Proceedings at the military tribunal in Yaounde took an unexpected turn when witnesses called by the prosecution were unable to identify the defendants they had come to testify against. After a session marked by objections from defence lawyers and murmurs in the public gallery, the case was once again adjourned.
What happened in court
The hearing was part of the legal proceedings against people arrested in connection with the Anglophone crisis. When asked to point out the accused they had described in their statements, the state witnesses hesitated, gave contradictory answers or failed to recognise the persons in the dock. Defence counsel seized on the moment to argue that the case against their clients rested on weak foundations.
Relatives and supporters of the accused, who had travelled to Yaounde to follow the trial, described the scene as dramatic. Some expressed hope that the hearing would hasten the release of their loved ones, while others feared that the repeated adjournments would keep them in detention indefinitely.
Why the trial is controversial
The prosecution of Anglophone activists and civilians before a military court has drawn criticism from lawyers' associations and human rights organisations. They argue that civilians should be tried by ordinary courts, that some charges carry disproportionately heavy penalties, and that the long periods spent in pre-trial detention amount to punishment before judgment.
Concerns raised by the defence
- The use of a military jurisdiction to try civilians
- Hearings held in French in cases involving English-speaking defendants
- Repeated adjournments that prolong detention
- The quality and reliability of the evidence presented
The prosecution's position
The state maintains that the accused are being prosecuted under the law for acts that threatened public order and national security, and that the military tribunal is competent for such charges. Prosecutors have asked for more time to bring further evidence and witnesses before the court.
Another adjournment
At the end of the session, the presiding judge adjourned the case to a later date. For the accused, this means another stretch in detention; for their lawyers, another round of preparation. Observers note that each adjournment adds to the political cost of the trial and to calls for a political solution.
Many in the Anglophone community see the trial as a barometer of the government's willingness to calm tensions. A credible, fair and speedy process, or the dropping of charges where evidence is lacking, would send a strong signal. Continued delays, on the other hand, risk deepening the sense of injustice behind the crisis.