It is usually said that there are several types of bad scientists, including those that provide the right answers to the wrong question and those that provide the wrong answers to the right question. Much of the debate that followed the appointment of members of the Board of ELECAM has identified many such scientists

Section 8 (2) of law N°2006/011 of 29 December 2006 creating Elections Cameroon (ELECAM) states that: "Members of the Electoral Board shall be designated from the midst of independent personalities of Cameroonian nationality, reputed for their stature, moral uprightness, intellectual honesty, patriotism, neutrality and impartiality" .
Therefore the right question under debate is whether Paul Biya violated the stated statute and goes ahead to do things the other way round as a typical dictator.

A reputed Magistrate like Hon. Paul Ayah has already clarified the question thus: "the term reputed [in section 8(2) of the law] is of the family of reputation;reputation therefore is the opinion the public holds of some person;such opinion comes from past and not future perceptions resignation from one's party after appointment cannot retrospectively confer the prerequisite of reputed neutrality that was lacking at the time of appointment.(Hon. Paul Ayah)

Following the appointments, an activist like Hilaire Kamga and many others hurried into the fray, providing answers to the wrong question! Using section 11 of the law which only reiterates section 8(2) by stating incompatibilities, they argued that Paul Biya was within the law in his appointments, since the appointed persons have resigned from their partisan positions

This should be noted will not go any where to give ELECAM the powers to excercise free and fair elections as is the cry of most Cameroonians. The Ministry of Territorial Administration and Decentralization is still to hand over the control of Elections to ELECAM.

Furthermore, following the ridiculous ruling of the Administrative Bench of the Supreme Court on the grievances related to the appointments into ELECAM board, another University don Pius Ondoa (in an essay in a local newspaper) used the Colegrove vs Green (1946) and the Baker vs Carr (1962) rulings of the Supreme Court of the USA to sustain the Administrative Bench's very disturbing argument that the appointment of members of ELECAM is a "political question" and therefore outside the jurisdiction of the judiciary.

Therefore, if our courts cannot say what the law is, then we have a naked court system. The question whether Paul Biya violated section 8 (2) of law N°2006/011 of 29 December 2006 creating Elections Cameroon (ELECAM) is still begging for a scientific answer. As famously put by Vaclav Havel, democracy is not a matter of faith, but of guarantees. Our Judiciary has to show that it can guarantee democracy in Cameroon by upholding the rule of law.

But is this really the case with Cameroon as well as other African countries?