The escalating tensions surrounding separatist movements in the Anglophone regions of Cameroon have raised alarming concerns regarding national security and political stability. On 10 September 2025, along Mile 14 Munyenge on Muyuka Road, a rural stretch in the country’s Southwest region, a routine patrol by Cameroonian soldiers turned into a deadly ambush.

Six soldiers were killed in a single morning without any warning or prior threat, just a flash, a blast, and then silence. Similarly, on 5 September, an incident in Malende, Muyuka, claimed the lives of seven soldiers.

This was not just another isolated act of violence in a forgotten war. Rather, it was a high-profile attack occurring just four weeks before the Cameroonian presidential election, an election in which the 92-year-old incumbent, Paul Biya, is seeking an unprecedented eighth term in office. While the political elite in Yaoundé prepare for the election, the war in the Anglophone regions is also evolving, becoming more sophisticated and deadlier than ever before. The use of advanced explosives demonstrates a level of technical skill that marks a significant escalation from the simple ambushes and kidnappings that characterized the early days of this rebellion. These actions, well executed by the separatists, are not merely acts of violence; they are calculated efforts to undermine the state’s authority and assert a narrative of resistance.

How did the conflict arise? In 2016, lawyers, teachers, and students later joined to take to the streets in towns such as Bamenda, Kumba, and Manfe, among others, to protest the appointment of French-speaking judges and teachers who could neither express themselves in English nor function in their common law courts and English-speaking schools. The Anglophone protesters perceived this as a slap on their identity. The government’s response was to deploy military personnel instructed to use tear gas and live ammunition to disperse the protesters. Unbeknownst to the government, what began as a peaceful protest quickly escalated into a full-scale war and a demand for secession. This brutal crackdown radicalized an entire generation, transforming a moderate call for federalism into a full declaration of independence for the Ambazonia state in 2017.

The attacks on the government military reveal the dangerous reality of state failure brewing in Cameroon. A country already on the edge, these attacks signify that the old guard of power is losing its grip, creating a vacuum where new, more radical forces are now emerging.

The implications for Cameroon are profound, especially during election cycles when political discourse is highly sensitive and can significantly influence public perception. The attacks may trigger a surge in nationalistic sentiments, potentially further polarizing voters. While some individuals might unite in solidarity when facing perceived threats, there is a real concern that the ongoing violence will lead to disillusionment, fear, and apathy among the electorate. When citizens feel unsafe, they are less likely to participate actively in the democratic process, which could result in lower voter turnout, a troubling scenario for any government. Additionally, political opponents may exploit the attacks and the heightened insecurity in conflict-affected regions as a strategic narrative to strengthen their platforms, presenting themselves as agents of change capable of restoring safety and stability. This could foster a chain reaction of political shifts, leaving the current government on the defensive and struggling to maintain the support of its base amid growing public anxiety.

As we approach October 12, 2025, in just a few weeks, the Electoral Committee must develop a framework to ensure the safety of citizens as they head to the polls. Again, leaders should take the initiative to recognize the urgency of addressing the underlying issues fueling separatism while simultaneously reinforcing the pillars of democracy.

Failure to do so could not only jeopardise the upcoming elections, especially in the Anglophone regions, but also lead to an election marred by chaos, further destabilising the nation and undermining confidence in the democratic process.

Culled from Mail/Guardian

In a move that epitomises a reign defined by staggering detachment and brutal repression, Cameroon’s octogenarian dictator, Paul Biya, is preparing to abscond to the luxurious confines of a Swiss palace, a mere three weeks before a presidential election engineered to grant him an eighth term. This trip, a private vacation to Geneva’s Intercontinental Hotel, is a slap in the face to a nation buckling under the weight of his nearly four decades of misrule, a bloody conflict, and a spiralling humanitarian crisis.

Biya, a leader often criticised as a reclusive and out-of-touch figure, submitted his candidacy on August 25th for an election he has no intention of contesting fairly. Instead of engaging with the electorate, he is scheduled for a ten-day sojourn in Switzerland, a country where historical records from Le Temps newspaper show he has squandered over 55 million Swiss Francs (approximately 34 billion CFA francs) of state funds on extended stays between 1982 and 2009. His return, just days before the campaign’s start on September 22nd, reveals a man confident that the electoral process is a mere formality, to be rigged by his stooges and clansmen while he enjoys European luxury.

A Dirty War and a Daughter’s Damning Indictment

As Biya packs for Switzerland, the military force he commands continues a brutal campaign in the Anglophone regions of Ambazonia, a conflict accurately described as a “dirty war.” As reported by HumAngle Media, this brutal fratricidal conflict has thrown victims into a vortex of trauma, with widespread atrocities, disappearances, and killings occurring under the silent and complicit gaze of the international community. This is not a war but a genocide, state-sponsored terror aimed at subduing a population seeking autonomy.

The damning condemnation of this regime comes not just from external observers but from within the dictator’s own household. His daughter, Brenda Biya, recently broke ranks in a stunning act of defiance, urging Cameroonians to reject her father. “My Father has made a whole nation suffer, don’t vote for him,” she declared, a truth that echoes through the bullet-riddled villages of Ambazonia and the impoverished neighbourhoods of Yaoundé and Douala.

A Nation on the Brink

The security situation remains volatile. Recent attacks, including a deadly roadside ambush claimed by separatists that killed seven soldiers, as reported by CTV News, highlight a conflict with no end in sight. There is a palpable fear that Biya’s absence could trigger a violent power struggle or even a military coup, exposing the fragile and fear-based foundation of his rule. The nation is a tinderbox, and its absent president is playing with matches from a safe distance of 4,000 miles.

A Call to Action: For Justice and Liberation

This cannot stand. The international community, particularly Switzerland and signatories to the Geneva Conventions, must no longer be a haven for a man whose treasury-draining vacations are funded by the misery of his people. We call for the immediate arrest of Paul Biya for crimes against humanity and genocide upon his arrival on Swiss soil. The principle of universal jurisdiction must be invoked to hold this tyrant accountable for the blood spilled in the Cameroons.

We demand the immediate and unconditional release of Dr Cho AYABA held in Norway, Mr Benedict NwanaKuah and Pascal Kikishy Wongbi, held in the United States and all Ambazonian political prisoners held in Cameroonian detention facilities, where torture and inhumane conditions are rampant.

To the brave fighters of the Ambazonia Defenceforces (ADf), we say: Continue your righteous struggle. Continue to protect the citizens of Ambazonia from the genocidal attacks of the Cameroonian military. Continue to inflict painful and heavy losses on the invading forces, particularly the notorious BIR (Rapid Intervention Battalion), the brutal spearhead of Biya’s repression. Your resilience in the face of a monstrous regime is the only shield our people have.

The world must open its eyes to the suffering in the Southern Cameroons (Ambazonia). The time for silent complicity is over. The time for justice, accountability, and the liberation of Ambazonia is now.

By: Dr. Larry AYAMBA,

Cameroonians go to the polls in October 2025 in what some people hoped might be a break from the country’s troubled recent past. They thought that President Paul Biya (92) might stand aside to allow a transition.

Three years ago I was one of those who expressed optimism about the 2025 poll. But I was wrong.

Biya is set to run yet again for an 8th term. He is already one of Africa’s longest ruling presidents, behind only Equatorial Guinea’s Teodoro Nguema.

Biya is on the cusp of achieving lifetime presidency since taking office in 1982.

In July 2025, after months of speculation, he confirmed in a tweet that he would run again.

Having weathered coups, silenced dissent, defied death rumours, and outlasted generations of challengers, he reminded friend and foe alike that he remains at the centre of Cameroon’s political ecosystem.

I am a long time scholar of and commentator on African politics, regime transformation, democratic transition and broader governance. Given regional developments that have seen the military deposing long term leaders, one might expect Biya to superintend a managed transition. The intriguing question is: what is it about the situation in Cameroon that continues to defy logic?

There is evident restlessness and frustration among young Cameroonians as well as clear clamour for change. Yet, the incumbent remains the front-runner, supported by the ruling party, the Cameroon People’s Democratic Movement, and his near-total command of the state’s political machinery.

Simply, the system has been designed to serve Biya’s interests. With government control of the media, resources, and judicial and electoral institutions, it is unlikely that the opposition can bring about systemic change.

Some things have changed, however. Biya’s previous wins were landslides that left no room for debate. This time things could potentially be different on account of high-profile defections from his party. These men will be challenging him at the polls.

The field

The last electoral cycle, leading up to the 2018 poll, was characterised by subdued challenges and a co-opted or deeply divided opposition. This time Biya appears to face a relatively organised opposition.

Initially, 83 candidates signalled their interest. In July the electoral commission cleared 13 to run. The commission controversially disqualified Maurice Kamto, a renowned legal scholar who performed respectably in the 2018 electoral cycle with 14% of the vote.

Human Rights Watch warned that this would cast a shadow over the credibility of the electoral process.

Nevertheless, several credible figures across the political spectrum remain in the race and present alternatives.

Biya faces two other former allies turned political adversaries.

One is Issa Tchiroma Bakary, his minister of employment and vocational training. A longtime insider of the regime, he served in various ministerial roles and was long considered a loyalist. Yet in June 2025, he resigned from the government, delivering a searing critique of the system he once represented.

He then launched his campaign, running on the ticket of the Front for the National Salvation of Cameroon.

The minister of tourism and leisure, Bello Bouba Maigari, still formally holding office, declared his intention in July 2025 to run against his boss in the October elections.

This announcement was especially striking given the deep political history between the two men. Maigari is not just any cabinet member. He is a long-standing confidant of the president, having been appointed Biya’s prime minister in 1982 and hailing from the vote-rich northern region. The decision to enter the race marks a shift from loyal lieutenant to presidential challenger, revealing the growing fissures within the ruling elite.

Others in the race worth noting are:

Akere Muna, the son of a former speaker who swore in Biya in 1982 and a tireless advocate for transparency and accountability. He ran for the top job in 2018 (but withdrew at the last minute).

Cabral Libii, from the Cameroon Party for National Reconciliation, a young and dynamic leader who also ran for president in 2018 and garnered 6% of the total vote.

Joshua Osih, a seasoned politician with a strong track record.

The issues

The nation’s pressing issues remain the same as they have been for a long while.

These include:

Endemic corruption. Cameroon is ranked 140 out of 180 countries by Transparency International. The reasons are systemic decay of state institutions and maladministration.

Economic stasis, including stubborn unemployment forecast at 7.34% by Statista; 23% live below the international poverty line and 3.3 million are food insecure.

The ongoing anglophone regional crisis pitting the English speaking regions against the dominant francophone centre.

Biya’s ability to govern and the succession question, given his very advanced age and the potential vacuum or infighting if he couldn’t complete his term.

The external dimension

Western actors have been consistent critics of Biya’s regime in the recent past. However, some have adopted a more cautious tone, balancing criticism with strategic interests.

The US, for instance, suspended some military assistance to Cameroon in 2019 over human rights abuses. But it continues counter-terrorism cooperation against Boko Haram.

The European Union, while pressing for peaceful resolution of the anglophone conflict, remains an important trade and aid partner.

China has become Cameroon’s largest bilateral creditor and a top trading partner. According to a report by Business in Cameroon, in 2024 Cameroon owed about 64.8% of its external bilateral debt to China. This is primarily for infrastructure loans that have funded projects like the Kribi Deep Sea Port, the Yaoundé-Douala highway, and hydropower stations.

For regime survival, Biya has pursued a pragmatic foreign policy. Beijing’s diplomatic stance of non-interference and respect for sovereignty resonates with Cameroonian political elites wary of western scrutiny and criticism over democratic backsliding and the anglophone conflict.

But Biya has not severed ties with the west. For example, the government maintains partnerships with France for security training, with Germany for decentralisation support, and with the US for counterinsurgency.

This balancing is not simply geopolitical. It is also deeply embedded in domestic patronage networks. Foreign aid, loans and investments serve as resources to consolidate elite power, strengthen the patronage system and suppress dissent.

The October polls are sure to reaffirm the status quo.

Culled from The Conversation

Quite predictably, the Constitutional Council missed another manifest rendezvous with history after it rejected the petition by Barrister Akere Muna, seeking the disqualification of the 93-year-old Paul Biya from contesting the upcoming presidential election. Akere Muna, anti-graft crusader, eminent jurist, former Bar Council and Pan-African Lawyers Union (PALU) president; and presidential candidate in the October 2025 election, had asked the Constitutional Council to declare Paul Biya ineligible to run. Citing Article 118 of the electoral code, Akere’s argument was simple but devastating: nemo dat quod non habet – one cannot give what one does not have – a president who has become a ghost, absent for weeks abroad, ruling through “high instructions” relayed by unelected proxies, incapable of fulfilling his constitutional duties, lacks the requisite capacity to credibly seek re-election. This was not merely legal reasoning but a moral imperative to prevent the grotesque spectacle of a nation held hostage by a phantom ruler, hell-bent on dragging Cameroon to his grave. That the petition foundered at the Constitutional Council is beside the point. That much was expected from a captive institution that has transformed itself into a spineless, uncircumcised appendage of the ossified regime.

Akere’s petition had sought to rescue Cameroon and restore sanity to a nation drowning in absurdity and international ridicule – a nation where fawning sycophants pledge their support to a picture running for president! Akere spoke truth to power with courage. And for that, he stands not alone, but with every patriotic Cameroonian who dares to still dream of a country worthy of its name. Of course, such patriotic Cameroonians will not include Dr. Theodore Ashu Nyenty, aka “Teddy Boy” who saw in Akere’s petition, an opportunity to showcase his obsequious boot-licking credentials and endear himself to the corridors of power. In a rambling critique of Akere’s petition, Ashu Nyenty was contortionist, twisting law and logic until they collapse beneath the weight of their own contradictions. He begins with a semblance of intellectual honesty and rigor – he admits Akere has locus standi, and concedes the Constitutional Council has jurisdiction. Yet, he dismisses Akere’s argument of “shadow governance” as “specious.” He argues that no statute limits presidential travel, and scoffs at Biya’s prolonged absences. He contends that delegation of powers is constitutional, and sneers at Akere’s appeal to the mischief rule as “hocus pocus,” as though interpretation were not the lifeblood of jurisprudence. His rhetoric is not that of a jurist but that of a griot, skilled not in law but in the art of gilding decay with pedanticism.

Dr. Ashu Nyenty – The Scholar as Griot

Ashu Nyenty’s analysis reads less like a serious juristic dissection and more like the rhythmic panegyric of a palace griot, dutifully plucking the strings of sophistry to serenade a crumbling autocratic regime on life support. Cloaked in the verbosity of academia and the pretensions of legal rigor, his jibberage is nothing more than an obtuse and dim-witted justification for the continued desecration of Cameroon’s democratic conscience by a 93-year-old incumbent whose advanced age, health comorbidities and failing faculties, now stand as a national embarrassment and international disgrace. This incantation at the altar of power is self-centered pedestrianism. Consider Ashu Nyenty’s core arguments:

Come to Equity with Clean Hands: Ashu Nyenty argues that Akere lacks “clean hands” because he accepted to run in an election convened by the same “ghost president” whose incapacity he denounces. This is sophistry in extremis. Akere’s participation is strategic engagement, not complacence. The act of running under a phantom decree is not a ringing endorsement of its legitimacy but a courageous defiance of a broken system. One cannot on one hand acknowledge that Paul Biya has been an absentee president; that Ferdinand Ngoh Ngoh effectively runs the country by proxy, and then on the other hand insist that this is constitutionally pristine. That is not law – it is griotic gymnastics, the kind of intellectual prestidigitation one expects from court jesters, not legal scholars or public intellectuals.

On Biya’s Prolonged Absences: Ashu Nyenty insists no law restricts presidential travel. True, but constitutional logic must consider ratio legis. While no law prescribes travel limit, the constitution presupposes presence, vigilance, and personal exercise of executive power. Data from the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project reveal Biya spent at least 5.5 years abroad between 1982- 2018. To claim this comports with constitutional fidelity is to reduce the presidency to an absentee landlordship – an absurdity reductio ad absurdum exposes as untenable. Law is not blind to reason; cessante ratione legis, cessat et ipsa lex—when the reason for the law ceases, the law itself collapses. This is a literalist refuge that offends both logic and justice because Summum jus, summa injuria – strict law applied rigidly may become the greatest injustice. To aver the contrary is to mock the very essence of democratic accountability.

On Governance by Proxy: Ashu Nyenty conflates limited statutory delegation with permanent abdication. He appeals to Article 10(2) of the 1996 Constitution, arguing delegation of presidential authority is permissible. But delegation, by nature, presumes temporary necessity, not permanent abdication. Delegata potestas non potest delegari – delegated authority cannot be re-delegated ad infinitum. Delegation of authority assumes the principal retains ultimate agency. Biya does not. His “high instructions” are scripted whispers, his decrees the product of proxies who wield his signature like a ventriloquist’s dummy. Delegation cannot substitute leadership itself; it was conceived as an occasional necessity, not as the architecture of a phantom presidency. The framers of the constitution never intended delegation of authority to ossify into governance by unelected proxies. To defend this perversion and normalize this absurdity is to legitimize the grotesque.

On the Mischief Rule: Ashu Nyenty sneers at Akere’s invocation of the mischief rule as “hocus pocus.” Yet if ever there was mischief crying out for judicial remedy, the mischief here is glaring: a president too enfeebled to govern has reduced national sovereignty to the whims of unelected groveling courtiers. Ubi jus ibi remedium-where there is a right, there must be a remedy. If interpretation cannot address this absurdity, then law itself becomes an accomplice to tyranny and dictatorship. To dismiss Akere’s interpretation of Mischief rule as “hocus pocus” is to strip law of its teleological essence and its very purpose. For Ashu Nyenty to pretend otherwise is not ignorance – it is intellectual self-masturbation.

On Hierarchy of Norms: Ashu Nyenty retreats to the hierarchy of norms to shield Biya, claiming the Constitution trumps the electoral code. But the electoral code is not peripheral – it operationalizes constitutional norms. And this is precisely the point Akere’s petition presses: when the spirit of the Constitution is violated by a president who has effectively abdicated his duties to unelected proxies, the electoral code must be invoked to rescue the nation from becoming a geriatric monarchy. The principle lex non cogit ad impossibilia (the law does not compel the impossible) invites purposive interpretation: candidacy implicitly requires functional capacity. Cameroonians cannot be compelled to accept governance by a phantom. A system that tolerates a nonagenarian absentee candidate seeking an eighth term is not law – it is organized national suicide.

The Griot’s Betrayal

There is, in truth, nothing new in Ashu Nyenty’s performance. Cameroon has always had its chorus of intellectual boot-lickers willing to play the griot for the palace. At bottom, Ashu Nyenty performs the ancient role of griot – singing praises before the palace gate, perfuming decay with pseudo-juristic incense, and rationalizing the tyranny of an aging monarch he dares not name unfit. Let’s be very clear: Biya is no longer fit to govern. His age has hollowed his body. His prolonged absences, government by remote control, his visible mental and physical decline betray his incapacity. His governance by proxy, through the perpetual “high instructions” of Ferdinand Ngoh Ngoh, have transformed the highest office in the land into a grotesque parody of leadership. A nation cannot be ruled by a ghost president. This is not governance; it is political necromancy – governance of the living by an absentee mummified despot. All Cameroonian, except those blinded by self-interests, will agree that Biya is showing more wear and tear in the form of his creeping baldness, his wrinkled carbuncular face; the declining swagger of his gait; the deterioration in his husky voice, the diapers, uncontrollable flatulence, and protracted anal blasts. At 93, Biya cuts the figure of a frail, distracted relic, more object of pity than leader. And yet Ashu Nyenty dares to call this normal, lawful, even constitutional. Cameroon deserves better.

Akere’s petition was not only legally sound; it was morally urgent – salus populi suprema lex esto: the welfare of the people shall be the supreme law. The petition is not “legal brigandage” (to borrow Ashu Nyenty’s clumsy expression); it is a necessary moral intervention against the ongoing abuse of an inebriated nonagenarian held captive by a cabal of unelected political jobbers. Ashu Nyenty’s analysis is a sycophantic prostitution of law; the choreography of a man who has exchanged his critical faculties for the baubles of proximity to power. He seems a man too enamored with servitude. He calls Akere’s arguments “legal masturbation.” Yet it is he who engages in intellectual self-masturbation. The pitiful spectacle of Dr. Ashu Nyenty, parading his academic credentials like a griot’s kora, plucking sophistries in defense of a decrepit system is shameful, pathetic, disgraceful and devoid of any perfunctory exaggeration. Cameroon does not need spineless charlatans and court jesters serenading a ghost president. It needs men of character with the courage of their convictions. The tragedy is not merely Biya’s refusal to relinquish office, but the complicity of intellectual griots and sycophants, who, in the twilight of his reign, chose to sing lullabies to tyranny, instead of sounding the alarm for liberty. Ashu Nyenty’s commentary is law in service of power rather than justice. Jurists should uphold fiat justitia ruat caelum – justice even if the heavens fall.

By Ekinneh Agbaw-Ebai

Ah! What a grand spectacle of democracy turned into pilgrimage, where citizens no longer travel to Jerusalem or Mecca, but to Etoudi—armed not with rosaries or Qur’ans, but with envelopes of pledges and pockets emptied of 5 to10K contributions. The Presidency has become a shrine, and Ferdinand Ngoh Ngoh its high priest, who, like the Pope’s emissary, receives all delegations on behalf of the invisible God-King.

Here is the paradox: to meet the Head of State, one must never see the Head of State. His presence is too divine, too sacred, too holy for mortal eyes. Instead, portraits hang like sacred icons on the walls, absorbing prayers, oaths of allegiance, and the groveling of chiefs. Some even went further: dragging a lifesize statue as if Israel’s golden calf had found a rebirth in Yaoundé. Indeed, Biya is no longer a president; he has been canonized into an idol, an untouchable effigy, the Fon of Fons, the deity of marble and ink.

The absurdity glitters like a carnival: chiefs who once commanded warriors now parade as errand boys; student leaders and academics, who ought to grade truth and knowledge, now grade their own loyalty before the altar of the portrait; women examiners, included for “gender balance,” chant in chorus, proving that even equality can be prostituted to idolatry. And for this grand pilgrimage? Each member must pay their own offering—2,000 CFA—like indulgences in medieval Europe, except here it is not for salvation, but for a photo-op with a frame.

What greater hypocrisy! A regime so petrified of its own mortality that it hides behind paper portraits and lifeless statues, yet insists the nation believes the ghost still breathes, still rules, still reigns. The people are told: do not look for the man, only believe in the image. It is politics turned into a cargo cult—where the mere sight of a statue, a portrait, or a signature photocopied a hundred times is enough to summon the aura of authority.

If irony were oxygen, Cameroon would have long suffocated. For in this land, the living leader is absent, the absent leader is omnipresent, and the portrait of the absent leader rules more firmly than the man ever did.

So what’s the purpose of leaving all the way from Bamenda, Garoua etc to Yaoundé when you will still end up talking with a portrait? Millions of whose copies are available nationwide? Let the Chief priest save people the inconveniences by telling them to pledge loyalty at all district levels, just like local congregations worshipping the almighty God!

By Wepngong Moses

Ahead of the 2004 presidential election, SDF’s Hon. Joseph Mbah Ndam (RIP) told me, boastfully and happily, that the SDF candidate Ni John Fru Ndi, would come second ahead of opposition coalition candidate Adamou Ndam Njoya. That implied Mbah Ndam knew and was comfortable that incumbent president Paul Biya would win. That was my first direct experience with political half-aim.

I was a young political reporter and editor at The Herald newspaper then. Fru Ndi had walked out of an opposition coalition effort because Ndam Njoya had been chosen as the “consensual candidate”. Though the political and civil society leaders involved concluded that Ndam Njoya was the man with the profile for the job at the time, Fru Ndi’s entourage said it was inconceivable for Ndam Njoya, leader of a “small party” to clinch the coalition ticket over Fru Ndi, leader of the biggest opposition party at the time.

Not everyone running for President really means to be President. Or rather, many run for President to “win” as little as nowhere near elective office even at the lowest level. By the way, only one out of the lot makes it at any election. For many, it is beyond being able to win. They know they really cannot win. Ostensibly, the most selfless of them run to set an agenda by floating their ideas for more serious candidates to adopt them for the wellbeing of citizens. Matter of fact, many only step into the fray to seek for notice. They engage the race for other purposes.

Take the trouble to count presidential aspirants around the world across human history and possibly less than one percent of names on ballots have ever won anything, not even significant votes. The man called Apostle Ambe Valentine Ngwa might just have avoided that, but for his troubles with an early declaration, and smart calculations, he might have secured a political future.

Dr Nick Ngwanyam, a current affairs commentator, might have captured – with apparent marksman precision – what could have been the calculations of this eloquent TV personality who is also a Pentecostal preacher. Ambe declared to run early but, falling short of fulfilling the conditions to appear on the ballot, he announced he was withdrawing from the race to throw his weight behind SDF’s presidential candidate, Joshua Osih, whom he says embodies the vision he has for Cameroon.

Ambe said his bid for the presidency has been frustrated by the impossibility of obtaining the signatures of personalities (senators, first-class traditional rulers, etc) across the ten regions to make up the required 300 to be eligible as an independent candidate.

Who is surprised? Who, except no one, not even Ambe himself really thought he would be an eligible candidate without a political party nomination? He clearly knew he would not be on the ballot. He obviously declared to run for other purposes than to actually run for president. Ambe says he made phone calls to personalities across the regions of the country to obtain their signatures. Just phone calls! Not as much as field tours to meet – not just call – personalities around the country!

Nevertheless, Nick Ngwanyam says, with that act of endorsing Osih, Ambe might have secured a political future, and thus gets elevated to the high stage to travel, eat, lodge, speak and commune at the same level on the campaign trail as Osih, a non-negligible presidential candidate.

And, Ngwanyam adds, after the election, should Osih win, Ambe may stand a chance to become minister or should Osih fall short, Ambe might hope to be propelled to a high-profile political career from the top in the SDF and may eventually run for mayor of Bonaberi in Douala where he lives. Hence, he might have declared to run for president to end up as mayor.

I recall how humorist, Koukam Narcisse used Ni John Fru Ndi’s traditional appellation “Ni” to mock him. (The word “Ni”, used to refer respectfully to an uncle or any senior in the Ngemba languages spoken in several villages in Bamenda and its environs, means “neither/nor” in French.)

Koukam mocked Fru Ndi for all his political bravado and achievements with a massive political party SDF, as being “Ni John, Ni Fru, Ni Ndi, Ni Maire, Ni Député, Ni Président.” (Neither Mayor, nor MP, nor President.) At least, by Nick Ngwanyam’s projection, Apostle Ambe could reap the benefits of his early announcement of a run for the Presidency by grabbing a mayoral seat. Ambe won’t be the first.

In 1997, UPC’s Henri Hogbe Nlend and NUDP’s Bello Bouba Maigari secured ministerial positions under Biya; the one by running for president perhaps to lose, the other by not running to inconvenience Biya and be rewarded. In that election boycotted by the three most vibrant opposition candidates at the time (Fru Ndi, Bello Bouba Maigari and Adamu Ndam Njoya), one of them, Bello, tiptoed backwards and worked his way into the Government as Minister of State. Fifteen years earlier, he had been made prime minister in the first government after Biya became president in November 1982.

Across decades of Cameroon’s political history, politicians and civil society actors have reaped political benefits by their posturing either by running or not running, either by endorsing candidates or offering to be counter-forces or nuisances to potential winners to the benefit of the incumbent.

Such was the case of certain early UPC militants in the 1970s who were lured into the government by pioneer President Ahmadou Ahidjo after the revolutionary party had been subdued with the execution of its last leader, Ernest Ouandie, in 1971. (Um Nyobe and Felix Moumie had been eliminated earlier.)

As a result, Augustin Frederick Kodock was appointed to several positions including Director General of Cameroon Airlines and at the African Development Bank, sponsored by the Ahidjo government. Mayi Matip was elevated to Senior Vice Speaker of the National Assembly under long-serving House Speaker, Solomon Tandeng Muna.

After the 2018 presidential election when MRC’s Maurice Kamto gave President Biya a real run for his money and even claimed stolen victory, Barrister Jean de Dieu Momo was appointed into the government as reward for his spoiler job alongside the G-20. Momo, a Bamileke like Kamto and himself a presidential candidate in 2011, did not run in 2018. He was rather among 20 or so spoiler political and civil society actors who declared they were supporting Biya. Of them all, Momo got appointed into the government thereafter.

In 2022, Nkongho Felix Agbor “Balla” turned down his announced co-opting into the SDF Shadow Cabinet by then leader, Ni John Fru Ndi, with the obvious backing of then Vice Chairman, Osih. Now, with Balla’s endorsement of Osih for president earlier this year, the SDF presidential candidate said upfront that Balla would be his Minister of Justice should he win the Presidency.

Several other candidates in this 2025 presidential race are obviously not running to win but to position themselves for eventualities. They thus use the election as a positioning test, whereby candidates size their bite by their percentage score which is the equivalent of territory captured by armed groups in an armed struggle to weigh their negotiating position during eventual talks.

With 83 individuals submitting files this year to the elections management body, ELECAM, Cameroonians had before them individuals with different motives from doing a dress rehearsal to testing their potentials for future elections by demonstrating their political weight to secure a place on the negotiating table in case political deadlock necessitates a consensus government or a “government of national unity”. Or even just to get their public service debts paid like Leopard Bessiping.

Some presidential aspirants are under pressure from party militants to berth ministerial portfolios for them to have their own “chop farm” like UPC Kodock loyalists or like Charly Gabriel Mbock under Hodge Nlend or like the entourage of Bello Bouba and Issa Tchiroma enjoying privileges at their ministries. Such is the mindset when chances of regime change appear bleak to supporters and they resort to “wetin man go do” (or a sense of resignation), settling for less than the presidency.

By Franklin Sone Bayen