Gerontocracy and Underdevelopment in Cameroon: Does It Not Ridicule Unconstitutional Change of Government?

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

Africa’s future does not have the potential to be bright if African scholars do not wake up on a more serious note to address obstacles militating against a greater Africa. It was in 1972 that Walter Rodney gave an exegesis of the exploitation of Africa. The exegesis is contained in his book, How Europe underdeveloped Africa. He not only traced the exploitation to European Slave Trade as a basic factor and to the coming of imperialism and colonialism, but also noted the contributions of Africa to the development of European capitalism. Put differently, it was partly, if not largely, thanks to the exploitation of Africa, that European capitalism came into being.

It has become a desideratum for all seasoned scholars in Africa to engage in a more critical thinking on how Africa is underdeveloped by Africans themselves. If colonialism and imperialism are major dynamics of underdevelopment of Africa, how do we explain the recidivist character of the non-development as of today? Without doubt, Walter Rodney gave his own understanding of what we should mean by development and under-development. As he put it, ‘development in human society is a many-sided process. At the level of the individual, it implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility, and material well-being.’ As for under-development, it is ‘not absence of development, because every people have developed in one way or another and to a greater or lesser extent. Underdevelopment makes sense only as a means of comparing levels of development. It is very much tied to the fact that human social development has been uneven and from a strictly economic viewpoint some human groups have advanced further by producing more and becoming more wealthy.’

In this regard and comparatively, why is it that Africa has not been able to compete well internationally in terms of economic development? Walter Rodney did not talk about the underdevelopment of Africa by Africans. If he did not, what prevents the African academics from doing so? In an attempt to identify some rationales, we attempt to inquire using the Cameroonian presidential gerontocracy as a first level of analysis. This is done within the context of non-acceptability of unconstitutional change of government in Africa.

Gerontocracy and Unconstitutional Changes of Government 

Africa’s policy attitude towards unconstitutional change of government is noteworthy in three ways. First, it marks a departure from the policies of non-interference and non-intervention in the exclusive domestic affairs of Member States. Under the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), emphasis was placed on non-interference. With the transformation of the OAU to the African Union (AU) in 2002, the principle of non-interference was jettisoned. Secondly, unlike the principle of non-interference under the OAU, which was almost religiously adhered to, the alleged zero tolerance for unconstitutional change of government under the AU has not been so religiously complied with. Thirdly, and perhaps more importantly, a legal background was given to the zero tolerance policy.

For instance, there was the Lomé Convention done in 2000 which addressed the challenge of unconstitutional changes of government. So was there the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (ACDEG), which was done in 2007 and which identified military coups, mercenary or rebel interventions, refusal of incumbent leaders to relinquish power after losing elections, as well as undemocratic constitutional or legal amendments to extend tenure and retain power. The AU Peace and Security Council is given the mandate to enforce this regulation by either suspending any Member found guilty of the infraction from AU activities, or impose punitive politico-economic sanctions, or deny diplomatic recognition of such an unconstitutional government. What is particularly interesting about these measures is that the AU has been aiding and abetting unconstitutional changes of government by its inconsistent policy attitude. AU kept mute many times and some other times, the AU condemns but has no teeth to bark.

For instance, in 2024, President Faure Gnassingbe reviewed the Constitution of Togo to remove the term barriers in the Constitution. This was the pattern adopted by Cameroon’s Paul Biya. He came to power in 1982 following the resignation of President Amadou Ahidjo. In April 2008, Paul Biya got the Parliament to also remove the barrier of term limit in the mania of Togo. The AU could not do anything to change the situational reality. The same ineptitude of the AU was what occurred when the Chadian constitution was disregarded when the President of the country, Idriss Déby, was killed in the battle field and his son, Mahamat, was made to replace him on 20 April, 2021. The Chadian Constitution requires that in the event of absence of the president or when a presidential vacuum is created by force of necessity, the President of the National Assembly should organise an election within 60 days for purposes of replacement. The Constitution was simply set aside. All the proponents of zero tolerance at home and abroad, and particularly France, all kept quiet.

President Biya has been in power since November 6, 1982 and is seeking re-election for the eighth time, meaning that, with his current age of 92 this year, he may still be in power until 1999 in the absence of death. Cameroon still maintains the 7-year presidential term borrowed from France who had cut her own term to only five years. President Biya was the 5th Prime Minister of Cameroon, from 1975 to 1982, and the second President of the country before President Ahmadou Ahidjo died on November 30, 1989.

Why does President Biya want to be in power at 99 years of age or still be President at 100 years? This question arises in light of the fact that he has not always been appearing in public functions. Several Cameroonians have been raising many concerns about this and have insinuated that his health has become very fragile. When public outcries appeared to be hitting him hard, President Biya banned in 2024 any public discussion on his non-appearance in public activities. This is dictatorship per excellence. By banning public discussions on his non-appearance, does that make him healthier? Does that mean not performing his official functions by himself?

Cameroon has many critical problems that President Biya has not been able to meaningfully address. The cost of living has become very exorbitant, especially the cost of food. Youth unemployment rate is very high. It is important to note here that Cameroon has a population of about 30 million, 60 percent of whom are 25 years of age and below. What future have the youth in light of the system of gerontocracy in Cameroon? Apart from this, the northern part of Cameroon is still faced with armed banditry and secession struggle in the southern Anglophone region. 

For over forty years in power, none of these problems has been given any acceptable solution. Of the 30 million people in Cameroon, 8.2 million aged 20 and more are eligible to vote. Most unfortunately, however, voter apathy has been on the increase over the years for obvious reasons: no matter what, Biya is always scheduled to win any presidential election in Cameroon. One good point for reflection is the fact that, today, 12 October, 2025 the presidential election is taking place and he is expected to win. It was only on October 7, 2025, that is, less than a week that President Biya launched his campaigns for re-election. If he was not sure that he would not be re-elected, he would surely have been compelled to flag off his campaigns earlier on. 

There is also the fact of a weakened opposition. During the 2018 presidential election, the main challenger then, Maurice Kamto, was disqualified while the other contenders could not agree on a candidate of unity. President Biya simply took advantage of the situation. He won the election with massive votes. Besides, the domestic environment in Cameroon has not substantially changed. Socio-political instability and agitation by the Anglophone Cameroonians for separate identity has not been resolved. The Cameroon and Africa of yesterday are still the same as of today. Which factors are responsible for this situation? In which way can it be posited that Africa is no longer under foreign exploitation in different ramifications as of today? Why is it difficult to do away with the colonial virus injected into the African blood? Why is Africa a problem unto itself? Why are African eyes no longer seeing clearly? Have African youths any brighter future if we consider the gerontocracy style of government in Cameroon? Why is Africa not looking at the scenarios of when there will be no more resources to be exported to Europe and America, and by implication, when Europe and America would have taken advantage of Africa’s resources to develop and there would not be anything left for Africa’s own development? 

Gerontocracy as a Ridicule in Cameroon 

The system of government in Cameroon, gerontocracy, is the government of people by old people. For instance, Paul Biya will be 92 years old on February 13, 2026. As noted by Akanni Dorcas in her “Meet Africa’s 11 Oldest Leaders Aged over 70, and published in the Vanguardngr.com, Paul Biya, ‘at 91, holds the distinction of being the second-longest ruling president in Africa and longest consecutively serving non-royal leaders in the world. If he was born in 1933 and he became the President of Cameroon in 1982, that means he attained power at the age of 49. 

More importantly, if he served for the first two terms of 7 years each, there is nothing to suggest that he ever had any new or fresh creative ideas to govern Cameroon by 2014. If he could not do his best in the first seven years, which is almost the equivalent of a two four-year term in several democracies, every other subsequent term cannot but be a waste of time as all his development strategies would have been exhausted. The exhaustion of old ideas and fraudulent, as well as forceful efforts to remain in power necessarily prevent fresh and younger people to participate in the political governance of Cameroon. This is most ridiculous. 

What is it that President Biya wants to achieve as a nonagenarian when as a septuagenarian and octogenarian, he could not perform any better? His Senate President, Marcel Niat Njifenji, is 90 years old. He was elected Senate President following the creation of an Upper House of Parliament by constitutional amendment in 1996 which only came into effect in April 2013. He has always been re-elected since then. His last re-election was in March 2025.  The President of the National Assembly of Cameroon is Cavayé Yéguié Djibril and he is 85 years old. He has been occupying the position since March 31, 1992. The Minister of State and Minister of Justice, as well as the Keeper of the Seal, is Laurent Esso. He is 83 years old. He was appointed Minister of Justice on September 19, 1996. The President of the Constitutional Court is Clement Atangana. He is 84 years old and has not only been serving in that capacity since February 07, 2018, but has also approved the eligibility of President Biya to contest today’s presidential election. The oldest of them all, is the National Police General, Martin Mbarga Nguelé, who is 93 years old. He is older than the President. He was appointed on September 1, 2010 following a security shake-up. His retirement age has always been extended. Being a Delegate General, he has a ministerial ranking. 

The Chief of Army Staff of the Cameroonian Armed Forces, is Army Corps General, René Claude Meka. He has been occupying the position since September 2001. 

From the foregoing, once an individual is considered fit for ministerial position, there is nothing like any limitation to the tenure unless there is a problem of non-performance or disagreement with the President, As the President himself does not think of leaving presidential power to anyone, the need to carry along others supporting him in the same boat is a necessity. Our main contention here is therefore that Cameroon has not and is not likely to make fundamental progress for as long as the gerontocratic system of government is sustained.

First the foundation of President Biya was not solid when he took over power.  He assumed presidential power in 1982 following the resignation of President Ahidjo who was later, in 1984, accused of plotting against Paul Biya. As a result, Ahmadou Ahidjo, who was on exile in Dakar, Senegal, was sentenced to death in absentia. Ahidjo died in exile in 1989. But his supporters never died with him. They were always there to protect his interests. However, should they be held responsible for the coup attempt against Paul Biya that began on April 6, 1986? If they should, what then is the meaning and implication for Ahmadou Ahidjo to resign in 1982 voluntarily and then to come back two years later to plan a coup against Paul Biya for whom he resigned ab initio?

For reasons of force majeure, Paul Biya had to accept a multiparty system in December 1990 following the end of the Cold War and the Franco-African La Baule Summit in France where President François Mitterrand made democratisation a conditionality for future development aid to Africa. And true enough, the first multi-party presidential election was held on 11 October 1992, in which incumbent President Biya won the election with 40% of the votes. Since then he has been winning all subsequent elections.

Under President Ahidjo, attempt was made in 1972 to move away from the federal system in place to a unitary state, for which a constitutional referendum was held on 20 May 1972. A 98% turnout was recorded and 99.99% of the voters reportedly passed the referendum on Unitary State for Cameroon in rejection of the existing system of Federal State. Today, 12th October, President Biya is contesting for the eighth term as a gerontocrat. For how long can gerontocracy be sustained? From federalism state, through unitary system, to gerontocracy, quo vadis Africa? This cannot but be very ridiculous.

Secondly, gerontocracy is a resultant from elections that are often organised to the detriment of strong challengers to President Biya. It is sufficient for President Biya to identify an opponent to be a threat and to ensure the disqualification of the candidate. In this regard, what is the place of electoral manoeuvrings in the acceptable electoral or constitutional change of government? If an incumbent president used an act of illegality to organise an election, why should this be considered normal? Is this not an indirect mania of changing a government illegally?  Why is the AU keeping mute about African leaders manipulating their Constitutions in order to remain in power until they die? 

Without doubt, gerontocracy and the Cameroonian youth remain another area of critical challenge in the governance of Cameroon. Gerontocracy has some advantages, like reservoir of experience. It is believed that an experienced leadership will be useful in fostering national cohesion. It is also believed that not much time will be needed in decision-making. The process will not only be faster, it will also be simpler. In the same vein, gerontocracy also has its demerits. The ruling cannot but be biased. It is a rule by one man in power. Politico-economic instability cannot be ruled out. How are Cameroonian youths affected by gerontocracy? Is it really in their interest if they are excluded from ministerial portfolio? Gerontocracy, admittedly, is a form of rule that leaders who are much older than most of the adult population, rule in such a way that ‘power within the ruling class accumulates with age,’ and thus, ‘making the oldest individuals the holders of the most power.’ If the more elderly are to continue to hold on to power, to what extent is their holier-than-thou personality? In which way is Cameroon better than other countries in Africa? And true enough, how is Cameroon faring in international politics?

In essence, we do not have qualms with Gerontocracy as a form of government. Our concern is about the manipulation of the Constitution to enable prolongation of tenure of the incumbent president. When a zero policy for unconstitutional changes of government is declared, it is to enable an elected president to complete his or her tenure. It is to promote democracy and sustain neo-liberalism, which is generating new concerns in Nigeria. Without whiff of doubt, the more one lives is also the more he or she learns. In this regard, how does gerontocracy apply to intolerance of unconstitutional changes of government in Africa? What is the structure of gerontocracy? Who are the Cameroonians being specifically trained to succeed the current leaders? How do they interact with their peers in other African countries? In final submission, every re-election of President Paul Biya is a resultant from the fraudulent use of law in 2008 to remove the tenure barriers in the constitution. Even if there are old people elsewhere, invited to come back to power to help rebuild their nations, the truth remains that such more elderly people were invited. They do not commit any infraction in order to return or stay in power. The manoeuvre-driven gerontocracy in Cameroon is not helpful to national development and cannot but continue to have the potential of promoting unconstitutional changes of government. Paul Biya’s visible good-health deficit and inability to perform in public functions, while still struggling to remain in power is not only an abuse of power but a major mockery of black dignity. It is ridiculous.He should go and rest. 

Bola A. Akinterinwa 

Africa’s future does not have the potential to be bright if African scholars do not wake up on a more serious note to address obstacles militating against a greater Africa. It was in 1972 that Walter Rodney gave an exegesis of the exploitation of Africa. The exegesis is contained in his book, How Europe underdeveloped Africa. He not only traced the exploitation to European Slave Trade as a basic factor and to the coming of imperialism and colonialism, but also noted the contributions of Africa to the development of European capitalism. Put differently, it was partly, if not largely, thanks to the exploitation of Africa, that European capitalism came into being.

It has become a desideratum for all seasoned scholars in Africa to engage in a more critical thinking on how Africa is underdeveloped by Africans themselves. If colonialism and imperialism are major dynamics of underdevelopment of Africa, how do we explain the recidivist character of the non-development as of today? Without doubt, Walter Rodney gave his own understanding of what we should mean by development and under-development. As he put it, ‘development in human society is a many-sided process. At the level of the individual, it implies increased skill and capacity, greater freedom, creativity, self-discipline, responsibility, and material well-being.’ As for under-development, it is ‘not absence of development, because every people have developed in one way or another and to a greater or lesser extent. Underdevelopment makes sense only as a means of comparing levels of development. It is very much tied to the fact that human social development has been uneven and from a strictly economic viewpoint some human groups have advanced further by producing more and becoming more wealthy.’

In this regard and comparatively, why is it that Africa has not been able to compete well internationally in terms of economic development? Walter Rodney did not talk about the underdevelopment of Africa by Africans. If he did not, what prevents the African academics from doing so? In an attempt to identify some rationales, we attempt to inquire using the Cameroonian presidential gerontocracy as a first level of analysis. This is done within the context of non-acceptability of unconstitutional change of government in Africa.

Gerontocracy and Unconstitutional Changes of Government 

Africa’s policy attitude towards unconstitutional change of government is noteworthy in three ways. First, it marks a departure from the policies of non-interference and non-intervention in the exclusive domestic affairs of Member States. Under the Organisation of African Unity (OAU), emphasis was placed on non-interference. With the transformation of the OAU to the African Union (AU) in 2002, the principle of non-interference was jettisoned. Secondly, unlike the principle of non-interference under the OAU, which was almost religiously adhered to, the alleged zero tolerance for unconstitutional change of government under the AU has not been so religiously complied with. Thirdly, and perhaps more importantly, a legal background was given to the zero tolerance policy.

For instance, there was the Lomé Convention done in 2000 which addressed the challenge of unconstitutional changes of government. So was there the African Charter on Democracy, Elections and Governance (ACDEG), which was done in 2007 and which identified military coups, mercenary or rebel interventions, refusal of incumbent leaders to relinquish power after losing elections, as well as undemocratic constitutional or legal amendments to extend tenure and retain power. The AU Peace and Security Council is given the mandate to enforce this regulation by either suspending any Member found guilty of the infraction from AU activities, or impose punitive politico-economic sanctions, or deny diplomatic recognition of such an unconstitutional government. What is particularly interesting about these measures is that the AU has been aiding and abetting unconstitutional changes of government by its inconsistent policy attitude. AU kept mute many times and some other times, the AU condemns but has no teeth to bark.

For instance, in 2024, President Faure Gnassingbe reviewed the Constitution of Togo to remove the term barriers in the Constitution. This was the pattern adopted by Cameroon’s Paul Biya. He came to power in 1982 following the resignation of President Amadou Ahidjo. In April 2008, Paul Biya got the Parliament to also remove the barrier of term limit in the mania of Togo. The AU could not do anything to change the situational reality. The same ineptitude of the AU was what occurred when the Chadian constitution was disregarded when the President of the country, Idriss Déby, was killed in the battle field and his son, Mahamat, was made to replace him on 20 April, 2021. The Chadian Constitution requires that in the event of absence of the president or when a presidential vacuum is created by force of necessity, the President of the National Assembly should organise an election within 60 days for purposes of replacement. The Constitution was simply set aside. All the proponents of zero tolerance at home and abroad, and particularly France, all kept quiet.

President Biya has been in power since November 6, 1982 and is seeking re-election for the eighth time, meaning that, with his current age of 92 this year, he may still be in power until 1999 in the absence of death. Cameroon still maintains the 7-year presidential term borrowed from France who had cut her own term to only five years. President Biya was the 5th Prime Minister of Cameroon, from 1975 to 1982, and the second President of the country before President Ahmadou Ahidjo died on November 30, 1989.

Why does President Biya want to be in power at 99 years of age or still be President at 100 years? This question arises in light of the fact that he has not always been appearing in public functions. Several Cameroonians have been raising many concerns about this and have insinuated that his health has become very fragile. When public outcries appeared to be hitting him hard, President Biya banned in 2024 any public discussion on his non-appearance in public activities. This is dictatorship per excellence. By banning public discussions on his non-appearance, does that make him healthier? Does that mean not performing his official functions by himself?

Cameroon has many critical problems that President Biya has not been able to meaningfully address. The cost of living has become very exorbitant, especially the cost of food. Youth unemployment rate is very high. It is important to note here that Cameroon has a population of about 30 million, 60 percent of whom are 25 years of age and below. What future have the youth in light of the system of gerontocracy in Cameroon? Apart from this, the northern part of Cameroon is still faced with armed banditry and secession struggle in the southern Anglophone region. 

For over forty years in power, none of these problems has been given any acceptable solution. Of the 30 million people in Cameroon, 8.2 million aged 20 and more are eligible to vote. Most unfortunately, however, voter apathy has been on the increase over the years for obvious reasons: no matter what, Biya is always scheduled to win any presidential election in Cameroon. One good point for reflection is the fact that, today, 12 October, 2025 the presidential election is taking place and he is expected to win. It was only on October 7, 2025, that is, less than a week that President Biya launched his campaigns for re-election. If he was not sure that he would not be re-elected, he would surely have been compelled to flag off his campaigns earlier on. 

There is also the fact of a weakened opposition. During the 2018 presidential election, the main challenger then, Maurice Kamto, was disqualified while the other contenders could not agree on a candidate of unity. President Biya simply took advantage of the situation. He won the election with massive votes. Besides, the domestic environment in Cameroon has not substantially changed. Socio-political instability and agitation by the Anglophone Cameroonians for separate identity has not been resolved. The Cameroon and Africa of yesterday are still the same as of today. Which factors are responsible for this situation? In which way can it be posited that Africa is no longer under foreign exploitation in different ramifications as of today? Why is it difficult to do away with the colonial virus injected into the African blood? Why is Africa a problem unto itself? Why are African eyes no longer seeing clearly? Have African youths any brighter future if we consider the gerontocracy style of government in Cameroon? Why is Africa not looking at the scenarios of when there will be no more resources to be exported to Europe and America, and by implication, when Europe and America would have taken advantage of Africa’s resources to develop and there would not be anything left for Africa’s own development? 

Gerontocracy as a Ridicule in Cameroon 

The system of government in Cameroon, gerontocracy, is the government of people by old people. For instance, Paul Biya will be 92 years old on February 13, 2026. As noted by Akanni Dorcas in her “Meet Africa’s 11 Oldest Leaders Aged over 70, and published in the Vanguardngr.com, Paul Biya, ‘at 91, holds the distinction of being the second-longest ruling president in Africa and longest consecutively serving non-royal leaders in the world. If he was born in 1933 and he became the President of Cameroon in 1982, that means he attained power at the age of 49. 

More importantly, if he served for the first two terms of 7 years each, there is nothing to suggest that he ever had any new or fresh creative ideas to govern Cameroon by 2014. If he could not do his best in the first seven years, which is almost the equivalent of a two four-year term in several democracies, every other subsequent term cannot but be a waste of time as all his development strategies would have been exhausted. The exhaustion of old ideas and fraudulent, as well as forceful efforts to remain in power necessarily prevent fresh and younger people to participate in the political governance of Cameroon. This is most ridiculous. 

What is it that President Biya wants to achieve as a nonagenarian when as a septuagenarian and octogenarian, he could not perform any better? His Senate President, Marcel Niat Njifenji, is 90 years old. He was elected Senate President following the creation of an Upper House of Parliament by constitutional amendment in 1996 which only came into effect in April 2013. He has always been re-elected since then. His last re-election was in March 2025.  The President of the National Assembly of Cameroon is Cavayé Yéguié Djibril and he is 85 years old. He has been occupying the position since March 31, 1992. The Minister of State and Minister of Justice, as well as the Keeper of the Seal, is Laurent Esso. He is 83 years old. He was appointed Minister of Justice on September 19, 1996. The President of the Constitutional Court is Clement Atangana. He is 84 years old and has not only been serving in that capacity since February 07, 2018, but has also approved the eligibility of President Biya to contest today’s presidential election. The oldest of them all, is the National Police General, Martin Mbarga Nguelé, who is 93 years old. He is older than the President. He was appointed on September 1, 2010 following a security shake-up. His retirement age has always been extended. Being a Delegate General, he has a ministerial ranking. 

The Chief of Army Staff of the Cameroonian Armed Forces, is Army Corps General, René Claude Meka. He has been occupying the position since September 2001. 

From the foregoing, once an individual is considered fit for ministerial position, there is nothing like any limitation to the tenure unless there is a problem of non-performance or disagreement with the President, As the President himself does not think of leaving presidential power to anyone, the need to carry along others supporting him in the same boat is a necessity. Our main contention here is therefore that Cameroon has not and is not likely to make fundamental progress for as long as the gerontocratic system of government is sustained.

First the foundation of President Biya was not solid when he took over power.  He assumed presidential power in 1982 following the resignation of President Ahidjo who was later, in 1984, accused of plotting against Paul Biya. As a result, Ahmadou Ahidjo, who was on exile in Dakar, Senegal, was sentenced to death in absentia. Ahidjo died in exile in 1989. But his supporters never died with him. They were always there to protect his interests. However, should they be held responsible for the coup attempt against Paul Biya that began on April 6, 1986? If they should, what then is the meaning and implication for Ahmadou Ahidjo to resign in 1982 voluntarily and then to come back two years later to plan a coup against Paul Biya for whom he resigned ab initio?

For reasons of force majeure, Paul Biya had to accept a multiparty system in December 1990 following the end of the Cold War and the Franco-African La Baule Summit in France where President François Mitterrand made democratisation a conditionality for future development aid to Africa. And true enough, the first multi-party presidential election was held on 11 October 1992, in which incumbent President Biya won the election with 40% of the votes. Since then he has been winning all subsequent elections.

Under President Ahidjo, attempt was made in 1972 to move away from the federal system in place to a unitary state, for which a constitutional referendum was held on 20 May 1972. A 98% turnout was recorded and 99.99% of the voters reportedly passed the referendum on Unitary State for Cameroon in rejection of the existing system of Federal State. Today, 12th October, President Biya is contesting for the eighth term as a gerontocrat. For how long can gerontocracy be sustained? From federalism state, through unitary system, to gerontocracy, quo vadis Africa? This cannot but be very ridiculous.

Secondly, gerontocracy is a resultant from elections that are often organised to the detriment of strong challengers to President Biya. It is sufficient for President Biya to identify an opponent to be a threat and to ensure the disqualification of the candidate. In this regard, what is the place of electoral manoeuvrings in the acceptable electoral or constitutional change of government? If an incumbent president used an act of illegality to organise an election, why should this be considered normal? Is this not an indirect mania of changing a government illegally?  Why is the AU keeping mute about African leaders manipulating their Constitutions in order to remain in power until they die? 

Without doubt, gerontocracy and the Cameroonian youth remain another area of critical challenge in the governance of Cameroon. Gerontocracy has some advantages, like reservoir of experience. It is believed that an experienced leadership will be useful in fostering national cohesion. It is also believed that not much time will be needed in decision-making. The process will not only be faster, it will also be simpler. In the same vein, gerontocracy also has its demerits. The ruling cannot but be biased. It is a rule by one man in power. Politico-economic instability cannot be ruled out. How are Cameroonian youths affected by gerontocracy? Is it really in their interest if they are excluded from ministerial portfolio? Gerontocracy, admittedly, is a form of rule that leaders who are much older than most of the adult population, rule in such a way that ‘power within the ruling class accumulates with age,’ and thus, ‘making the oldest individuals the holders of the most power.’ If the more elderly are to continue to hold on to power, to what extent is their holier-than-thou personality? In which way is Cameroon better than other countries in Africa? And true enough, how is Cameroon faring in international politics?

In essence, we do not have qualms with Gerontocracy as a form of government. Our concern is about the manipulation of the Constitution to enable prolongation of tenure of the incumbent president. When a zero policy for unconstitutional changes of government is declared, it is to enable an elected president to complete his or her tenure. It is to promote democracy and sustain neo-liberalism, which is generating new concerns in Nigeria. Without whiff of doubt, the more one lives is also the more he or she learns. In this regard, how does gerontocracy apply to intolerance of unconstitutional changes of government in Africa? What is the structure of gerontocracy? Who are the Cameroonians being specifically trained to succeed the current leaders? How do they interact with their peers in other African countries? In final submission, every re-election of President Paul Biya is a resultant from the fraudulent use of law in 2008 to remove the tenure barriers in the constitution. Even if there are old people elsewhere, invited to come back to power to help rebuild their nations, the truth remains that such more elderly people were invited. They do not commit any infraction in order to return or stay in power. The manoeuvre-driven gerontocracy in Cameroon is not helpful to national development and cannot but continue to have the potential of promoting unconstitutional changes of government. Paul Biya’s visible good-health deficit and inability to perform in public functions, while still struggling to remain in power is not only an abuse of power but a major mockery of black dignity. It is ridiculous.He should go and rest.