Mr. Minister of State, Minister of Justice, Keeper of the Seals, a few weeks ago, some English-speaking lawyers went on strike. They took to the streets of the North West and South West Regions and demanded inter alia the translation of the OHADA Uniform Acts into English...
Let me first of all clarify a concept that leads to confusion.
Going on strike is the result, after consultation, of employees who collectively cease to go to work because they submitted a professional claim to their employer and intend to support this professional claim by refusing to work.
Cessation of work, in our view, is not necessarily a noisy demonstration on the public highway, accompanied by violence and destruction.
In the Cameroon legal system, practice at the Bar is a liberal profession. The advocate is not an employee of a court. An advocate is remunerated by a client to perform a specific assignment in court.
In fact, Section 1 of Law No.90/59 of 19 December 1990 to Organize Practice at the Bar provides: "Practice at the Bar is a liberal profession which shall consist, against remuneration, of assisting and representing the parties before the law courts, conducting suits, pleading and giving legal advice".
The strike by advocates, therefore, does not concern the courts or the Minister of Justice.
The strike by advocates concerns only the latter and their employers, to wit, their clients.
Consequently, an advocate who ceases to represent or defend the interests of his client in court should be held professionally and ethically liable, and disciplinary action brought against him before the Bar Council.
I would like to add that the law also provides that all persons shall be entitled, without being represented by an advocate, to appear before any court except the Supreme Court, for the purpose of conducting a suit and pleading, on their own behalf or their spouse ... etc.
And in criminal matters, where the presence of a lawyer is compulsory for the defence, the courts issue summons, appoints advocates ex officio requiring designated advocates, to hold brief for the defendant.
As you can see, the functioning of courts is not necessarily impeded by the absence of lawyers.
The problem thus posed by a noisy demonstration in the street by advocates, who are supposed to be practitioners of the law, is not properly presented.
However, it should be noted that justice is not rendered for advocates.
Nor is justice rendered for Judicial and Legal Officers.
Justice is not rendered in the interest of the courts.
Justice is rendered on behalf of the people of Cameroon, for litigants.
It would therefore be appropriate, for the proper administration of justice, that advocates and their clients agree and that the courts be understanding of litigants when they wish to have their lawyers present at the hearing, without however further aggravating judicial delays that are vehemently deplored.
Now, let me answer your question and precisely that concerning the OHADA Uniform Acts.