Beyond Symbolism: Can an Anglophone Vice President redefine Governance in Cameroon?

By Anthony Antem

Executive Summary

This brief examines the proposition of appointing an Anglophone Vice President in Cameroon and interrogates whether such a move would transcend symbolic inclusion to meaningfully reshape governance. Situated within the broader context of the Anglophone crisis and longstanding concerns over political marginalization, the analysis explores the extent to which elite-level representation can address structural governance deficits, restore trust in the state, and contribute to national cohesion. It argues that while the creation of such a position may signal political recognition and responsiveness, its transformative value depends on the clarity of mandate, institutional design, and genuine redistribution of executive power rather than mere representational optics. The brief further assesses the risks of tokenism, elite co-optation, and institutional duplication, emphasizing that governance reform in Cameroon requires more than constitutional engineering. It concludes that an Anglophone Vice Presidency could contribute to redefining governance only if embedded within a broader agenda of decentralization, accountability, and inclusive state reform. Without these structural adjustments, the initiative risks reinforcing symbolic politics rather than resolving the underlying governance and identity challenges facing the country.

Policy Highlights

• Cameroon currently operates a centralized governance architecture wherein the President of the Republic wields considerable and sweeping powers backed by the constitution.
• President Biya’s over 40-year rule has exacerbated governance deviances such as electoral malpractices, endemic corruption, elite monopoly/manipulation and Anglophone marginalization.
• The existence of an Anglophone Vice President without substantive and institutional reform will only amount to political appeasement, perpetual instability and an erosion of state legitimacy.

Introduction

Since achieving independence in the 1960s, Cameroon has known only two Presidents. The transition from Ahmadou Ahidjo to Paul Biya marked a profound shift in Cameroon’s governance trajectory, with several dynamics contributing to its deterioration. Initially couched in promises of “rigour and moralisation,” Biya’s rule evolved into deeply rooted political authoritarianism, characterized by contested elections, suppression of opposition, and the 2008 constitutional amendment that abolished presidential term limits, enabling his over four-decade hold on power. Economically, his early years coincided with a severe crisis that ushered in structural adjustment programs, reduced public spending, and widespread privatization, eroding much of the relative stability achieved under Ahidjo.

At the same time, national cohesion weakened significantly, particularly through the deepening marginalization of Anglophone regions exacerbated by the abandonment of federalism, the symbolic and political reversion from the “United Republic of Cameroon” to the unitary state of “La République du Cameroun,” and the state’s inadequate handling of emerging grievances, which intensified regional fractures. Governance under Biya also became increasingly defined by absentee leadership, with decision-making perceived as distant and reactive, relying more on coercive security apparatuses and the intimidation of dissenting voices than on proactive development policies. This environment fostered endemic corruption, where initiatives such as Operation Sparrowhawk were frequently criticized as selective tools for neutralizing political rivals rather than addressing systemic graft. As underscored by assessments like the Bertelsmann Transformation Index 2024 report, the cumulative effect of these trends reflects a transition from Ahidjo’s relatively centralized and interventionist governance to a more detached, survival-oriented regime under Biya, prioritizing regime durability over democratic consolidation and sustainable development.

This policy brief highlights the problematic of Cameroon’s limited inclusivity at the executive level which accentuates weak crisis coordination mechanisms and persistent perceptions of political exclusion particularly among Anglophone constituencies. This paper seeks to critically assess whether the introduction of an Anglophone Vice Presidency in Cameroon would constitute a substantive governance reform or merely a symbolic gesture of political inclusion. It aims to evaluate the potential of such an institutional arrangement to address longstanding grievances related to marginalization, strengthen national cohesion, and improve governance effectiveness. In doing so, the paper interrogates the structural, political, and constitutional conditions necessary for the office to meaningfully contribute to inclusive governance, decentralization, and sustainable conflict resolution in Cameroon.

The state of governance in Cameroon

According to the 2024 Economist Intelligence Unit index, Cameroon scores 2.56/10, classifying it as an authoritarian regime with limited political participation and weak functioning of government. Institutional checks on executive power remain low, with indices on judicial and legislative constraints scoring 0.146 and 0.265 respectively, pointing to limited separation of powers. Corruption continues to be systemic: the World Bank’s control of corruption indicator stands at -1.22, significantly below the global average, while Cameroon’s National Anti-Corruption Commission (CONAC) reports indicate that the state still loses billions of FCFA annually to corrupt practices despite some recovery efforts. Broader governance assessments further describe Cameroon as an autocratic system with formal democratic institutions that function largely through patronage networks, undermining public trust and policy effectiveness. These structural weaknesses are compounded by ongoing conflict in the Anglophone regions, which reflects not only security challenges but also deep governance failures in inclusion, representation, and responsiveness, reinforcing a cycle of fragility and limited state legitimacy.

The case for an Anglophone Vice President

The case for appointing an Anglophone Vice President in Cameroon rests on its potential to advance political inclusion, conflict mitigation, and executive efficiency within a highly centralized governance system.

At the level of political inclusion and legitimacy, such an appointment would enhance representation at the apex of state power, signaling a concrete commitment to integrating Anglophone constituencies into national decision-making processes and helping to rebuild eroded trust in public institutions.

In terms of conflict mitigation, a Vice President from the Anglophone regions could serve as a credible intermediary between the state and affected populations, facilitating dialogue, supporting peace negotiations, and strengthening local engagement efforts in the North West and South West regions.

Beyond symbolism, the role could also improve executive efficiency through the strategic delegation of responsibilities, including oversight of decentralization reforms, coordination of post-conflict reconstruction, and management of humanitarian responses. If endowed with clear authority, such a position could therefore function not only as a unifying political instrument but also as an operational mechanism for more responsive and coordinated governance.

From symbolic inclusion to transformative governance

For a Vice Presidency to deliver meaningful impact in Cameroon, its effectiveness must be anchored in clear constitutional design and credible institutional safeguards. This requires explicit constitutional provisions that define the roles, powers, and scope of action of the office, thereby preventing ambiguity or political marginalization within the executive. Beyond formal recognition, there must be genuine delegation of executive authority, enabling the Vice President to oversee strategic portfolios and take binding decisions rather than serving a purely ceremonial function.

Equally critical is the establishment of robust checks and accountability mechanisms, including parliamentary oversight, transparent reporting structures, and performance monitoring frameworks to ensure the office contributes to governance outcomes. Finally, the role must be aligned with ongoing decentralization efforts and broader governance reforms, particularly in strengthening local governance, improving service delivery, and addressing regional grievances. Without this integrated approach, the Vice Presidency risks reinforcing existing structural weaknesses rather than contributing to transformative governance and sustainable peacebuilding.

Conclusion and policy recommendations

In conclusion, the creation of an Anglophone Vice President in Cameroon should not be viewed as a silver bullet for resolving the country’s deep-rooted governance and conflict challenges. While symbolically significant, its true value lies in its potential to transition from mere representation to substantive, transformative governance reform. If embedded within a framework of clearly defined powers, genuine authority, and institutional accountability, the role could contribute meaningfully to addressing long-standing grievances and improving state responsiveness. Ultimately, its effectiveness will depend on whether it is leveraged as part of a broader reform agenda one that strengthens inclusion, enhances decentralization, and rebuilds trust thereby advancing sustainable peacebuilding and reinforcing state legitimacy in Cameroon. In view of these the paper concludes with the following policy recommendations;

Short term recommendations – (within 3 months);

• Parliament must establish Constitutional Clarity on the Vice Presidency

The brief recommends an amendment of the Constitution of Cameroon by parliament within 3 months to explicitly define the roles, powers, and succession functions of the Vice President, including at least three clearly assigned executive portfolios (e.g., decentralization, peacebuilding, and reconstruction), to eliminate ambiguity and ensure operational relevance.

• Ensure Inclusive and Transparent Appointment Processes

Parliament must equally adopt, within 3 months, clear criteria for accession to the office of Vice President prioritizing regional representation, conflict mediation experience, and public credibility with the process communicated transparently to enhance legitimacy and public trust.

• The obligation to Institutionalize Delegated Executive Authority

It is essential for the President of the Republic to issue a presidential decree within 3 months to parliament, mandating the formal delegation of specific executive responsibilities to the Vice President, with quarterly performance benchmarks and reporting obligations to the presidency and cabinet, ensuring the office exercises measurable decision-making authority rather than ceremonial functions.

Medium term recommendations (within 3 – 6 months);

• The need for Strengthened Oversight and Accountability Mechanisms

Within 6 months, parliament must establish a Vice Presidential oversight framework requiring annual reporting to Parliament, independent audits, and the creation of a multi-stakeholder monitoring committee (including civil society and regional representatives) to assess performance against defined governance and peacebuilding indicators.

Long term recommendations (within 3 – 9 months);

• Align the Vice Presidency with Decentralization Reforms

Parliament must mandate the Vice President, within 6 months of office, to lead the implementation of decentralization policies by coordinating with regional and local authorities, with a target of increasing fiscal transfers and administrative autonomy to local governments by at least 20% within 3 years.

• Integrate the Role into National Peacebuilding Architecture

Within 6 months, parliament could formally designate the Vice President as the national focal point for Anglophone peacebuilding and dialogue, responsible for convening biannual stakeholder forums and facilitating structured negotiations, with progress measured through reductions in conflict incidents, improved social cohesion and improved community engagement indicators.