65/92 : Ligue Camerounaise des Droits de l'Homme / Cameroon The Facts 1. The complaint is in two parts. The first, submitted by the Ligue camerounaise des droits de l’Homme, alleges a number of serious and massive violations in Cameroon committed by the present government. The Ligue alleges that the prison conditions in Cameroon constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment and that many people have been arbitrarily arrested and detained in these conditions. Between 1984 and 1989 at least 46 persons were tortured and deprived of food in the Central Prison of Yaoundé. Further violations consist in the repression of freedom of expression, creation of special tribunals, denial of fair hearing, ethnic discrimination, and massacres of the civil population. 2. The second part relates to the situation of Mr Joseph Vitine, an ex-police officer. He stated that he has been persecuted by his former colleagues since March 1990. Subsequent to this submission Mr Vitine re-submitted his case as a separate communication, no. 106/93. 3. The Government of Cameroon responded in writing that the case of Mr Vitine should be declared inadmissible because the author did not appear to be in possession of his full mental faculties. The government responded orally that the allegations of the Ligue Camerounaise should be declared inadmissible because they are posed in disparaging and insulting language. Procedure 4. The communication is not dated but was received from the Ligue Camerounaise just before March th 1992. The Commission was seized of the communication at the 11 Session. th 5. The Government of Cameroon was notified of the communication on 8 April 1992. No response th was forthcoming. On 13 November 1992 another notification was sent. th 6. As of the 19 Session, no information had been received from the government. The Commission declared the communication as regards Mr Vitine inadmissible. th 7. On 17 May 1996 the Commission sent a letter to Mr Vitine informing him that his communication th had been declared inadmissible at the 19 Session. th 8. At the 20 Session, a delegation of the government of Cameroon was present and submitted a written response to the communication, dealing with the portion of the communication submitted by Mr Vitine, which had already been declared inadmissible. The government delegation made an oral presentation concerning the allegations of the Ligue Camerounaise. The Commission decided to request more information from both the government and the Complainant, and to postpone a decision th on the merits of the case. On 10 December 1996 the parties were informed of this decision. Law Admissibility 9. Article 55.2 of the Charter reads: A communication shall be considered by the Commission if a majority of its members so decide. 10. This power of the Commission to consider communications naturally includes the lesser power to decline to hear them. 11. The allegations submitted by Mr Vitine were in 1993 submitted separately to the Commission and registered as communication 106/93. The information in this communication did not give evidence of prima facie violations of the African Charter. For this reason the Commission declared the communication inadmissible. 12. Article Article 56.3 of the Charter reads:

Select target paragraph3