ELECAM and The Constitutional Council: Cameroon’s Elections Remote-Controlled Referees

In Cameroon, two institutions stand between voters and the official results of elections: Elections Cameroon (ELECAM), responsible for organizing and tallying votes, and the Constitutional Council, which validates results and rules on disputes. Ideally, they act as impartial referees. In practice, critics worry they operate more like remote-controlled Video-Assisted Referees — present in form but directed by political forces behind the scenes.

ELECAM was created to manage elections transparently. The Constitutional Council is the final legal authority, empowered to accept or reject results. Together, they form the legal pipeline from polling stations to the validated national outcome. But unlike sports referees supported by real-time video replay, Cameroon’s “VAR” checks happen only after votes are counted, leaving room for post-count manipulation.

The October 12, 2025 presidential election illustrated these tensions. Opposition parties released local tallies claiming victory, while authorities warned against circulating “fake” results, insisting only the Constitutional Council could validate the outcome. Protests and clashes followed, highlighting how control over information and legal interpretation can determine whose version of reality prevails.

Observers identify several mechanisms that make this possible:

• Political appointments: Leadership positions in ELECAM and the Council are often filled through political channels, raising questions about independence.

• Centralized legal power: The Council can annul regional results on procedural grounds, overriding local tallies.

• Information control: Official warnings about false results can delegitimize oppositional claims before legal validation.

• Security influence: Access to counting centers and protection of electoral materials can affect transparency.

This is not new. Since ELECAM’s creation in the 2000s, electoral bodies in Cameroon have faced accusations of bias and opaque procedures. The Constitutional Council’s final say in elections has repeatedly become the flashpoint for political dispute.

The consequences are serious: if voters and parties distrust these institutions, legitimacy erodes, peaceful dispute resolution weakens, and the risk of unrest rises. The weeks following the 2025 vote show how quickly procedural disputes can spill into streets and social media.

Experts recommend reforms to reduce this “remote-control” effect: transparent appointments, auditable tallies, narrow legal grounds for annulment, robust observer access, secure transmission of results, and clear public communication. Yet technical solutions work only if political will exists to enforce impartiality.

Calling ELECAM and the Constitutional Council “remote-controlled referees” may be provocative, but the metaphor captures a pressing reality: institutions meant to ensure fair elections can instead preserve entrenched power unless safeguards are strengthened. As Cameroon moves from vote counting to legal validation, the integrity of the process depends not on technology, but on impartial institutions and the political courage to respect the voters’ choice.

Steve Nfor (Retired Senior Journalist)