The trial over the murder of journalist Martinez Zogo took a dramatic turn on June 22 and 23 before the Yaoundé Military Court, where testimony from cybercrime expert Jean Pierre Ouloumou raised fresh questions about the credibility of the second forensic report submitted in the case.

Ouloumou, who was appointed by the investigating judge to analyze several phones seized during the investigation, faced sustained questioning from lawyers representing the civil parties, who challenged the basis of his findings.

At the start of his testimony, the expert said the phones seized from businessman Jean Pierre Amougou Belinga “revealed no link to the Martinez Zogo case.” He said the same conclusion applied to devices attributed to journalist Bruno Bidjang. Ouloumou went a step further, confirming that his report recommended Amougou Belinga’s release.

Recommendation Went Beyond Expert’s Mandate

That recommendation quickly became one of the most contentious issues raised during the hearing. Questioned by one of the lawyers about the scope of his assignment, Ouloumou acknowledged that the order appointing him as an expert did not authorize him to recommend the release of any suspect.

He nevertheless defended his decision, explaining that he had proposed Amougou Belinga’s provisional release as a way to “trap” possible masterminds who might still have been operating behind the scenes.

The explanation prompted surprise in the courtroom. Asked why that recommendation applied only to Amougou Belinga, even though he claimed to have found no direct evidence linking other suspects to the case, Ouloumou gave the same answer. In his view, releasing Amougou Belinga could have helped expose the “real masterminds.”

Rather than settling the issue, that explanation appeared to deepen concerns. It suggested the expert had gone beyond his technical role by advancing a procedural strategy that was not part of the assignment given to him.

Reset Phones Raise New Questions

The expert’s testimony came under even greater scrutiny when he described the evidence behind his conclusions regarding Amougou Belinga. Ouloumou said his analysis was based on two phones presented to him by former investigating judge Lt. Col. Aimé Florent Sikati Kamwo II. During the hearing, however, he acknowledged that both devices were “blank,” as if they had been reset.

That admission became one of the most disputed moments of the cross-examination. How, lawyers asked, could an expert conclude that a suspect was not implicated after examining phones that contained no data?

Pressed on the issue by civil party lawyer Me Calvin Job, Ouloumou simply replied: “I found nothing.” The answer did little to ease the concerns raised in court. Instead, it reinforced questions about whether the report rested on incomplete or flawed technical evidence. In a case where digital evidence plays a central role, the reliability of the material examined has now become one of the key issues before the court.

A Controversial Release Order Comes Back Into Focus

The testimony also brought renewed attention to another controversial episode in the case. It was on the strength of Ouloumou’s recommendation that investigating judge Lt. Col. Aimé Florent Sikati Kamwo II signed an order on December 1, 2023, authorizing the release of Jean Pierre Amougou Belinga. That order was later described as fraudulent by both the judge himself and Cameroon’s Ministry of Defense.

As a result, the hearings shifted beyond the technical findings of the expert report to the legal and procedural consequences it may have produced. More broadly, the proceedings reopened questions about the overall weight of an expert opinion that had already been the subject of controversy.

Questions Over the Analysis of Phone Records

The hearings also exposed weaknesses in the way some communications were interpreted. In his report, Ouloumou concluded that Bill-Marie Gigi, also identified as Sidoine Olivier Biloa Nkolo, was the last person to see Martinez Zogo alive at 6 p.m. on January 17, 2023.

During cross-examination, however, one of the lawyers for the civil parties pointed to a communication that he argued the expert had overlooked. According to the lawyer, an unidentified contact called Martinez Zogo later that evening.

Based on the exchanges examined in court, that contact reportedly appeared elsewhere under the name Bill-Marie Gigi and under the alias “Essomba DGRE” in Bruno Bidjang’s phone. The same alias was said to correspond to the phone number of Bidzongo Mbede Albert, also known as Arthur Essomba, another defendant in the case.

If that interpretation is correct, Arthur Essomba—not Bill-Marie Gigi—would appear to have been the last person to contact Martinez Zogo by phone. The exchange added to doubts about some of the links established in Ouloumou’s report and, more broadly, about the reliability of conclusions based on technical correlations challenged during the hearings.

Expert Report Faces Broader Scrutiny

One of the report’s strongest conclusions concerned Maxime Léopold Eko Eko, the former head of Cameroon’s external intelligence service (DGRE). According to Ouloumou, data extracted from Eko Eko’s phones suggested he was “completely unrelated” to the case and viewed himself as the victim of a plot designed to implicate him.

That conclusion was not directly challenged during this phase of the trial. However, as other parts of the report came under increasing scrutiny, questions over its overall credibility inevitably cast doubt on all of its findings.

By the end of the June 22 and 23 hearings, it was not just one technical argument that had been weakened. The standing of the second expert report itself appeared significantly more fragile.

In a trial where digital evidence plays a central role, the debate surrounding the Ouloumou report underscored that an expert opinion is judged not only by its conclusions, but also by the quality of the evidence examined, the rigor of the methodology, and whether the expert stays within the limits of a technical mandate rather than venturing into judicial judgment. The trial is scheduled to resume on July 13 and 14.

Source: Business in Cameroon