What started some three months ago as a simple protest by Common Law Lawyers, based mainly on what they saw as government’s reluctance to provide an English version of the OHADA law, and were later joined by Teachers’ Unions in the two Anglophone Regions, has taken another twist. The President has appointed, just as he promised in his end of year speech, a commission which is hoped will promote bilingualism and multiculturalism in Cameroon. The Commission goes under the name National Commission on the Promotion of Bilingualism and Multiculturalism, (NCPBM) in Cameroon. In fairness to Mr. President, we appreciate his concern in all his attempts so far to seek a solution to the current crisis rocking the country. Most right thinking people believe very strongly that the fundamental solution to this crisis lies largely within the reach of no one else than the president himself.
Having thus appointed a15-Member team of the commission by a Presidential decree, led by non else than Senator Peter Mafany Musonge, as the Chairperson, even though coming almost three months after the President promised, in the heat of the crisis to set up a body that will look into the situation, it still reflects the spirit. We are convinced it is one bold step forward in search for a lasting solution.
However, it is also pertinent and this should not be construed as a humiliation to any one, that its format, its Terms or Reference, and even the composition of its membership, have been greeted with mixed feelings. Going by the decree which appointed this commission, it has been placed under the direct authority of the President with headquarters in Yaounde. This means the said body will be deprived of the necessary guarantees of the freedom to function as it would be expected. With the usual pressure that most often comes from above, we see some dark clouds gathering.
Secondly the Commission has been given the evident status of an advisory body without any specific powers to deal with situations found on the ground, that are likely to frustrate efforts of the Commission in the course of their duties. This we are tempted to believe only further reduces its functions to that of one who only sits to watch whatever is going on around him, and just to report same to whoever assigned him. 
One of our worries here is, as the name of the commission denotes, that is, to promote bilingualism and multiculturalism in Cameroon, with a view to maintaining peace, consolidating the country’s national unity, as well as strengthening the peoples’ willingness and day to day experiences with respect to living together
That an observatory body will abandon its defined responsibility, which is to observe, to another responsibility of promoting two complex values in the lives of the people who are so eager to live in harmony and in recognition of the prevailing diversity, raises too many hard questions. And, that the commission is strictly under the authority of the president does not as a matter of fact, clearly shows the way forward for the commission’s assignment.
Some of the pertinent questions to ask stem from what the decree has equally placed on the commission as its responsibilities. The Commission has also been assigned to monitor the implementation of the constitutional provisions establishing English and French as two official languages of equal status and especially ensuring their use in all government services, semi public bodies as well as the state’s subsidized bodies.
It is obvious that right from the very beginning the original 1961 constitution, through the various amendments, bilingualism as the soul of the unification of Cameroon has been emphasized with every zeal. And as a follow up Linguistic Centres were immediately established throughout the country, to facilitate the promotion of bilingualism. These linguistic centres were intended to make civil servants equip themselves with the two languages.
The question to ask today is where has all this effort to promote bilingualism landed us? What new strategies shall we put in place that would be more effective than the facilities that were put at the disposal of Cameroonians, more than fifty years ago?
The end result is that a large majority of Anglophones, including Ministers, speak perfect French. Why is it not the same with the Francophones?
Concerning the issue of multiculturalism, we want to believe that there has never been, and can never be, any problem with the diversity of our various ethnic or tribal cultures. We therefore hope that the issue of multiculturalism, which the commission has been called to address, will not be tuned down to mean ethnic or tribal differences which have never interfered with our national life. We are looking straight at the cultural diversities inherited from the various colonial influences of our former colonial masters. We strongly believe that the inability of government to address the issue of the clash between these influences of this inheritance is largely responsible for the present crisis in the country.
To be more specific, what constitutes the problem today in Cameroon, with special emphasis on the Anglophones, has to do with politics, the judiciary, Education, administration and to a large extent, governance. These factors make any exercise intended to find any solution to be rocked by the fact that the issues at stake are by nature more profound than the ordinary mind can perceive. It goes beyond the three month-old strike by Teachers and Common Law Lawyers. It involves a total overhauling of the fabric of society, by looking seriously and without bias, at certain provisions of the constitution that have not been strictly respected, and which tend to derail the process of good governance. This is obviously where the crux of the matter lies and we should not at any time pretend that the issue of the Lawyers and Teachers’ strike is what constitutes the problem staring at us today. We should bury our pride and look deeper at the real source of the problem.
As for what concerns the composition of the just appointed Commission, even though many have received it with mixed feelings, we consider ourselves not qualified to question the integrity of those who have been chosen. All we know is that amongst them there are a few we recognize as having a full knowledge of the true situation.
Mr. David Aboum A Tchoi, for instance, has been a governor of both North West and South West respectively, worked closely under Ahidjo and later Biya. He is one of those who have not hidden the truth about the existence of an Anglophone problem. He has voiced it out on several television interviews. Much is therefore expected from him in this lofty mission at this critical time.
One time Minister of Justice, Mr. Benjamin Ito, was in a panel of four Jurists who took upon themselves the responsibility of drafting a constitution which was to be presented to the Joseph Owona Constitution Drafting Commission proposed by the President. The Joseph Owona commission out rightly rejected the Itoe and Co. constitutional proposal and in its place the Commission came out with the 1996 constitution which, till date, some of its provisions are yet to be respected. This apart, Mr. Itoe and his colleagues spurred by the task ahead of them had earlier convened what has become known in History as the All Anglophone Conferences, AAC (1) and (11), a mass gathering of Anglophones from within Cameroon and the Diaspora. The purpose of these Conferences was to seek the mandate of the people of this part of the country to draw up a constitution proposal. He therefore has a full knowledge of what to do at this crucial time.
There are a few others like George Ngwane, another convener of the AACs and Barrister Nico Halle, who have been vocal over the Anglophone problem. Cameroonians therefore expect much from them at this crucial moment of our history. The facts should be stated as clearly and gently as it should be. No new twist should misguide them.