Can Cabinet Reshuffling Improve Governance in Cameroon? An Assessment of the Anticipated Changes

By Anthony Antem

Executive Summary

As discussions intensify around a possible cabinet reshuffle in Cameroon, expectations of improved governance and administrative performance have resurfaced. Yet despite repeated ministerial changes over the years, Cameroon continues to face persistent governance deficits, suggesting that personnel changes alone may not be sufficient to drive lasting improvement. According to the Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) 2026, decision-making remains highly centralized, ministerial autonomy is limited, and institutional coordination remains weak. Continuing challenges in health, infrastructure, corruption control, and public service delivery point to the structural constraints that personnel changes alone may struggle to resolve. This suggests that cabinet reshuffles are more likely to generate sustainable improvements when accompanied by broader institutional reforms. To maximize the benefits of any future government reorganization, Cameroon should institutionalize performance contracts for ministers, accelerate effective fiscal decentralization, strengthen merit-based recruitment and promotion, reinforce oversight institutions, expand digital governance, and ensure continuity of strategic reforms under Vision 2035 and the National Development Strategy 2020–2030.

Key messages

• Cabinet reshuffles in Cameroon have often served political stabilization objectives while producing mixed results in terms of governance reform.
• Structural and institutional constraints often play a more significant role in shaping governance outcomes than individual ministerial appointments.
• Cabinet reshuffles can create opportunities for reform, but lasting improvements depend on strengthening oversight institutions, professionalizing the civil service, deepening decentralization, and institutionalizing performance-based governance.

Introduction

President Biya’s announced cabinet reshuffle amid mounting economic, social, and political pressures, have generated renewed public expectations of improved government performance and administrative efficiency. While such reshuffles are often perceived as opportunities for policy renewal, evidence from previous administrations suggests that ministerial changes alone rarely translate into significant or sustained improvements in governance outcomes. This is largely because the persistence of governance challenges in Cameroon is driven less by individual officeholders and more by deep structural constraints, policy implementation gaps, including highly centralized decision-making, weak institutional accountability, limited decentralization, bureaucratic inefficiencies, and persistent capacity deficits within the public administration. Consequently, although cabinet reshuffles may alter political dynamics and public perceptions of responsiveness, their impact on governance outcomes remains limited in the absence of broader institutional reforms. This brief argues that sustainable governance improvements require comprehensive policy and institutional reforms rather than personnel changes alone, and it concludes by outlining policy recommendations aimed at strengthening institutions, enhancing accountability, and improving overall public sector performance.

I – Understanding the Political Logic of Cabinet Reshuffles

Since President Paul Biya assumed office in 1982, cabinet reorganizations have become an important mechanism through which the executive manages political loyalty and balances regional, ethnic, and partisan interests. Even though reshuffles have legitimately served as a vital political tool to maintain the national character, ensuring that appointments reflect the diverse regional and linguistic demographics (Francophone and Anglophone) required for sociopolitical stability and national integration, [cabinet reshuffles in Cameroon have not consistently translated into measurable improvements in public sector performance but more or less been imperatives aimed at preserving regime stability, maintaining elite coalitions, and responding to periods of heightened political pressure. The 2018 cabinet reshuffle illustrates this political logic. Amid escalating tensions in the North-West and South-West regions, the government created the Ministry of Decentralization and Local Development and appointed Georges Elanga Obam as pioneer minister. Similarly, Paul Atanga Nji was appointed Minister of Territorial Administration while Professor Nalova Lyonga, an Anglophone academic, became Minister of Secondary Education. These appointments were widely interpreted by some observers and analysts as efforts to demonstrate inclusiveness and respond to grievances associated with the Anglophone crisis, rather than fundamentally reform governance structures.

Furthermore, cabinet reshuffles also serve as symbolic responses to economic difficulties, corruption scandals, or declining public confidence. The October 2015 reshuffle, for instance, occurred amid growing concerns over insecurity caused by Boko Haram and public criticisms of administrative inefficiencies. Eleven ministers were replaced or reassigned, including changes in strategic ministries such as Defence and Transport. However, these changes were not accompanied by major institutional reforms, limiting their long-term impact on public administration.

In addition, ministerial changes also reinforce presidential control over the political system. The concentration of decision-making powers at the presidency means that ministers largely operate within a framework where strategic decisions originate from the executive center. Consequently, cabinet reshuffles often strengthen political discipline and loyalty rather than decentralize authority or improve institutional autonomy.

II – Why Personnel Changes Often Produce Limited Governance Gains

Cameroon’s administrative system remains heavily centralized. Although ministers head their respective departments, major decisions concerning policy priorities and strategic initiatives often require approval from the Presidency or Prime Minister’s Office. The Bertelsmann Transformation Index (BTI) notes that the Presidency effectively functions alongside a “shadow cabinet”, leaving ministries with limited autonomy and resulting in fragmented coordination. This institutional arrangement reduces the capacity of individual ministers to initiate transformative reforms.  Over the past two decades, the Ministry of Public Health has witnessed several changes in leadership. Yet persistent challenges including shortages of medical personnel, inadequate infrastructure, and uneven access to healthcare have remained. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed structural weaknesses that could not be attributed solely to ministerial leadership, highlighting deficiencies in financing, coordination, and institutional capacity.

Changing ministers does not automatically strengthen accountability. Oversight institutions, parliamentary scrutiny, and performance evaluation mechanisms remain relatively weak, limiting incentives for improved performance. The persistence of corruption despite numerous anti-corruption campaigns demonstrates this reality. Operations such as Operation Sparrowhawk (Épervier) have led to prosecutions of high-profile officials, yet governance indicators have shown limited sustained improvements because anti-corruption efforts have not been accompanied by deeper institutional reforms.

Public administration in Cameroon continues to suffer from overlapping mandates and cumbersome procedures. The BTI 2026 report highlights duplication within ministries and poor coordination among administrative structures. For example, the health sector includes multiple layers of administration, central ministry departments, delegated secretariats, and regional delegations which often complicate decision-making and reduce efficiency. The 2019 fire at SONARA exposed broader weaknesses in governance and strategic planning. Although managerial changes occurred subsequently, structural problems relating to maintenance, financing, and institutional oversight remained unresolved. The episode demonstrated that replacing leadership without addressing systemic deficiencies produces limited gains.

III – Leveraging Personnel Change To Enhance Positive Governance Outcomes: Policy Options

Cabinet reshuffles can provide opportunities for reform, but only when accompanied by broader institutional changes.

1. Delegate Administrative Authority to the Prime Minister and Sectorial Ministries: The The Government of Cameroon could consider reforms aimed at strengthening transparency, accountability, and institutional effectiveness across government. This should include delegating greater administrative authority to the Prime Minister and sector ministries for policy implementation. Ministerial appointments should be accompanied by measurable performance contracts tied to clearly defined targets. Similar mechanisms already exist partially within Cameroon Vision 2035 and the National Development Strategy (NDS30), but implementation remains weak. Annual public reporting on ministerial performance would enhance accountability and reduce excessive emphasis on political loyalty.

ii.Strengthen Meritocracy in Public Administration

Personnel management reforms should prioritize competence, technical expertise, and professional development. Reducing political patronage in appointments would improve institutional continuity and preserve administrative memory.Countries such as Rwanda and Mauritius have demonstrated that strong public institutions and performance-oriented civil services can produce better governance outcomes than frequent personnel changes.

iii.Strengthen Oversight Institutions

The effectiveness of institutions such as Contrôle Supérieur de l’État, CONSUPE, the National Anti-Corruption Commission (CONAC), Parliament, and the Audit Bench of the Supreme Court should be reinforced through greater independence and enhanced enforcement powers. Governance reforms should focus on creating systems capable of holding officeholders accountable irrespective of who occupies ministerial positions.

iv: Ensure Policy Continuity Across Administrations

Strategic programs under Vision 2035 and the National Development Strategy (NDS30) should be insulated from disruptions associated with ministerial changes. Permanent secretariats and professional senior civil services can preserve institutional memory and sustain reforms over time.

Conclusion

Cameroon’s governance challenges are rooted less in the identities of ministers than in the institutional architecture within which they operate. The experience of repeated cabinet reshuffles since 1982 demonstrates that changing personnel without reforming governance systems produces only marginal gains. Sustainable improvements in public sector performance require strengthening institutions, deepening decentralization, enhancing accountability, and professionalizing the civil service