link add

link add

Wednesday, October 10, 2018

Victory of Kamto: Paul Ayah Abine reacts

Paul Ayah Abine also began the debate on the proclamation of the results following the self-proclamation of Maurice Kamto as victorious of the election.

Here is his point of view:

While it is well known that the Constitutional Council has the exclusive power (the exclusive right) to proclaim the results of certain elections in Cameroon, the question of the meaning of the PROCLAMATION seems not to be addressed, even by some lawyers. Many are laypeople who have embarked on their own antics. But this is not as intolerable as the postulates of professional scholars, guided perhaps by sordid and invested interests.

Lawyers are aware that, in the context of elections, proclamation involves the formal formulation of a public statement on the identity of the candidate among the candidates. These statements are supported by statistics on the scores of the different candidates. Often, the statistics are corroborated by the votes of each candidate at the chosen levels.

The proclamation goes well beyond the public declaration of the score of a candidate in an election. In fact, the law (the electoral code in our context) makes it compulsory for the results of each polling station to be made public on the spot at the closing of the polls. If the proclamation is equivalent to making the results public, it means that the results are PROCLAIMED at each polling station.

This can only be foolish because it would go against the exclusive prerogative of the Constitutional Council to enforce (ensure) the regularity of elections. To use an analogy here could be instructive and salutary. Making the results public is like a product at the initial stage. If it's good, it will survive defeated by the Constitutional Council. He is thrown differently. Thus, the finished product could remain unchanged;it could be changed or sorted.

As regards the statements made yesterday by Professor Maurice Kamto, it is obvious that he has done nothing more than what the law allows. Making public his gross score during the elections in subtle terms (without specifying the score in figures) only repeated what the polling stations had already legally done. In fact, it is even a contradiction in terms of saying that he has "made public". You can not "make public" what is already common knowledge: you can not make public the results already made public by polling stations! If that were the case, you can not break the law by behavior authorized by the law itself.

If, therefore, the CPDM barons are nervous, it is strongly suggested that the cautious recurrence of their rival in the law is hostile to their maneuvers to reverse the results. But in law, the conduct of Professor Maurice Kamto is NOT reprehensible. He has cleverly chosen his terms!