prosecutor who carries the burden of proving how the crime was committed while the defence lawyers are there to raise doubts.
In a briefing at his Yaounde Omnisport residence, immediately after the adjournment, Fru Ndi told the press that he was in Court as an accused to tell Cameroonians and the world that no one is above the law.
Going by the declarations in the Court, he said the services of judicial translators and experts in sign language would be sought by the Court for the case to proceed. He said from what he gathered in Court, when effective hearing would have started by October 13, the delivery of the ruling would not take long.
On whether he was not frightened by the over 100 armed gendarmes deployed at the Court premises, Fru Ndi said when the party was being launched in 1990, the entire military armada was mobilised. Yet, he remained unperturbed. He, however, refused to comment further stating that he is confident justice would take its course.
Members of the SDF Shadow Cabinet, Parliamentarians, Mayors and militants jammed the court premises as well as curious onlookers including pickpockets who spent time searching members of the audience for booty.