(publicly) discussed ways and means of introducing multi-party democracy in Cameroon. Articles of the Covenant: 7, 9, 12 (4), 14 (1) (3), 19 Article of the Optional Protocol: 5 (2) (b) 2.5 Between 26 February and 23 March 1990, Mr. Mukong was detained at the Mbope Camp of the Brigade mobile mixte in Douala, where he allegedly was not allowed to see either his lawyer, his wife or his friends. He claims that he was subjected to intimidation and mental torture, in that he was threatened that he would be taken to the torture chamber or shot, should any unrest among the population develop. He took these threats seriously, as two of his opposition colleagues, who were detained with him, had in fact been tortured. On one day, he allegedly was locked in his cell for twentyfour hours, suffering from the heat (temperatures above 40°C). On another day, he allegedly was beaten by a prison warder when he refused to eat. 1. The author of the communication is Albert Womah Mukong, a citizen of Cameroon born in 1933. He claims to be a victim of violations by Cameroon of articles 7; 9, paragraphs 1 to 5; 12, paragraph 4; 14, paragraphs 1 and 3; and 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. He is represented by counsel. The Optional Protocol entered into force for Cameroon on 27 September 1984. The facts as submitted by the author 2.1 The author is a journalist, writer and longtime opponent of the one-party system in Cameroon. He has frequently and publicly advocated the introduction of multi-party democracy and has worked towards the establishment of a new political party in his country. He contends that some of the books that he has written were either banned or prohibited from circulation. In the summer of 1990, he left Cameroon, and in October 1990 applied for asylum in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. In December 1990, his wife left Cameroon for Nigeria with her two youngest children. 2.6 The author contends that there is no effective remedy for him to exhaust, and that he should be deemed to have complied with the requirements of article 5, paragraph 2 (b), of the Optional Protocol. In respect of his arrests in 1988 and 1990, he claims that although Ordinance 62/OF/18 of 12 March 1962, under which he was charged with "intoxication of national and international public opinion", was abrogated by Law 090/046 of 19 December 1990, the fact remains that at the time of his arrest, the peaceful public expression of his opinions was considered a crime. The author adds that there is no procedure under domestic law by which one could challenge a law as being incompatible with international human rights standards; fundamental human rights are only guaranteed in the preamble to the country's Constitution, and the preambular paragraphs are not enforceable. The fact that the Ordinance of 1962 was abrogated in 1990 did not provide the author with relief, since it did not mean that he could challenge his detention during his imprisonment and, as it was not made retroactive, it did not mean that he could seek compensation for unlawful detention. 2.2 On 16 June 1988, the author was arrested, after an interview given to a correspondent of the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), in which he had criticized both the President of Cameroon and the Government. He claims that in detention, he was not only interrogated about this interview but also subjected to cruel and inhuman treatment. He indicates that from 18 June to 12 July, he was continuously held in a cell, at the First Police District of Yaoundé, measuring approximately 25 square metres, together with 25 to 30 other detainees. The cell did not have sanitary facilities. As the authorities refused to feed him initially, the author was without food for several days, until his friends and family managed to locate him. 2.7 The author further submits that the examining judge of the tribunal of Bafoussam found him guilty as charged and, by order of 25 January 1989, placed him under military jurisdiction. He explains that under domestic law, this examining magistrate does not decide on either guilt or innocence of an accused, but merely on whether sufficient evidence exists to justify an extension of the detention and to place him under military jurisdiction; the placement under military jurisdiction allegedly could not be challenged. 2.3 From 13 July to 10 August 1988, Mr. Mukong was detained in a cell at the headquarters of the Police Judiciaire in Yaoundé, together with common criminals. He claims that he was not allowed to keep his clothes, and that he was forced to sleep on a concrete floor. Within two weeks of detention under these conditions, he fell ill with a chest infection (bronchitis). Thereafter, he was allowed to wear his clothes and to use old cartons as a sleeping mat. 2.8 It is noted that the author's lawyer twice applied to the High Court of Cameroon for writs of habeas corpus. Both were rejected on the ground that the case was before a military tribunal and that no writ of habeas corpus lies against charges to be 2.4 On 5 May 1989, the author was released, but on 26 February 1990, he was again arrested, following a meeting on 23 January 1990 during which several people, including the author, had 87