“We were told
not to go to ourforest anymore”

Sudcam’s assault on human rights

CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION				3THE SUDCAM PLANTATION		

5

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE’S RIGHTSIN CAMEROON				7TRAMPLING ON
BAKA’S RIGHTS				7RECOMMENDATIONS			13REFERENCES				15Photo front cover: cleared landscape inside the Sudcam concession,
July 2018, © Greenpeace.
© Greenpeace

INTRODUCTION
The Congo Basin forest forms the second
largest block of rainforest on Earth. Spanning six
countries, it is home to millions of people whose
livelihoods depend directly on forest resources
and whose cultural and spiritual practices areclosely linked to the forest. More than 60 billion
tons of carbon are stored in its trees and soils,
half of it in recently discovered peatlands.1 The
Congo Basin forest plays a key role in regulating
the subregional and global climate and provides
important ecosystem services such as soil
protection, water filtration and the maintenanceof biodiversity.2
With approximately 20 million hectares ofdense humid forests,3 Cameroon comprises
about a tenth of the Congo Basin forest. Its
forests are among the most species-rich of theregion. Despite their crucial role, they are being
systematically sold off for industrial logging,agribusiness plantations and mining. Under
the guise of “development,” these activities areserving narrow economic and political interests,
while threatening the global climate, biodiversity
and communities whose lives depend on forests.
A case in point is the rubber plantation of Sud
Cameroun-Hévéa, SA (“Sudcam”), carved outof dense rainforest between 2011 and 2018.
Sudcam is located on the traditional territories
of indigenous Baka communities, lands
which were expropriated by the Cameroonian
government for this purpose without theirconsent, and without fair compensation.
Indigenous peoples’ and local communities’
rights to their lands receive very limited
recognition under Cameroonian law. The
government often hands out their lands to
private companies in violation of international
human rights law.
In March 2012, inspectors evaluating the threats to
the Dja Faunal Reserve, a Unesco World Heritagesite adjacent to Sudcam, were refused access tothe concession “for so-called security reasons.”4

3

For years, international organisations and NGOs
have raised concerns that Sudcam is undermining
the rights and livelihoods of local communities andplacing increased pressure on the Dja Reserve.5
Sudcam’s parent company is London-based
rubber company Corrie MacColl Limited(“Corrie MacColl”), a subsidiary of Halcyon Agri
Corporation Limited (“Halcyon Agri”), which
despite the multiple concerns raised abouthuman rights violations and environmental
damage, acquired Sudcam in 2016. Corrie
MacColl describes itself as the “global leader insustainable natural rubber” and “a sustainablemodel corporate citizen [...] extensively invested
in ecological conservation, economic growth andsocial development.”6
In July 2018, Greenpeace published Ruinous
Rubber, a report documenting the extent of
the environmental damage caused by Sudcam
as well as the systematic violations of national
and international norms throughout theplantation’s roll-out. 7
The current brief looks more closely at violations ofindigenous peoples’ rights that have resulted fromthe Sudcam plantation. It documents the forced
displacement of Baka communities from theirtraditional lands and the destruction of their forest
resources and settlements inside the concession.
It focuses on two Baka communities (Bitye, Edjom)
whose lands have been partly destroyed for theplantation, and one community (Nyabibete) whoselands are within the concession, but have not yet
been cleared. The cases of these communities
are indicative of the situation of other indigenous
groups directly or indirectly affected by Sudcam,
like the Baka communities of Ngoe, Ndjikom,
Memvae, Mintima, Melen, Oding, Bikoula,
Emvieng I and Akom Ndong. The brief is basedon interviews and focus group conversations held
during field trips in July 2017, July 2018 and July
2019, complemented with a literature review.

The brief concludes with specificrecommendations for the immediate remediationof the situation of the indigenous communities andbroader policy recommendations to shift towards
sustainable community-based forest management
by strengthening rights.

Logging operations inside theSudcam concession, July 2017,© Greenpeace

4

SUDCAM PLANTATION (HALCYONAGRI GROUP) IN CAMEROON

DJA WILDLIFERESERVE

5 km
Livelihood activities of Bantou and Baka local communities:
farming, gathering, fishing...
Villages
Forest clearance for plantation development (since 2011):
more than 11 600 ha
SUDCAM concessions
CONCESSION: Forest Atlas of Cameroon 2018, WRI. LIVELIHOOD ACTIVITIES: Rainforest Foundation UK/MappingForRights, APIFED. FOREST CLEARANCE: Greenpeace, based on Landsat 7/8 (NASA)& Sentinel 2 (ESA) images. BACKGROUND IMAGE: Sentinel 2, 4/01/2018, ESA.
MAP PRODUCTION: Greenpeace, 19/11/2019.

5

THE SUDCAM PLANTATION
Between 2008 and 2015, the Cameroonian
government awarded more than 75,000 hectaresof densely forested land to Sudcam to create arubber plantation in the South Region.8 The land
is only seven kilometers from the Mvomeka’amansion, security compound and airstrip ofCameroon’s president Paul Biya9. In 2015, CIFORresearchers reported that “an influential memberof the Cameroonian political elite” apparently
owns 20% of Sudcam’s shares (see Box 1: Whoowns Sudcam?).10
More than 30 communities live in and aroundthe area allocated to Sudcam, including
indigenous Baka communities. The concession
overlaps significantly with their traditional lands.
Participatory maps show the multiple uses ofthe forest in this area, including farming, fishing,gathering and hunting.11 The plantation has had,and continues to have, profound impacts on theirlivelihoods and their rights.
In 2011, the government granted Sudcam longterm tax exemptions and protection against legal
challenges.12 Shortly after, the company started
clearing the forest in its concessions. Between
2011 and December 2018, it destroyed over
10,000 hectares, an area the size of Paris, toreplace it with a monoculture rubber plantation.13
The resulting emissions have been estimated at 11
million tonnes of CO2,14 the equivalent of burning
more than 60,000 railcars of coal.15
Under pressure from NGOs, in November 2018
Halcyon Agri announced a number of initiatives,
including a “Sustainable Natural Rubber Supply
Chain Policy” and the creation of a “sustainability
council” mandated to monitor its implementation.16
In December 2018, following a period of intensified
deforestation in the concession, Halcyon Agri alsodeclared a suspension of all forest clearing.17 Our
analysis indicates that no further deforestation has
taken place since then. However, while its policies
state the company will respect customary land
tenure rights and prohibit land grabbing, the reality

6on the ground remains grim. Communities whose
land was grabbed have not seen the remaining
uncleared land returned to them, communities
whose lands have already been cleared haven’t
received any compensation, and no community
has received reparations for the violations of
their rights and the damage inflicted upon them.
Additionally, while the company has announced
that a 25,000 hectare area will be set aside forcommunities, it is unclear who will have whichrights in that area, what its boundaries are andwhether it corresponds fully with the traditionallands expropriated for the concession.18

Mbil Thomas,
which includes
sacred sites andwas used as abasis for hunting
and gathering,inside the Sudcam
concessions.
Currently a
restricted area
for the Baka,
July 2019 ©,Greenpeace

BOX 1: WHO OWNS SUDCAM
Sudcam is 80% owned by Société de Développement du Caoutchouc
Camerounais, SA (SDCC), which was acquired by Singapore-based
and -listed rubber company Halcyon Agri Corporation Limited(Halcyon Agri) in 2016.19
After acquiring UK-registered rubber trader Corrie MacColl Trading
Limited in early 2018, Halcyon Agri changed the name of this new
subsidiary to Corrie MacColl Limited and brought its entire non-tyreand specialty tyre business, including its Cameroonian plantations,
under Corrie MacColl’s ownership and management.20
The remaining 20% of Sudcam is held by a private Camerooniancompany called Société de Production de Palmiers et d’Hévéa, SA(SPPH). In a 2015 study CIFOR researchers reported that “according
to a local representative of the Ministry of the Environment, thePresident of the Republic’s family owns the company,” adding“However, we have learned only that an influential member of
the Cameroonian political elite, whose identity we do not know,
apparently owns 20% of the Company’s shares. Still, it is likely the
Cameroonian shareholder influenced the allocation of the temporary
concession near a World Heritage site without regard to existing land
designations and relevant regulations.”21
In a September 2018 email, Corrie MacColl’s CEO Robert Meyer
claimed not to know whether Sudcam had “ties to the government.”
In a follow-up email he claimed not to know SPPH’s registration
number in Cameroon’s trade register.22

7

INDIGENOUS PEOPLE’S
RIGHTS IN CAMEROON
Hunter-gatherer indigenous peoples are estimatedto make up approximately 0.4% of the populationof Cameroon.23 These forest peoples include the
Baka (estimated at 40,000 people), the Bagyeli/
Bakola (estimated at 4,000 people), and the
Bedzan (estimated at 300 people).24
Cameroon is party to various binding international
instruments that require the State to respect andprotect indigenous peoples’ rights, including theirrights to own, occupy, manage and use theirterritories.25 Cameroon also voted in favour of
the adoption of the UN Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in 2007. Under
these instruments, where indigenous peoples havebeen forcibly dispossessed of their lands, theyalso have the right to have their lands returnedto them, or, where that is impossible, to receive
alternative lands of equal size and quality.
Despite these international standards, indigenous
peoples in the country continue to suffer
widespread discrimination and dispossessionof their lands and natural resources. Lack ofadequate recognition by the Cameroonian
government of distinct socio-culturalcharacteristics of indigenous peoples is a serious
barrier for improving their situation. Another key
problem is the absence of legal recognition for
indigenous and local communities’ customaryland rights. Forests traditionally occupied
and maintained by indigenous communities
have been handed out by the government asprotected areas, logging concessions, large-scale
plantations and mining concessions. Because
their land rights receive limited recognition in law,concessions of this nature are generally handed
out without consultation with affected indigenous
communities, without obtaining their free, priorand informed consent, and without any paymentof compensation.26 There are many reports ofhuman rights violations, arbitrary punishments,
destruction of homes, camps, personal property,
torture of indigenous peoples by wildlife guards.27

8The primary obligation to respect, protect andfulfill these human rights rests with the State of
Cameroon. However, the UN Guiding Principles
on Business and Human Rights recognise thatbusinesses also have a responsibility to respecthuman rights – i.e. to ensure their activities do
not undermine human rights.28 Sudcam, Corrie
MacColl and Halcyon Agri have clearly notrespected human rights in their operations to date,as the next section shows.

TRAMPLING ON
BAKA’S RIGHTS

I

ndigenous peoples shall not
be forcibly removed from theirlands or territories. No relocation
shall take place without the free,prior and informed consent of theindigenous peoples concerned andafter agreement on just and faircompensation and, where possible,
with the option of return.
(Article 10 UNDRIP)

From its very start, the Sudcam plantation has
been a mockery of respecting indigenous peoples’
rights to their lands and resources. The principleof free, prior and informed consent means thatindigenous peoples and other forest-dependentcommunities are entitled to be consulted and giveor withhold consent to a project that may affectthem or their land. Once they have given theirconsent, they can also withdraw it at any stage.

Although the Cameroonian government allocated
two initial blocks amounting to more than 45,000
hectares of land to Sudcam back in 2008,
testimonies from the Baka of Edjom and Bityesuggest they were informed only four years later.
They were never asked for consent. “Sudcam
arrived and entered the forest without asking
for anyone’s opinion. We just learned they werealready there,” according to testimony from Bitye.
“They never met with me. We have not talked. I
only heard rumours.”
Baka from Bitye said the divisional officer (DO)of Meyomessala finally informed the village chiefin 2012 and told him to ask the community not
to enter the forest any more. One member of thecommunity recalled bitterly: “We were told not to
go to our forest camps any more.”“Sudcam arrived andentered the forest
without asking foranyone’s opinion.”

The same year, the Baka communities of Bitye
and Ngoe wrote to the senior divisional officer(SDO) of Sangmélima, emphasizing the forest
was their principal source of subsistence. They
asked to move the concession boundary eight
kilometers to the East, in order to save theirforest camp Mbil Thomas and their sacred sites,
and requested proper compensation for the rest.29
None of this happened.

9I

ndigenous peoples have theright to the lands, territories
and resources which they havetraditionally owned, occupied orotherwise used or acquired.
(Article 26 UNDRIP)

Despite their explicit request to save Mbil Thomas,
the Baka of Bitye say they were told to abandon
the camp, as well as another forest camp called
Kou’ou. They claim Kou’ou, which included
sacred sites, was razed to the ground with thesurrounding forest to make way for a village
for Sudcam plantation workers. Mbil Thomas,
which includes graves, remains abandoned in
the uncleared forest area inside the concession.
Although community members occasionally passthrough Mbil Thomas, they say they have no rightto visit the graves of their ancestors or to collectforest products in this forest that became theprivate property of Sudcam.

The Baka of Edjom abandoned Bingou, a forest
camp where they used to grow cocoa and collectmangos, oranges and medicinal plants, as well as
engage in other activities. Mbout, another camp of
the Baka of Edjom inside the concession, remains
in use, but the community is worried it could be
expelled from it at any time.

Bingou, inside
the Sudcam
concessions.
Until the arrivalof Sudcam,
the Baka used
to grow andcollect fruits
and medicinal
plants here.
July 2019 ©
Greenpeace

BOX 2: FOREST PRODUCTS
Forests are a key source of products traditionally used for food,medicine, and construction, and constitute a major contributor to
the economy.
Non-timber Forest Products (NTFPs) are goods of biological origin(plant, fungi and animal) from natural, modified or managed forested
landscapes.30 They include fruits and nuts, vegetables, fish andgame, medicinal plants, resins, essences, fuel wood and barks, andfibres such as bamboo, rattans and other palms and grasses. NTFPs
are used for food, forage, utensils, tools for construction, medicine,aromatic products and colorants, and objects of ornament, art andcultural value.31
Moreover, they can be traded in markets, allowing diversification
in household income.32 High-value NTFPs such as bush mango(Irvingia gabonensis), eru or fumbwa (Gnetum spp.), honey andwax, gum arabic, raffia (Raphia farinifera), kola nut (Cola acuminata),safou (Dacryodes edulis) and pygeum (Prunus africana) provide on
average 42% of annual income for harvesters’ households.33

10

I

ndigenous peoples have theright to maintain and develop
their political, economic andsocial systems or institutions, tobe secure in the enjoyment of theirown means of subsistence anddevelopment, and to engage freely
in all their traditional and othereconomic activities.
(Article 20 UNDRIP)“We were told not to
go to our forest camps
any more.”I

ndigenous peoples havethe right to the conservationand protection of theenvironment and the productive
capacity of their lands or
territories and resources(Article 29 UNDRIP).

11

Although the Baka of Bitye and Edjom have long
lived alongside the Bantu in these villages, theirlivelihood is almost entirely based on the forest.
Before 2012, they used to reside part-time in theforest camps now destroyed and abandoned. The
camps served as their bases for hunting, fishingand gathering in the forest. They harvested wild
honey, wild mangoes, djansang (the fruit of a tree,
Ricinodendron heudelotii, used as a spice) andmedicinal plant in the forests. These products
served for subsistence and as a source of income.
The closing off and destruction of part of theirforest has reduced the area in which thesecommunities can undertake their economic
activities and their access to resources. “They’ve
planted [rubber, GP] wherever the people used
to collect bush mango seeds, according totestimony from Bitye. Where the forest still stands,
restrictions apply: “Access to it and the way weused it isn’t the same as before. You can enter, but
you don’t have the same things you found before.
Even hunting has become complicated. You can
encounter the guard and he can arrest you,” wewere told in Edjom.
The Baka of Nyabibete said they have one forest
camp inside the Sudcam concession, called
Menguenye. They also have a sacred site outsideof it. As the company hasn’t started operatingin this part of the concession, the camps remain
accessible. However, the community lives inconstant fear of losing them. Moreover, they
consider the forest remaining outside of theconcession insufficient for gathering forest
products, the income of which allows them tosend their children to school.

I

ndigenous peoples have theright to redress, by means that
can include restitution or, when
this is not possible, just, fair andequitable compensation for the lands,
territories and resources which they
have traditionally owned or otherwise
occupied or used, and which have been
confiscated, taken, occupied, used ordamaged without their free, prior andinformed consent.
(Article 28 UNDRIP)

Neither the Cameroonian government nor Sudcam
provided the Baka of Bitye and Edjom with justand fair compensation for the land and resourcesthat were expropriated for Sudcam’s concession
without consent. Baka in Bitye claimed only two
community members received anything at all.
Under Cameroonian law, compensation is notprovided for unregistered customary land, only
for recognized “improvements” such as planted
crops. This means indigenous peoples’ lossof forest resources which they use sustainably- without destroying or “developing” the land,or leaving traces - is as a general rule entirely
uncompensated. One of the two beneficiaries said
Sudcam paid a mere 800,000 CFA francs (€1,200)
to compensate for the loss of cocoa trees on aplot a little under one hectare in size. A cocoa
farm of one hectare could generate profits of morethan 15,000 euro over its lifetime.34

Despite all the promises of “development”,
testimonies indicate the Baka have seen little
or no benefits from the plantation for which
their land was taken away from them and theirforest destroyed. Many of the Baka children
don’t go to school and hardly any Baka havebeen employed by Sudcam. “I don’t see theirusefulness since their arrival in 2012. Other thanbringing some food and drinks for the children,just this little gesture, I don’t see that Sudcam
has been useful at all.”The land grab was facilitated by a context ofstructural discrimination and marginalization ofindigenous peoples and lack of recognition ofcustomary land and land use rights in Cameroon.
With the Baka displaced from their traditionallands, barred from access to their forest anddriven to derive livelihoods from agriculture inadjoining Bantu villages, there is increasingpressure on the remaining land resources. The
Baka are on the losing end. They don’t havesignificant areas of agricultural land because
farming is not the traditional basis of theirlivelihood. Local land allocations are generally
determined by Bantu chiefs who consider thelands belong to the Bantu. In the villages the
Baka have no rights over the land or otherresources and in the forest, their resources are
exploited by plantation workers and their families.
“It’s especially the rivers and streams that are
taken over. [...] One day when our women wentfishing there, they found that the women of
Sudcam had taken everything over. The wives ofthe people [...] who work there, in the villages of
Sudcam, the work camps of the sub-contractors,
there’s a lot of people there,” according to atestimony in Edjom. The marginalisation of the
Baka is further exacerbated by the lack of official
recognition of their chiefs, while Bantu chiefs
have legal status.

© Greenpeace

12

I

ndigenous peoples have the rightto manifest, practise, develop andteach their spiritual and religious
traditions, customs and ceremonies;
the right to maintain, protect, and haveaccess in privacy to their religious andcultural sites; the right to the use andcontrol of their ceremonial objects;
and the right to the repatriation of their
human remains.
(Article 12 UNDRIP)

The Baka also used their forest camps as thebasis for rituals and their cultural and spiritual
life. The destruction and restriction of access tothe forest is having a serious negative impact on
the transmission of traditions and knowledge,
including the Baka language, which are alreadyunder threat from external influences.

© Greenpeace

13

RECOMMENDATIONSThe Baka are guardians of the forest, which they have been using and managing sustainably for many
generations. Like other indigenous peoples, they play a crucial role in protecting forests and combatingclimate change. At the core of many of the threats they face is a lack of recognition of their rights.
Recognizing the rights of indigenous peoples over the forest is not only a human rights imperative, but alsoa solution that can generate environmental benefits and halt detrimental industrial activities in the forest.
These activities threaten the forest’s potential to contribute to the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 degree limit, which
Cameroon’s president himself has pledged to support.35
In the first section below, we set out recommendations for Sudcam that were raised by communities during
our investigation. The second part includes recommendations by Greenpeace Africa and Apifed to otheractors, to assist with a broader systemic shift in how Africa’s rainforests are managed - moving away fromthe false pretense of “development” in the service of multinational corporations to people-led development
through environmentally sustainable community-based forest management.

Recommendations from communities for Sudcam

Seek free and informed consent from indigenous communities.
Restore the destroyed forest.
Pay just and fair compensation for loss of livelihood, as well as losses of cultural andspiritual value of indigenous peoples as a result of the Sudcam plantation.
Return the remaining undestroyed forest inside the concession to the communities.
Provide communities with regular and adequate information on the company’s activities.

14

Recommendations for Halcyon agri investors

Engage with and put pressure on Halcyon Agri to ensure the above mentioned demands
are met.

Recommendations For the UN agencies

Closely monitor the respect of human rights of indigenous peoples by the Cameroonian
government and to formulate recommendations and proposals for remediation of past andongoing alleged violations.

Recommendations For donors, including those involvedin the Central African Forest Initiative (CAFI)

Allocate funds to support transition to community-based forest management in all
Congo Basin countries.

15

Recommendations for the Cameroon government

Declare a moratorium on new projects which would negatively affect indigenous peoples.
Reform national land tenure and related laws and regulations to respect and protect
indigenous people’s rights to own, manage and use their traditional lands and territories,
as well as to give or withhold their free, prior and informed consent to any activity that may
affect their lands.
Legally recognize indigenous com munity chiefs in accordance with the legal recognitionof traditional chiefs in Cameroon.
Recognize, protect and support traditional knowledge, livelihoods and sustainable
resource management systems of indigenous peoples, and their role in sustainable
resource management.
Ensure effective participation and representation of indigenous peoples in alldecision-making processes relating to lands, territories and resources affecting them.

Recognize and respect, at all levels of governance, the intrinsic value of sacred natural sites
and territories and insure that these places are no-go areas for industry.
Simplify procedures for indigenous people to acquire land titles, grant such titles andsupport community-based forest management as well as community-led initiatives tomaintain and promote Baka culture.36

16

REFERENCES
1

Dargie, G. C., Lewis, S. L. Lawson, I. T., Mitchard, E. T. A., Page,
S. E., Bocko, Y. E. and Ifo, S. A. “Age, Extent and Carbon Storageof the Central Congo Basin Peatland Complex.” Nature 542,
no. 7639 (January 11, 2017): 86–90. https://doi.org/10.1038/
nature21048.

8

The area was reportedly subsequently reduced to approximately
58,000 hectares.

9

Greenpeace Africa. Op. cit.

10

Assembe-Mvondo, S., Putzel, L. and Eba’a Atyi, R. Op. cit.

2

De Wasseige, C. , Tadoum, M. Eba’a Atyi, D. R. and Doumenge,
C. eds. The Forests of the Congo Basin - Forests and Climate
Change. Special Issue of the State of the Forest - 2015. Belgium:
Weyrich, 2015. http://observatoire-comifac.net/docs/edf2015/EN/
SOF2015_EN.pdf.

11

Participatory maps have been developed by the communities
with the support of a local NGO, Appui à l’Autopromotion etl’Insertion des Femmes, des Jeunes et des Désoeuvrés (Apifed)
and the British NGO Rainforest Foundation UK (RFUK). Osuna
Orozco and Salber. Op. cit.

3

Mayaux, P., Pekel, J. F., Desclee, B., Donnay, F., Lupi, A., Achard,F., Clerici, M., Bodart, C., Brink, A., Nasi, R. and Belward, A.
“State and Evolution of the African Rainforests between 1990
and 2010.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of
London, Series B, Biological Sciences 368, no. 1625 (2013).
https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0300.

12

See Greenpeace Africa. Op. cit. for details.

13

Greenpeace Africa. Op. cit.

14

Global Witness. Op. cit.

15

US EPA, OAR. “Greenhouse Gas Equivalencies Calculator.”
Data and Tools. US EPA, August 28, 2015. https://www.epa.gov/
energy/greenhouse-gas-equivalencies-calculator.

16

Halcyon Agri Corporation. “Press Release: Halcyon Agri
Announces Sustainable Natural Rubber Supply Chain Policy
and Launches Sustainability Commission for Cameroon,”
November 19, 2018. https://www.halcyonagri.com/wp-content/
uploads/2018/11/Sustainable-Natural-Rubber-Supply-ChainPolicy-and-Sustainability-Commission-for-Cameroon.pdf.

45Maziz, L., Diedhiou, Y. and Lethier., H. Rapport de Mission deSuivi Réactif de La Réserve de Faune Du Dja. République Du
Cameroun. 27 Février – 5 Mars 2012. 2012. S.l.: UNESCO World
Heritage Center & IUCN.
Greenpeace International. Palm Oil’s New Frontier. How
Industrial Expansion Threatens Africa’s Rainforests. Amsterdam:
Greenpeace International, 2012. http://www.greenpeace.org/
international/Global/international/publications/forests/2012/
Congo/PalmOilsNewFrontier.pdf.

Halcyon Agri Corporation Limited. “Sustainable Natural Rubber
Supply Chain Policy (‘SNRSCP’). HAC-SNRSCP_v2.” Halcyon
Agri Corporation Limited, July 31, 2019. https://www.corriemaccoll.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/Sustainable-NaturalRubber-Supply-Chain-Policy_2019-Aug-29.pdf.

Chen, S. “Agricultural Expansion Needs Regulating!” Greenpeace
East Asia, May 12, 2015. http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/
news/blog/agricultural-expansion-needs-regulating-sinoc/
blog/52852/.
Assembe-Mvondo, S., Putzel, L. and Eba’a Atyi, R.
Socioecological Responsibility and Chinese Overseas
Investments: The Case of Rubber Plantation Expansion
in Cameroon. Bogor: CIFOR, 2015. http://www.cifor.org/
publications/pdf_files/WPapers/WP176CIFOR.pdf.
Greenpeace Africa. “UNESCO Fails to Protect Cameroon’s Dja
Reserve from Multiple Threats Including the Sudcam Rubber
Plantation.” Greenpeace Africa, August 23, 2016. http://www.
greenpeace.org/africa/en/News/news/UNESCO-fails-to-protectCameroons-Dja-Reserve-from-multiple-threats-including-theSudcam-rubber-plantation/.
Agnew, R. “The Impacts of Agri-Business in Cameroon
Laid Bare.” Mapping for Rights, July 22, 2016. http://blog.
mappingforrights.org/?p=1359.

Halcyon Agri. “Delivering on Sustainability: Corrie MacColl Forms
Cameroon Sustainability Council,” April 23, 2019. https://www.
halcyonagri.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/CorrieMacColl_
Release_Sustainability_Council_Launch_23_April_2019.pdf.
17Halcyon Agri Corporation. “Message from Robert Meyer on
Sudcam and HeveCam Clearing Activities,” December 6, 2018.
https://www.halcyonagri.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/
Message-from-Robert-Meyer-on-Sudcam-and-Hevecamclearing-activities.pdf.

18

Corrie MacColl Limited. “Our Community Forest.” Corrie
MacColl Limited, June 5, 2019. https://www.corrie-maccoll.com/
community-forest/.

19

Halcyon Agri. Future Rubber. Corporate Report 2018. Book
One: Strategy and Sustainability. Singapore: Halcyon Agri, 2019.
https://www.halcyonagri.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/
Halcyon_Corporate-Report-2018_Online_Spread_LR_Secure.
pdf.

20

Ibid.

21

Assembe-Mvondo, Putzel and Eba’a Atyi. Op. cit.

22

Greenpeace International. Countdown to Extinction. What Will
It Take to Get Companies to Act? Amsterdam: GreenpeaceInternational, 2019. https://storage.googleapis.com/planet4international-stateless/2019/06/2beb7b30-gp_countdown_to_
extinction_2019.pdf.

23

This figure is however considered to be a significant
underestimate by some actors.

24

Cultural Survival. Observations on the State of Indigenous
Human Rights in Cameroon. Prepared for: The 30th Session of
the United Nations Human Rights Council Universal Periodic
Review May 2018. Cambridge: Cultural Survival, 2017. https://www.culturalsurvival.org/sites/default/files/UPR-reportCameroon-2017.pdf.

25

Including the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights,
the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, theInternational Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights,
the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of
Racial Discrimination, among others.

26

For further details and some examples, see:

Greenpeace International. Justice for People and Planet.
Ending the Age of Corporate Capture, Collusion and Impunity.
Amsterdam: Greenpeace International, 2018.
Earthsight. The Coming Storm. S.l.: Earthsight,
2018. https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/624187_
a3688b61a2c84ec9aad89efea8ffc6db.pdf.
Osuna Orozco, A. and Salber, M. Palmed off. An Investigation
into Three Industrial Palm Oil and Rubber Projects in Cameroon
and the Republic of Congo. London: Rainforest FoundationUK, 2019. https://www.rainforestfoundationuk.org/media.ashx/
palmedoffengfinal.pdf.
Global Witness. Money to Burn. How Iconic Banks and Investors
Fund the Destruction of the World’s Largest Rainforests.
London: Global Witness, 2019. https://www.globalwitness.org/
documents/19811/Money_to_Burn.pdf
Deodatus, F. and Emougou Nnoubilong, M.. “Impacts Des
Activités Agro-Industrielles de Sud Cameroun Hévéa Sur
Le Site Du Patrimoine Mondial de La Reserve de Faune Du
Dja, Cameroun. Mission de Conseil. Rapport Final.” S.l.:
Unesco/European Union, 2019. https://whc.unesco.org/
document/174684.
6

Corrie MacColl Limited. “Corrie MacColl Limited.” Corrie MacColl
Limited. Accessed October 3, 2019. https://www.corrie-maccoll.
com/.

7

Greenpeace Africa. Halcyon Agri’s Ruinous Rubber.
Johannesburg: Greenpeace Africa, 2018. https://storage.
googleapis.com/planet4-africa-stateless/2018/10/8f21a9bc8f21a9bc-greenpeace-africa-sudcam-report-2018-1.pdf.

17

Barume, A. Étude du cadre légal pour la protection des peuples
indigènes et tribaux au Cameroun. Genève: Organisation
Internationale du Travail. 2005.

Nguiffo, S.. “Case Study 6: Cameroon - Dja Wildlife Reserve. One
Forest and Two Dreams: The Constraints Imposed on the Baka in
Miatta by the Dja Wildlife Reserve.” In From Principles to Practice:
Indigenous Peoples and Protected Areas in Africa, by Nelson, J.
and Hossack, L. (eds.). From principles to practice: indigenous
peoples and protected areas in Africa. Moreton-in-Marsh: Forest
Peoples Programme, 2001. http://www.forestpeoples.org/sites/
default/files/publication/2010/08/cameroondjaeng.pdf.
Owono, J. C.. “Cameroun – Campo Ma’an. Le degré d’implication
des Pygmées Bagyeli dans le plan d’aménagement et de gestion
de l’UTO Campo Ma’an.” In Résumé de l’étude de cas donné lorsde la conférence organisée par le CAURWA en collaboration avec
le FPP: Les peuples autochtones et les aires protégées en Afrique: Du principe à la pratique. Kigali: Rwanda. 2001. http://www.
forestpeoples.org/documents/africa/fpproj_cameroon_campo_
maan_summ_fr.shtml
Nguiffo, S., Kenfack, P. E. and Mballa, N. “Historical andcontemporary land laws and their impact on indigenous peoples’
rights in Cameroon” in Land Rights and the Forest Peoples ofAfrica. Moreton-in-Marsh: Forest Peoples Programme, 2009.
Alden Wily, L. Whose Land Is It? The Status of Customary Land
Tenure in Cameroon. Yaoundé/Brussels/London: Centre pourl’Environnement et le Développement (CED)/FERN/Rainforest
Foundation UK (RFUK), 2011. http://www.fern.org/sites/fern.org/
files/cameroon_eng_internet.pdf.
Perram, A. Behind the Veil: Transparency, Access to Information
and Community Rights in Cameroon’s Forestry Sector. Moretonin-Marsh: Forest Peoples Programme, 2016.
Nounah, S. and, Perram, A. De la coupe aux lèvres - le CLIP dansla Réserve de faune de Ngoyla au Cameroun, Moreton-in-Marsh:
Forest Peoples Programme, 2019.
27

Survival International. How Will We Survive? The Destructionof Congo Basin Tribes in the Name of Conservation. Baka
Cameroon. S.l.: Survival International, September 2017. https://
assets.survivalinternational.org/documents/1683/how-will-wesurvive.pdf.
Warren, T., and Baker, K. J. M.. “WWF Funds Guards Who Have
Tortured And Killed People.” BuzzFeed News, March 4, 2019.

28

UNOHCR. Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights.
Implementing the United Nations ‘Protect, Respect and Remedy’
Framework. New York / Geneva: UN, 2011.

29

Letter from Communauté Baka (Pygmées) du Groupement Ngoe
de Bitye to Préfet du Département du Dja et Lobo. “Objet: Délimitation de La Concession Hévéa-Sud Dans La Zone BityeEdjom - Prise En Compte de La Loi Sur Les Minorités: Cas Des
Baka Des Bitye,” April 9, 2012.

30

Awono, A., Ingram, V., Schure, J. and Levang, P. Guide for small
and medium enterprises in the sustainable non-timber forest
product trade in Central Africa. Bogor: CIFOR, 2013. http://www.
fao.org/forestry/38158-02f4528706017d99cb71b03d983e521df.
pdf

31

Ibid.

32

FAO. Living in and from the forests of Central Africa. Rome: FAO,
2017.

33

Ibid.

34

At a yield of 400 kg per hectare, the average for Cameroon, a
cocoa plant lifetime of 30 years, and farm gate prices of 2.21 €per kg. Average yield, cocoa plant lifetime, revenue and profit
in Wessel, M. and Quist-Wessel, P. M. F. “Cocoa Production inWest Africa, a Review and Analysis of Recent Developments.”
NJAS - Wageningen Journal of Life Sciences 74–75 (December2015): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.njas.2015.09.001 and Laven,A., Buunk, E. and Ammerlaan, T.. “Appendix A. Determination of
Cocoa Prices in Cameroon, Nigeria, Ghana, Côte d’Ivoire andIndonesia. Appendix to Report Market Concentration and Price
Formation in the Global Cocoa Value Chain. Commissioned by
the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, The Netherlands.” Amsterdam:
SEO Amsterdam Economics, September 2016. https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/binaries/rijksoverheid/documenten/
rapporten/2016/09/28/appendix-a-determination-of-cocoaprices-in-cameroon-nigeria-ghana-cote-d-ivoire-and-indonesia/
appendix-a-determination-of-cocoa-prices-in-cameroon-nigeriaghana-cote-d-ivoire-and-indonesia.pdf.

1835

Biya, P. “L’enjeu de la COP21 est d’assurer la survie de l’espèce
humaine” Le Monde.fr, November 30, 2015. https://www.
lemonde.fr/afrique/article/2015/11/30/paul-biya-cop21-le-tempsd-agir_4820706_3212.html.

36

For example the 60,000 hectares of forest south-east of the
Dja Reserve requested by the Association des Kobo et Chefs
Traditionnels “Akok-Bac” for a community forest, a communitymanaged hunting zone, and forest museum.

Published in November 2019
Greenpeace Africa
293 Kent Avenue
Randburg

Johannesburg
South Africa

Email: info.africa@greenpeace.org
Web: www.greenpeace.org/africa/

Appui à l’Auto Promotion etInsertion des Femmes, des Jeunes
et Désoeuvrés (APIFED)
Mbalmayo

Cameroon

Email: apifed@yahoo.fr

Web: https://apifed-89.webself.net/

19