{"id":517,"date":"2016-11-18T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2016-11-18T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/africa\/uncategorized\/517\/the-gaps-and-omissions-in-the-cct-audit-report-by-cameroons-ministry-of-forestry-brings-to-light-the-need-for-an-independent-forest-monitor\/"},"modified":"2019-11-06T08:23:20","modified_gmt":"2019-11-06T08:23:20","slug":"the-gaps-and-omissions-in-the-cct-audit-report-by-cameroons-ministry-of-forestry-brings-to-light-the-need-for-an-independent-forest-monitor","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.greenpeace.org\/africa\/en\/press\/517\/the-gaps-and-omissions-in-the-cct-audit-report-by-cameroons-ministry-of-forestry-brings-to-light-the-need-for-an-independent-forest-monitor\/","title":{"rendered":"The gaps and omissions in the CCT audit report by Cameroon\u2019s Ministry of Forestry brings to light the need for an Independent Forest Monitor"},"content":{"rendered":"
The Cameroon Ministry of Forestry recently published the results of an audit it commissioned of the Cameroonian company Compagnie de Commerce et de Transport (CCT). This audit concluded that the allegations made by Greenpeace Africa concerning illegal activities by some suppliers of timber to CCT were founded, but went further to state that these illegal activities have always been repressed by its administration.<\/div>\n
\n

Greenpeace Africa through this briefing is responding to this audit report.<\/p>\n

Brief History<\/strong><\/p>\n

On the 9th<\/sup> of September 2015, Greenpeace published a report CCT\u2019s Timber Trade from Cameroon to Europe-A Test Case for EUTR\u2019s Due Diligence Requirement<\/em><\/a> in which it revealed how the Cameroonian firm CCT has been trading wood from a large number of Cameroonian logging companies (Greenpeace Nederland, 2015). The Greenpeace report listed CCT\u2019s main 2014 suppliers, providing evidence that several of them were involved in illegal logging activities. A frequently observed infringement was that of logging outside its legal boundaries of its cutting permit (hereinafter referred to as VCs from the French ventes de coupe<\/em>), then subsequent declaring that this illegal wood originates from the legal logging title.<\/p>\n

The Cameroon government debunked this report as false a few days after it was released without any attempt to descend to the fields to ascertain the veracity of the report. The Minister of Forestry wrote in a press release that \u201cthese allegations, which are simply derived from stereotypes with the intention to breed trouble, are unfounded and have nothing in common with the true picture of the forestry sector in Cameroon\u201d (Point of Order, Minfof 2016)<\/p>\n

Nonetheless, the Dutch Competent Authority, after its own investigation stemming from the same report which was debunked by the Cameroon Minister of Forestry, imposed sanction on Fibois, a Dutch company that trades in wood from CCT, for violating the European timber regulation (Greenpeace, 2016<\/a>) The sanction consisted of a conditional penalty against the Dutch company and the Dutch Competent Authorities also filed an official report with the public prosecutor.<\/p>\n

Greenpeace Africa carried out yet another field research in early 2016 concerning another CCT supplier, La Socamba, and sent a letter to the Minister of Forestry with its findings on April 4th<\/sup> 2016. The letter revealed how this CCT supplier was involved in illegal logging activities and also stated in part that \u201cWe recommend a full investigation on CCT and its suppliers as an immediate \ufb01rst step\u201d (Greenpeace Africa, 2016)<\/em>. This time, the Minister seemed to have followed Greenpeace Africa recommendation to open an investigation. However, the investigation methodology has remained unclear and the conclusions reached raise further questions. Greenpeace Africa has sent a letter via email to Minfof requiring clarification but we did not get any response from them. (Letter for Clarification After Perusal of Ministry of Forestry and Wildlife (MINFOF) CCT Audit, Greenpeace Africa 2016).<\/p>\n

Conclusions of Minfof Audit and the questions it raises<\/strong>:<\/strong><\/p>\n

One of the stated objectives of this audit was to identify all the supply sources of CCT for the previous and the current year (\u201cIdentifier toutes les sources d\u2019approvisionnement de CCT pour l\u2019exercice pr\u00e9c\u00e9dent et l\u2019ann\u00e9e en cours\u201d<\/em>). However, the tables provided in the report all concern 2015 and no explanation was given why the 2016 data does not appear in the report even though it was part of the objectives. Similarly the source of the data on the table on page 2-3 is omitted in the report.<\/p>\n

The table on page 2-3 mentions \u201cR.A.S.\u201d (rien \u00e0 signaler) for the companies SFC, Amougou Aboui etc but in the April 2016 \u201csommier des infractions\u201d published by MINFOF\u00a0 these companies appeared on the list of companies which committed infractions as shown below:<\/p>\n