By Dr David Makongo | Opinion
Editor’s note: This contributed opinion presents the author’s account and questions about the Buea town-hall meeting. Claims concerning excluded speakers, land grabbing and political or financial interests have not been independently verified by BaretaNews. They should be read as the author’s allegations and requests for investigation, not established findings.
Cameroon Tribune presents the Buea town-hall meeting as a major consultation convened in response to President Paul Biya’s call for dialogue, peace and a return to normalcy in the South-West.
If that was genuinely its purpose, why were victims of the Anglophone crisis and the people’s legitimate representatives prevented from speaking directly to the Prime Minister? What was the administration afraid they might say? What dangers does such deliberate exclusion create?
Can the government honestly claim that the people of the South-West “answered the call” when many of their most credible representatives were not allowed to answer at all?
Who selected the speakers, and what criteria were used? Why was the Lord Mayor of Buea not permitted to formally welcome the Prime Minister to his own municipality? Why were Senator Mbella Moki Charles, the MPs representing Buea and Limbe, the Paramount Chief of Buea, other Fako traditional authorities and victims of the crisis denied the opportunity to speak?
Was this truly a consultation—or was the conclusion prepared before the meeting even began?
Why was His Excellency Peter Mafany Musonge—former Prime Minister, President of the National Commission for the Promotion of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism, CPDM Central Committee member, distinguished Fako notable and former senator—not invited to address the Prime Minister?
If this was truly a meeting about dialogue, peace, bilingualism, multiculturalism and national unity, why was the very person entrusted with promoting these values not given an opportunity to speak about the situation affecting his own people?
Why was Professor Dorothy Limunga Njeuma—pioneer Vice-Chancellor of the University of Buea, former Rector of the University of Yaoundé I, ELECAM Electoral Board member, senior CPDM personality and distinguished daughter of Buea—not permitted to address the Prime Minister?
Professor Njeuma is widely respected for defending the interests of Buea, opposing land grabbing and promoting peace and stability. Why was her voice excluded from a meeting supposedly organised to understand the realities confronting Buea and the South-West?
These are not unknown or marginal personalities. They are highly respected national figures from Buea and Fako Division who live among the people and understand the daily effects of the crisis. Why were they snubbed? If there was nothing to conceal, why were such credible and experienced voices kept away from the microphone?
Were the organisers afraid that these personalities might present a picture different from the carefully prepared official narrative? Did they fear questions about land grabbing, insecurity, administrative failures and the government’s handling of the crisis?
The manner in which this meeting was stage-managed lends credibility to those who argue that certain people do not want the crisis to end because its continuation protects their positions, influence and financial interests.
Is the crisis being prolonged because some individuals benefit politically or financially from it? Are there officials or intermediaries who fear that peace would cost them their positions, privileges or sources of income?
If these suspicions are unfounded, why does the government continue to organise meetings that exclude victims and silence the people’s genuine representatives?
Do those managing this crisis understand that it is the children of ordinary Cameroonians—both in the national defence and security forces and in separatist camps—who are being sent to die every day?
Do they care about the safety of other people’s families while bodyguards protect them, security officers guard their homes and offices, and their own children remain far from the battlefield?
How many more young Cameroonians must die to preserve the positions, privileges or interests of people who are personally shielded from the consequences of this war?
Serious questions have also been raised about the young men presented as former fighters who had surrendered and entered the state’s rehabilitation programme. Were they independently verified as former combatants? Who selected them, and on what basis? Were their testimonies freely given, or were they included as part of a carefully managed presentation?
These questions must be answered transparently. Otherwise, the presentation will reinforce public suspicion that the event was staged—and that victims and genuine representatives of the people were denied the opportunity to speak because their accounts might have contradicted the official narrative.
The meeting was presented as dialogue between the administration and those involved in the conflict. How many known separatist representatives were invited? How many actually participated? Who represented the armed groups, displaced families, victims, detainees and communities living under the daily consequences of this war?
If no recognised separatist representative was present, and victims, elected representatives, traditional authorities and respected Fako personalities were not permitted to speak, between whom exactly did this so-called dialogue take place?
A government speaking to carefully selected supporters cannot describe the exercise as dialogue with separatists or the affected population. That is not genuine engagement. It is a conversation with itself.
What a tragic missed opportunity!
Was the Buea town-hall meeting genuine dialogue, or merely a carefully managed show designed to create the appearance of consultation while silencing the voices that mattered most?
Was there concern that these representatives would raise allegations of land grabbing involving the Governor’s administration and other local officials? Was the meeting structured to prevent uncomfortable truths from reaching the Prime Minister?
If not, the organisers must explain publicly how the speakers were selected, why the people’s recognised representatives were excluded and what meaningful outcome the meeting achieved.
The Governor and the Prime Minister must understand the danger of such conduct. When victims are silenced, their pain does not disappear. When elected representatives and traditional authorities are ignored, public frustration deepens. When allegations of land grabbing are avoided instead of independently investigated, suspicion grows and confidence in government collapses.
What exactly did President Paul Biya send the Prime Minister to Buea to hear if the people of Buea, Fako and the South-West could not speak freely for themselves?
A town-hall meeting cannot be called dialogue when the government decides who may speak, what may be said and which grievances may be heard. That is not dialogue. It is a façade—a public-relations performance lacking the seriousness demanded by a conflict in which people continue to die.
The Prime Minister’s reported suggestion that the crisis might die a natural death within another 10 to 15 years makes this exclusion even more alarming.
How many more civilians, soldiers and separatist fighters must die while the government waits? How many more families must be displaced? How many more children must lose their education, their parents or their future?
Reports that three civilians were killed in Ekona and that a gendarme was shot dead in Molyko demonstrate the gravity of the situation. Every life matters. Every death demands a credible and independent investigation.
Yet, while people were dying, the administration appeared more interested in controlling the microphone than confronting the truth.
Waiting is not a peace policy. Silencing victims is not dialogue. Excluding elected and traditional representatives is not consultation. Speeches without measurable action will not end this war.
South-West Governor Bernard Okalia Bilaï and the organisers of this meeting must immediately explain themselves to President Paul Biya, the Prime Minister and Head of Government, the Senate, the National Assembly, the Minister of Justice, the South-West Regional Assembly—including its House of Chiefs—and, above all, the people of the North-West and South-West.
They must:
- Explain who selected the speakers, what criteria were applied and why key elected, traditional and community representatives were excluded.
- State whether the Lord Mayor of Buea, Senator Mbella Moki Charles, the relevant parliamentarians, the Paramount Chief of Buea, H.E. Peter Mafany Musonge, Professor Dorothy Limunga Njeuma and recognised victims were invited or given an opportunity to speak.
- Verify publicly the identities, backgrounds and surrender records of those presented as former fighters.
- Disclose how many recognised separatist representatives were invited and how many actually participated.
- Establish independent investigations into the reported killings and other abuses.
- Investigate allegations of land grabbing impartially, including any possible involvement of administrative or local officials.
- Disclose and investigate any political or financial interests that may be benefiting from the continuation of the crisis.
- Give victims, elected officials, traditional authorities and affected communities a genuine voice.
- Begin credible, inclusive and internationally supported negotiations aimed at ending the conflict.
These are not unreasonable demands. They are the minimum requirements of accountability, genuine dialogue and responsible government.
If people conclude that lawful institutions will neither hear them nor protect their lives and property, trust in the state will collapse. Some may feel compelled to take their security into their own hands, creating the risk of an even wider breakdown of law and order.
The government must prevent that danger by listening, protecting lives and acting with urgency.
But the responsibility does not rest with the government alone. It is now incumbent upon the people of the North-West and South-West to unite as one people around the defence of life, dignity, justice and lasting peace.
We must reject every attempt to divide us by region, tribe, party, religion or personal interest. We must refuse to allow politicians, profiteers, armed actors or opportunists to turn our suffering into a permanent business.
Our children are dying on all sides. Our villages are being emptied. Our schools and businesses are being destroyed. Our families are being displaced, and an entire generation is growing up surrounded by fear and uncertainty.
We cannot continue waiting for others to value our lives more than we value them ourselves.
Our determination must therefore be unequivocal: this crisis must end. It must end through truth, justice, inclusive dialogue, responsible leadership and a negotiated political settlement—not through more guns, intimidation or carefully staged meetings.
The people of the North-West and South-West must rise above division and speak with one peaceful but unshakable voice. Traditional authorities, religious leaders, elected representatives, civil society, women, young people, business leaders, victims, the diaspora and every person of conscience must unite around a common demand:
Stop the killing. Protect civilians. Reveal the truth. Bring the real parties to the negotiating table and secure a just and lasting peace.
History will not judge this government by the number of meetings it organised, the speeches it delivered or the newspaper headlines it produced. History will judge it by the lives it protected, the truths it confronted and the peace it achieved.
Those who control the microphone today must remember that they cannot control the verdict of history tomorrow.
The people must also understand that silence, fear and division will only prolong their suffering. No outsider can build unity for us. No official can impose genuine peace upon a divided population. We must organise peacefully, speak courageously and stand together until our collective demand for peace can no longer be ignored.
Let the people speak. Protect every life. Investigate the allegations. Follow the money. Unite the North-West and South-West. Bring the real parties to the table and negotiate an end to this war.
Cameroon cannot continue burying its children while protected officials organise carefully staged meetings and call them dialogue.
End the façade. Confront the truth. Stop the killing. Negotiate and end the crisis now.
