Kamto 2025 MANIDEM nomination
As the Constitutional Council prepares to rule on the presidential candidates for the October 2025 elections in Cameroon, one nomination is stirring serious legal and political controversy: that of Professor Maurice Kamto, nominated by a faction of MANIDEM led by Mr. Anicet Ekane.
Kamto’s nomination sparks legal and political debate.
Kamto’s supporters argue with a 14-point justification that his nomination is procedurally sound and legally binding. However, a deeper constitutional and political analysis reveals that the process is far from undisputed.
Here’s why the Constitutional Council should not validate this nomination solely based on procedural formalities.
1. Authorized Party ≠ Internal Legitimacy
Although MANIDEM appears on the official list of authorized political parties, this does not confirm its internal unity or legal legitimacy. Article 121 of the Electoral Code requires that a presidential candidate be nominated by a party in good legal and organizational standing. In MANIDEM’s case, Mr. Ekane’s leadership remains disputed and unresolved by the courts.
2. A Contested Nomination Process
Kamto’s nomination was reportedly endorsed by the party’s “Steering Committee” (CDM), created at the 2018 congress. Yet, this congress and its outcomes were challenged by other factions from the outset.
The later withdrawal of a legal complaint by Mr. Dieudonné Yebga does not amount to a court ruling. No tribunal has confirmed the legality of the CDM or recognized Ekane as the undisputed party leader. Kamto’s candidacy thus remains politically weak and legally uncertain.
3. MINAT’s Recognition Is Not a Legal Verdict
The July 17, 2018 letter from MINAT recognizing Mr. Ekane as party president is frequently cited as evidence. However, MINAT is not empowered to resolve internal party disputes—it merely acknowledges receipt of documents. Only administrative courts have jurisdiction to validate changes in party leadership.
4. Past Electoral Participation Does Not Justify Future Irregularity
That MANIDEM participated in the 2020 municipal and legislative elections under Ekane’s leadership does not automatically validate his authority in a presidential race, which demands stricter constitutional compliance. A flawed past practice cannot justify future legitimacy.
5. Silence Does Not Equal Validation
The argument that the absence of recent legal appeals equates to approval is flawed. Court inaction does not mean the matter is resolved. The Constitutional Council must assess unresolved issues, not just uncontested ones.
6. Electoral Integrity Begins with Internal Democracy
If Professor Kamto, who presents himself as a champion of electoral transparency, accepts a disputed nomination, what should voters think? One cannot call for fair elections while circumventing internal party democracy.
CONCLUSION: The Constitutional Council Must Exercise Caution
The Cameroonian people deserve candidates whose legitimacy is clear—not obscured by legal ambiguity or factional games. The presidency demands procedural and constitutional integrity.
The Council must go beyond appearances and assess the substantive legitimacy of nominations. It must defend constitutional order against political manipulation.
Doing what is right means rejecting confusion—and upholding the law.
