| Cameroun, Conseil constitutionnel, 24 février 2020, 019/CC/SRCER

RULING No 019/CC/SRCER 24Tx FEBRUARY 2020 BETWEEN:
AT AV Bi
AND
1-CPDM
2- SDF
3-ELECAM
4-MINAT
RELIEF SOUGHT:
- Petition for the cancellation of the Legislative election results of February 9, 2020 at
BF polling centres in Belo Sub-division of Boyo Division or the transfer of votes to
UDP candidat.s.
- Petition for the cancellation of the Legislative election results of February 9, 2020 in
Bum Sub-division of Boyo Division or the transfer of votes to UDP candidat.s.
---The Constitutional Council sitting in open Court, the 24” to 25" of Ap 2020,
before the panel composed thus:
—Mr. Clement ATANGANA, President of the Constitutional Council:
President;
---Messrs:
X Y Bh
Ab BJ AK
Ai Ba B AJ
Bb BA
---Mrs: Ad Az AX
--- Messrs:
Bf Aa A BE
AW BH AN
Bm Bd AM
Ax Z
COUNCILLORS/MEMBERS
---With the assistance of Mr. HAMADJODA, interim Registrar-In-Chief and Mrs.
Au Ay BD épse Bg BL, Registrar;
---In the presence of Mr. MALEGHO Joseph ASEH, Secretary Be.
---In the matter of two petitions pitting:
-Mr. AT AV Bi, candidate on the list of the UDP for Boyo Division for
the February 9, 2020 Legislative elections, Petitioner
-CPDM
- SDF
-ELECAM
- MINAT
Respondents;
---Has delivered the following Ruling:
---The Constitutional Council,
---Mindful of the Constitution,
---Mindful of law No. 2004/004/ of 21/04/2004/ to lay down the organisation and
functioning of the Constitutional Council as amended by law Nos. 2012/ 015 and
2012/016 of 21/12/2012;
---Mindful of decree No. 2018/104 of 7/02/2018 to lay down the organisation and
functioning of the Be Af of the Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of law No. 2012/001 of 18/04/2012 on the Electoral Code as amended and
supplemented by law No. 2012/017 of 21/12/2012;
---Mindful of Decree No. 2018/015 of 07/02/2018 appointing the Members of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree No. 2018/106 of 07/02/2018 appointing the President of the
Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree No. 2018/170 of 23/02/2018 appointing the Secretary-General of
the Constitutional Council;
---Mindful of decree No. 2019/621 of 10/11/2019 convening electors for the February
9, 2020 Legislative and Municipal elections;
---Mindful of the petitions of AT AV Bi;
---Upon listening to the report of Mrs. AX Ad Az, Councillor/Reporter;
---Considering that by a petition dated 10 February 2020, received on the 11" of the same
month and registered under n° 02, Mr. AT AV Bi, candidate on the list
of UDP for Boyo Division, seized the Constitutional Council requesting for the
cancellation of the legislative election results of February 9, 2020 at the BF polling
centres in Belo subdivision of Boyo Division or the transfer of votes to UDP candidat.s.
---Considering that the petition in question reads thus:
“AT AV Bi;
« ‘Subject: Request for the cancellation of legislative election results of February 9, 2020 at
BF polling centers in BELO subdivision of BOYO division or transfer the votes to
UDP candidat.s.
-I have the honour to inform you that the polling Centers for february 9, 2020 legislative
elections in BF Aj subdivision, of BOYO Division was in private CPDM
man's premises Bk AH AI, which is against the LA..
“He was standing at his gate directing voters to vote for the CPDM for the council and
SDF for the legislative. The health post where the polling center was positioned is in
Bk AH AI compound which is against the LAW as i stated a.ove.
“I therefore urge you and members of your commission to cancel the votes/results of the
BF polling center or transfer the votes to the UDP candid.tes.
“The health center which the voting took place belongs to Bk AH AI
which is a private property in his fenced compound not a public health post but to take
care of his wor.ers.
“Thanks, yours AT AV Bi UDP CANDIDATE;
---Considering that by another petition dated 10 february 2020, filed on the 12” of the
same month and registered under n° 11, Mr. AT AV Bi, candidate on
the list of UDP for Boyo Division, seized the Constitutional Council requesting for the
cancellation of the legislative election results of february 9, 2020 in Bum Sub-division of
Boyo Division or the transfer of votes to UDP candidat.s.
The additional petition in question reads thus:
‘Subject: Request for the cancellation of legislative election results of February 9, 2020 in
Bum sub-division of BOYO division or transfer the votes to UDP candid.tes.
“In addition to my petition dated ten of Ap 2020, reliable information says SDF did
not had the number of votes in Bum Sub-divi.ion.
“I have the honor to inform you that SDF votes in Bum Sub-division are inaccurate
because SDF do not have up to 300 votes in Bum Sub-division. The original report which
UDP polling agent signed on the 09 Ap indicated that SDF do not have up to 300
votes. It was on the 10” of february 2020 that the ELECAM official increased SDF votes
to about 800 and did not present the report to UDP polling agent to sign. UDP had more
than 945 votes in Bum sub-division.
“The UDP here by request ELECAM to present the signed report by the UDP polling
agent Mr NKAH Jo.eph.
“We hereby, urge the Constitutional council to cancel the SDF votes for Bum sub-division
because they were irregularly put by the ELECAM official
“Thanks your AT AV Bi UDP CANDIDATE;
“sign”;
---Considering that in compliance with section 168 as read with sections 130(5), 132,133,
134, 135 and 136 of law No. 2012/001 of 19” April 2012 relating to the Electoral Code as
amended by law No. 2012/017 of 21* December 2012, these petitions were posted up at
the Constitutional Council and duly notified on all the respondents within 24(twenty four)
hours. The respondents in return had 48(forty-eight) hours to deposit their statements of
defen.e.
---Considering that in reply to the petitions of Mr. AT AV Bi, the SDF
political party filed their written submission on the 14” of Ap 20.0.
---Considering that Elections Cameroon (ELECAM) filed two separate replies to the
petitions of AT AV Bi on the 16” of February 20.0.
---Considering that the Bo AG As Bj filed two written
submissions with respect to both petitions on the 15” and 19 of February 2020.
---Considering that the CPDM on his own part did not file any statement of defen.e.
---Considering that the written submissions of the SDF reads thus:
“BEFORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL HOLDEN AT YAOUNDE
“BETWEEN
“SOCIAL AL AU
“HON.NJONG EVARISTUS
“ELECTIONSCAMEROON (ELECAM)
“AND
“AT AV Bi (UDP Substantive Candidate), PETITIONER
“WRITTEN SUBMISSION IN RESPONSE TO THE PETITION FILED ON THE 11 FEBRUARY 2020 BY AT AV Bi
“ MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS; In response to the petition filed on the 11 of
Ap 2020 and an additional petition filed on the 12/02/2020 wherein petitioner
claims that the 3"* respondent put a polling centre of the February 9, 2020 legislative
elections in BF Aj Subdivision in a private residence of Bk AH
AI who himself was standing at the entrance to direct voters on how and who to
vote; He further claimed that votes cast in favour of the Social AL AU in Bum
Sub-division are inaccura.e.
“ But considering that section 49 of the Law on the Organisation and Functioning of the
Constitutional Council States as follows:
«Sous peine d’irrecevabilité, la requête doit contenir les noms, prénom(s), qualité et
adresse du requérant ainsi que le nom de l’élu ou des élus dont l'élection est contest.e.
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. » ;
« That with regards of the above mentioned section, under penalty of inadmissibility, the
petition must contain the name or surnames, capacity and address of petitioner and also
the name or surnames of the elected whose election is contested. The petition of the
petitioner has failed to meet the mandatory legal requirements of Section 49 for his
petition to be admissible. He has not mention the name or names of the elected persons
whose election is being contested. Being a prioriquisit for the admissibility of the petition,
this requirement was not complied with by the petitioner and consequently, the petition
should be rejected or declared inadmissib.e.
“ But if by any stretch of legal imagination the Constitutional Council will think otherwise
as to want to entertain the petition, then we will further submit as follows:
“With regards to the petitioner’s allegation that the polling centre was in a private
residence of a CPDM militant, it is however not true. The pooling centre was at
BF Ac Centre which is a public place. BF is an adoret with many
inhabitants. BF Ac Centre is not the private property of Mr AI but a
community Health Centre. This pooling centre was published before pooling day and the petitioner was aware of this and did not complain. This allegation is however base.ess.
“Considering that the petition raised issues of votes not accurately calculated but failed to
prove his allegation with the report or reports from the various pooling stations. Section
115 of the Electoral Code states as follows;
“The results of the poll shall forthwith be entered in to a report. Such report, which shall
be made in as many copies as there are members plus 2 (two), shall be closed and signed
by all members ”
Section 115(2) states as follows:
“A copy of the report shall be handed to each member of the Local Polling Commission
present and having signed it”
“It is clear from the forgoing that a report is established in the polling stations and all
parties who sign the report and are present, are handed a copy. If the petitioner could not
attached even a copy of the polling station report or a bailiff report, then it means he was
not represented in the polling station and consequently does not have anything to prove
his allegat.ons.
“These allegations are therefore unfounded because the petition has not attached any
prove to support his allegat.ons.
“The relief sought by the petitioner is baseless, unfounded and unwarra.ted.
“We Pray your Lordships to reject the petition of AT AV Bi,
“ And that will be justice;
“Ar Aoo;
“Bl, 14/02/2020;
“Sign;
“BB AR Aq, Barrister and Solicitor”;
---Considering that the written submissions of Elections Cameroon read thus:
“IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL OF CAMEROON-YAOUND..
“REQUEST FOR THE CANCELLATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTION RESULTS
OF FEBRUARY 9, 2020 AT BF POLLING CENTERS IN BELO SUB DIVISION
OF THE BOYO DIVISION OR TRANSFER THE VOTES TO UDP CANDID.TES.
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:
“The Petitioner filed a petition dated the 10” February 2020 before the Constitutional
Council, praying the Council to cancel the results of the Legislative Election of 09"
Ap 2020 at BF polling centers in the Aj Bc Division of the Boyo Divisi.n.
The petitioner in his petition alleged that the polling centers were in a private CPDM
man's premises Bk AH AI which is against the.law.
“The petitioner further alleged that the said Bk AH AI stood in his
compound and asked voters to vote for the SDF list for the Legislative Elections and to
vote for the CPDM for the Municipal Elect.ons.
“The petitioner ended up by praying that the elections in the polling centers be cancelled
or the votes transferred to UDP .ist.
“SUBMISSION TO THE COURT:
“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 allowed 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 therefor. 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 acknowledged.”
“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 m.ans.
“Upon a careful perusal of the petition of Mr. AT AV Bi, he has
vehemently failed to present the facts and means as required by the above cited .aws.
“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 Mr. AT AV Bi never
included a summary statement of practical and legal grounds therefore before fili.g.
Hence it is in violation of the law here in above menti.ned.
“The petition of Mr. AT AV Bi is accordingly inadmiss.ble.
“Mindful of the fact that 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
petitionner as well as the name of the member (s) of Parliament whose election is
“Mindful of the fact that the petition of the petitioner does not specify the names of those
elected or whose election is being contested ;
“That this petition was not made in conformity with the provision of the law aforecited ;
“That this petition is therefore inadmissible for violating the provision of the la..
“We submit My Lords that the petitioner’s allegation that the polling center at BF is
not a public place is a misconception for the following reasons;
“Section 96(4) of the Electoral Code stipulates;
“Every polling station shall be located in public premises or in premises open to the
public”
“The petitioner in his petition to the Constitutional Council mentioned that the said
polling center is located in a health center. A health center is not only a public premises
but a premises open to the public as envisaged by the provision of the Electoral Code here
above c.ted.
“We further submit that the petition of the petitioner has not specified any alleged facts
and means as provided by Section 133(3) of the Electoral .ode.
“It is a cardinal principle of law that he who alleges a fact must provide adequate
evidence to proof. The petitioner herein alleged that Bk AH AI was directing
people to vote for SDF list for the Bn Ae and for CPDM list for the
Municipals and has not adduced any iota of evidence to proof the facts all.ged.
“FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
“And for some other reasons that the Constitutional Council may evoke suo-moto:
“IN FORM:
“Declare the appeal of the appellant inadmissible for having been made in violation of.the
law.
“ON THE MERITS:
“If the Constitutional Council for any reason finds that the petition is admissible, we
humbly urge the Honourable Council to reject the petition of UNITED AL
AO (UDP)
“And AT AV Bi for being unfounded for want of evid.nce.
“Ar Aoo
“Bl, the 13th February .020.
“FOR ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM) “Ak AP Av AZ
“Barrister OKHA BAU OKHA
« Maître ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph » ;
II- _ “IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL OF CAMEROON-YAO.NDE.
“WRITTEN REPLY IN DEFENCE OF THE RESPONDENT
“MOTIVE OF PETITION:
“REQUEST FOR THE CANCELLATION OF THE LEGISLATIVE ELECTION RESULTS
OF FEBRUARY 9, 2020 AT BUM SUB DIVISION OF THE BOYO DIVISION OR
TRANSFER THE VOTES TO UDP CANDID.TES.
“ELECTORAL CONSTITUENCY:
“BOYO CONSTITUENCY
“MAY IT PLEASE YOUR LORDSHIPS:
“The Petitioner filed a petition dated the 10” February 2020 before the Constitutional
Council with registration NO 12, praying the Council to cancel the results of the
Legislative Election of 09" Ap 2020 in Bum Sub Division of the Boyo Division or
transfer the votes to the UDP candidates. The petitioner in his petition alleged that the
votes of SDF in the Bum Sub Division are inaccurate
“SUBMISSION TO THE COURT:
“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 acknowledged.”
“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 m.ans.
“Upon a careful perusal of the petition of Mr. AT AV Bi, he has
vehemently failed to present the facts and means as required by the above cited .aws.
“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 Mr. AT AV Bi never
included a summary statement of practical and legal grounds therefore before fili.g.
Hence it is in violation of the law here in above menti.ned.
“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 require.ent.
“The petition of Mr. AT AV Bi is accordingly inadmiss.ble.
“FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS:
“And for some other reasons that the Constitutional Council may evoke suo-moto:
“IN FORM:
“Declare the appeal of the appellant inadmissible for having been made in violation of.the
law.
“ON THE MERITS:
“If the Constitutional Council for any reason finds that the petition is admissible, we
humbly urge the Honourable Council to reject the petition of UNITED AL
AO (UDP) And AT AV Bi for being unfounded for want of
evid.nce.
“Ar Aoo
“Bl, the 13th february 20.0.
FOR ELECTIONS CAMEROON (ELECAM)
Ak AP Av AZ
Ak AY BG AY
Maître ATANGANA AMOUGOU Joseph
---Considering that the replies of the Bo AG As Bj read thus:
I- « OBSERVATIONS DU REPRESENTANT DE L'ETAT DU CAMEROUN (MINAT) SUR
L'ANNULATION DES ELECTIONS LEGISLATIVES DANS LES BUREAUX DE VOTE
DE LA LOCALITE DE BF Aj DANS LA CIRCONSCRIPTION ELECTORALE
DU BOYO
« A Monsieur le Président du Conseil Constitutionnel ;
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel ;
« Vu la requête, en date du 10 février 2020, aux fins d'annulation des élections législatives dans la localité de BF Aj dans la circonscription électorale du Boyo, enregistrée
au Greffe de céans sous le numéro 02 ;
« Attendu que Sieur AT Bi, candidat de l'United AL AO (UDP) aux
élections législatives du 09 février 2020, allègue que les bureaux de vote de la localité de
BF Aj étaient installés dans la propriété privée de sieur Bk AH
AI, membre du Rassemblement Démocratique du Peuple Camerounais
(RDPC) ;
« Qu'il sollicite soit l'annulation des élections dans cette localité soit que tous les votes
soient transférés à l'UDP; .
« Mais attendu que l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) entend démontrer que cette requête ne
« Que l'Auguste Juridiction peut s'en apercevoir au moyen des arguments développés ci-
après;
« I-Sur le caractère mal orienté de la requête
« Attendu qu'à la lecture de la requête de Sieur AT Bi, il apparaît qu'il a
entendu, sans équivoque, saisir le Président de la Commission Nationale de Recensement
Général des Votes;
« Qu'on peut en effet lire à l'entête: "THE PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR
THE FINAL COUNTING OF VOTESI THE PRESIDENT, CONSTITUTIONNAL
COUNCIL"
«Qu'en concluant ladite requête, il prie le Président et les membres de sa
commissiond'annuler les
élections dans la localité de BF Aj en ces termes:
« 1 therefore urge you and members of your commission to cancel the votes »,;
« Attendu que le Conseil Constitutionnel et la Commission Nationale de Recensement
Général des Votes sont deux organes distincts;
« Que le Président du Conseil constitutionnel n'est pas Président, encore moins membre
de la Commission Nationale de Recensement Général des Votes qui a à sa tête un
Magistrat du Conseil Constitutionnel désigné par lui, tel que cela ressort des dispositions
de l'article 68 du Code électoral;
« Qu'en saisissant la Commission, il a estimé que c'est cette instance qui est compétente
pour donner une suite légale à sa requête;
« Qu'il ne revient pas, en l'espèce, au Conseil Constitutionnel de se saisir d'une requête
adressée à une autre instance;
« Qu'au demeurant, il convient de constater que le requérant a saisi la Commission
Nationale de Recensement Général des Votes, de lui en donner acte et de l'inviter à se
mieux pourvoir;
« II-Sur l'irrecevabilité tirée de l'absence d'articulation des moyens et du nom de l'élu dont
l'élection est contestée
« A- Sur l'irrecevabilité tirée de l'absence d'articulation des moyens
Attendu qu'aux termes de l'article 133(3) du Code électoral, la requête doit, sous peine
d'irrecevabilité, préciser les faits et les moyens allégués;
« Que les moyens sont les raisons de fait et de droit invoquées par un plaideur à l'appui de
sa prétention ;
« Qu'en l'espèce, Sieur AT Bi n'indique pas, à l'appui de sa prétention, la
disposition légale qui aurait été violée;
« Qu'il convient de déclarer sa requête irrecevable;
« B- Sur l'irrecevabilité tirée de l'absence du nom de l'élu dont l'élection est contestée
« Attendu que l'article 49 de la loi n° 2004/004 du 21 avril 2004 portant organisation.et
fonctionnement du Conseil Constitutionnel dispose que la requête doit contenir, sous peine
d'irrecevabilité, le nom de l'élu ou des élus dont l'election est contestée;
« Qu'à la lecture de la requête de Sieur AT Bi, il n'est nulle part fait mention du
nom de l'élus ou des élus dont il conteste l'élection;
« Qu'il y a lieu, en application de la disposition légale susvisée, de déclarer cette requête
irrecevable;
« IIT- Sur le caractère non justifié de la requête
« Attendu qu'il est de principe en droit qu'il appartient à celui qui allègue un fait d'en
rapporter la preuve;
« Qu'en l'espèce, Sieur AT Bi qui prétend que les bureaux de vote de la localité
de BF Aj étaient installés dans la propriété privée de sieur Bk AH
BI AI ne rapporte ne serait-ce qu'un début de preuve de ses allégations qui, de ce
fait, ne sauraient retenir l'attention de l'Auguste Juridiction;
« Qu'il ne rapporte non plus la preuve de ce que ce grief pourrait avoir une incidence sur
les résultats de l'élection exposant ainsi sa requête au rejet sur le fondement de l'article
134 du Code électoral qui dispose que le Conseil Constitutionnel peut rejeter les requêtes
ne contenant que des griefs ne pouvant avoir aucune incidence sur les résultats de
l'élection;
« Qu'il en résulte que cette requête n'est pas justifiée;
« Par ces motifs et tous autres à en déduire ou suppléer d'office,
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel de :
« - recevoir l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) en ses observations et l'y dire fondé;
« - constater que Sieur AT Bi a saisi la Commission Nationale de recensement
Général des Votes au lieu du Conseil Constitutionnel;
« - le renvoyer à se mieux pourvoir ainsi qu'elle avisera;
« - déclarer sa requête irrecevable pour défaut d'articulation des moyens et du nom de
l'élu ou des élus dont l'élection est contestée;
« - surabondamment, la déclarer non justifiée;
« Et ce sera justice ;
« Yaoundé, le 14 février 2020
« Le Représentant de l'Etat
« (é) AS Aw Ag » ;
II- « OBSERVATIONS DU REPRESENTANT DE L'ETATDU CAMEROUN (MINAT) SUR
L'ANNULATION DES ELECTIONS LEGISLATIVES DU 09 FEVRIER 2020 DANS LA
LOCALITE DE BUM DANS LA CIRCONSCRIPTION ELECTORALE DU BOYO
« A Monsieur le Président du Conseil Constitutionnel
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel!
« Vu la requête, en date du 10 février 2020, aux fins d'annulation des élections législatives
dans la localité de Bum dans la circonscription électorale du Boyo, enregistrée au Greffe
de céans sous le n° 11 ;
« Attendu que Sieur AT Bi, candidat de l'United AL AO (UDP) aux élections législatives du 09 février 2020, allègue que le Social AL AU (SDF)
disposait d'à peine 300 voix dans la localité de Bum ;
« Qu'il ajoute que le procès-verbal original signé du représentant de l'UDP signé le 09
février 2020 confirme cette tendance contrairement à celui détenu par les représentants
d'ELECAM qui fait mention de 800 voix obtenues par le SDF et qui n'est pas signé du
représentant de l'UDP ;
« Qu'il sollicite donc l'annulation des élections dans cette localité;
« Mais attendu que l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) entend démontrer que cette requête ne
« Que l'Auguste Juridiction peut s'en apercevoir au moyen des arguments développés ci-
après;
« I-sur le caractère mal orienté de la requête
« Attendu qu'à la lecture de la requête de Sieur AT Bi, il apparaît qu'il a
entendu, sans équivoque, saisir le Président de la Commission Nationale de Recensement
Général des Votes;
« Qu'on peut en effet lire à l'entête: "THE PRESIDENT NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR
THE FINAL COUNTING OF VOTES! THE PRESIDENT, CONSTITUTIONNAL
COUNCIL"
« Attendu que le Conseil Constitutionnel et la Commission Nationale de Recensement
Général des Votes sont deux organes distincts;
« Que le Président du Conseil constitutionnel n'est pas Président, encore moins membre
de la Commission Nationale de Recensement Général des Votes qui a à sa tête un
Magistrat du Conseil Constitutionnel désigné par lui, tel que cela ressort des dispositions
de l'article 68 du Code électoral;
« Qu'en saisissant la Commission, il a estimé que c'est cette instance qui est compétente
pour donner une suite légale à sa requête;
« Qu'il ne revient pas, en l'espèce, au Conseil Constitutionnel de se saisir d'une requête
adressée à une autre instance;
« Qu'au demeurant, il convient de constater que le requérant a saisi la Commission
Nationale de Recensement Général des Votes, de lui en donner acte et de l'inviter à se mieux pourvoir;
« II-Sur l'irrecevabilité tirée de l'absence d'articulation des moyens et du nom de l'élu dont
l'élection est contestée
« A- Sur l'irrecevabilité tirée de l'absence d'articulation des moyens
« Attendu qu'aux termes de l'article 133(3) du Code Electoral, la requête doit, sous peine
d'irrecevabilité, préciser les faits et les moyens allégués;
« Que les moyens sont les raisons de fait et de droit invoquées par un plaideur à l'appui de
sa prétention;
« Qu'en l'espèce, Sieur AT Bi n'indique pas, à l'appui de sa prétention, la
disposition légale qui aurait été violée;
« Qu'il convient de déclarer sa requête irrecevable;
« B- Sur l'irrecevabilité tirée de l'absence du nom de l'élu dont l'élection est contestée
« Attendu que l'article 49 de la loi n° 2004/004 du 21 avril 2004 portant organisation et
fonctionnement du Conseil Constitutionnel dispose que la requête doit contenir, sous peine
d'irrecevabilité, le nom de l'élu ou des élus dont l'élection est contestée;
« Qu'à la lecture de la requête de Sieur AT Bi, il n'est nulle part fait mention du
nom de l'élus ou des élus dont il conteste l'élection;
« Qu'il y a lieu, en application de la disposition légale susvisée, de déclarer cette requête
irrecevable;
« IIT- Sur le caractère non justifié de la requête
« Attendu qu'il est de principe en droit qu'il appartient à celui qui allègue un fait d'en
rapporter la preuve;
« Qu'en l'espèce, Sieur AT Bi qui prétend que des chiffres fictifs ont été portés
sur les procès- verbaux ne rapporte ne serait-ce qu'un début de preuve de ses allégations
qui, de ce fait, ne sauraient retenir l'attention de l'Auguste Juridiction;
« Qu'il ne rapporte non plus la preuve de ce que les griefs invoqués pouvaient avoir une
incidence sur les résultats de l'élection exposant ainsi sa requête au rejet sur le fondement
de l'article 134 du Code électoral qui dispose que le Conseil Constitutionnel peut rejeter
les requêtes ne contenant que des griefs ne pouvant avoir aucune incidence sur les
résultats de l'élection;
« Qu'il en résulte que cette requête n'est pas justifiée;
« Par ces motifs et tous autres à en déduire ou suppléer d'office,
« Plaise au Conseil Constitutionnel de :
« - recevoir l'Etat du Cameroun (MINAT) en ses observations et l'y dire fondé;
« - constater que Sieur AT Bi a saisi la Commission Nationale de recensement
Général des Votes;
« - le renvoyer à mieux se pourvoir;
« - déclarer sa requête irrecevable pour absence d'articulation des moyens et du nom de
l'élu ou des élus dont l'élection est contestée;
« - surabondamment, la déclarer non justifiée;
« Et ce sera justice ;
« Le Représentant de l’Etat
“(eë) AS Aw Ag »;
ON THE CONSOLIDATION OF PROCEEDINGS
---Considering that the petitions referred to above have the same purpo.e.
---Considering that it is proper for good administration of justice to examine them
together.
ON THE ADMISSIBILITY OF THE PETITIONS
---Considering that by virtue of Section 133(3) of the Electoral Code, the petition shall
specify the alleged facts and mea.s.
---Considering that the petitioner in the present case filed his petitions without any legal
backing to ascertain the allegations contained in the said petitions. That his action is
therefore inadmissib.e.
---Considering that proceedings before the Constitutional Council are free of charge as per
Section 57 of law No. 2004/004 of 21* of April 2004, the cost of these proceedings shall
be defrayed by the Public Am.
---Considering that by virtue of section 15(2) of the aforementioned law and section
131(3) of the Electoral Code, this Ruling shall be served forthwith to the An Al of ELECAM and to all the parties concerned, and published in the At Ah in
French and in English.
UPON THESE GROUNDS:
---The constitutional Council, after a full hearing in open Court on post-electoral disputes
as final jurisdiction with the unanimous vote of its members;
---Consolidates petitions nos. 003/SRCER/G/SG/CC and 036/SRCER/G/SG/CC filed by
Mr. AT AV Bi.
---Declares the action instituted by AT AV Bi inadmissible for lack of
legal backing;
---Orders the Public Am to defray the cost of these proceedings;
---Orders service forthwith of this Ruling to the An Al AG BK and to all
the parties concerned, and its publication in the At Ah in French and in Engli.h.
---Thus decided and pronounced in open court by the Constitutional Council, the same
day, month and year as cited above in the Court Hall of the said Council ;
---In witness whereof, this present decision has been signed by the President, the
Secretary- General and countersigned by the interim Registrar-In-Chief/-
THE PRESIDENT THE SECRERATY-GENERAL
Clément ATANGANA MALEGHO Joseph ASEH
THE INTERIM REGISTRAR-IN- CHIEF
HAMADJODA