The ‘New Clothes’ of Administrative Control of Information-Providing Organizations in Cameroon since the 1990 Reform
| Author | Gérard Pekassa Ndam |
| Date | 01 September 2004 |
| DOI | 10.1177/0020852304046209 |
| Published date | 01 September 2004 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Review of
Administrative
Sciences
The ‘new clothes’ of administrative control of
information-providing organizations in Cameroon since the
1990 reform
Gérard Pekassa Ndam
Abstract
The aim of the present study is to examine whether the new political dynamism
and legislative architecture of Cameroon in terms of communication has been
accompanied by innovations in the administrative control of organizations
providing information to describe the essence thereof. Analysis shows that the
new political impetus towards democratization and the new legislative environ-
ment of liberalization have a definite influence on the practices of authorities
vested with the power of administrative control. However, in the new legislative
context resulting from Law 90–52, subsequent modifications and applicable
regulatory texts, the control of information-providing organizations remains a
major preoccupation of the administrative authorities and there have been
changes. The 1990 reform regarding communication in Cameroon, of which Law
90–52 of 19 December 1990 regarding social communication constitutes the
legal base, is ambiguous. Regardless of the advances that can be attributed to it,
its scope appears to be limited. It is undeniable that this reform ushered in a new
era. However, it must be noted that the liberalization in question was delimited.
Far from being a ‘legal revolution’, the reform of December 1990 offers the
prospect of less cumbersome administrative control on information-providing
organizations because it is dependent upon the slow rate of democratization of
the national political system.
Introduction
Information-providing organizations1 are both a means of expressing and dissemi-
nating opinions. The search for freedom of the press and freedom of expression2 is
Gérard Pekassa Ndam is Head of Public Law Courses, University of Yaoundé II, Cameroon.
Copyright © 2004 IIAS, SAGE Publications (London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi)
Vol 70(3):547–565 [DOI:10.1177/0020852304046209]
548 International Review of Administrative Sciences 70(3)
a permanent and historical aspiration of modern societies. A variety of international
and national legal instruments hold these two freedoms sacred.
As regards international instruments, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of
1948 affirms in Article 19 that ‘Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and
expression; this right includes . . . receiving and imparting information and ideas
through any media’. Article 9 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights of
1981 states: ‘Every individual shall have the right to receive information . . . the right
to express and disseminate his opinions within the law.’
As regards national instruments, the French Declaration of Human and Citizen’s
Rights of 1789, the constitutional value of which was recognized by the Preamble
to the Constitution of 1946, affirms that ‘the free communication of thoughts and
opinions is one of the most precious human rights’. Where Cameroon is concerned,
the preamble of its successive constitutions states that ‘the freedom of expression,
the freedom of the press . . . are guaranteed in conditions fixed by the law’.
In the context of these liberties, organizations that provide information by report-
ing facts along with their comments and analysis contribute to the building of public
opinion3 and to the exercise of civil rights. The importance and delicate nature of
the information-providing function justifies subjecting the exercise of freedom of the
press to limitations defined by national legislation and rules in the interest of the
public or the protection of individuals.4
This being the case, if the legal and regulatory norms reconcile the principle of the
freedom of the press and the necessary restriction of the latter, maintaining this
balance depends primarily on the control exercised by the administrative authorities.
If governments are preoccupied with controlling the media, the doctrine postulates
that the degree of constraint of such control is dependent upon the authoritarian or
democratic nature of the political regime.5 To address the new mechanisms for
administrative control of information-providing organizations in Cameroon since the
reform of 1990 requires a brief historical reminder of the previous situation in this
country.
Immediately subsequent to its accession to international sovereignty in 1960,
Cameroon set up a legal framework specifically for communication and it experi-
mented with diverse methods of administrative control of information-providing
organizations. Law 66/LF/18 of 21 December 1966 regarding the written press
formally liberated Cameroon from the French law of 29 July 1881 regarding the
press. The former made the publication of a newspaper subject to censorship, seizure
or interdiction by the administration if deemed detrimental to public order, social
mores or national security. After several minor modifications, Law 80–18 of 14 July
1980 marked a break with the liberal character inspired by French legislation, thus
signalling the conceptual autonomy of the legislators in Cameroon: the creation of a
newspaper became subject to administrative authorization and required both a fiscal
receipt and the deposit of a security. The audiovisual communication regime under-
went a slower evolution. Initially limited to radio broadcasting, the service was set up
as a monopoly to be operated by the state;6 this was later extended to television, its
operation being entrusted to a public institution whose organic and functional auton-
omy was limited in its effectiveness by the existence of state-imposed control.7
Evidently, the monolithic political system, founded in 1966 with the creation of a
Ndam Information-providing organizations in Cameroon 549
single party, largely explains the restrictive character of the legislation and administra-
tive control in place until 1990,8 both in terms of the creation and content of
information-providing organizations.
In the middle of 1990, the authorities demonstrated their willingness to commit
Cameroon to a process of democratization.9 The parliamentary session of November
1990 was called the ‘session of liberties’ to translate ‘the array of laws adopted to
mark the renaissance of the country as a democracy’.10 In this unprecedented burst
of legislation that was described as a ‘legislative revolution’,11 Law 90–52 of 19
December 1990 set out the principle of freedom of communication. Although the
state maintained de facto a monopoly on audiovisual communication, the immediate
effect of this law was the blossoming of private press organizations that were
globally critical of the authorities or sometimes served as a platform for the expres-
sion of virulent opposition.
The aim of the present study is to examine whether the new political dynamism
and legislative architecture in terms of communication has been accompanied by
innovations in the administrative control of information-providing organizations and
to describe the essence thereof. Analysis shows that the new political impetus
towards democratization and the new legislative environment of liberalization have
had a definite influence on the practices of the authorities invested with the power of
administrative control. However, in the new legislative context resulting from Law
90–52, together with its subsequent modifications and applicable regulatory texts,
the control of information-providing organizations remains a major preoccupation of
the administrative authorities and this has undergone changes.
In this regard, a combination of legislative measures and administrative practices
makes it possible to verify the effectiveness of control by way of administrative recog-
nition of the creation of information-providing organizations and of the multiple
interventions of the administration in the activity of these organizations.
Systems for administrative recognition of information-providing
organizations
Law 90–52 did not establish a single administrative system for the creation of all
information-providing organizations. In Article 6, the freedom of the press is affirmed
but it makes publication subject — according to Article 7, paragraph 1 — to prior
statement of intent to the prefect of the relevant department. In principle, this
system should lead to the prefectural authorities noting the creation of a newspaper.
In practice, due to the prior statement of intent, there is not only the noting of the
creation of a press organization but also the administrative recognition of said
creation.
Furthermore, Article 36, paragraph 1, of this law affirms the freedom of audio-
visual communication. However, the following paragraph 2 creates a distinction
between the ways in which radio and television stations are created depending upon
whether these media are from the public or private sector: if the former is the case
their creation is defined by the decree;12 in the latter case, their creation is subject to
prior authorization. The means to obtain this authorization give the administration
broad powers of assessment.
550 International Review of Administrative Sciences 70(3)
Recognition by way of prior statement of intent
Since 1990, publishers have been able to operate without prior authorization or
deposit of security but any publication must be preceded by a statement of intent in
accordance with Article 7, paragraph 1, of Law 90–52. In order to issue a receipt for
the statement that is valid as administrative recognition of the creation...
To continue reading
Request your trial