Joe Dinga Pefok (Uncle Joe)
“Traditional Rulers No Longer Have The Power Over Their People, The Way They Used To Have. There Are Five Reasons. The First Reason Is That Most Of Their Subjects Are In Different Political Parties From Them, And They Disagree On Partisan Lines. Secondly, Many Fons These Days Don’t Have The Means Of Survival, And So Tend To Be Very Vulnerable”. (See Second Part Of Article, Inside).
In the paper which Dr Rev Father Humphrey Tatah Mbuy, presented at the high level workshop that was organized in Douala on April 10, 2026 on the theme – JUSTICE , PEACH BUILDING AND RECONCILIATION IN CAMEROON, jointly organized by Heritage Higher Institute Of Peace and Development Studies, and the Nico Halle & Co Law Firm, to celebrate the 3rd anniversary of their partnership, the renowned cultural anthropologist disclosed that in the research he carried out, he identified five reasons for the declining power of traditional rulers (fons) these days.
That is, why Fons no longer have power over their people, the way they used to have. The first major reason which Dr Rev Father Tatah Mbuy identified in his research is the involvement of Fons in partisan politics, which brings them into confrontation with their subjects who do not belong to the same party like them. It is no secret that almost all the Northwest Fons are militants of the ruling CPDM. Most of them were dragged there by some of their subjects who are CPDM elites that have taken the Fons hostage, because of money.
“We are in a very trying and highly partisan political atmosphere, and one of the major reasons raised by a vast majority of our people, has been the open and undiluted affiliations of some of the Fons towards this or that party. As a human being, every Fon is a political animal like others, and therefore, as a person, has an inalienable right to belong to whatever political orientation he chooses. However, as High Priest of the people, as Referee, as Guarantor of justice, common sense would call for absolute discretion in all his political actions. When Fons deliberately come out and campaign for this or that party, this compromises their role and status, and easily create a difficult relationship with some of their subjects”, Tatah Mbuy pointed explained .
BELOW IS THE SECOND PART OF DR REV FATHER TATAH MBUY’S PAPER THAT WAS PRESENTED AT THE WORKSHOP THAT HELD IN DOUALA ON APRIL 10, 2026 ON THE THEME: JUSTICE, PEACE BUILDING AND RECONCILIATION:.
Part 2) TRADITIONAL RULERS AS GUARANTORS OF JUSTICE, PEACE AND RECONCILIATION IN RURAL CAMEROON.
Examining A Tragic Future In Contemporary “Anglophone Cameroon”.
Traditional Rulers In An Ever Evolving Geopolitical Cameroon
We live in a world where it could be said with a certain legitimate tautology that “the only constant thing in life is change”. The ancient Greek philosopher, Heraclitus of Ephesus was convinced that everything is a flux. Yes, we are so used to change and evolution in our life, that things can never be the same as they were before. The world has evolved enormously and in many ways, and all anthropologists know that culture is the greatest recipient of change. That is the reason why there is hardly anything today called “pure culture”: every culture if dynamic, never static. That is a truism that cannot be challenged. However, it is equally a scientific fact that in as much as there are “variables” in life, there are always “invariables” which do not change, and which cannot change, otherwise, we will cease to be who we are, who we were, and who we shall be.
There is a lot of legitimate talks these days about the evolving geopolitical climate in Cameroon, such that some people would tell us, that the “Fons” today cannot remain what they were yesteryears. One can only react to such rhetoric with reasonable skepticism because, first, we have a problem with understanding what geopolitics is all about. “Geopolitics” simply understood, has to do with the way ‘politics’ is practiced in a certain area or State. When good old Aristotle of Athens coined the word, “politics”, he meant “good governance of the City State”. In fact at the end of his classic, the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle declared that “politics has to do with the wellbeing and good management of human affairs”. Unfortunately, we use the word “politics” today in the most pejorative sense to mean “legitimate foul play” in the management of the affairs of the people. It is this unfortunate understanding, of politics that has had a very dreadful and profound impact, on our traditional structures and original understanding of authority.
When the British colonialists in particular, came into former Southern Cameroon, they were positively struck by the ingenuity of the concept, structure and understanding of the “Fon” in the Bamenda Grass field in particular. That is why they exploited it and created the famous “House of Chiefs” styled after the structure in England, in which the “Fons” could come together and discuss issues of society and offer their wisdom to the British colonial masters. In rural Cameroon s we indicated already, the “fon” was accepted by, and sustained by the people.
Today, given the evolution of society and the challenges of daily life, each person is bothered more about his so many responsibilities over the education of his own children and family, that, those of the “Fon” risks being left on the periphery. An interview conducted among most of the traditional rulers in Anglophone Cameroon, showed that the difficulties of survival as “Fon” without a steady income, deeply complicated the role of the “Fon” as father of all, especially towards his own children and wives. In many ethnic groups, even the elite hardly ever think spontaneously about the welfare of the “fon” as their forebears did. Furthermore, in 1974, the Government of Cameroon constitutionally abrogated the status of traditional rulers in West Cameroon.
On the contrary, in 1978, the law made traditional rulers as “auxiliaries of the administration”, and wittingly or unwittingly, this has been the beginning of an end to the former “authority” of the Fon. One may not fully understand the pain of what has happened, if he did not experience what “Fonship” meant in the days of mystic “Sem Atar in Nso Land, Achirimbi in Bafut, Foyn Yuh of Kom , Galega II in Bali Nyonga , and the enigmatic Angwafor III of Mankon. Who on earth could have imagined that any of these would speak, and anyone, even the SDO or Governor, would dare to challenge them? That Sem Atar would stoop to a foreigner in his own land? That he would greet a woman, even the Queen of England, with his hand?”. No.
But we have seen strange scenes since the late 90s, and it rents the heart to see “Fons” yelling out insults against subjects, see DOs and Gendarmes treat traditional rulers with frightening foolhardiness!. Worse, our traditional rulers in the name of wanting the means to survive are subjected to treatment that even decent gentlemen will have to silver to accept. One even fears to mention some of the things that have happened, and are happening before our eyes to our “traditional rulers”. The Nigerian novelist, the late Chinua Achebe, was wont to say that “a vulnerable person cannot easily fight his own vulnerability”. Others must take up their cause in a more coordinated and orderly manner. And that is the real core of this discourse.
How Do We Dialogue Identity, Culture and Evolution?
The situation in which our traditional rulers find themselves is a complex and complicated issue, given the geopolitical atmosphere in which we live. Nonetheless, without any pretense to want to solve the entire matter in a short paper like this, five important component must be extensively studied and dealt with before we can hope for a lasting solution.
First, we are in a very trying and highly partisan political atmosphere, and one of the major reason raised by a vast majority of our people, has been to open undiluted affiliations of some of the “Fons” to wards that party. As a human being, every “fon” is a “political animal” like others, and therefore, as a person, has an inalienable right to belong to whatever political orientation he chooses. However, as a high priest of the people, as a referee, as guarantor of justice, common sense would call for absolute discretion in all political actions. When “fons” deliberately come out and campaign for this or that party, this compromise their role and status, and easily creates a difficult relationship with some of their subjects. And this has unfortunately been the real cause of uneasy andtense atmosphere between our “fons” and their subjects. Only each “fon” can take a reason decision in conscience about his political approach.
Second, by the 1978 Law, “traditional rulers” in Cameroon are considered as “Chef” and this fails to capture the reality in profoundly culture areas of the NW and West where each traditional ruler knows by instinct where he belongs, what his real title is, and how he relates to others. Strictly speaking, only the Northwest, West and the Grand North, culturally had a tradition of paramount fondoms and chiefs. However when the British found this excellent tradition, they extended to most of the other parts, and then in West Cameroon, they instituted the “House of Chiefs”, with the understanding, as still happens in Britain, one of the greatest democracies and Royalties in the modern world, that it would be an abomination for any politician in England to ever try to “politicize” either the King or Queen, or for that matter any member of the Royal Family.
Democracy has its role, but royalty equally maintains its original significance in Britain, even in the height of one of the fastest developing countries in Europe. We learned from them, is there anything bad continuing to learn from them?
Third, our traditional rulers are now known as “auxiliaries of the administration” and anyone seems to interpret this as fits his situation. There is definitely a yawning need for legal experts in this country, particularly those from former West Cameroon, to give the right interpretation which would harmonize the relationship between the Paramount Fon and the SDO, the Sub Chief and the DO, and so on. In the past, when people understood fonship better, there was hardly any conflict, but today there is definitely something wrong with a DO calling himself, ‘Chef de Terre”. In whose land! Where does he keep the one who by divine consecration of the ancestors is the titular owner of the land where he pours libation and other sacrifices? Sometimes, those who handle issues of traditional rulers seem to lack the right anthropological understanding of what is at stake. Therefore, the onus lies on the Cameroon association of anthropologists, to clearly articulate the facts of what the true identity and status of the fon is.
Fourth, money, means of survival and the material wellbeing of our traditional rulers has drastically fallen to near zero, and therefore makes most of the rulers vulnerable and ready to do anything and everything to survive. Everyone has the right to live a happy and fulfilled life, much so, our “fons”. However it is possible in every jurisdiction of the fon, that all subjects who are working put aside, every month a token amount, say 1000 FCFA, for the institution of the fon. In fact in some ethnic groups, this has been done with remarkable success. Others can copy and do the same. Nearly all Fondoms and ethnic groups also have development associations. These can put material wellbeing of the palace as priority to be budget for every year. Furthermore, in practically all Fondoms, there will be more than at least 10 elites who can task themselves every month to ensure the material wellbeing of their traditional ruler, without making him look like a beggar. There are many other ways in which we call collectively and individually, in our respected fondoms, help to restore the dignity and status of our traditional rulers.
Finally, there is a conspiracy theory, and I have no idea how true this is, but the theory holds that the “fons” of the NW in particular, but also those of the West, and Grand North were getting too powerful, to be politically comfortable. Therefore, it seemed like good political shrewdness to trim their wins. If this is true, then, perhaps it would be necessary to make a review because the traditional rulers were the people who have always, and can ensure social harmony, fair play and security. Failure for this, we could just be a penny wise and a pound foolish.
