Perspectives on the Constitutional Council of Cameroon’s Effectiveness in Resolving Electoral Conflicts

Abstract

The creation of the Constitutional Council of Cameroon in 2018 as the final arbiter of electoral disputes generated significant public debate regarding its effectiveness, particularly following the broadcast of its 2018 hearings on state media. This study examines perspectives from the general public and key electoral stakeholders on the effectiveness of the Constitutional Council in resolving electoral conflicts. Using a mixed-methods approach, data were collected through an online survey of 219 participants and semi-structured interviews and focus group discussions with 35 stakeholders including political parties, ELECAM, the Ministry of Territorial Administration, civil society organizations, and members of the Constitutional Council. The findings reveal predominantly negative public perceptions, with majorities viewing the Council as lacking independence, transparency, and fairness, and as ineffective in resolving disputes and delivering justice in cases of electoral fraud; meanwhile, stakeholder interviews produced mixed views, as some defended the Council's adherence to the rule of law while others criticized its limited independence due to presidential appointments, questioned the impartiality of certain members, noted that political parties poorly mastered litigation procedures, and identified restrictive timelines and flawed electoral laws as barriers to effective justice. Although the Constitutional Council has established mechanisms for handling electoral disputes, both public opinion and stakeholder assessments indicate significant dissatisfaction and reveal structural and legal limitations that undermine confidence in the institution.