Constitutional Council: Petitioners react to hearings

Some petitioners and members of political parties have expressed diverse feelings after the first hearings of the Constitutional Council organised this Thursday 15th March 2018.

Honourable Mbah Ndam who defended the course of his party, the SDF applauded the Constitutional Council for fairly applying the rule of law during the session. He however argued that, the case pitting the SDF against the CPDM and Elections Cameroon, ELECAM in the West region should be ruled in favour of the SDF.

To him, the CPDM Senatorial list in the West region had an almost non-existent member in the name of Teingnidetio Joseph. Honourable Paul Tchatchoung who petitioned the CPDM for presenting this list that violates article 165 of the Electoral Code according to him, said he is happy the Council noticed irregularities in the list.https://www.crtv.cm/2018/03/constitutional-council-11-members-sworn-tuesday-6th-march-2018/

He hopes the case will be trashed during the next sitting scheduled for March 19th 2017. Responding to this case that prolonged the hearing for almost two hours, the Vice Secretary General of the Cameroon Peoples’ Democratic Party, Gregoire Owona said his party has accepted the decision from the highest Council in the land.

Another mixed feeling was expressed by Ahmadou Ahidjo from Koutaba in the Noun Division, West Region of Cameroon. His petition against his party the CPDM for not being nominated amongst the seven on the list was rejected by the Constitutional Council.

The President of the Council, Clement Atangana said his request is an internal affair within the party and not the court.

In his vexing state, he blamed the party for marginalising him and his Bororo minority in the region.

The CPDM scribe, Prof Ngolle Ngolle on his part said he is positive that the Constitutional Council has come just on time as several elections are scheduled this year.

A Barrister-at-law advocating for the CPDM, Luke Kisob said the four petitioners whose files were rejected before the council did not have concrete evidence to support their cases.

To him, the four petitioners could not argue their cases as most of them violated Article 129 which notes that the requesters must be a candidate or representative of the government.

The heated debates between the college of lawyers, members of political parties and the Constitutional Council come two weeks to the Senatorial Elections.

Benly Anchunda

Laisser un commentaire

Votre adresse e-mail ne sera pas publiée. Les champs obligatoires sont indiqués avec *

Ce site utilise Akismet pour réduire les indésirables. En savoir plus sur comment les données de vos commentaires sont utilisées.