Some foreign partners who come to audit or inspect our aviation security measures and programme seem to use different yardsticks for evaluation.

If a simple explanation is permitted, conformity is acting in accordance with established standards, conventions, rules and laws while uniformity is the state of I being alike and lacking diversity. Cameroon did not invent civil aviation; il cannot operate il "à la camerounaise". Air transport is an international industry; air transport activity in Cameroon must fit into the international framework or il shall fade out. Cameroon is a sovereign state, but in the exercise of ils sovereignty il has ratified a number of international conventions in the domain of civil aviation. Must our aviation security measures and programs conform to or be uniform with those put in place elsewhere ?

This question arises because some of our foreign partners who come to audit or inspect our aviation security measures and programmes seem to use different yardsticks for evaluation. While one visitor is evaluating us on the basis of Annex 17, Chers evaluate vis-à-vis what is obtained in certain countries.

The 1944 Chicago Convention provides in ils article 37 that contracting states undertake to collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree of uniformity of regulations, standards, procedures and organisation in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation. To this end, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) shall adopt and amend from time to time, as may be necessary, international standards and recommended practices. Il is evident from this provision that what is intended is uniformity by conforming to international, not Cher national, standards and practices.

States may still differ, under certain conditions, from even the standards set by the ICAO. Il is stipulated in article 38 of the Convention that any State which finds il impracticable to comply in all respects with any such international standard or procedure, or te, bring ils own regulations or practices into full accord with any international standard or procedure after amendment of the latter, or which deems il necessary, to adopt regulations or practices differing in any particular respect from those established by an international standard, shall give immediate notification to the ICAO of the differences between ils own practice and that established by the international standard.

As it concernss aviation security, the relevant international standards and practices are found principally in Annex 17 of the Convention. A standard is any specification for physical characteristics, configuration, material, performance, personnel or procedure, the uniform application of which is recognised as necessary for the safety or regularity of international air navigation and to which contracting States will conform in accordance with the Convention. In the event of impossibility of compliance, notification to the ICAO Council is compulsory. A recommended Practice, in contrast, is any specification for physical characteristics, configuration, material, performance, personnel or procedure, the uniform application of which is recognised as desirable in the interest of safety, regularity or efficiency of international air navigation, and to which States will endeavour to conform in accordance with the Convention.

The uniqueness of every state is undeniable. There is, therefore, a need to adopt security programmes that are endorsed by the different local government agEencies to ensure their effective implementation. Equally important is the fact tlhat aviation security measures adopted by a State have to be commensurate with the level of threat - real or potential.

Let us cite a few concrete examples:

1. Standard 3.1.2 of Annex 17 requires each contracting State to designate ai specüy to ICAO an 'appropriate authority'. The State of India conformed to the Standard by designating and specifying to ICAO, the Commissioner of Security Civil Aviation (COS CA). The State of Cameroon conformed to the same Standard by designating and specifying to ICAO, the Cameroon Civil Aviation Authority (CCAA);

2. Standard 4.4.1 requires each Contracting State to ensure that originating passengers of commercial air transport operations and their cabin baggage are screened prior to boarding an aircraft departing from a security restricted area. The USA conforms by entrusting the screening to Federal Agents employed by the Transport Security Administration which is a structure in the Homeland Security Department The State of Cameroon equally conforms by entrusting the screening to the National Police.

3. Standard 4.3.4 requires States to ensure tha in originating commercial aircraft is protectec from unauthorised interference until il departs In France, the Air Transport Police (GTA) per forms that task while in Cameroon, the gendarmeries does.

So, what is expected of us ? We are unique, but we are a member of the international civil aviation community. Our aviation security systems must conform to the Standards established by the International Civil Aviation Organisation. The specific measures need not necessarily be uniform with those of any particular country. However, in developing our own measures, we can draw inspiration fron the examples of Cher States. We do not violate any laws by copying the effective measures implemented in another State or States if they are commensurate with our threat level and if they are endorsed by our local government agencies But we do not run afoul either, if our measures are not uniform to those of arn other State - as long as they conform to the ICAO standards.

But we may be deviating if the men and women assigned the responsibility of implementing the measures at our airports do not do so with dedication and diligence like their colleagues do in Cher countries. We can be viewed as a pariah in the international air transport community if Cameroonians of all stations and status refuse to subject themselves to the security measures put in place at the airports as they do at foreign airports; or obstruct those responsible for the imple mentation of those measures, what they never do at foreign airports. We shoulc not allow our country to become the weak link in the global strategy to protect civil aviation from acts of unlawful interference.