Joseph Befe Ateba: Journalist on the Other Side.

Joseph Befe Ateba: Journalist on the Other Side.

The sovereign people's coin is always two-sided. On the one side is society in which the people exercise their freedoms – freedom of thought, of speech, of association, of assembly and protest - and exercise their God-given talents and skills. On the other side is the state – the government – to which the sovereign people have delegated the power to regulate the activities of society.

Journalists are the ones who have to shout daily that the proverbial king has no clothes! They cover the naked king on a daily basis. In the process, some stand up to government – to power - with rare courage and integrity. And most live by the mantra of the profession that it is not the function of a journalist to keep secrets – especially on the nakedness of the king. These attributes give journalists their share of power. In a way, they see their labour as God's work. 

In the interaction between society and government, government always seeks to expand its power by encroaching on the freedoms of society. This is why the power of the press is always in conflict with this government effort to expand its power. The mission of outfits like the government-controlled National Communication Council (NCC) is to check the power of the press, and by implication, society's freedoms, to cede space for government power.

Joseph Befe Ateba is the Bishop of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Kribi. He was appointed Chairman of the National Communication Council following the demise of the first Chairman of the outfit, octogenarian Felix Sabal Lecco. Following his appointment, we learned from the appreciative write-ups in the press that he has "extensive experience in the media field" and that he was not only a journalist for the national newspaper "L'effort camerounais," but he also worked as a press agent for the Symposium of Episcopal Conferences of Africa and Madagascar (SECAM/SCEAM), and as the president of the Media Commission of the Episcopal Conference of Cameroon. He can therefore be said to be a journalist indeed.

In an editorial in the Catholic newspaper for which he worked as a journalist, it was written that "Although the Church's mission is primarily spiritual, the State is increasingly attributing a greater role and looking up to the Church in charting a way forward for Cameroon's budding, though lethargic democracy....Appointments in themselves are insignificant if those appointed do not seize the opportunity they have been given to bring about sweeping and memorable changes where they have been called to serve..."

 

This is why we have been watching the Bishop closely. With his appointment, he added what we can call the "press law(s)" to the Bible he carried in his armpit as a Bishop. His activities so far seem to indicate that he may be up to the task of helping the government to expand its power. Under his impulsion, we heard it repeated that the NCC only understands the language of the law; that they are not responsible for what they do because they are only carrying out the orders of the law! Their fragrant action of suspending many news outlets just before the last twin elections was calculated to intimidate the press - to gag it - and prevent reports on the nakedness of the king during what turned out to be a masquerade. With the fixation of the Ancient Mariner, the Bishop told journalists during the elections that they did not have to publish election "trends." It did not matter to him that election results are proclaimed at polling station: that was not news for the press to publish!

The recent meeting of the NCC has only added more worries to our basket of worries about the mission of the Bishop. These worries are amplified by the expectation that the Church should always rise above the government, judge it, and serve as a beacon of proper moral conduct. The Church and the State should remain separate institutions - the State being for earthly matters and the Church for heavenly ones. From its separate position, the Church is expected to be the supreme moral judge and critic of government.

Indeed, in the book, "The political regimes of Ahmadou Ahidjo and Paul Biya, and Christian Tumi" Cardinal Tumi states, correctly, that in Cameroon "The structures in place marginalise the law." The laws in Cameroon always carry seeds of chaos because no one wants them to work in the first place: the constitution, the electoral laws, regulations for management of public property and funds, maintenance of law and order, freedom of thought, expression and association, etc. Indeed, the rampant corruption, the generalised embezzlement of public funds, the inhumanity prevalent in our hospitals, the courts, the various government ministries and other places where state services are provided, and the rampant abuse of power, all testify to the presence of Satan in our society. Like Francis Fukuyama would say, the regime in Cameroon has humiliated ordinary people by forcing them to make a myriad of petty, and sometimes not so petty, moral compromises with their better natures.

It is within this context that somebody would easily say that a Bishop of the Catholic Church who gives the impression of joyously serving such a regime is not up to the mission expected of him. As a journalist, he obviously knows that in the heat of the robust debate that should promote and protect the interests of society against the abusive encroachments of government, some "erroneous" and even "false" statements could be made; some of these should be protected, otherwise, the rigour of such debate would be dampened and limited. Indeed, those in positions of control like Befe Ateba should have a thick skin and always remember that the thin skin is a serious, incurable career "disease" that can destroy an unsuspecting arbiter.

It is also in this context that it is difficult to understand Befe Ateba's complaint at the recent NCC meeting against the journalist who accused him of serving Satan. Such behaviour gives the impression that the "law(s)" he added to the Bible in his armpit seem to be having the better of him. Otherwise, he would have remembered that even those who cried out "crucify him, crucify him" and actually crucified Jesus earned the following prayer from Jesus: "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Lk 23:34).

Another journalist was invited to the recent meeting of the NCC to answer questions related to articles in his newspaper about the Nigerian sect Boko Haram, and repeated reminders about…. April 6, 1984! Well, for the Boko Haram issue, the media control freaks were reminded that they just need to Google "Boko Haram in Cameroon" to know how futile their effort can be. The new information and communication technologies have since put such control efforts to shame.

As for April 6, 1984, it represents much more than a power tussle between Paul Biya and Ahmadou Ahidjo that should be forgotten about. It is about the death sentence on Ahidjo, about Ahidjo's death and burial in Senegal, about the mass graves, about the many families that were bereaved, and the thousands of citizens that are still forced to feel guilty because the state has not yet given back their dignity and rights. Repeated articles on April 6, 1984 are grounded on the legacy of 1984: the date is an epitome for a kind of politics that should be changed and transformed. Government's efforts to gloss over the shortcomings of such politics show a determination to also confiscate the history of Cameroon.

We need to come to grips with April 6, 1984; we can only do so if we understand the corruption of politics that made it possible. To close the public space where such effort to come to grips with our history is discussed, is to close our past and leave us with the politics of the will of a totalitarian state-party and the dictates of its militants. In fact, those who understand the legacy of 1984 and the history and politics it represents would not invite Aminatou Ahidjo to be the marketing manager of a regime that gave birth to 1984.

Some apologists may say that there are other journalists in NCC other than its Chairman. Of course, they are there, but most seem to at least cover-up by indulging in sophistry and casuistry. Whatever the case, it is Befe Ateba that is in the dock. After all, it is usually said that the buck can be passed on but it must end somewhere. For the NCC, the buck ends with Joseph Befe Ateba!

Tazoacha Asonganyi

Yaounde.