Echoes of Colonial Control and Counterterrorism: The logics, laws and politics of proscription in Cameroon

Abstract

Proscription, or the outlawing of a political actor, is the state’s most punitive power. It can depoliticise and ban a particular group or actor and criminalise its supporters, deny the self-determination of minority groups, justify state violence, and avoid genuine attempts at conflict resolution. Although the number of proscription regimes surged globally in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001, proscription is an historical tool with roots in civil and common law. This thesis constructs a framework that conceptualises proscription laws as colonial legacies, rather than the products of postcolonial governance or the global response to September 11. To do so, I inquire into the colonial origins of proscription powers in Cameroon. I apply a genealogical approach to investigate the evolution and use of proscription laws and find that proscription laws have remained mostly unchanged since their importation into Cameroon by the French colonial administration. Critically, I find that the maintenance of colonial proscription laws also perpetuates a kind of governance that uses the logics and methods of colonial administrators. I argue that proscription laws facilitate the continuation of a ‘colonial rationale.’ In this mode of governance, colonial laws specify (and limit) what elements need protecting by the state and therefore what constitutes a threat to those elements and merits proscription. The thesis adopts the ‘colonial rationale’ as a theoretical framework. It develops its scope by drawing on a related concept of ductility, that theorises the perpetuation of the colonial rationale as a property of proscription laws imported from the French administration into Cameroon, which are maintained by successive governments. The resulting theoretical framework is used to analyse the evolution of Cameroon’s security governance from pre-independence to 2017. I also consider the role of UNSC Resolution 1373 and find that neocolonial systems also facilitate a colonial rationale by implicitly approving of illiberal proscription if state leaders comply with global policy requirements. This analysis illustrates for scholars of counterterrorism governance how counterterrorism powers impact the human rights of self-determination, freedom of expression and non-violence.