| Cameroun, Conseil constitutionnel, 25 février 2020, 17/CC/SRCER

RULING N° 17//CC/SRCER OF 25th BE 2020
BETWEEN:
HON. BN Bb AP PETITIONER
AND
1. ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
2. CAMEROON PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (CPDM)
3. BQ AV BP BG (MINAT)
RELIEF SOUGHT:
“PETITION FOR THE PARTIAL CANCELLATION OF THE BE 9",
2020 LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS IN THE X AI AND AJ WEST
REGION”
---The Constitutional Council sitting in open session this 25" day of BE 2020, in
Electoral matters, before the Panel composed thus:
---Mr. Clément ATANGANA, President;
---Messrs:
AT AU Br
Ab AQ AX
Bb Ac B AW
Aw BJ
---Mrs: Ao An AM
---Messrs:
At Ax A BL
AY BB
Bu Bq BA Emile ESSOMBE;
Councillors/Members;
---And with the assistance of Mr. HAMADJODA, Interim Registrar-In Chief; And
Mrs Bj Am BK épouse Au Y, Registrar-In-
Attendance;
---In the presence of Mr. AH Bb AZ, Secretary-General.
---In the matter of a Petition pitting:
---HON. MBAH-NDAM JOSEPH NJANG.………PETITIONER
---AND
-1. ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM) ;
2. CAMEROON PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT(CPDM);
3. BQ AV BP BG (MINAT)
RESPONDENTS;
---Rules as follows:
---Mindful of the Constitution;
---Mindful of law n° 2004/004 of 21/04/2004 to lay down the organization and functioning
of the Constitutional Council, as amended by law n° 2012/015 of 21/12/2012;
---Mindful of decree n° 2018/104 of 7/02/2018 to lay down the organization and
functioning of the Ba As of the Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree n° 2018/105 of 7/02/2018 appointing the Members of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree n° 2018/106 of 7/02/2018 appointing the President of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree n° 2018/170 of 23/02/2018 appointing the Secretary-General of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree n° 2019/612 of 10/11/2019 to convene the electoral college in view
of the election of Members of the National Bs;
---Mindful of the Petition of Hon. BN Bb AP;
---Mindful of the Report of Bp Ab AQ AX;
---Considering that the bases of this ruling is on a petition filed by Hon. BN
Bb AP, Substantive Candidate for the Bi Bc of 9/02/2020 on the
SDF list for Momo East Constituency and registered n° 021 at the Ba General of
the Constitutional Council wherein he requests for the partial cancellation of the BE
9, 2020 legislative elections in the X AI and AJ West Regions.
---Considering that below is the wording of his petition:
“PETITION FOR THE PARTIAL CANCELLATION OF THE BE 9"", 2020
LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS IN THE X AI AND AJ WEST REGION
“To, THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL YAOUNDE
“Az BN Bb AP, candidate for the Social AG Bk
(SDF) for the 9” BE 2020 legislative Elections in the Momo East Constituency, of
the North-West Region, having as Counsels; Ag BC BM Ai,
MBANDAM BONEFACE, MBAH MBOLE CHARLES, BH BF, NDANGOH
TAH CALVIN, NGOUANA MOUSTAPHA, NANA WILSON, ADELINE NJONGANG Tel:
677533702,
“HAVE THE HONOR TO PETITION AS FOLLOWS:
“That following the results of the 9” BE 2020 legislative elections, it is alleged that
INJOH FOO NGANG PRUDENCIA, ANYERE CHARLES AKAH, Aq Bn
Ak, Bh Bd, Ap Al, Bf Aj Af, Ekwe Andrew, and a
host of others, candidates for the CPDM, have come out victorious thereby purportedly
winning virtually all the seats of the North-West and South-West Regions of Cameroon.
“That there is no gain-saying that no elections took place in the North-West and South-
West Regions of Cameroon on the 9" of BE 2020 as it will be
demonstrated here under:
“There is cogent evidence that all day long, terror and horror gripped the whole of the
North-West and South-West Regions as there were exchanges of gunfire with live bullets
between the separatist fighters and the military, causing all civilians to
flee for safety.
“That SDF parliamentary candidates were targeted by the separatist fighters and the
petitioner was specifically proclaimed in audio recordings that went viral, as leading
seven trucks and amour cars into Momo Division with the avowed goal of
destroying all the Separatist fighters. This led to barricades being built all along the major
roads of the two regions and thus were deprived the candidates of
every attempt to supervise the voting processes,
“That in the midst of all these, the Ministers of the CPDM in the two regions were
permitted both by the Military and the "Amba boys" to enter every constituency and
visited the polling centers with the group of people who followed them and
voted, despite the fact that they were not registered voters of the respective polling
stations at the polling centers thus illegally created throughout the two
regions; At the hearing, the petitioner will seek leave to corroborate these assertions
through different Audio and video messages on Social Media, before
and during the polls.
“That since May 2017, ELECAM Branch offices in the two regions ceased to exist, thus
rendering it practically impossible to carry out electoral operations in the whole of the
said regions.
“That all of the above facts and many others to be deduced or supplemented constitute
violations of many provisions of the electoral Laws as it shall be
demonstrated hereunder:
“A) Violation of section 96 of law no 2012/001 of 19” april 2012, as amended relating
to the Electoral code in that:
“Section 96(1) stipulates that the Bg As of Elections shall draw up the list of polling stations for every council.
“@) Such list shall specify the area covered by each polling station;
“(3) There shall be one polling station for a maximum of 500 (Five hundred) elections
“(4) Every polling station shall be located in public premises or in premises open to the
public.
“Honorable President and members of the Constitutional Council,
“The total number of voters duly registered for North-West and South-West Regions is
quite high but curiously, ELECAM, unilaterally cut them down to into a few centers and
considerably reduced the existing polling stations without indicating which polling
stations had been suppressed;
“That in the same vein ELECAM invited the petitioner and his colleagues to designate
polling station representatives without revealing the number of polling stations and
without having regard to the fact that the elections were twin requiring each polling
station for the Municipal and legislative elections to have their respective representatives;
“That to our greatest surprise, on the day of elections, ELECAM decided unilaterally
without informing the candidates of the SDF as well as the electors to move ail the polling
stations into polling centers, thus preventing electors from exercising their civic right to
vote. Worst still, this polling centers were located for most of their part in the military
camps contrary to the information previously given us by the ELECAM Heads that the
polling centers would be installed in the government Schools.
“That military camps as per the provisions of section 96(4) are not public premises
especially at this moment of war in the North-west and South-West Regions in that these
military camps were not open to the public.
That in this characteristic disorder coupled with perpetual gun firing on election day, the
polls were said to have taken place with a purported participation rate of far less than
15% as shall be demonstrated at the trial;
“That while the electors were unable to make it to the polling centers as explained herein
above, the CPDM Ministers who had arrived the purported polling centers succeeded in
influencing the counting processes to award for their Party the figures now appearing on
the polling center reports;
“That the same scenario was witnessed throughout the two regions where ballot papers
were actually stuffed into the boxes at the behest of he said Ministers who had access to
the whole two regions by being carried around in armored cars, while certain
propaganda literature that went virile on whatsapp continuously warning the whole
population of the two regions to stay away because SDF candidates were arriving in
armored cars full of the military for total annihilation. Again, at the hearing of this
petition, the petitioner will seek leave for the constitutional council to listen to these audio
recordings;
“That the figures contained in the reports of the Bt Ad Commission are a
total fake, being the product of the fraud machinery put in place by the CPDM and its
Ministers who hail from the two regions;
“b) Violation of section 97 of the Electoral Code.
“Section 97 stipulates that: 'The list of polling stations shall be forwarded to council
branches of Elections Cameroon for posting up at least (8) days before the day of
election".
“That due to the fact that the ELECAM branch offices had been destroyed and closed,
since 2017, such lists were never posted at the ELECAM council branches and the
ELECAM council heads were brought into their respective areas in armored cars only on
the eve of the polis.
“That having not done pasted the lists as required by the law, our electors knew they were
to vote in the different polling stations in their localities as they did in the past elections.
Moreover, ELECAM had sent messages to confirm this to the electors.
“C) Violation of Section 54 of the Electoral code
“1) Every polling station shall have a local polling commission comprising of:
Chairperson: A personality appointed by the Head of the divisional branch of elections
Cameroon.
Members:
“-A representative of the administration appointed by the sub divisional officer
“-A representative of each Candidate, list of Candidates or political party
“2) The names of representatives of the administration and candidates, lists of candidates or political parties chosen from among electors registered in the electoral register of the
polling station concerned, shall be notified no later than the sixth day before the Election
Day.
“3) The composition of each local polling commission shall be approved by a decision of
the head of the divisional branch of elections Cameroon.
“That as requested by council heads of the ELECAM branches for North-west and South-
West regions, we forwarded the lists of our representatives for the different polling
stations, but unfortunately on polling day our representatives were chased away by both
the military and the separatist armed forces and that is why the vast majority of the
polling station reports have not been signed by the SDF polling agents and/or
representatives.
“C. Very Low and Dismal percentage of participation.
“That the results reaching us show that the percentage participation is ridiculously low
and shall be demonstrated at the trial;
“That the AU Charter on Democracy, Elections and Good governance in many of its
provisions stresses on the necessity for elections to be free, fair and credible;
“That the percentage participation obtained in the North-West and South-West Regions
renders the election incredible;
“That with such a percentage, a candidate cannot be declared victorious; That on the
whole, there were no legislative elections on the 9th of BE 2020 in the North-West
and South-West regions;
“Having regard to all of the above, we pray the venerable members of the constitutional
council to:
“1) Declare the legislative elections purportedly held in the North-West and South-West
Regions null and void ab initio;
“2) Cancel the said purported legislative elections results in the North-West and South-
West Regions and thereby restore sanity and hope for a democratic dispensation in
Cameroon;
“3) Order a re-run of elections in the North-west and South-West Regions.
The petitioner so humbly submits.
“Signed, Bb BN Ar”;
---Considering that the Respondents and the BQ AV BP BG were
duly notified with the petition and they in turn duly filed their replies.
---Considering that the CPDM via their Counsels; filed a reply on 15 BE 2020 at the
Registry of the Constitutional Council, wherein they urged this HonourableCouncil to
dismiss the petition ;
---Considering that the said reply reads thus:
“BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL HOLDEN AT YAOUNDE
“BETWEEN BN Bb AP (Social AG
BkAN, PETITIONER
“AND
« 1. ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
“2. INJOH FOO NGANG PRUDENCIA, ANYERE CHARLES AKAH, AL
Z AG BO (CPDM), RESPONDENTS;
“RESPONSE OF THE CAMEROONS PEOPLE DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT
(CPDM) TO PETITION No. 021 RECEIVED ON THE 13/02/2020 AT THE
REGISTRY
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS the AL Z AG BO
(hereinafter CPDM) doth hereby prays Your Lordships to declare inadmissible, and
ultimately dismiss the petition of MBAH-NDAM JOSEPH NJANGof the Social
AG Bk (hereinafter SDF) for the MOMO EAST Constituency, during the
elections of the 9" BE 2020.
This response shall be articulated on grounds of admissibility and substance (merits)
“T. On the admissibility of the Petition
“Your Lordships, it is expressed in the provisions of Sections 48 (1) and (2) of the 1996
Constitution that:
“Section 48: (1) The Constitutional Council shall ensure the regularity of presidential
elections, parliamentary elections and referendum operations. It shall proclaim the
results thereof.
“(2) Any challenges in respect of the regularity of one of the elections provided for in
the preceding paragraph may be brought before the Constitutional Council by any
candidate, political party that participated in the election in the constituency concerned
or any person acting as Government agent at the election.
“(3) Any challenges in respect of the regularity of a referendum may be referred to the
Constitutional Council by the President of the Republic, the President of the National
Bs, the President of the Senate, one-third of the members of the National
Bs or one-third of the Senators.”
“That Section 52 of the same fundamental law states that:
““Article 52: A law shall lay down the organization and functioning of the
Constitutional Council, the conditions for referring matters to it as well as the procedure
applicable before it.”
“That, it is in the execution of the provisions of Section 52 of the Constitution cited herein,
that Law No. 2004-004 of 21 April 2004 to Lay Down the Organisation and Functioning
of the Constitutional Council, was adopted and promulgated.
“Precisely, Section 1 of Law No. 2004-004 of 21 April 2004 to Lay Down the
Organisation and Functioning of the Constitutional Council, states that:
“Section 1: This law lays down the organization and functioning of the Constitutional
Council, the conditions for referring matters to it, as well as the procedure before the
Council, pursuant to Article 52 of the Constitution”
“Your Lordships, note must be taken that by virtue of the fact that Law no. 2004-004 of 21
April 2004 to Lay Down the Organisation and Functioning of the Constitutional Council
is legislation which was specifically provided for by the constitution, to precise the
modalities for the organisation and functioning of the Council, and the modalities according to which it can be seized and the procedure before it, it should be considered as
an organic law, which is an enabling law.
“That in the hierarchy of norms, an organic law is classified directly under the
constitution, from which she emanates, and consequently superior to other ordinary laws.
That Law no. 2004-004 of 21 April 2004 which is an enabling instrument of the
Constitutional Council, is therefore superior to the Electoral Code, which is an ordinary
law that also provides modalities according to which the Constitutional Council can be
seized and the procedure before it.
“That according to its attributes, as stated in Section 3(2) and 40 of Law no. 2004-004 of
21 April 2004, cited herein, the Constitutional Council “shall ensure the regularity of
presidential, parliamentary elections and referendums. It shall proclaim the results
“That concerning the procedure to follow and the manner to seize the Constitutional
Council, in case of contestation of the election of members of parliament, Sections48, 49
and 55(1) of Law no. 2004-004 of 21 april 2004 states clearly that:
“Section 48(1): Where the regularity of the election of members of Parliament is
contested, any candidate or political party that participated in the election in any given
constituency or any person having the status of a Government agent for the election,
may petition the Constitutional Council.
“(2): Where a dispute relating to the election of a member of parliament or a senator is
referred to the Constitutional Council, it shall rule on the regularity of the election in
respect of both the substantive and alternate candidates.
“Section 49: The petition shall, under pain of inadmissibility, bear the full name, status
and address of the petitioner, as well as the name of the members of Parliament whose
election is contested. In addition, it shall be reasoned and include a summary statement
of the practical and legal grounds thereof. The petitioner shall append to the petition,
the documents produced as exhibit.
“Section 55(1): Any petition lodged with the Constitutional Council shall bear the date
and signature of the petitioner. The petition should be reasoned and include a summary
statement of the practical and legal grounds thereof”
“That the above-cited provisions which have to be applied by the Constitutional Council,
as required by the Constitution, have to read in conjunction with the provisions of the
Electoral Code dealing with contestations of the regularity of the elections of members of
parliament.
“That Law no. 2012/001 of 19” April 2012 relating to the Electoral Code as amended by
Law No. 2012/017 of 21“ December 2012, in its Section 168 (2) states that:
“Electoral disputes and organisation of a new election, as the case may be, shall be
carried out in pursuance of the provisions of Sections 132 to 136 of this law.”
“That further, Sections 133(1) and (3) of the same electoral law state clearly that:
“ (1) AII petitions filed pursuant to the provisions of Section 132 above must reach the
Constitutional Council within no more than 72 (seventy-two) hours of the close of the
poll.
“(3) Under pain of rejection, the petition shall specify the alleged facts and means. It
shall be posted up within 24 (twenty-four) hours of its submission and notified to the
parties concerned who shall be allowed 48 (forty-eight) hours to submit their replies,
against a receipt.
“Your Lordships, following a combined reading of all the above-cited legal provisions, we
can authoritatively state that:
“i) In the case of the contestation of the regularity of a member of parliament, the
Constitutional Council can be seized by any candidate, any political party which took part
in the election or any person serving as a representative of the Administration for the said
election “i) The petition shall, under pain of inadmissibility, bear the full name, status and
address of the petitioner, as well as the name of the members of Parliament whose election
is contested
“iti) The petition shall under pain of inadmissibility, specify the alleged facts and means
“iv) The petition shall bear the date and signature of the petitioner
“Considering that previously, the Supreme Court seating as the Constitutional Council,
following the principle that “form takes precedence over substance”, always verified
whether petitions brought before it met the minimum legal requirements.
“That it was in such a manner that, following post-electoral petitions of the 2004
presidential elections, all the petitions filed by the Social AG Bk were declared
inadmissible, because they were all signed by their Counsel, instead of the petitioner.
“Your Lordships, on a basis of comparative law, reference can be made to the legislation
in France, which inspired the Cameroonian law, to wit, Section 35 (1) of Ordinance no.
58-1067 of 7” november 1958 to Lay Bo the Constitutional Council of France, which
states that “petitions shall bear the names, functions of the petitioner, and the names of
the elected persons, whose election is contested”;
“In the same vein, the petition shall under pain of inadmissibility, bear the signature of the
petitioner (Section 3(1) of the Rules Applicable in the Procedure before the
Constitutional Council for litigation on the election of members of parliament and the
senate).
“That by applying the said provisions, the Aa Av Ae declared a petition
signed by a lawyer, who declared to be acting on behalf of the petitioner, to be
inadmissible (Cons. Const. 6 mai 1986, AN Polynésie française, Rec. Cons. Const., p. 42;
8 juin 1993, AN Alpes-Maritimes, 7 circ. JO 12 juin 1993, p. 8422 ; 30 sept. 1993, AN
Réunion, 3e circ., JO 12 oct. 1993, p. 14254.)
“Your Lordships, the petition of BN Bb AP does not contain all
the names of the substantive and alternate candidates, whose election is contested, which is a flagrant violation of Section 49 of Law No. 2004-004 of 21 April 2004 to Lay Down
the Organisation and Functioning of the Constitutional Council.
“Conclusively, Your Lordships, we pray this Honourable Constitutional Council to
declare this petition INADMISSIBLE
“T. On the Substance (merits) of the Petition
“1.First and foremost, the petition submitted before this Honourable Constitutional
Council is more than sufficient evidence that there was effectively an election that was
conducted in the Momo EastConstituency.
“2. Secondily, the grounds raised for the petition, affected every competitor of the election
in the same constituency.
“The petitioner has not alleged or shown any evidence that the atmosphere decried,
exclusively affected the petitioner or benefitted the candidates of the CPDM.
“3. The petitioner is complaining about the displacement of polling stations, but fails to
understand that the same Section 96(1) and (2) of the Electoral Code authorizes the
Bg General of ELECAM to create polling stations that are convenient for all voters.
“In fact, the “polling centres” were created for administrative and security convenience,
in order to ease the accomplishment of the duties of all voters, without exception.
Consequently, polling stations were effectively operational within the alleged polling
centres, and were fully staffed and equipped.
“I. The petitioner has failed to demonstrate how either of the local and international texts
cited, were violated during the conduct of the said election.
2. The cardinal principle in bring matters before a tribunal, is that he who alleges any
facts, must bring clear and incontrovertible evidence to the facts alleged. The petitioner
has failed to provide any of such evidence before the Honourable Constitutional Council.
“Your Lordships, we pray this Honourable Constitutional Council to discard or reject any
purported evidence that is projected to be filed by the petitioner at the hearing, which had neither been submitted to appraisal of the respondents herein nor the judge reporter. It
shall be a violation of the cardinal principle of fair hearing before any judicial procedure
“Conclusively, and in consonance with Section 134 of the Electoral Code, we pray that if
by some stroke of imagination, this Honourable Constitutional Council were minded to
take into consideration the alleged irregularities, it should declare that they were not of a
nature that could influence the outcome of the election.
“From the above, we urge Your Lordships to dismiss the said petition.
“RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
“Yaoundé 14” day of BE 2020
“ADDRESSES FOR SERVICE:
“RESPONDENTS: c/o their Counsel
ix) MBITA Blaise
x) … AK Bb
xiii)) AO AS Rose Celine
xv) ALIMA Marcus
----Considering that Bc AL BIAR) on it part through Counsels;
Ag BD Bm C, OKHA BAU OKHA and ATANGANA
AMOUGOU Joseph, submitted thus;
« PLAISE AU CONSEIL CONSTITUTIONNEL :
« Attendu que suivant requête datée du 14 février 2020, enregistrée le 14 février 2020 au
Greffe du Conseil Constitutionnel sous le n° 43, Monsieur BN Bb AP
a sollicité a d’une part la disqualification des candidats du RDPC du fait de leur
implication dans les violences ayant perturbé le déroulement de l'élection législative du
09 février 2020 dans les circonscriptions électorales des régions du Nord-Ouest et du Sud- Ouest, d'autre part, la reconduction des députés du Social AG Bk siégeant à
l’Assemblée Nationale pour le compte desdites circonscriptions ;
« Que cette requête est cependant irrecevable comme faite hors délai ;
« IN LIMINE LITIS : SUR L’IRRECEVABILITE DE LA REQUETE COMME FAITE
HORS DELAI.
« Attendu que l’article 133 alinéa 1 du Code électoral dispose que « Toute contestation
formulée en application des dispositions de l’article 132 ci-dessus doit parvenir au
Conseil Constitutionnel dans un délai maximum de soixante-douze (72) heures à
compter de la date de clôture du scrutin (.…).»
« Que les élections législatives s'étant tenues sur toute l'étendue du territoire camerounais
le 09 février 2020, les recours devaient parvenir au Conseil Constitutionnel au plus tard
soixante-douze (72) heures après la clôture du scrutin, soit le 12 février 2020 ;
« Qu’or, le recours du sieur BN Bb AP a été déposé au Conseil
Constitutionnel le 14 février, soit le lendemain du jour fixé pour la saisine du Conseil
Constitutionnel ;
« Que ce recours est donc irrecevable comme déposé hors délai.
« PAR CES MOTIFS :
« Et tous autres à déduire, à ajouter ou à suppléer même d'office s’il y a lieu ;
« IN LIMINE LITIS : Déclarer irrecevable le recours de Monsieur BN
Bb AP comme déposé hors délai.
« ET CE SERA JUSTICE.
« SOUS TOUTES RESERVES,
« Yaoundé, le 14 février 2020 ;
« POUR ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
« Ag BD Bm C (é);
« Barrister OKHA BAU OKHA (é);
« Maître ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph(é);
SUR LA DEMANDE D'ANNULATION PARTIELLE DES ELECTIONS
LEGISLATIVES DU 09 FEVRIER 2020 DANS LES REGIONS DU NORD-OUEST
ET DU SUD-OUEST
« A Monsieur le Président du Conseil Constitutionnel Yaunndé ;
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel!
« Vu le recours du 12 février 2020 de Sieur BN Bb AP, candidat du
Social AG Bk (SDF) aux élections législatives du 09 février 2020, enregistré
au greffe de céans sous le numéro 21, aux fins d'annulation partielle des
élections législatives dans les Régions du Nord-Ouest et du Sud-Ouest;
« Attendu qu'au soutien de sa demande Sieur MBAH-NDAM allègue de nombreuses
irrégularités et le faible taux de participation des électeurs;
« Mais attendu que l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) entend démontrer que cette requête ne
« Attendu que suivant l'article 48(1) de la loi n° 2004/004 du 21 avril 2004 portant
organisation et fonctionnement du Conseil Constitutionnel, « En cas de contestation de la
régularité de l'élection des membres du Parlement, le Conseil Constitutionnel peut
être saisi par tout candidat, tout parti politique ayant pris part à l'élection dans la
circonscription concernée et toute personne ayant la qualité d'agent du
Gouvernement pour cette élection» ;
« Qu'en l'espèce, les contestations de Sieur MBAH-NDAM, qui a postulé comme candidat
dans la circonscription électorale de MOMO Est, ne peuvent porter que dans cette
circonscription;
« Que de ce fait, la demande de Sieur MBAH-NDAM va au-delà de la circonscription
électorale pour laquelle il est candidat;
« Mais attendu que l'article 149 du code électoral dispose:
« (1) Le département constitue la circonscription électorale.
« (2) Toutefois, compte tenu de leur situation particulière, certaines circonscriptions
peuvent faire l'objet d'un découpage spécial par décret du Président de la République»
« Qu'ainsi, la région n'est pas une circonscription électorale dans le cas de l'élection des
députés à l'Assemblée Nationale;
« Qu'il s'ensuit donc qu'une requête visant l'annulation des élections législatives dans
l'ensemble d'une région est sans objet et ne saurait être recevable;
« Attendu par ailleurs que Sieur MBAH-NDAM demande, de manière insidieuse, le report
des élections législatives dans les Régions du Nord-Ouest et du Sud-Ouest à ne date
ultérieure;
« Qu'une telle demande ne relève pas cependant de la compétence du Conseil
Constitutionnel;
« Attendu au demeurant que la demande de Sieur MBAH-NDAM tend à créer un vide
institutionnel;
« Que de ce chef, elle n'est pas non plus recevable;
« Par ces motifs et tous autres à endéduire ou suppléer d'office,
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel de :
« - recevoir l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) en ses observations et l'y dire fondé;
« - déclarer irrecevable le recours de Sieur MBAH-NDAM aux fins d'annulation partielle
des élections législatives du 09 février 2020 dans les Régions du Nord- Ouest et du Sud-
Ouest;
« - le rejeter en conséquence,
« Et ce sera justice ;
« Yaoundé le 15 février 2020;
« Le représentant de l'Etat ;
« (è)Bl Ay» ;
ON THE ADMISSIBILITY
---Considering that Section 48(2) of the Constitution as read with Section 132(2) of the
Electoral Code defines the quality of persons to file petitions before this Council while
Section 133 of same defines the time frames for filing, and the content of such petitions in
matters relating to the election of members of the National Bs;
---Considering that Section 149(1) of the Electoral Code states that a Division shall
constitute an Electoral Constituency;
---Considering that Section 48(2) of the Constitution estop candidates from filing petitions
for irregularities of electoral operations in constituencies other than theirs as pertains to
matters of the election of members of parliament;
---Considering that the petitioner lose sight of this important legal ingredient in requesting
for the partial cancellation of the BE 09, 2020 legislative elections in the X AI
and AJ West Regions which are made up constituencies other than his;
---Considering that his petition has thus woefully failed the arduous test of admissibility;
---It is consequently inadmissible for lack of locus standi.
---Having failed the arduous test of admissibility, it is a waste of time delving into the
merits of the petition.
---Considering that proceedings before the Constitutional Council is free by virtue of
Section 57 of Law n° 2004/004 of 21st April 2004 to lay down the organization and the
functioning of the Constitutional Council as amended by Law n° 2004/015 of 21st
december 2012, cost of these proceedings shall be borne by the public treasury.
---Considering that in application of Section 15(2) of the above cite law as read with
Section 131(3) of the Electoral Code, it is proper to order the service forthwith of this
ruling on the Be Ah, all the parties and its publication in the official gazette in
English and French.
UPON THESE GROUNDS
---The Constitutional Council, after a full hearing in open session on post-electoral
petitions, with the unanimous vote of its Members;
---Declares the Petition of Az BN Bb AP inadmissible for
lack of locus standi;
---Orders that the cost of these proceedings be borne by the public treasury;
---Orders the service of this Ruling on all the parties and its publication in the official
gazette.
---Thus decided and pronounced in open Court the same day, month and year as above in
the Court Hall of the Constitutional Council.
---In witness whereof, this present Ruling has been signed by the President, the Secretary-
General and countersigned by the Interim Registrar-In-Chief./-
PRESIDENT SECRETARY-GENERAL
Clément ATANGANA MALEGHO Joseph ASEH
Interim Registrar-In-Chief
HAMADJODA