By METIEGE DIVINE NJIKANG Esq
( Magistrate)
Amicus Curiae Submission
Meaning of “Amicus Curiae Submission”
“Amicus curiae” is a Latin term that means “friend of the court.”
An amicus curiae submission refers to a legal document filed in a court case by someone who is not a party to the case (i.e., not directly involved as plaintiff or defendant), but who has a strong interest in the matter and believes their perspective could help the court make a better informed decision.
Non-party intervention:
The amicus is not suing or being sued but offers expertise, legal opinion, or insight.
Objective support:
The purpose is not to advocate for one party but to help clarify legal or constitutional issues from an informed standpoint.
Common in high level or constitutional cases, where decisions may have broader public, political, or legal implications.
The submission may include:
Legal analysis
Expert interpretation of law
Implications for constitutional principles
Broader social or political impacts
The phrase “Amicus Curiae Submission by ME” suggests that:
I am not part of a formal legal proceeding,
But is providing expert constitutional and political insight as a friend of the court to help explain or justify the Constitutional Council’s decision on President Biya’s eligibility
Legal and Constitutional Commentary on the Decision of the Constitutional Council Affirming the Eligibility of H.E. President Paul Biya to Stand as a Candidate in the Upcoming Presidential Election. In reading this commentary, please read the same with an open and unbiased mind. The author is apolitical, and the write-up is untainted with any political bias of any political party in Cameroon but full of legal reasoning.
This brief is submitted for the purpose of offering a legal perspective on the recent pronouncement by the Constitutional Council of Cameroon, which affirmed the eligibility of President Paul Biya to contest in the forthcoming presidential election. The comments herein are intended to elucidate the constitutional underpinnings of the Council’s ruling and its broader implications for constitutional governance in the Republic of Cameroon.
Legal Authority of the Constitutional Council
Pursuant to Articles 46–54 of the Constitution of the Republic of Cameroon (1996 as amended), the Constitutional Council is vested with the exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters relating to the constitutionality of laws, the regularity of elections and referenda, and the eligibility of presidential candidates.
The Council’s recent decision is, therefore, an exercise of its constitutional mandate. It constitutes a binding interpretation of the supreme law and is enforceable erga omnes (toward all). It is not subject to appeal and enjoys the presumption of constitutional correctness unless amended by constitutional reform.
On the Constitutionality of President Paul Biya’s Candidacy
The decision of the Council confirms that, within the framework of the current constitutional order, no provision legally precludes H.E. President Paul Biya presented his candidacy. The eligibility criteria, as prescribed under the Constitution and applicable electoral laws, have been fulfilled. Thus, the Council’s decision aligns with both the letter and spirit of constitutional interpretation.
Assertions to the contrary, often made in political discourse, do not amount to legal invalidation. The Constitutional Council, not political opinion, is the final arbiter on such matters.
Democratic and Institutional Implications
The Council’s decision must be understood as an affirmation of the rule of law and democratic continuity. When institutions render decisions grounded in the Constitution, they enhance legal certainty, institutional trust, and electoral stability. This is essential in safeguarding the legitimacy of the forthcoming electoral process and the broader democratic order.
It must also be underscored that respect for such judicial determinations is a hallmark of constitutional democracy. Disagreement with the outcome cannot justify disregard of due process and binding institutional authority.
Conclusion
The Constitutional Council has acted within the full ambit of its legal competence. Its ruling on President Biya’s eligibility is constitutionally sound, institutionally stabilizing, and democratically constructive. Legal and political stakeholders are thereby enjoined to respect the outcome as an expression of constitutional fidelity and a reinforcement of the Republic’s legal framework.
Submitted Respectfully,
By METIEGE DIVINE NJIKANG Esq
