寻找和平解决喀麦隆土地冲突的途径:对 "土地协商委员会 "缔造和平作用的批判性分析

Mbira C., William H. A.
{"title":"寻找和平解决喀麦隆土地冲突的途径:对 \"土地协商委员会 \"缔造和平作用的批判性分析","authors":"Mbira C., William H. A.","doi":"10.52589/ajlpra-awglkl4j","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The regulation of Land tenure systems is one of the main sources of conflicts in Africa and one of the continent’s most difficult realities to pin down. In its 1974 land reform, the Cameroonian legislature sought to strike a balance between traditional norms and modern instruments, between administrative, judicial and customary authorities, in order to establish an inclusive, democratic and peaceful system of land tenure. The establishment of the Land Consultative Board as the regulatory instrument the state planned to use in land matters was projected as the answer to this quest. While the original intention remains laudable - to enable the state, guarantor of the general interest to acquire a local instrument with the appropriate legitimacy and capable of ensuring the peaceful regulation of land tenure. It has to be said that, almost 50 years later, this ambition has not been achieved. The recurrence of land conflicts and the density of disputes reflect the inadequacy of the rules governing land tenure in Cameroon, depriving the board of any real regulatory authority. The central argument of this paper is that the legislator's ambition was not sincere because of the precedence of the administrative authority to the detriment of other actors. The choice of evaluating this working assumption through the theory of the instrumentation of public action is therefore essential. It makes it possible not only to determine the legislator's intention through textual and contextual analysis, but also to observe the interplay of actors around this regulatory instrument through an interdisciplinary approach. Between its structural inability to acquire real autonomy and the barely concealed desire to downgrade custom, its role has steadily diminished along with its influence, though without disappearing. It remains, however, the institutional relic where the philosophy of the “palaver tree,” supported by the practice of non-violence and democratic dialogue, can still survive, as well as the keystone of the entire land tenure system of the country. The analysis of the consultative Board’s peacemaking role through its instrumentation (or its instrumentalisation) opens up new perspectives for understanding the regulation of public action in our so-called Southern countries, especially for decision-makers, donors and any actor interested in the thorny issue of land tenure insecurity.","PeriodicalId":344811,"journal":{"name":"African Journal of Law, Political Research and Administration","volume":"325 5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Searching for Ways of Settling Land Conflicts by Peaceful Means in Cameroon: A Critical Analysis of the Peacemaking Role of the ‘Land Consultative Board’\",\"authors\":\"Mbira C., William H. A.\",\"doi\":\"10.52589/ajlpra-awglkl4j\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The regulation of Land tenure systems is one of the main sources of conflicts in Africa and one of the continent’s most difficult realities to pin down. In its 1974 land reform, the Cameroonian legislature sought to strike a balance between traditional norms and modern instruments, between administrative, judicial and customary authorities, in order to establish an inclusive, democratic and peaceful system of land tenure. The establishment of the Land Consultative Board as the regulatory instrument the state planned to use in land matters was projected as the answer to this quest. While the original intention remains laudable - to enable the state, guarantor of the general interest to acquire a local instrument with the appropriate legitimacy and capable of ensuring the peaceful regulation of land tenure. It has to be said that, almost 50 years later, this ambition has not been achieved. The recurrence of land conflicts and the density of disputes reflect the inadequacy of the rules governing land tenure in Cameroon, depriving the board of any real regulatory authority. The central argument of this paper is that the legislator's ambition was not sincere because of the precedence of the administrative authority to the detriment of other actors. The choice of evaluating this working assumption through the theory of the instrumentation of public action is therefore essential. It makes it possible not only to determine the legislator's intention through textual and contextual analysis, but also to observe the interplay of actors around this regulatory instrument through an interdisciplinary approach. Between its structural inability to acquire real autonomy and the barely concealed desire to downgrade custom, its role has steadily diminished along with its influence, though without disappearing. It remains, however, the institutional relic where the philosophy of the “palaver tree,” supported by the practice of non-violence and democratic dialogue, can still survive, as well as the keystone of the entire land tenure system of the country. The analysis of the consultative Board’s peacemaking role through its instrumentation (or its instrumentalisation) opens up new perspectives for understanding the regulation of public action in our so-called Southern countries, especially for decision-makers, donors and any actor interested in the thorny issue of land tenure insecurity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":344811,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"African Journal of Law, Political Research and Administration\",\"volume\":\"325 5\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"African Journal of Law, Political Research and Administration\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.52589/ajlpra-awglkl4j\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"African Journal of Law, Political Research and Administration","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.52589/ajlpra-awglkl4j","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

土地使用权制度的规范是非洲冲突的主要根源之一,也是非洲大陆最难解决的现实问题之一。在 1974 年的土地改革中,喀麦隆立法机构试图在传统规范和现代手段之间,在行政、司法和习惯当局之间取得平衡,以建立一个包容、民主与和平的土地使用权制度。成立土地协商委员会作为国家计划在土地问题上使用的监管工具,被认为是对这一追求的回应。尽管其初衷仍然值得称赞--使国家这个普遍利益的保障者能够获得一个具有适当合法性并能够确保和平管理土地使用权的地方工具。不得不说的是,将近 50 年过去了,这一雄心并未实现。土地冲突的反复发生和纠纷的密集程度反映了喀麦隆土地使用权管理条例的不足,使委员会失去了真正的管理权。本文的中心论点是,立法者的雄心并非真心实意,因为行政当局的优先地位损害了其他行为者的利益。因此,选择通过公共行动工具理论来评估这一工作假设是至关重要的。它不仅可以通过文本和背景分析确定立法者的意图,还可以通过跨学科方法观察围绕这一监管工具的参与者之间的相互作用。由于在结构上无法获得真正的自主权,以及几乎不加掩饰地希望降低习惯的地位,习惯法的作用虽然没有消失,但其影响力却在逐步减弱。不过,它仍然是 "议事树 "哲学在非暴力和民主对话实践支持下得以延续的制度遗迹,也是该国整个土地保有制度的基石。对协商委员会通过其工具(或工具化)所发挥的缔造和平作用的分析,为理解我们这些所谓的南方国家的公共行动规范开辟了新的视角,尤其是对决策者、捐助者和任何对土地使用权不安全这一棘手问题感兴趣的行为者而言。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Searching for Ways of Settling Land Conflicts by Peaceful Means in Cameroon: A Critical Analysis of the Peacemaking Role of the ‘Land Consultative Board’
The regulation of Land tenure systems is one of the main sources of conflicts in Africa and one of the continent’s most difficult realities to pin down. In its 1974 land reform, the Cameroonian legislature sought to strike a balance between traditional norms and modern instruments, between administrative, judicial and customary authorities, in order to establish an inclusive, democratic and peaceful system of land tenure. The establishment of the Land Consultative Board as the regulatory instrument the state planned to use in land matters was projected as the answer to this quest. While the original intention remains laudable - to enable the state, guarantor of the general interest to acquire a local instrument with the appropriate legitimacy and capable of ensuring the peaceful regulation of land tenure. It has to be said that, almost 50 years later, this ambition has not been achieved. The recurrence of land conflicts and the density of disputes reflect the inadequacy of the rules governing land tenure in Cameroon, depriving the board of any real regulatory authority. The central argument of this paper is that the legislator's ambition was not sincere because of the precedence of the administrative authority to the detriment of other actors. The choice of evaluating this working assumption through the theory of the instrumentation of public action is therefore essential. It makes it possible not only to determine the legislator's intention through textual and contextual analysis, but also to observe the interplay of actors around this regulatory instrument through an interdisciplinary approach. Between its structural inability to acquire real autonomy and the barely concealed desire to downgrade custom, its role has steadily diminished along with its influence, though without disappearing. It remains, however, the institutional relic where the philosophy of the “palaver tree,” supported by the practice of non-violence and democratic dialogue, can still survive, as well as the keystone of the entire land tenure system of the country. The analysis of the consultative Board’s peacemaking role through its instrumentation (or its instrumentalisation) opens up new perspectives for understanding the regulation of public action in our so-called Southern countries, especially for decision-makers, donors and any actor interested in the thorny issue of land tenure insecurity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信