Independent Evaluation of the Complaints Mechanism and the functioning of the Mambele Human Rights Centre

Independent Evaluation of the Lobeke Complaints Mechanism and the functioning of the Mambele Human Rights Centre, East Cameroon

Given the experiences of Baka Indigenous Peoples living around Lobeke National Park, the usefulness of a complaints mechanism is clear. It is well established that the Baka have suffered human rights violations related to their access to the park – which overlaps parts of their traditional territories – including denial of access and abuse by ecoguards. While the establishment of a legal access regime for the park is a positive step, there are still significant barriers to access in practice, including the continued risk of human rights violations. The Baka face significant, in many cases insuperable, barriers to accessing State justice mechanisms. Creating a more accessible, less formal complaints mechanism which enables human rights violations to be safely raised and fairly addressed is one important way to bridge the gap between the rights Baka have on paper and what they can do in practice.   

To carry out this evaluation, we were invited to conduct several interviews with the main actors in the towns of Yaoundé, Yokadouma, Salapoumbe, Sokambo, Libongo, Mambele, Moloundou and in ten Baka villages, using standard questionnaires. We also reviewed the (limited) documents explaining the processes of the existing complaints/(referral and monitoring mechanism. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the main actors and several findings emerged, among the most important:

• The existing complaints mechanism does not address the issue of conflicts associated with access to the parks.
• MINFOF (the Conservation Service) which is the main actor in the management of parks, does not accept the legitimacy of the mechanism.
• The mechanism is financially and technically dependent on the structures that contribute to its implementation, in particular CEFAID and WWF. WWF is however also key actor in relation to the Lobeke National Park, raising the possibility of a conflict of interest.
• The mechanism’s operating rules are not well known to all stakeholders, in particular Baka communities.
• The mechanism is not a dispute resolution body and does not offer dispute resolution directly.
• In practice, the mechanism has a low geographical coverage, and there are still many barriers to access by Baka communities.
• The mechanism is under-resourced and there is a need to strengthen the technical and managerial capacity of those who implement it.

In fact, our analysis is that the “complaints mechanism”, while potentially providing a useful service for legal assistance and monitoring of a wide range of human rights violations, is not a complaints mechanism as the term is generally understood, nor is it particularly focused on or adapted to monitoring violations of human rights connected to the Lobeke National Park. It does not, and is not intended to, provide an effective remedy to Baka communities, but rather to support them to denounce a range of abuses and assist in obtaining a remedy in other (existing) fora, including through State judicial mechanisms.

The evaluation makes the following key recommendations:

A. In respect of CEFAID’s existing mechanism:

1. Change the name of the mechanism to Community Mechanism for Referral and Monitoring of Baka Abuse Cases, to avoid misunderstanding and confusion over its function and role, and change the name of the centre from Centre des droits de l’Homme to Centre des Droits Humains.
2. Provide ongoing training for community relays and equip them to effectively report and document cases of abuse or other problems. These trainings should explicitly include training to improve gender sensitivity in the activities carried out, and the inclusion of more women in the teams.
3. Ensure sustainable funding of the mechanism by an independent body for fixed costs (office rent, appropriate salaries, working materials, etc).
4. Continually improve the management and other relevant capacity of those in charge of the mechanism.
5. Further strengthen and legitimise the mechanism by increasing the involvement of other actors in its development and implementation (Gbabandi, RACOPY etc.).

B. In respect of the issue of human rights of Baka associated with access to and use of the Lobeke National Park and surrounding areas:

1. Create a new complaints mechanism, based on agreement between all main actors (government, conservation actors, safari operators, Baka communities), to deal with grievances connected with access to and use of the Lobeke National Park. The mechanism should have power to convene all actors, incorporate alternative dispute resolution processes, have the power to make binding decisions to award redress, be enforceable under national law and be subject to appeal.
2. Ensure the mechanism is transparent, adequately funded, resourced and accessible to Baka communities, and undertake ongoing monitoring of its performance.
3. Facilitate access via the mechanism, in appropriate cases, to recourse to ordinary courts or supra-national bodies where stakeholders in the management of the parks would be subject to legal action (e.g. CERD, African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights).
4. Ensure gender perspectives are integrated in the approach and operations of the mechanism, including in the handling of cases as well as through aiming for gender balance in the recruitment of staff.

Complaints Mechanism Report (French)

Executive Summary (English)

See here for the accompanying evaluation of the effectiveness of current access arrangements for Baka communities around Lobeke National Park