How the CPDM System Enables the Repression, Abuses, and Deaths That Shock Cameroon
For 43 years, the Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement (CPDM) has shaped every layer of the state:
the executive, the judiciary, the security apparatus, the administration, and the political environment.
This longevity has created a political order that critics describe as authoritarian, centralized, and structurally hostile to dissent.
When tragedies like the death of Anicet Ekane occur, critics do not see them as isolated incidents they see them as the predictable consequences of a system engineered and preserved by the CPDM.
Here is how activists, scholars, human rights groups, and political observers argue the CPDM has enabled these abuses for decades.
1. The CPDM Built a System Where the Executive Dominates Every Institution
Over decades, the CPDM consolidated a structure where:
-
the presidency controls key appointments,
-
institutions lack autonomy,
-
security bodies act under political directives,
-
oversight mechanisms are weakened.
In such a system, power rarely faces consequences, and abuses can occur without restraint.
Critics argue that this structural imbalance creates the conditions that allow:
-
arbitrary arrests,
-
prolonged detentions,
-
and unexplained deaths.
2. The CPDM Designed a Judiciary With Limited Independence
Human rights organizations and scholars regularly cite:
-
political appointments to judicial leadership,
-
lack of autonomy in high-profile cases,
-
the involvement of military bodies in political matters.
This produces a justice system that critics say serves political stability for the ruling party, not justice for citizens.
In this environment, opposition figures like Ekane become vulnerable, because their legal protections depend on political approval rather than constitutional guarantees.
3. Security Institutions Have Been Politicized Under CPDM Rule
Analysts argue that CPDM governance blurred the line between:
-
national security,
-
political control,
-
and state survival.
This is why, in many cases, political actors end up:
-
detained at the SED,
-
interrogated by military officers,
-
surveilled by intelligence units.
When security forces become part of political conflict, critics say, detention becomes a weapon, not a procedure.
4. The CPDM Maintains a System Where Opposition Is Framed as a Threat
Over the years, political opponents have been publicly labeled as:
-
destabilizers,
-
agitators,
-
extremists,
-
or threats to public order.
This rhetoric promoted through speeches, state media, and administrative language—creates a climate where:
-
arresting opponents feels justified,
-
prolonged detention feels “normal,”
-
and heavy-handed security tactics become routine.
Critics argue this discursive framework is a CPDM survival strategy, not a security necessity.
5. Lack of Accountability Is a Direct Result of CPDM Dominance
In a political system where:
-
the ruling party controls parliament,
-
oversight institutions answer to the executive,
-
investigations rarely lead to accountability,
-
and officials rarely face consequences,
wrongdoing is rarely investigated transparently.
This absence of accountability is what activists say enables recurrent abuses — including deaths in detention.
6. CPDM Party-State Fusion Makes Abuse Systemic, Not Accidental
After four decades, the line between:
-
party
-
state
-
administration
-
and security services
has blurred to the point that critics describe Cameroon as a party-state.
In a party-state, abuses are not “exceptions” they are seen as structural because:
-
institutions operate under political incentives,
-
repression becomes bureaucratized,
-
legality becomes flexible,
-
and dissent becomes dangerous.
This is how activists explain the tragic death of figures like Anicet Ekane.
7. The CPDM Has Normalized a Culture of Fear
Citizens report:
-
fear of protest,
-
fear of arrest,
-
fear of speaking publicly,
-
fear of state institutions.
This fear did not appear spontaneously.
It is a direct result of years of:
-
repression of dissent,
-
criminalization of protest,
-
intimidation of activists,
-
and harsh responses to criticism.
Critics argue that fear is the most powerful political tool of the CPDM system.
8. The CPDM’s Longevity Depends on Weakening Alternatives
Dominant parties stay in power by preventing strong opponents from emerging.
Observers note that:
-
opposition leaders face administrative obstacles,
-
their events are disrupted or banned,
-
their activists are detained,
-
and their movements are restricted.
In such an environment, the death of an opposition figure in detention becomes a political event, not an isolated tragedy.
9. Ekane’s Death Is a Consequence of the System, Not a Mistake
Critics argue that what happened to Ekane reflects:
-
structural failures,
-
institutional decay,
-
lack of legal safeguards,
-
and systemic militarization of political conflict.
To them, his death is not an accident but the logical end point of a system designed to control, suppress, and outlast dissent.
10. The CPDM Must Answer for the System It Built Because People Are Dying Inside It
Whether through:
-
detentions,
-
intimidation,
-
abuse,
-
institutional silence,
-
or unexplained deaths,
the CPDM system has created an environment where citizens face real danger for participating in political life.
Ekane’s death has become the symbol of a regime that critics say has lost moral legitimacy because it cannot guarantee the safety of its citizens, its opponents, or even its elders.
Conclusion: Critics Are Right to Say the CPDM System Bears Responsibility
Not because individuals ordered wrongdoing but because the system the CPDM built allows this to happen, again and again.
Four decades of:
-
centralized power,
-
politicized institutions,
-
opaque procedures,
-
and weakened accountability
have created a political reality where tragedies like Ekane’s death are not anomalies — they are symptoms.
And when a system produces fear, repression, and death, activists say:
0 comments