 |
| Ama Tutu Muna: Cameroon's minister of arts and culture |
I was channel flicking recently
when I stumbled on a regular talk-show program (“Tous Azimuts” it is called) on one of Cameroon’s privately-owned TV stations (LTM TV to be precise). On any other day
I would have flicked on but the presence of a diverse panel
as well as their respective passionate commitment to their points of view
caught my eye and convinced me to watch on. I must admit the talking point was
rather mouth and ear watering, so to speak.
That infamous ministerial
decision
The talking point when I joined
the programme was the decision by Cameroon's minister of arts and culture to
challenge the election of Ndedi Eyango -allegedly American- as President of
Cameroon's artists' copyright management body SOCAM because of his “dual
nationality” which Cameroon’s law on nationality doesn’t recognise except
implicitly regarding Cameroonian women who marry foreigners - Section 32(1) of Law No 68-LF-3
of 11th June 1968. To the average informed Cameroonian this is an
old mole -ridden issue that had been making headlines recently with renewal of
the conviction, for embezzlement, of “soi-disant” French – Cameroonian Michel
Thierry Atangana.
Despite the allure of the
onslaughts, sometimes gratuitous, on Minister Ama Tutu Muna’s intelligence and
stewardship of arts as well as cultural matters in Cameroon, the almost
dogmatic resolve and patronising absolutism of some of the panellists, I was
sustainably struck by one thing: the reasons advanced by some of the panellists
on why Cameroon needs to adopt a more liberal posture regarding
nationality.
Bad reasons
why Cameroon needs a more liberal posture on nationality?
During that talk show, most of
the panellists delved into effect and fear mongering. To some Cameroon needs to
extensively recognise dual nationality because of the effect it would have on
Cameroon. Not recognising dual nationality will make Cameroon lose out on some
of the good reputation it sucks associatively from names like Richard Bona;
Cameroon would have to return the football trophies it won with
“dual-nationals” in its ranks, Cameroon would be justifying the Tunisian
complaint filed against it at FIFA after our qualification for the Brazil 2014
World Cup on the grounds that players like Tchouopo – Moting were not eligible
to play for Cameroon due to their dual nationalities. Cameroon would be unjust to its
remittance-sending diaspora etc.
Good reasons
I concur generally with the
panellists that Cameroon needs to change its current conservative stand on dual
nationality. In this world of globalisation and unavoidable cultural intercourse,
every country needs tolerant nationality laws, if not to legislatively respect
the international trend, to embrace its culturally-diverse elements and give
them room to express themselves through recognition of their multiple
identities.
However we should avoid doing a good thing for the
wrong reasons.
 |
| Ndedi Eyango: challenged SOCAM president |
Furthermore our calls should not
be informed by the fear or any of the reasons advanced by the panellists stated
above. This is an erroneous premise to build on since we must not lose sight or
under look the implications of being a national of a particular country - this by
the way is an important piece of the dual nationality puzzle. In seeking wider
legislative recognition of dual nationality, we must endeavour to priorily
answer the following questions: what should being Cameroonian mean? Should it
mean nothing more than recognition and affirmation of our descent? Shouldn’t it imply whole wholehearted devotion
to a particular community? Shouldn’t it mean undivided subscription to a set of
values and beliefs? Shouldn’t it at some point be synonymous to unalloyed
allegiance to one flag and fatherland? Our degree of comfort (or discomfort)
and consensus with the answers to the above questions should inform the framing
of any eventual amendment of Cameroon’s current position of dual nationality. I
am quite sure somebody will ask whether in today’s global village any country
can afford an uncompromising appreciation of the issue. But then again this
doesn’t mean it is a perspective we should lose sight of in the current debate.
The underlying issue here is definition. If ever a bill attempting to modify
Cameroon’s current legislative position regarding nationality is ever tabled,
its content should be a reflection of how we define what it means to be a
national of Cameroon and whether this is compatible with dual nationality.
Conclusion
Dual nationality is a
double-edged we should cautiously wield. The core question every country
seeking to adopt it liberally is whether nationality means belonging to a
particular society and subscribing fully to all its customs and traditions or
is it nothing more than a formality? As such, can someone really be for example
both American and Cameroonian at the same time? Can you simultaneously advocate
social, moral and legislative tolerance as well as vituperation of something like
homosexuality? This is a practical
dimension of the issue.
And so?
If Cameroon’s government ever decides to amend the country’s law on
nationality, it should remember that as
much as it should make allowance for our diaspora, even foreign born, to
connect with their country of birth or descent, it should not turn being Cameroonian
into a consolation prize it dolls out. It should guard against opening the
doors too wide to Western-leaning mind-sets seeking to radically distort our
way of life or perverting our political processes with the hard-currency and
extreme liberalism at their disposal. In short Cameroon should be made to mean
something. Hiring persons even of Cameroonian origin to some positions like the
President of an association like SOCAM should not necessarily lead to cries of
foul play on grounds of nationality. This should simply be viewed as the hiring
of a foreign hand to help steer Cameroon in the right direction.
