A CRITICAL ASSESSMEMT OF THE MECHANISMS FOR THE PROTECTION OF WORKERS AGAINST UNFAIR DISMISSAL IN CAMEROON
Keywords:
Termination of Employment Contract, Protection, Determination, work, Unfair Dismissal.Abstract
This piece of work has as main objective to critically analyse the mechanisms for the protection of workers’ rights against unfair dismissal in Cameroon, particularly as it has immense potentials for problems. The ILO in order to bring to an end the concept of “at will” termination which was the practice in most countries adopted, the Termination of Employment Convention No 158 of 1982. The aim of this Convention was to do away with unfair dismissal situations which existed in most countries. Irrespective of the existence of the above Convention, the practice of determination of contracts of employment in Cameroon is employer -friendly as the employer is free to determine(terminate) the contract of his employee for a cause or no reason at all. This principle runs in contradiction with the ILO Convention No 158 of 1982, a treaty duly ratified by Cameroon which provides in Article 4 for termination based on a valid reason. Though there exist several structures such as the Labour inspectorate which are in place to ensure the protection of workers against unfair termination, unfair termination has remained a pertinent issue in the Cameroon economy. This is premise on the fact that the mechanisms put in place to afford protection to workers has failed to live up to expectation. In connection with our above objective we adopted an in-depth content analysis which is based on primary and secondary sources of data collection imperative to the study.
References
1. Mikano E., Kiye . The Repugnancy and Incompatibility Tests and Customary Law in Anglophone Cameroon. African Studies Quarterly vol. 15, pp.85-106.
2. E.A Taiwo . Repugnancy Clause and its impact on Customary Law: Comparing the South African and Nigerian Positions some Lessons for Nigeria . Journal for Judicial Science, 2009:34.
3. See Bronstein 1998:388 at 469.
4. Adopted in 1955.
5. Mikano E. Kiye, Op Cit.
6. Law No. 96 -06 of 18 January 1996 to amend the Constitution of 2 June 1972.
7. Law No 2006/015 of 29 December 2006 0n Judicial Organization.
8. 1955 Southern Cameroon High Court Law.
9. F. Henry, Cameroon Legal System, retrieved at hg.org/legal-articles.
10. U.B Chuks, Repugnancy Doctrine and Customary Law in Nigeria: A positive Aspect of British Colonialism.
11. O.W., Igwe and M.D Ogolo . Repugnancy Test and Customary Criminal Law in Nigeria: A time for Re -assessing Content and Relevance. Donnish Journals, 2017.
12. H. Nwaechefu, the subjection of the customary laws to repugnancy tests by Nigerian courts; the need to broaden the Horizon, International Journa l of Law, vol.3; Issue 6; November 2017; pp.70-74.
13. Derrett (1965) Justice, Equity and Good Conscience (Changing Laws in Developing Countries Anderson J.N.D (ed) London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co.
14. U.B Chuks, Op cit.
15. Law No. 2011/011 of May 2011, to amend and supplement certain provisions of the 1981 Ordinance on Civil Status.
16. (1962-64) WCLR 321.
17. See section 77 (2) of the civil status registration ordinance of 29 June 1981(old)
18. Mikano E. Kiye, Op Cit.
19. Section 17 of Law No 2016/007 of 12 July 2016 relating to the penal code.
20. Customary court Ordinance CAP 142 of 1948. See also A.O., Enabulele & B. Bazuaye, validity and enforceability of customary law in Nigeria: towards a correct delimitation of the province of the courts, journal of African Law, 2019.
21. Mikano E. Kiye, Op Cit.
22. E. Taiwo. Repugnancy clause and its impacts on customary law: comparing the South African and Nigerian Positions - Some lessons for Nigeria . journal for juridical Science 2009:34(1).
23. Ibid. Cite this Article Tangwa Modestine Ginj, Tasiki Desvarieux Ntobengwia . The Domination of the Repugnancy and Incompatibility Tests on Customary Law in Anglophone Cameroon. National Journal of Labour and Industrial Law . November, 2020; 3(2): 32–37p.
