| Cameroun, Conseil constitutionnel, 25 février 2020, 21/CC/SRCEROF

RULING N° 21/CC/SRCEROF 25TH FEBRUARY 2020
BETWEEN:
B Bi BY
AND
1. ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
2. CAMEROON PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (CPDM)
3. CC BA Am BS (MINAT)
RELIEF SOUGHT:
(Petition for the cancellation of the legislative election in the AU X Y
marred by BP AP, grievous election malpractice)
---The Constitutional Council sitting in open session, the 24% to 25% of Ba 2020, in
electoral matters, before the Panel composed thus:
---Mr. Clément ATANGANA, President of the Constitutional Council ;
---Messrs:
AY AZ Ce
Ae AT BH
Bo Ag C BF
Bk BV
---Mrs: Be Bd BO
---Messrs:
Bh Bm BD
BZ
CA BK
Ch Cb BJ
Bb A;
Councillors/Members;
---And with the assistance of Mr. HAMADJODA, Interim Registrar-In-Chief; And
Mrs Bv At BX épouse AK CB, Registrar-In-
Attendance;
---In the presence of Mr. AH Bo BI, Secretary-General;
---In the matter of a Petition pitting:
-EMBOLA ROBERT EMBELLE
---AND
-ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
-CAMEROON PEOPLE’S DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (CPDM)
-MINISTRY OF TERRITORIAL ADMINISTRATION (MINAT);
---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 AN Bg 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 AN Bg 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 Cf;
---Mindful of the Petition of B Bi BY;
---Mindful of the Report of By Be Bd BO;
---Considering that an undated petition was filed through email on the 12 of february 2020
AI B Bi BY, Substantive Candidate for the Legislative Elections of
February 9, 2020 on the SDF list for the AU X Y, and registered n° 027
at the AN General of the Constitutional Council wherein he is requesting for the total cancellation of the said election in the AU X Y and an order for a re-
run;
---Considering that the petition reads thus:
“IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL HOLDEN AT YAOUNDE
“BETWEEN :
“B Bi BY, SDF Parliamentary candidate for AU X
Y (Petitioner)
“Versus
“ELECTIONS CAMEROON
“Az Ak An Cg (CPDM);
“Respondents list consist of Hon. Mrs Bc AL AG who has purportedly
won the election.
“IN THE MATTER OF A PETITION FOR THE CANCELLATION OF THE
LEGISLATIVE ELECTION IN THE AU X Y MARRED MY
BP AP, GRIEVOUS ELECTION MALPRACTICE
“1) I EMBOLLA ROBERT EMBELE has chosen as counsel, Ao BR Bn
Ac of the Al AV Ad Bq, P.O Box 278, TIKO for the purpose of the
filing of this petition.
“2) That the SDF Parliamentary ballot papers were not available in four villages namely :
Bosumbu, AM, EKONA, EKONJO and Bando. Hence the population of the said villages
were deprived of their fundamental and inalienable rights to freely choose their
parliamentarian.
“3) The SDF ballot papers ran out of stock in several polling stations namely :
“-G.N.S Wotutu only 25 SDF ballot papers were exhibited.
“-In GBPS Ewongo, only 30 SDF ballot papers were exhibited.
“-In Ax Bz Ar, only 30 SDF ballots were available.
“-In Community all, Mapanja, only 22 SDF ballot papers were insidiously displayed.
“-In Ax Bz, WONJAWA 31 SDF ballots were available.
“-In Ax Bz Ah, 36 ballot papers were placed on the stands for the
electorate that when the SDF polling agents prostested, the CPDM candidate Mr. Ai
Ae Bp and Mr. Aj, the city Mayor of Buea moved round with combat gear troops and arrested the SDF polling agents lust them detained and only released them at the
close of the polls at 6pm.
“4) That the SDF Candidate, Hon Mrs AG Bc made rounds in the polling centers
with combat gear troops and intimated the electorate during the polls.
“5) That in AM village, voting started at dawn, before 6:30 am and the voters were
stunned to find that two ballot boxes had already been filled to the brum
“6) In Bj BM a, the SDF polling agent was taken by hostage the Military at the beck and
call of Hon. Bc AG for having turned down a bribe of 200.000frs and he was later
chased away.
“7) That in the Ay Aq Bz Au the polling booth was roundly discarded
as voting was done in the open without the clock of AN and SDF polling agents were
molested. Venerable President in Buea rural for being an abuse, on the totality of the
foregoing the electoral operations in Buea Rural was a hideous piece of burlesque
performed to the tenets of democracy unscrupulous by villains. It is akin to priracy at high
sea.
“CONSEQUENTLY
“We pray you for ultimate interest of Justice, the much heralded good governance and to
in order to uphold the ideal od democracy
“1) Cancel the entire parliamentary election in Buea Rural for being an abuse tenets of
democracy.
“2) Order for a re-run and other consequential ORDERS AS THE COURT MAY DEEM
FIT, PROPER AND OPPOSITE.
“AND THAT WILL BE JUSTICE
---Considering that the Respondents and the CC BA Am BS were
duly notified with the petition;
---Considering that the CPDM via their Counsels, submitted a reply dated 14 february
2020 and filed on 15 february 2020 at the Registry of the Constitutional Council, wherein
they urged this Honourable Council to dismiss the petition;
---Considering that the said reply reads thus:
“BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL HOLDEN AT YAOUNDE ---BETWEEN
-EMBOLA ROBERT EMBELLE (Social An BwAQ, petitioner;
---AND
-ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
-EMILIA AL AG, Az Ak An Cg (CPDM),
respondents
-RESPONSE OF THE CAMEROONS PEOPLE DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (CPDM)
TO PETITION No. 012 RECEIVED ON THE 14/02/2020 AT THE REGISTRY
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS the Az Ak An Cg
(hereinafter CPDM) doth hereby prays Your Lordships to declare inadmissible, and
ultimately dismiss the petition of B Bi BY of the Social An
Bw (hereinafter SDF) of the AU X Y, during the elections of the 9”
February 2020.
“This response shall be articulated on grounds of admissibility and substance (merits)
“TL 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.
“@) 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
Cf, the President of the Senate, one-third of the members of the National Cf
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, Sections 48, 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:
“(D) 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
“ii. 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
“tit. The petition shall under pain of inadmissibility, specify the alleged facts and means
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 An Bw 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 Bx 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 Ab Bs 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 B Bi BY 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.
“Furthermore, and more serious, the petitioner does not cite grounds on which this
petition is predicated;
“Conclusively, Your Lordships, we pray this Honourable Constitutional Council to
declare this petition INADMISSIBLE
“IL. On the Substance (merits) of the Petition
“I. First and foremost, the grounds of the unavailability and insufficiency of the ballot
papers of the SDF raised by the petitioner, are baseless as there is no evidence brought
before this Honourable Constitutional Council that such an anomaly existed.
“2. Secondly, the allegation that the CPDM candidate, Mrs LIFAKA EMILIA made
rounds “with combat gear troops and intimidated the electorate…”, and proposed to
bribe the petitioner sounds like pure fiction, as there is no shred of evidence to back up
such a scandalous claim.
“3. That the other allegations of stuffing of ballot boxes before the opening of the polling
station and discarding of polling booths as the voting was done, is altogether laughable,
as there is no evidence to back up such claims.
“4. The cardinal principle in matters brought 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 this Honourable Constitutional Council.
“5. 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.
“6. It shall be a violation of the cardinal principle of fair hearing before any judicial
procedure.
“7. 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 february 2020;
“ADDRESSES FOR SERVICE:
“RESPONDENTS: c/o their Counsel
“BE Cd Ccc
“BT Aff
“BQ Bo
AS BB Luke
“BC BG AK Brr
“AR Z Bf Ass
“BW AO Avv
“AX Bl;
---Considering that Bu Az BUAW) on it part through Counsels;
Ao BL Bl AJ, OKHA BAU OKHA and ATANGANA
AMOUGOU Joseph, filed a reply dated 14 february 2020 and received on 15 february
2020 at the Registry of the Constitutional Council and as well urged the Constitutional
Council to dismiss the petition ;
---Considering that their reply is couched as follows:
“IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL OF CAMEROON-YAOUNDE.
WRITTEN REPLY IN DEFENCE OF THE RESPONDENT (ELECTIONS CAMEROON)
“FOR ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM),Ao BL Bl AJ,
BarrOKHA BAU OKHA, ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph — Advocates ;
“AGAINST :
“B Bi BY (SDF)
“CAMEROON PEOPLE DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT (CPDM)
“MOTIVE OF PETITION:
“CANCELLATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTION RESULTS OF FEBRUARY 9,
2020 IN AU X Y.
“ELECTORAL CONSTITUENCY: BUEA RURAL;
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:
“The Petitioner, Mr. B Bi BY, filed an undated petition at the
registry of the Constitutional Council on the 12” February 2020, registered as petition
no.27 praying the Council to cancel the results of the Legislative Election of 09" february
2020 in the AU X Y.
“The petition is however inadmissible for it violates the mandatory provisions of the law;
IN LIMINE LITIS: ON THE INADMISSIBILITY OF THE PETITION FOR VIOLATING
THE MANDATORY PROVISIONS OF THE LAW.
“Section 133(3) of the Electoral code provides;
“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 allow 48 (forty eight) hours to submit their replies, against a
receipt.”
“In the same vein, Section 42(3) of law no.2004/004 of 21“ april 2004 to lay down the
organization and Functioning of the Constitutional Council, provides:;
“The petition shall state the alleged facts of the matter and the grounds therefore. It shall
be posted within 24(twenty four) hours of its submission and sent to the parties concerned,
who shall have a period of 48(forty eight) hours to present their written submissions, duly
“From the mandatory provisions of the above cited laws, all petitions before the
constitutional Council for the Cancellation of elections must state the facts and means.
“Upon a careful perusal of the petition of Mr. B Bi BY, he has vehemently
failed to present the facts and means as required by the above cited laws.
“Furthermore, Section 55(1) of law no. 2004/004 of 21“ april 2004 to lay down the
Organization and Functioning of the Constitutional Council, provides;
“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 therefore.”
“A vivid perusal of the petition is quite glaring that the petitioner never dated same before
filing. Hence it is in violation of the law here in above mentioned.
“Lastly, Section 49 of law no. 2004/004 of 21“ april 2004 to lay down the Organization
and Functioning of the Constitutional Council, provides;
‘’The petition shall, under pain of inadmissibility bear the full name, status and address of
the petitioner as well as the names 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 therefore. The petitioner shall append to the petition the
documents produced as exhibits.
“A careful perusal of the petition before the Council falls short of this legal requirement.
“The petition of petitioner is accordingly inadmissible.
“FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
“And for some other reasons that the Constitutional Council may evoke suo-moto;
“Declare the petition inadmissible and accordingly dismiss it.
“Aw Ap.
“Yaoundé, the 14th february 2020.
“FOR ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
“Ao BL Bl AJ
“ Barrister OKHA BAU OKHA
« Maître ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph
Considering that the CC BA Am BS as the representative of
the State filed a reply in the following words;
“OBSERVATIONS DU REPRESENTANT DE L'ETAT DU CAMEROUN (MINAT) SUR
L'AFFAIRE B Bi BY (candidat SDF) CONTRE ELECAM.
(Annulation des élections législatives du 09 février 2020 dans la circonscription de Buéa
Rural) ;
« A Monsieur le Président du Conseil Constitutionnel -YAOUNDE- ;
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel!
« Vu la requête de Sieur B Bi BY, candidat de la liste SDF dans la
circonscription de Buéa rural aux élections législatives du 09 février 2020, ayant pour
Conseil Maître NJENJE Valentin, Avocat au Barreau du Cameroun, enregistrée au Greffe
du Conseil Constitutionnelle 12 du même mois, sous le numéro 27;
« Attendu que le susnommé sollicite l'annulation desdites élections dans sa circonscription
électorale;
« Qu'au soutien de sa demande, le requérant affirme que le scrutin a été émaillé de
fraudes massives et de nombreuses irrégularités;
« Qu'il en a résulté la victoire de Dame Bc AL AG, candidate RDPC
dans la même circonscription;
« Mais attendu que l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) entend démontrer que cette demande ne
« Que d'une part, le recours de Sieur B Bi BY est irrecevable (1) et
d'autre part, il est non justifié (II) ;
« 1- Sur l'irrecevabilité du recours pour relation globale des faits
« Attendu que Sieur B Bi BY,prétend entre autres irrégularités,
« Que les bulletins de vote du SDF n'étaient pas disponibles dans quatre villages à savoir
BOSUMBU, EKONJO, AM et BANDO, que lesdits bulletins de vote étaient
insuffisants dans plusieurs bureaux de vote, que la candidate RDPC intimidait les
électeurs avec des militaires armés;
« Attendu que le recours n'est constitué que d'une description des irrégularités qui
auraient émaillé le scrutin;
« Que nulle part, ne sont étayés les moyens évoqués par le requérant au soutien de sa
cause;
« Attendu que l'article 49 de la loi n° loi n° 2004/004 du 21 avril 2004 portant
organisation et fonctionnement du Conseil Constitutionnel dispose: « Sous peine
d'irrecevabilité, la requête doit contenir les nom(s), prénom(s), qualité et adresse du
requérant ainsi que le nom de l'élu ou des élus dont l'élection est contestée. Elle doit en
outre être motivée et comporter un exposé sommaire des moyens de fait et de droit qui la
fondent. Le requérant doit annexer à la requête, les pièces produites au soutien de ses
moyens» ;
« Mais attendu que le requérant n'a pas évoqué les moyens en appui de sa requête;
Qu'il y a lieu de déclarer irrecevable de son recours;
« II- Sur le caractère non justifié du recours de sieur EMBOLA.
« Attendu que le requérant énonce vaguement une série d'irrégularités;
« Qu'aucune preuves n'est produite en appui à ses allégations;
« Que lesdites allégations ne sauraient justifier l'annulation des élections contestées;
« Que le Conseil Constitutionnel en titrera toutes les conséquences;
«Par ces motifs et tous autres à en déduire, voire suppléer, même d'office,
« Plaise au Conseil constitutionnel de :
« Recevoir le MINAT en ses observations;
« Dire que le recours de Sieur B Bi BY est irrecevable et non
justifié au surplus;
« Le rejeter en conséquence;
« Et ce sera justice
« Yaoundé, ! e15 Février 2020
« Le représentant de l'Etat
« MELAT ATIOGUE Brice
ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE PETITION
---Considering that disputes on the election of members of the National Cf are
governed by the Electoral Code and not by law no. 2004/4 of 21 april 2004 to lay down
the organisation and functioning of the Constitutional Council as amended and
supplemented by Law no. 2012/15 of 21 december 2012;
---That indeed, contrary to the submissions of respondents, section 45 of the said
“organic” law referred to above clearly provides that presidential election disputes shall be
governed by the electoral laws in force;
“That henceforth, sections 132 and 133 of the Electoral Code to which section 168 relates
for parliamentary elections are applicable to the detriment of the provisions of the organic
law on which the submissions in reply of respondents are based;
“Considering that in this regard, pursuant to section 132(2) referred to above, the
Constitutional Council “shall rule on all petitions filed by any candidate, any political
party which took part in the election or any person serving as a representative of the Administration for the election, requesting the total or partial cancellation of election
operations.”;
That for its part, section 133(1) and (3) provides:
“(1) AI 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…”;
---That from a reading of the provisions referred to above, admissibility of a petition must
fulfil three (3) conditions namely, the petitioner must have locus standi, respect the time
limit provided for by law, and clearly state the facts and points of law alleged;
---Considering that the petitioner in the present case filed his petition without any legal
backing to ascertain the allegations contained in the said petition;
---That his patition is therefore inadmissible;
---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 Bt Ca, 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 B Bi BY inadmissible for lack of legal
backing;
---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 Registrar-In-Chief.
PRESIDENT SECRETARY-GENERAL
Clément ATANGANA MALEGHO Joseph ASEH
INTERIM REGISTRAR-IN-CHIEF
HAMADJODA