Me Sikati: MRC Convention Proceeds Despite Willy Mengue Challenge

• Me Désiré Sikati, an MRC counsel, affirmed the party's determination to hold its extraordinary convention on October 17, 2026, despite challenges.
• Recently excluded member Willy Mengue sought to ban the convention, citing risks of public disorder, and petitioned the sub-prefect of Yaoundé IV.
• The Tribunal de première instance de Yaoundé-Ekounou declared itself incompetent to block the convention, though Mengue has appealed this decision.
• Sikati alleges Mengue's actions constitute 'apologie de crime' under Article 267 of the Penal Code and 'atteinte à la sûreté de l'Etat,' offenses carrying severe penalties.
• The MRC maintains it possesses all necessary administrative authorizations for the convention, which aims to organize Maurice Kamto's political succession.

The strong rhetoric from Me Sikati, including the invocation of 'apologie de crime Code Pénal Cameroun' and 'atteinte sûreté Etat Cameroun' with severe potential penalties, signals a robust defense against perceived threats to party stability and national order.

A significant internal and judicial conflict is brewing within Cameroon's Mouvement pour la Renaissance du Cameroun (MRC) as the party prepares for its extraordinary convention scheduled for October 17, 2026. This gathering is intended to organize the political succession of Maurice Kamto, the party's former leader. At the heart of the current contention is Willy Mengue, a former militant who was recently excluded from the MRC, and his efforts to disrupt the upcoming event.

Me Désiré Sikati, a prominent cadre and counsel for the MRC, has publicly addressed Mengue's actions, asserting the party's unwavering determination to proceed with its planned convention. Sikati's statement serves as a direct legal and political rebuttal to Mengue's attempts to block the event. The MRC maintains that it possesses all necessary administrative authorizations and receipts to lawfully hold the convention, signaling its readiness to counter any challenges.

Willy Mengue initiated his challenge by petitioning the sub-prefect of Yaoundé IV, requesting an outright ban on the MRC convention. His stated reasons included concerns over potential public disorder and existing internal tensions within the party. This administrative maneuver followed Mengue's online acknowledgment that authorities had already issued a receipt for a public meeting declaration, effectively authorizing the convention.

Further complicating the matter, Mengue, along with other dissenting militants, sought judicial intervention to block the party's leadership. However, on September 17, 2026, the Tribunal de première instance de Yaoundé-Ekounou declared itself incompetent to rule on their request. Despite this setback, Mengue has since filed an appeal with the Court of Appeal of the Centre against the Ekounou court's summary judgment decision. Me Sikati, however, emphasized that this appeal does not have a suspensive effect, meaning it does not halt the ongoing preparations for the MRC convention 2026 legal challenge.

Me Sikati has not only dismissed Willy Mengue's administrative efforts but has also leveled serious criminal accusations against him. Sikati suggested that Mengue's actions, particularly his declaration of intent to disturb public order, could lead to his arrest and detention by law enforcement. He argued that Mengue, having been excluded from the MRC, lacks the standing to interfere with party activities, and his stated intentions constitute a threat to public peace.

According to Me Sikati, Mengue's conduct could warrant administrative detention for 15 days, renewable, under Cameroon's 1990 law concerning public order maintenance. More severely, Sikati characterized Mengue's actions as an 'apologie de crime' (incitement to crime) under Article 267 of the Code Pénal Cameroun. He further contended that Mengue's alleged threats to social peace should lead to prosecution for 'atteinte à la sûreté de l'Etat' (undermining state security), an offense that carries penalties as severe as the death penalty in Cameroun. Sikati urged administrative authorities to locate and prosecute Mengue for these intentions, asserting that capitulating to his demands would undermine public authority.

The ongoing dispute surrounding the MRC convention, marked by the `Willy Mengue exclusion MRC` and the subsequent `MRC convention 2026 legal challenge`, highlights the aggressive legal and political tactics employed in Cameroonian political discourse. The case illustrates how challenges to party conventions can escalate into accusations of serious criminal offenses, such as incitement to crime and undermining state security, particularly when framed around concerns of `Cameroun troubles ordre public`.

This situation underscores the critical importance of securing proper administrative authorizations for public gatherings and the potential for political dissent to be criminalized. The `Tribunal Yaoundé-Ekounou incompétence` ruling, while specific to Mengue's initial request, also points to the complex interplay between administrative approvals, judicial oversight, and political maneuvering in the country. The strong rhetoric from Me Sikati, including the invocation of 'apologie de crime Code Pénal Cameroun' and 'atteinte sûreté Etat Cameroun' with severe potential penalties, signals a robust defense against perceived threats to party stability and national order.

This case illustrates the aggressive legal strategies employed in Cameroonian political disputes, particularly how challenges to party conventions can be framed as serious criminal offenses (e.g., incitement to crime, undermining state security) and the critical role of administrative approvals for public gatherings. Lawyers should note the potential for political dissent to be criminalized and the importance of securing proper administrative authorizations for client events.

Source: Reporting based on Actu Cameroun