Point of View. Elecam and Gender politics. Prof Tazoacha Asonganyi

Law no. 92/002 of 14 August 1992 to lay down the conditions governing the
election of municipal councilors stated in section 3(2) that “Each list
shall take into consideration the various sociological components of the
constituency concerned.” The law governing the election of parliamentarians
had the same provision. There was virtually no mention of gender in the
laws; it was left to the political parties to act at their pleasure.

Prof Tazoacha Asonganyi

Part V of the 2012 electoral code relating to provisions specific to the
election of members of parliament states in section 151 (3) that “Each list
shall take into consideration the various sociological components of the
constituency concerned. It shall also take into consideration gender
aspects.” Part VI of the code on provisions specific to the election of
municipal councilors states in section 171(3) that “Each list shall take
into consideration: the various sociological components of the constituency
concerned; (and) gender aspects.”

Political parties also have their specific rules and regulations to take
care of gender issues in the politics and internal management of the
parties. How much these meet the expectations of the women is another
matter.

The clauses on “sociological composition” introduced in the first versions
of the electoral laws, and in the present electoral code, are vague because
they do not prescribe numbers or proportions. The imprecision caused
opposition political parties dearly in the past because since no numbers or
proportions were prescribed in the electoral law, the proportions and
numbers were decided on a subjective basis by the administrative
authorities; and later by NEO and the administration! The rejection of the
SDF council list in Tiko in 2002 – like many others – was on the argument
that it did not “take into consideration the various sociological
components.” On appeal to NEO, NEO’s opinion was that there were “only 7
indigenous” candidates in the list, therefore the list was finally
rejected!

Probably because many CPDM “big men” were from Fako Division, the
administrative authorities indulged in some very uncouth gymnastics. They
lured indigenous people away from the lists of opposition political parties
in order to use the provision on “sociological composition” as an excuse to
reject the lists. The strategy was used to reject the lists of opposition
political parties in cosmopolitan areas like Fako, Meme, Moungo, Wouri,
etc., most of the time, not due to the fault of the parties but to the
vagueness of the provision of the law and the propensity of administrative
authorities to use it to the advantage of barons of the CPDM. The following
letter from the Secretary of the SDF in West Coast, Limbe, Mr. Kaba Sinsah
Moses, on 23 May 2002 related to the SDF list for the 2002 Municipal
elections in West Coast makes the point:

“Two South Westerners were on the 19 May 2002 kidnapped by the district
head, West Coast from Sanje Village and taken to the SDO Fako and to the
Army Camp to resign from the SDF list. Penda Emmanuel Wokonyi and Ekelenge
Robert, all indigenes of Bamboko in the West Coast District were asked by
the SDO Fako in the Army Camp to write resignation letters in order that
the SDF list should be rejected and to take home 200.000 FCFA each.”

It is unfortunate that in spite of many challenges filed in various courts
in the country for the courts to say what the provisions on taking into
consideration the various “sociological components” really meant, the
courts failed or refused to give a clear ruling on the important matter.

One can only hope that this time around ELECAM will remember that the law
does not provide numbers or proportions. The provisions in the laws should
not be turned into tools to satisfy selfish interests and assuage the
tainted egos of barons of the CPDM in some constituencies, like was the
case in the past.

Women and men may all be human beings, but by nature, they are different.
This is why they are not lumped together in the Olympics to run races
together; there are always female races and male races. There are always
female boxing leagues and male boxing leagues; female football leagues and
male football leagues, and so on. Because of such differences between men
and women, there are various ways in which political parties usually ensure
some sort of gender equilibrium in multi-constituency elections.
Some encourage the investiture of women in sure constituencies, as the
labour party of the UK usually does. Some impose women in some
constituencies, as the CPDM usually does; others like the SDF impose women
in spite of their poor performance in joint primaries.

I have always argued that for parties that choose candidates through
primaries, there should be two streams of primaries in each constituency:
one for the male candidates and the other for the female candidates, with
the same electoral colleges. This will give the investiture commissions the
free hand to choose from the male and female lists at will, and leave very
little disgruntlement in the field. It will also invariably induce women to
participate more actively in politics in the knowledge that they will not
be bullied to submission by male chauvinists.

In spite of the tough environmental conditions imposed by the rains, and
the tough financial requirements imposed by laws revised over, and over
again since 1990 to exclude the poor (caution of candidatures increased
from 50.000 FCFA in 1992 to1.000.000 FCFA in 2013), opposition political
parties have done their best to submit lists to ELECAM offices.

ELECAM told Cameroonians at the close of registration at the end of April
2013 that they had some 5 million people registered. One expected that
after going through the various verification processes and weeding out
double and multiple registrations, the figure would change considerably and
mistakes would be reduced to a minimum. It is interesting that we are being
told that as many electoral cards as the figure that was announced at the
end of April have or will be produced meaning that the raw list from the
field was not touched. Further, we have heard the ELECAM chair confessing
that there are mistakes in some electoral cards (spelling of names, etc)
but the mistakes will not affect the possibility of casting a vote on
Polling Day.

In the screening of the lists of candidatures submitted by political
parties, ELECAM should not give the impression that if the electoral cards
with mistakes being freely distributed in the field were produced by
political parties, ELECAM would have rejected them! ELECAM should
scrutinize the lists of candidates with compassion, and ignore little
errors of spelling, little changes in order of names, and other such little
mistakes.  ELECAM will not be judged on the number of lists it rejects on
flimsy and subjective reasons, but on how much they ensure a free and fair
campaign and the integrity of the ballot box on Polling Day. ELECAM will be
judged on how much they act like the referee that ensures a level playing
field for all!

Tazoacha Asonganyi

Yaounde