a policeman punished for having relieved himself in a bush during an operation
A policeman punished for having relieved himself in a bush during an operation
While taking part in a closure, he withdrew for a time from his surveillance post to get comfortable in the brush. He was stripped of three steps.
At the National Security, natural needs have little urgency in the face of security measures. Police Inspector Wamba Zetaga Thierry Hector learned this the hard way. On the night of September 7 to 8, 2015, the person concerned participated in the “closure” carried out in the Manbanda district located near Bonaberi in the city of Douala. In police jargon, “closure” is a security operation carried out unexpectedly in order to surprise a wanted target. While the operation was underway, Mr. Wamba Zetega said he temporarily withdrew from his watch post to get comfortable in the brush.
Unfortunately, while he was relieving himself, the regional delegate for the territorial security of the Littoral, who himself supervised the “closure” mentioned, was making the rounds of the posts to ensure the smooth running of the operation. Having found the post entrusted to Mr. Wamba Zetega empty, the senior police officer had considered the absence of the cop as a violation of instructions from the hierarchy. For the prosecution, Mr. Wamba had deserted his post to extort motorists.
In the process, the senior officer had served a request for explanations to Mr. Wamba who was later brought to the police disciplinary council. He got away with the downgrading sanction. He started from the 4th to the 1st level of police inspector. In fact, Mr. Wamba challenged the decree of the Head of State issued on July 15, 2018 imposing on him the aforementioned sanction taken on the basis of the report of the police disciplinary council and is also requesting 15 million francs. of compensation. His appeal was heard before the Administrative Court of Yaoundé on September 6, 2022.
Guardian or inspector
Me Mbianga Boniface, the plaintiff’s lawyer, explained to the court that his “client is part of a rare species”. In 2009, Mr. Wamba presented the competition launched by the National Security for the recruitment of student police inspectors. But when the results were published, he had been admitted among the student peacekeepers. His client did not object. While undergoing training at the Police Training and Application Center (Ciap) in Muntengene, he was expelled from that center for “lack of diploma”. It had been discovered that he had not competed in the peacekeeper category.
Fortunately, the results of the investigation opened into this case were favorable to the complainant, the police having realized that it was by mistake that Mr. Wamba’s name had ended up on the list of student peacekeepers. while he had regularly passed the police inspectors’ competition in 2009. To repair the damage, Mr. Wamba had been readmitted to the Ciap of Muntengene in 2014 to follow the training of police inspector this time.
In 2015, during the Manbanda “closure” incident, Me Mbianga indicated that his client had been deployed on an internship in an Esir unit in Douala, wearing the epaulettes of a student police inspector. Moreover, the request for an explanation like the summons to the disciplinary council, observes the lawyer, had been served to his client under this status. Before the Disciplinary Board, the lawyer said he raised the Board’s incompetence to rule on the grounds that this body is only empowered to judge police officers. However, Mr. Wamba at that time did not formally have the status of a civil servant. As a result, the file should be transferred to the Ciap Disciplinary Board of Muntengene.
State of necessity
While the case was under investigation, on January 4, 2017, the Head of State first signed an order integrating Mr. Wamba into the body of National Security officials with reconstitution of his career from of 2009. Six months later, on the following July 15, he signed the decree inflicting on the complainant the sanction complained of. For Me Mbianga, the act of integration, which certainly has a retroactive effect, took place after the commission of the disputed facts.
For his part, the representative of the police in the proceedings considers that Mr. Wamba cannot have benefited from the rights and advantages of the act of his integration into the police and refuse to submit to the obligations linked to this act. “When we are asked to recall salaries, we are civil servants, but when it comes to responding to disciplinary faults, we are no longer civil servants”, he quips, adding: “it was a case exceptional, it was fashionable that his case be treated in an exceptional manner”. The disputed facts, he insists, are quite serious, because Mr. Wamba, should have asked permission before “going out of the security device”. In response, Me Mbianga said that “[his] client was in a hurry. In a state of necessity. In an emergency do we have to ask permission? Satisfying a natural need is not disrespecting one’s hierarchy.
During its requisitions, the public prosecutor took up the cause of the State. “We do not lower the ranks of someone who is not a civil servant […]. The acts were committed during a sensitive period: the “closure” operation. You have a need to report yourself. We don’t mess with safety.” Finally, after retiring to reflect on its decision, the court returned to announce to the public that it will conduct its “inquiry” with the parties behind closed doors (counsel chamber) on September 21 in order to “determine the status”. that Mr. Wamba had at the material time. That’s when he will probably make his decision.
