| Cameroun, Conseil constitutionnel, 25 février 2020, 29/CC/SRCER

RULING No. 29/CC/SRCER OF 25 FEBRUARY 2020
BETWEEN:
HON NDONG LARRY HILLS AND 10 OTHERS
AND
ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM) AND 5 OTHERS
RELIEF SOUGHT
(TOTAL CANCELLATION OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 2020 LEGISLATIVE
ELECTIONS IN THE MOMO WEST CONSTITUENCY OF THE C AH
REGION)
---After having recognised Xf Ac Bu Xb and Xf Af Bj
Xq in their report;
---Delivered the following ruling:
---THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL
---Mindful of the Constitution;
---Mindful of 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;
---Mindful of law no. 2012/1 of 19 april 2012 relating to the Electoral Code as amended
and supplemented by Law No. 2012/17 of 21 december 2012;
---Mindful of decree no. 2018/104 of 7 february 2018 to lay down the organisation and
functioning of the Ca Br of the Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of Decree No. 2018/105 of 7 February 2018 to appoint members of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree no. 2018/106 of 7 February 2018 to appoint the President of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree no. 2018/170 of 23 february 2018 to appoint the Secretary-General of
the Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree no. 2019/612 of 10 november 2019 to convene the electorate for the
election of members of the National Xo and of Municipal Councillors of 9 February
2020;
---Mindful of the petitions of Hon. BA Au Xd Xk Ai, Hon. Paul Ch
Ce, Aw Bn, Cr Bi Bk, Hon. Fobi Cg Cd,
Bc Bs Cf, Hon. Mbah-Ndam Cc Bt, Bm Bv Cq,
BF AZ Y, and Hon. Fusi Naamukong;
---Considering that as per the petitions referred to above, the petitioners seek the
cancellation of the electoral operations in some constituencies in the C AH Region
and Bd West Region;
---That on the ground of their similarity in facts and the law, there is reason to consolidate
them;
---Considering that in this regard, the petition of Mr. BF AZ Y that
is similar to the others reads as follows:
“PETITION FOR THE TOTAL CANCELLATION OF THE FEBRUARY 9, 2020
LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS IN THE MOMO WEST CONSTITUENCY OF THE C
AH REGION
“AND
“1-ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
“2-AWUTAH Cu Y (CPDM) RESPONDENTS;
“TO THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL YAOUNDE — CAMEROON
“May it please the Honourable Bb and Members of the Constitutional Council,
“T, BF AZ Y, Substantive Candidate for the Legislative
Elections of 9/2/2020 on the SDF List for Momo West Constituency, having as Aj
Ap Ax Xs, Suh Fuh Benjamin, BD Xn, Mbah-Mbole
Charles, Bo Cz Bf, Cn Ak, Xv Xw Cm, Ad
Bh and others, Tel No. 677-458-563, has the honour to petition as follows:
“That on the 9 of Cp 2020 all the 32 polling stations in the Andek were moved to
cramped to 1 polling centre at Andek. The distance Bx BH Cw is about
13kilometes, from Azem to Andek 12kilometers and from Tinechung 12 kilometers and this
resulted in the following:
“a. The Electors in the villages were not informed of this change of the locations of their
polling stations. And even on the eve of the elections ELECAM notified electors through
SMS texts of their polling stations but never mentioned the change of the locations of the
said polling stations. Section 96 of Law No. 2012/001 of 19 April 2012 relating to the
Electoral Code provides as follows:
"96(1) The Cs Br 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) electors.
“(4) Every polling station shall be located in public premises or in premises open to the
public".
“Honourable President and Members of the Constitutional Council, there is a clear
distinction between a polling station and a polling centre. The Electoral Code does not
make provision for POLLING CENTRES.
“The creation of the polling centres in Andek grouping 32 polling stations to 1
polling centre grossly violated Section 96 of the Electoral Code supra and prevented
many electors from exercising their right to vote. Section 4(2) of the Electoral Code provides that "Elections Cameroon shall perform its duties in keeping with the
Constitution and laws and regulations in force".
“The Preamble of the Constitution AW AM (Law No. 96-06 of 18 January 1996
to amend the Constitution of 2 June 1972) provides inter alia as follows:
" … Affirm our attachment to the fundamental freedoms enshrined in the BC
AS AW BL AV, the Charter of the Be Xu
and the AL AK on Human and Peoples" Rights, and all duly ratified international
conventions relating thereto,
“And Article 21 of the BC AS AW BL AV provides as follows:
"(1) Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or
through freely chosen representatives.
“(@) Everyone has the right of equal access to public service in his country.
“(3) The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government;
“This will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal
and equal suffrage and shall, be held by secret vote or by equivalent free _voting
procedures”.
“While Article 13(1) of the AL AK on Human and Peoples Rights provides
as follows:
"Every citizen shall have the right to participate freely in the government of his country,
either directly or through freely chosen representatives in
accordance with the provisions of the law".
“And Article 25 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights provides
as follows:
"Every citizen shall have the right and the opportunity, without any of the distinctions
mentioned in Article 2 and without unreasonable restrictions:
“a. To take part in the conduct of public affairs, directly or through freely chosen
representatives;
“b. To vote and to be elected at genuine periodic elections which shall be by universal and
equal suffrage and shall be held by secret ballot, guaranteeing the free expression of the
will of the electors;
“c. To have access, on general terms of equality, to public service in his country". By
moving the 32 polling stations from their locations mostly in villages, to one polling
centre in Andek, ELECAM expected electors from far off villages like Azem, to trek about
12 kilometres to the polling centre in Andek to vote and to trek back to their villages,
violating a Ministerial Order and putting their lives in danger.
“Thus by moving the 32 polling stations in the Momo West Constituency to one polling
centre in Andek, ELECAM violated Sections 4(2) and 96 of the Electoral Code, the
Preamble of the Constitution and the above cited International Conventions duly ratified
by Cameroon.
“Article 3 of Arrete No. 000009/A/MINAT/SG/DAP of 6 February 2020 signed by
Bg Y Ch Ac AW Xr Xc reads thus:
"(1)The movement of persons and goods by road, railway or by air shall be prohibited
from &th Cp 2020, at midnight, to 9th Cp 2020, at 6 p.m".
“@) The provisions of paragraph (1) above do not apply to:
“a. Persons and goods circulating within an urban or a rural area;
“b. Vehicles belonging to defence and BK AR;
“ c. Ambulances with special laissez-passer issued by the Governor of the Region or the.
Aq Xp Ay with territorial jurisdiction;
“d. Aircraft dispatched for security purposes, medical evacuation or delivery of election
materials;
“e. Aircrafts operating international flights;
“f. ELECAM officials and delegates, and duly accredited national and international
observers and journalists with badges and accreditations".
“To move from any of these villages of like Azem, Abichia where the 1 polling centre was
set up by ELECAM, an elector would be moving either by road or by air and such
movement had been prohibited by the Minister of Xr Xc. The only
exception in the Ministerial Order is where the movement is either within an urban area
or within a rural area. Thus an elector who had to move from Azem to Andek centre which
is in the central area would be violating the Ministerial Order.
“Electors were therefore prevented from choosing their representatives by conveniently moving to their polling stations and voting. That electors were prevented from voting by
insecurity as on the eve of the elections and even on the day of the polls there was gun
battle between BK AR and Cy Cj in Abieha, Azem and Tinechung.
“The gunshots scared and kept most of the electors in Andek indoors throughout the day
of the polls.
“That while most of the SDF militants were unable to make it to the 1 polling centre in
Andek as explained hereinabove, ambulant voters who had been ferried into Cw BE
Cb by the CPDM were transported to the 1 polling centre by the military in
armored cars to vote for the CPDM.
“That before and during the elections there existed no Cw Aj Ae office of
ELECAM in the constituency due to insecurity and this hindered the circulation of
information relating to electoral operations such as nomination of chairpersons of polling
stations, list of security officers brought in for security during electoral operations and
polling station activities.
“That prior to the election the list of polling stations was never posted up at least days to
the polling as provided by Section 97 of the Electoral Code which provides as follows:
“The list of polling stations shall be forwarded to Council Branches of Elections
Cameroon for posting up at least 8 (eight) days before the day of election".
“That the Representatives of the administration in the polling stations were not chosen
from amongst electors registered in the electoral registers of the polling stations
concerned and this is violation of Section 54(2) of the Electoral Code which provides that:
‘The names of the representatives of the administration and candidates, lists of
candidates or political parties chosen from amongst electors registered in the electoral
register of the polling station concerned shall be notified to the council
branch of Aa AM, no later than the sixth day before the election day".
“The following characteristics were peculiar to this constituency;
“I. That there exist no Elecam Office in Andek for the staff have long deserted due to
insecurity.
“2. Representatives of the Social BG AT could not be at the centre for they
have been abducted the day before. Consequently no proces-verbals could be obtained. Only two open boxes were at the polling centres of Befang. One for
Municipal and one for legislative.
“3. Voters were expected to trek from Bx, Cx Cw about 12 kilometres.
“4. Voters of 32 polling stations were expected to vote in one box in Andek.
“5, A video projector or a slide shall be mounted at the court to demonstrate the
atmosphere in the constituency as well as other supporting documents.
“From the foregoing the petitioner urges the Constitutional Council to;
“Hold that this petition has been filed in conformity with Section 168 as read with
Sections 132 to 136 of Law No. 2012/001 of 19 April 2012 relating to the Electoral Code
and to consequently declare same ADMISSIBLE;
“Find merits in the petition and totally cancel the electoral operations of the Legislative
Elections of 9" Cp 2020 in Momo West Constituency of the
C AH Region.
“Comply with the provisions of Section 135 of the Electoral Code. With Profound Respect.
“Done in ANDEK this 11th day of Cp 2020
“Signed;
“BF AZ Y;
“SDF SUBSTANTIVE CANDIDATE;
“MOMO WEST CONSTITUENCY”;
---Considering that the petitions were notified to the respondents and that they filed their
submissions in reply which were similar;
---That in this regard, Cameroon People’s BG X AJ), with Al
Xm Xl, A Ab, AG Cc, AX BA AI Xg, AP AU
Bp At, BI AN Az and BJ Bv, of Counsel for respondents
submitted as follows:
“BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL HOLDEN AT YAOUNDE
“BETWEEN
“BF AZ Y (Social BG ATAO, PETITIONER;
“AND “-ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
“-AWUTAH Cu Y, CAMEROON PEOPLE'S BG X
(CPDM), RESPONDENTS;
“RESPONSE OF THE CAMEROON PEOPLE'S BG X (CPDM)
TO PETITION No. 022 RECEIVED ON THE 13/02/2020 AT THE REGISTRY
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS the AM Ba's BG X
(hereinafter CPDM) doth hereby prays Your Lordships to declare inadmissible, and
ultimately dismiss the petition of BF AZ Y of the Social
BG AT (hereinafter SDF) for the MOMO WEST Constituency, during the
elections of the 9" February 2020.
“This response shall be articulated on grounds of admissibility and substance (merits)
“I. 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
Xo, the President of the Senate, one-third of the members of the National Xo
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:
“(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
“iii. 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 BG AT 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 Ah 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 Ae Xi Cv 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 BF AZ Y 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.
“I. On the Substance (merits) of the Petition
“I. 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 West Constituency.
“2. Secondly, the grounds raised for the petition affected every competitor of the election
in the same constituency.
“3. The petitioner has not alleged or shown any evidence that the atmosphere decried,
exclusively affected the petitioner or benefitted the candidates of the CPDM.
“4. 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
Cs 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.
“The petitioner has failed to demonstrate how either of the local and international texts
cited, were violated during the conduct of the said election.
“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 february 2020
“ADDRESSES FOR SERVICE:
“RESPONDENTS: c/o their Counsel
“Al Xm Xll
“A Abb
“AG Cc
AQ AX Luke
“AY BA AI Xgg
“AP AU Bp Att
“BI AN Azz
“BJ Bv”.
---Considering that for its part, Elections Cameroon (ELECAM) with Z Bv
B, Okha Bau Xt and Atangana Amougou Joseph, of Counsel for respondents also
submitted as follows:
“IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL OF CAMEROON-YAOUNDE.
“WRITTEN REPLY IN DEFENCE OF THE RESPONDENT (ELECTIONS CAMEROON)
“FOR:ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
“Ap Z Bv B ;
“Barrister OKHA BAU OKHA ;
“Maître ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph — Advocates
“AGAINST :
“SOCIAL BG AT (SDF)
“BF AZ Y
“AWUTAH Cu Y (CPDM)
“MOTIVE OF PETITION:
“PETITION FOR THE TOTAL CANCELLATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTION
RESULTS OF FEBRUARY 9, 2020 IN THE MOMO WEST CONSITUENCY.
“ELECTORAL CONSTITUENCY: MOMO WEST.
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:
“The Petitioner filed a petition dated the 11” February 2020 before the Constitutional
Council, registered on the 12” February 2020 with registration No.22 praying the Council
for a total cancellation of the Legislative Election of 09" Cp 2020 in the Momo
West constituency of the C AH Region.
“The petitioner alleges that the 32 polling stations in Andek were moved to one cramped
polling center at Andek. The petitioner further alleges that the voters were never informed of the change of locations by Elecam and to him, this orchestrated difficulties to voters to
access their polling stations.
“SUBMISSION TO THE COUNCIL:
“We submit My Lords that contrary to the allegation of the petitioner that voters were not
informed of their polling station in advance is not true because the Cs Br of
Elections in compliance with Section 96 of the Electoral Code published lists of polling
stations on the 30" Bq 2020 in Decision No.0450/ELECAM OF 30 JANUARY 2020
and the number of voters per polling station in the C AH region. The said decision
was public and the petitioner never contested just to turn round after the polls to allege
that it was never done. This is an afterthought by the petitioner to derail the course of
justice.
“The petitioner alleges that polling centers were put in the same location. It is our humble
submission that a polling center is a public premises or a premises opened to the public
that can harbor one or more polling stations as envisaged by Section 96(4) of the
Electoral Code.
“Secondly My Lords the electors are partitioned in polling stations after the registration
exercise in order not to violate the provision of Section 96(3) of the Electoral Code which
provides that there shall be one polling station for a maximum of 500 electors. The
number of polling stations in a polling canter is determined by the number of electors
registered in that polling centre. The more the number of registered electors, the more the
number polling stations in the polling centers with available spaces to contain. From this
analysis, Elecam was acting in conformity with law.
“ON THE ALLEGED VIOLATION OF THE PREAMBLE OF THE CONSTITUTION AW
AM, ARTICLE 21 OF THE BC AS AW BL
AV, ARTICLE 13(1) OF THE AL AK ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES
RIGHT, ARTICLE 35 OF THE INTERNATIONAL COVENANT OF CIVIL AND
POLITICAL RIGHT.
“From a careful perusal of the petition, the petitioner alleges that voters in Momo West
Constituency did not vote on 09” February 2020 thus violating their rights to elect their
members of parliament in violation of the above mentioned Conventions and Laws.
“These allegations of the petitioner are unfounded. We submit that in the contrary,
electors duly went to the polls and exercise their rights. The proof of this is the various
election reports from the local polling commissions.
“We further submit that voting in Cameroon is not compulsory. Each citizen is free to
participate in Election as a candidate or as a voter. He/she is at liberty to participate or
not in the electoral process.
“With regards to the Decision of the Bg AW Xr Xc mentioned in
the petition, it is our humble submission that security in the country as concerns election is
the prerogative of MINAT and other Government bodies. The decision was not aimed to
disenfranchise electors but to secure their participation on, during and after the polls.
Suffice it mention that the decision was applicable in the entire national territory.
“As concerns the allegation that Elecam Branches were in existent, we submit that they
were in all the ten regions and performed their duties as required by the law.
“As concerns the pasting of lists of polling stations eight days to the polls as alleged,
Elections Cameroon pasted same as duly required by the law.
“In contrary to the allegation that members of local polling commissions were not chosen
from electors in the various polling stations concerned, the Petitioner has not produce any
evidence to proof same. Furthermore Section 102(2) of the Electoral Code , makes it
possible for members of the local polling commissions to vote in the polling stations where
they work notwithstanding that they are not registered there on condition that they have
their voters card.
“FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
“And for some other reasons that the Constitutional Council may evoke suo-moto;
“IN FORM:
“Declare the petition admissible for having been made within the time frame provided by
the law.
“ON THE MERITS:
“Reject and dismiss the petition for being unfounded for want of evidence.
“By Xee
“Av, the 13th february 2020.
“FOR ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph
“sign”.
---Considering that the Bg AW Xr Xc through its representative
submitted as follows:
“SUBMISSIONS OF THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THE STATE (MINAT) ON THE
TOTAL CANCELLATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTIONS OF 9 FEBRUARY 2020
IN THE CONSTITUENCY OF MOMO WEST
“TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL, YAOUNDE-
“May it please the Constitutional Council!
“Mindful of the petition dated 12 February 2020 for the cancellation of the legislative
elections in Momo West constituency registered under No. 22 at the Registry;
“Considering that in support of his petition, Mr. BF AZ Y, SDF
candidate who took part in the legislative election of 9 February 2020 submits that on
polling day, polling stations were moved and cramped in polling centres without
“That there were many other irregularities that hampered the regular polling exercise;
“However, considering that the State AW AM (MINAT) intends to show that the
petition cannot prosper;
“That in order to be convinced, the Learned members of the Administrative Court will
read through the grounds raised below.
“IL Inadmissibility on the ground of absence of the name(s) of the member(s) of
Parliament whose election is contested;
“Considering that section 49 of Law No. 2004/4 of 21 April 2004 to lay down the
organisation and functioning of the Constitutional Council provides that the petition shall
under pain of inadmissibility, bear the full name of the member(s) of Parliament whose
election is contested.;
“That from the provision referred to above, mentioning the name(s) of the elected persons
from the challenged election is a substantial condition of admissibility of the petition filed
before the Constitutional Council;
“However, considering that a reading of the petition in this matter shows that the
procedural requirement referred to above was not respected;
“That indeed, Mr. BF AZ Y has not in his petition, made any
mention of the names of the members of the National Xo in the said constituency;
“That consequently, Honourable members of the Constitutional Council will not hesitate
to declare the petition inadmissible;
“I. The abundantly unjustified nature of the petition
“Considering that the petitioner declares that the delocalisation of the polling stations did
not make it possible for voters to exercise the right due to distancing and insecurity;
“That more so, the situation led to a low participation rate of voters in the said election;
“However, considering that such are simple allegations to which he does not adduce any
evidence;
“That indeed, since the law does not provide for any minimal participation ceiling in any
election, a low participation rate cannot be deemed to be an irregularity;
“Considering in addition, that bringing together polling stations to polling centres was
done on the ground of the insecurity in the C AH and Bd West Regions;
“That such special measure taken by ELECAM aimed to guarantee the security of voters
and facilitate polling operations as well as assemble the results in the said Regions;
“That in this regard, Mr. BF AZ Y cannot submit that there was
violation of section 96 of the Electoral Code or that the special measure constitutes an
irregularity that can be deemed a ground for cancellation of the elections;
“Considering further that the submission that Order No. 9/A/MINAT/SG/DAP of 6
February 2020 of the Minister of Xr Xc to prohibit movement by road,
railway or air to insidiously justify that the SDF did not obtained enough votes is
unconvincing;
“That in fact, the petitioner does not show how the alleged grievances would have had an
obvious impact on the results of the said elections;
“That consequently, he is caught by section 134 that provides that the Constitutional
Council may disallow a petition it deems does not contain grounds that can influence the
results of the election;
“That the Constitutional Council will easily establish the baselessness of the grounds
raised by Mr. BF AZ Y and consequently declare his petition
unjustified;
“Upon these grounds and any other grounds the Constitutional Council may raise of its
own motion,
“We pray the Constitutional Council to:
“-declare the submissions of MINAT admissible as having been filed in the form and
within the time limit provided for by law;
“-declare the petition of Mr. BF AZ Y inadmissible for lack of the
name of the member of the National Xo whose election is challenged;
“further declare that it is unfounded;
« -consequently, dismiss it;
“And justice would have been rendered.
“Yaounde, 18 February 2020
“The Representative of the State
“(sgd)
“Co An Ag”;
ADMISSIBILITY OF PETITIONS
---Considering that disputes on the election of members of the National Xo 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 Flectoral Code to which section 168
relates for parliamentary elections are applicable to the detriment of section 49 of the
instrument 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;
---That in this matter, the petitions referred to above comply with the legal provisions cited
above;
---That it is proper to declare them admissible.
ON THE MERITS
---Considering that the petitioners enumerated a significant number of similar election
irregularities in their different petitions, and in particular the transfer of polling stations,
the non-communication of the list of polling stations to council branches of Aa
AM, the non-existence of council branches of Aa AM, exchange of gun
shots, the absence of the names of representatives of the Administration on the list of
polling stations where they were found;
---That they seek the cancellation of electoral operations of the election of members of the
National Xo of 9 February 2020 in the following constituencies: Bw C,
Bui West, Cl Bd, Bui Centre, Bui Bd, Mezam Centre, Momo East, Bw
Bd, Momo West, Cl C in C AH Region, and Lebialem in Bd West
Region ;
---Considering that in their respective submissions in reply, respondents refuted most of
the allegations of the petitioners but upheld that the polling stations were brought together
in public areas or in areas open to the public;
---That they claimed that the bringing together of the polling stations was aimed at
securing not only the voters but also their votes considering the prevailing insecurity in
C AH Region and Bd West Region;
---That according to them, voters in the said regions were not deprived of their right to
vote considering that the elections were effectively held in all the polling stations as shown
by the return sheets of the local vote-counting commissions;
---That with regard to the Order of the Minister of Xr Xc to limit
movement of persons and goods, respondents claimed that the Order simply aimed at
guaranteeing the participation of voters in the election;
---That concerning the allegation that the names of representatives of the Administration
did not feature on the list of polling stations where they were found, respondents submitted
that the allegation was unfounded, whereas section 102(2) of the Electoral Code applies
automatically in the matter at hand;
---However, considering that the transfer of polling stations to public areas without the
knowledge of voters deprived a good number of them from their fundamental right to vote
as a result of the long distance between the public areas and the residences of the voters
who remained stagnant in addition to the Order of the Minister of Xr
Xc prohibiting the movement of goods and persons referred to above;
---That in addition, the delocalisation of polling stations was conducted in violation of the
provisions of section 96(1) of the Electoral Code, Decision No. 450/ELECAM/DGE and
Decision No. 453/ELECAM/DGE of 30 January 2020 of the Cs Br of
ELECAM to duly publish the lists of polling stations and that of voters per polling station
in the Regions concerned;
---That in any case, the operation, whether conducted for security purposes or not, marred
the regularity and fairmess of the polls in the constituencies concerned, considering that the
high rate of abstention registered does not bring out the distinction between whether voters
chose the delocalisation of polling stations or they were prohibited from movement to go
and vote;
---That it is proper to declare the petitions founded and that the challenged electoral
operations be cancelled;
---In view of the fact that the procedure before the Constitutional Council is free of charge
pursuant to section 57 of 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, it is proper to declare that there is no order as to costs;
---That in application of the provisions of section 15(2) of the Law referred to above and
of section 131(3) of the Electoral Code, it is proper to order that this ruling be served
forthwith on the Ao Xh and the parties concerned, and be published in the
Ci Bz in English and French;
UPON THESE GROUNDS
---The Constitutional Council, ruling as a final jurisdiction, in open session after full
hearing from all the parties on post-electoral disputes, and with the unanimous vote of its
members;
---Consolidates petitions Nos. 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 21, 14 and 13 filed
respectively by Messrs. BA Au Xd, Xk Ai, Paul Ch Ce, Cr
Bi Bk, As Cg Cd, Bc Bs Cf, BD
Cc Bt, Bm Bv Cq, BF AZ Y, Am
Bl, and Ms. Aw Bn, on grounds of similarity in relief sought and
parties;
---Declares them admissible as having been filed in the form and within the time limit
provided for by law;
---Declares them founded on the merits;
---Cancels the electoral operations of 9 February 2020 for the election of members of the
National Xo in the following constituencies:
- C AH Region:
Bw C, Bui West, Cl Bd, Bui Centre, Bui Bd, Mezam Centre,
Momo East, Bw Bd, Momo West and Cl C
- Bd West Region:
Lebialem;
---Declares that there is no order as to costs;
---Orders that this ruling be served forthwith on the Ao Xh, the Minister of
Xr Xc, and the parties concerned, and be published in the Ci
Bz in English and French;
---This is the ruling of the Constitutional Council as delivered this 25 February 2020;
---In witness whereof, this ruling has been signed by the President, the Secretary-General,
and countersigned by the acting Registrar-in-chief./-
PRESIDENT SECRETARY-GENERAL
Ck Xj Ar Cc Xa
Ct Registrar-in-chief
Hamadjoda