Tribunal Yaoundé: Willy Mengue MRC Incompétence Declared in Leadership Dispute

• The Yaoundé Court of First Instance declared itself incompetent to rule on a dispute involving the MRC and former members on September 17, 2026.
• Former MRC militants, including Willy Mengue, had challenged Maurice Kamto's leadership and sought an ad hoc administrator for the party's internal management. Maurice Kamto resigned from the MRC presidency on September 8, 2026, prior to the court's ruling.
• The MRC's defense argued that civil courts should not interfere in the internal organization of political parties, a position supported by the public prosecutor.
• The applicants, including Willy Mengue, were absent from the final hearing, and their lawyer only submitted written conclusions.
• The ruling reinforces the principle that civil justice generally lacks jurisdiction over internal governance disputes within political parties in Cameroon.

The court's decision underscores a significant legal precedent, affirming that civil judicial bodies generally lack jurisdiction to intervene in the internal organizational affairs of political parties in Cameroon.

The Yaoundé Court of First Instance delivered a significant ruling on Thursday, September 17, 2026, declaring itself incompetent to adjudicate the merits of a dispute involving the Mouvement pour la renaissance du Cameroun (MRC) and three of its former members. This decision effectively closes, for now, a judicial chapter that had spanned several months, centered on an internal leadership contest within the political party.

The proceedings were initiated by Willy Mengue, Laure Noutchang, and Sébastien Mbala Wouria II, who had challenged Maurice Kamto's leadership of the MRC. Maurice Kamto, however, resigned from the presidency of the MRC on September 8, 2026, prior to the court's ruling. Their application, filed as a summary proceeding (référé), sought the appointment of an ad hoc administrator to "normalize" the internal management of the movement. In response to these actions, the MRC had previously announced the permanent exclusion of Willy Mengue from the party.

During the final hearing for closing arguments on September 15, 2026, Willy Mengue and his co-applicants were notably absent for the second consecutive time. Their principal lawyer also did not attend, with a collaborator merely submitting written conclusions without participating in the oral arguments.

The defense team representing the MRC consistently argued for the incompetence of the summary proceedings judge. Their central contention was that a judge presiding over urgent matters is not equipped to resolve a serious dispute that delves into the fundamental operational aspects of a political party. They maintained that civil justice should not interfere with the internal organization of a political entity, a position that proved pivotal in the court's ultimate decision.

Further bolstering the MRC's stance, the public prosecutor (parquet) also requested that the court declare itself incompetent to hear the summary proceedings. This alignment between the defense and the public prosecutor on the jurisdictional question highlighted the procedural challenges inherent in bringing internal party disputes before civil courts. The court's ruling on the `Willy Mengue MRC incompétence tribunal Yaoundé` case therefore hinged on these arguments regarding judicial limits.

The Yaoundé Court of First Instance's declaration of incompetence in this matter is widely seen by observers as an affirmation of the MRC's defense position: that civil justice bodies should not meddle in the internal organizational affairs of political parties. This ruling provides important clarity on the `Droit partis politiques Cameroun`, particularly concerning the autonomy of `MRC organisation interne parti politique` and other political entities.

The court's decision underscores a significant legal precedent, affirming that civil judicial bodies generally lack jurisdiction to intervene in the internal organizational affairs of political parties in Cameroon. This outcome in the `procédure référé incompétence juge` context suggests that internal leadership contestations within the MRC, including those related to Maurice Kamto's former leadership, and similar governance issues are primarily matters for a party's own internal mechanisms, rather than external judicial intervention. The `Tribunal première instance Yaoundé incompétence` ruling reinforces the principle of non-interference in the internal workings of political associations.

This ruling clarifies the jurisdictional limits of civil courts in Cameroon regarding internal disputes within political parties, establishing that judges may declare themselves incompetent to intervene in their internal organization. Lawyers advising political entities should be aware of this precedent when handling internal governance challenges or disputes.

Source: Original reporting via Actu Cameroun