The recent appointments made by Paul Biya, the National President of the Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement (CPDM), have sparked intense debate. Many have questioned the legality of these appointments, citing three main concerns:
- Appointment Outside the CPDM Congress*: Critics argue that the appointments were made outside the CPDM congress, which they claim is a violation of party statutes. However, a closer examination of Section 24(2) of the CPDM statutes reveals that the National President has the discretion to appoint members to the Central Committee at any time.
“substantive members of the Central Committee, whose number cannot exceed 350, are distributed among others-210 members elected by the congress…[and] “Members designated by the National President”.
This position is sustained by section 27 of the Statutes which stipulates that:
( Consititutionalist)
“The National President ensures the proper functioning of the Party. To this end, he may take any necessary measures to ensure the good organization and proper functioning of the Party”.
II.Illegality of Delayed Congress*: Others argue that it is illegal for the CPDM congress not to have held for nearly 15 years. While Section 18(2) of the statutes does specify a five-year interval between congresses, it also allows for extensions or reductions by the political bureau in case of necessity. It is an application of this proviso that the political bureau met at the Unity Palace on November 3, 2016 and took four resolutions including:
- “The resolution extending the period for holding the RDPC Congress.”
- “The resolution extending the term of the National President until the next RDPC Congress.”
Among the reasons given at the time was the fight against Boko Haram, which was draining national resources. In the same vein, today the crisis in the North West and South West regions could be evoked to produce similar effects. The congress was not postponed in time but rather sine die, meaning till further notice. Therefore, if the CPDM congress has not held up to this point, it is not in illegality but in consonance with the party’s statute and the subsequent resolution of the political bureau.
III. Lapsed Mandate of the National President*: Some argue that Paul Biya’s mandate as National President has lapsed. However, the 2016 Political Bureau resolution extended his term until the next congress. Since the congress has not yet taken place, Biya’s mandate remains valid.
It is clear that the mandate of the National President, since 2016 is tied to the holding of a congress. Since the congress has not yet taken place, the mandate of the president is still running. Therfore , he is neither acting ultra virus nor is he in any situation of illegality.
In conclusion, a careful analysis of the CPDM statutes and relevant instruments reveals that Paul Biya’s appointments are rooted in legality. As a seasoned politician and legal expert, Biya has demonstrated a unique blend of political savvy and legal astuteness throughout his stewardship of the party and the state.