Human Rights Watch (HRW) has called on Cameroonian authorities to rescind a recently enacted decree, citing concerns over what it terms “unjustifiable censorship” of free speech. Emmanuel Mariel Djikdent, head of the Mfoundi division, introduced the decree on July 16, mandating measures that severely restrict freedom of expression as the country approaches its 2025 presidential elections. Among these measures is the potential for banning individuals from the division for making statements deemed as dangerous insults to state institutions or the individuals representing them.
Following the decree’s announcement, René Emmanuel Sadi, the Minister of Communication, defended it in a press release, emphasizing President Paul Biya’s electoral legitimacy and condemning the use of irreverent language against him. Djikdent argues that the decree aims to preserve public order. However, critics, including HRW, argue that it dangerously curtails free speech in a nation where such freedoms are already under threat.
HRW’s recent report underscores the urgency of revoking the decree ahead of the elections, to reduce tensions and ensure free expression. This concern is amplified by recent legislative actions, such as a law passed by the National Assembly of Cameroon in July, which postponed the country’s February 2025 parliamentary elections and extended the terms of office for its members until March 2026. President Paul Biya, now in his seventh term since assuming office in 1982, has faced mounting political strife following his reelection in 2018.
Barrister Akere Muna, one of the nine candidates in Cameroon’s last presidential election, criticized the decree, labeling it “deeply concerning for our country” in a statement to The East African. He added that the decree reflects a breakdown in the societal values of unity.
The decree is the latest in a series of legislative actions by the Cameroonian government that have been accused of suppressing free speech. Under a 2010 cybersecurity and cybercrime law, individuals who disseminate unverifiable information face penalties, including jail time. Critics argue that such laws are employed to stifle dissent and punish those who challenge government narratives.
For more details, visit the original post on JURIST.