- Request Fako High Court to issue a mandatory order for the President of the General Assembly of the Bar to Convene an immediate Elective General assembly of the Bar
- Notes that there is gross dereliction of duty at the helm of the Cameroon Bar Association.
- Adds that the President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Vice President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President and all members of the Bar are working on expired mandates.
By Ikome Christie-Noella Eposi in Buea
International lawyer and member of the Cameroon Bar Association, Rwanda Bar Association and the East African Law Society, Barrister Anyang Lewis Forchenallah has filed a case at the Fako High Court requesting the court to issue a mandatory order for the President of the General Assembly of the Bar to convene an immediate Elective General assembly of the Bar.
This was contained in a motion of notice tabled by the applicant, Barrister Anyang to the high court of Fako this Wednesday August 21 2024. Barrister Anyang Lewis in his motion of notice revealed that there is a gross dereliction of duty at the helm of the Cameroon Bar Association.
Stating more facts upon which the application is based, the legal practitioner added that according to the Bar laws, elections at the Bar are supposed to be organized and conducted after every two years. He added that still according to the Bar laws, the President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Vice President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President and all members of the Bar are supposed to be in office for a period of two years from the date they were elected into office.
The Applicant in his affidavit in support of the motion on notice clearly stated that the current President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President and all members of the Bar Council have been in office for more than two years in total violation of the Bar Laws with impunity. “Their mandates have expired”.
He added that the current persons mentioned above have deliberately and vehemently decided to violate the provisions of the Bar Laws by staying in office for more than two years without organizing and conducting new Bar Elections as provided for by the law. Bar. Anyang equally stated that the mandate of the aforementioned persons expired on June 20 2024 because they were elected on June 20 2022.
Attached below are other facts stated by the applicant in the affidavit in support in his 6 paged motion of notice;
- That the Bar Laws clearly stipulate that General Elections shall be held one month after the expiration of the mandate of the ordinary organs of the Bar.
- That upon the expiration of the mandate of the ordinary organs of the Bar on the 20th day of June, 2024, the General Elections were supposed to be held within a period of one month from the date in which the mandate of the ordinary organs expired; meaning the said General Elections were supposed to be held latest on the 20th day of July, 2024, or any time within the period from 20th June, 2024 to 20th July, 2024 which constituted the one month period for the General Elections to be held as provided for by the Bar Law.
- That it is very disgraceful and shameful to see that the President of the General Assembly of the Bar has not organized the General Elections on time as provided for by the Bar law.
- That it is even more disgraceful and shameful to see and realize that the Bar President and all the Bar Council members are happily holding office illegally despite the fact that their mandates have expired.
- The fact that the General Elections have not yet been held after the expiration of the mandate of the ordinary organs of the Bar easily corroborates the fact that the President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President and all the Bar Council Members are serving but their private interests and not the interest of the Bar.
- That only the Vice President of the Bar can be considered to be serving the interest of the Bar and not his personal interest because he dissociated himself from the illegal practices of the President of the General Assembly of the Bar who postponed the Elective General Assembly of the Bar illegally and in total violation of the Bar Law (See copy of the dissociation letter of the Vice President of the Bar herein attached and marked as Annexure B).
- That majority of the lawyers in the Bar were taken by surprise and disbelief when the President of the General Assembly of the Bar signed a letter on the 17th day of May, 2024 postponing the General Elections of the Bar to the period between December, 2024 and March, 2025.
- That the sole reason the President of the General Assembly of the Bar gave for postponing the Elective General Assembly was that he is working on putting in place a computerized electoral operations at the Bar.
- That since the President of the General Assembly of the Bar says clearly in his above mentioned letter that he is having operational constraints linked to the deployment of the said modern electoral process, it would have been in the interest of justice and equity for him to convene the Elective General Assembly of the Bar before their mandate expired.
- That there is continuity in administration and the elected officials of the Bar cannot do all the work of the Bar Association in a single mandate, and that is why administration continues forever. The President of the General Assembly of the Bar must not realize all his projects before convening the elective general assembly of the Bar, and there is no law that says that he must realize all his projects before he convenes the elective general assembly of the Bar.
- That note must be taken of the fact that the said computerized electoral operations has never been used in any Bar elections since the creation of the Cameroon Bar Association, and there is no former President of the General Assembly of the Bar, no former Bar President and no former Bar Council in the history of the Bar that has ever been elected by using computerized electoral operations.
- That even the current illegal President of the General Assembly of the Bar, Bar President and Bar Council members were not elected using computerized electoral operations.
- That the postponement of the general elections by the President of the General Assembly of the Bar is totally illegal and unwarranted.
- That the Bar laws do not give the President of the General Assembly of the Bar the power to postpone the General Elections of the Bar.
- That the President of the General Assembly of the Bar acted ultra vires by postponing the Elective General Assembly of the Bar.
- That even the Vice President of the General Assembly of the Bar has described the postponement of the general elections by his hierarchy (the President of the General Assembly) as “Illegal and Unreasonable” (in his own words). 25. That the Bar Council in its ordinary session on the 1st day of July, 2024 clearly stated in their minutes that they were surprised by the publication on social media of the postponement of the elective general assembly without prior consultation with the Bar Council. The Bar Council also expressed clearly in the same minutes that they appreciate the need to improve or change our laborious and cumbersome electoral process; but they clearly acknowledged the fact that the electronic vote proposed by the President of the General Assembly is “Premature” as the electoral system or voting process at the Bar is so crucial that it must be examined by the Bar Council, approved by the General Assembly of the Bar and experimented to satisfaction before any such implementation.
- That despite the Bar Council’s negative expressions in their session of July 01 2024 against the postponement of the elections by the President of the General Assembly, they have also failed in their duty to convene an Extraordinary Elective General Assembly of the Bar because the bar laws clear give the Bar Council the power to do so. It appears all the Bar Council members are very happy staying in power illegally.
- That the President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President and the Bar Council members are presently holding the Bar Association hostage by being in office illegally after their mandates have expired and without organizing new elections.
- That the President of the General Assembly of the Bar is planning to convene the Elective General Assembly of the Bar between the period of December, 2024 and March, 2025; meaning that by that time, the President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President, the Bar Council members would have been in office illegally for more than five months, and that would be totally illegal and undemocratic. This honorable court should not allow them to be in office illegally for that long.
- That if truly the Bar President and the Bar Council Members were serving the interest of the Bar and not their personal interests, they would have convened by now an Extraordinary Elective General Assembly because the Bar Law gives the Bar Council the power to do so.
- That the “INNOVATIONS” newspaper has clearly stated in its edition No 175 of 23rd July, 2024 that the President of the General Assembly of the Bar and the Vice President of the General Assembly of the Bar are in serious conflict in relation to convening the Elective General Assembly of the Bar.
- That also, the “INNOVATIONS” newspaper in its edition No 163 of 19th June, 2024 clearly state that the mandate of the Bar President shall end on the 20th day of June, 2022.
- That in addition, the same “INNOVATIONS” newspaper in its edition No 176 of 24th July, 2024 clearly mentions the fact that the Bar President wants to extend his mandate right up to the month of May, 2025.
- The fact that the President of the General Assembly of the Bar, the Bar President and the Bar Council members are still in office and have not organized new elections despite the fact that their mandates have expired seriously rubs the image of the Bar Association in the mud nationally and internationally. It sends a very bad signal to foreign investors and it contributes in making our judiciary to be weak, and not credible.
- It is scandalous to see that lawyers who are supposed to be the ones upholding the rule of law and fighting for justice in the society are instead the once grossly violating the rule of law in a laissez faire manner.
- That it will be in the interest of justice and equity for this application to be granted.