Abdul Karim’s Life Sentence Triggers Appeal Over Court’s Jurisdiction

Abdul Karim Ali’s legal team has announced they have appealed his life imprisonment by a Cameroon military tribunal. His lawyer confirmed this in an interview with Boh Elvis. The imprisonment has triggered an intense legal and political debate in Cameroon. They centre around issues of jurisdiction, citizenship, and the legal process.

In an exclusive interview, Barrister Joseph Awa Fru, the lead counsel for Abdul Karim, provided insight into the defence’s strategy and the broader implications of the case.

Challenge to Jurisdiction

Abdul Karim was arrested in Bamenda and later transferred to the State Secretariat for Defence (SED). He was held incommunicado for months and later tranfered to the Kondengui maximum-security prison. His lawyer and many rights advocates have persistently challenged the process. To them, he was ‘abducted’, as there was no arrest warrant or probable cause. He was later convicted on charges related to terrorism. However, his legal team is contesting the court’s authority to try him at all.

“Karim’s defence hinges on his claim of not being a citizen of the Republic of Cameroon,” Barrister Fru said. “This is not a mere political statement; it forms the legal foundation of our appeal.”

Barrister Fru has already filed the appeal, which aims to contest the Cameroonian military tribunal’s jurisdiction over Karim.

“We are emphasising his assertion of non-citizenship. If he is not Cameroonian, the court’s jurisdiction over him is fundamentally questionable,” he said.

A Question of Identity

The claim that Abdul Karim is not a Cameroonian citizen taps into long-standing tensions. The dispute is between the government and a faction of the Anglophone population in the North West and South West regions of the country. These regions, which were the former Southern Cameroons prior to October 1st 1961, are being contested. Many activists from these areas have historically resisted full integration into the central state, citing cultural, political, and historical grievances.

“The matter before the court is not just about one man’s freedom,” Barrister Fru said. “It touches on the broader question of national identity and the rights of individuals to assert that identity in the face of a judicial system they do not recognise.”

Strength Amid Adversity

Despite receiving a life sentence, Abdul Karim remains steadfast, according to his lawyer.

“He is strong and resolute in his beliefs,” Barrister Fru said. “He understands the stakes and is prepared to continue the fight through legal channels.”

Critical Legal Questions

However, Karim’s legal position is not without its challenges. Evidence suggests that prior to his arrest, Abdul Karim held and used Cameroonian identification documents, including a national ID card and passport. Legally, the possession and use of such documents strongly imply acceptance of Cameroonian citizenship.

Legal experts note that courts often apply the principle of estoppel. Individuals who have benefited from citizenship rights — such as international travel or access to public services — may not later deny that citizenship when facing prosecution.

Moreover, there has been no public record of Abdul Karim formally renouncing Cameroonian citizenship prior to his arrest, nor has there been legal recognition of an alternative nationality, such as “Ambazonian” citizenship, under international law.

“This complicates the defense’s argument,” noted a human rights lawyer familiar with the case, speaking anonymously. “Political objections to citizenship are different from legal renunciations. Courts typically look at what the person did before the arrest, not what they claim afterward.”

In addition, Cameroon has not invoked the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows states to try individuals for certain crimes regardless of nationality. The government maintains that it is exercising domestic legal authority over a Cameroonian citizen accused of terrorism on its soil.

What is Estoppel?

Estoppel, a legal principle, prohibits an individual from reversing their prior statements or actions if others have relied on them. Given that Abdul Karim used Cameroonian passports and identification documents prior to his arrest, this principle could potentially apply in his case.

Legally, estoppel may prevent Karim from claiming he is not a Cameroonian citizen after benefiting from rights associated with citizenship — such as travelling with a Cameroonian passport. The court could argue that his previous conduct, in using official state documents, implies recognition of his status as a citizen, despite his later political rejection of it.

Background and Broader Implications

Abdul Karim Ali, a prominent voice in the Anglophone peace movement, previously faced detention without formal charges, drawing attention from human rights organisations like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. His life sentence marks a significant escalation in the state’s handling of Anglophone activists.

Critics argue that trying civilians in military courts violates international human rights standards. The appeal lodged by Karim’s legal team could thus set a precedent in Cameroon’s handling of similar cases in the future.

As the case moves through the appeals process, it continues to spotlight unresolved issues of governance, citizenship, and justice within Cameroon.

Mimi Mefo Info