As the final week of campaigning intensifies, paid advertisements in newspapers and media outlets remain scarce. So far, only Paul Biya and Issa Tchiroma Bakary appear to be evenly matched in campaign visibility.
By Colbert Gwain
@The Muteff Factor (formerly The Colbert Factor)
Since the official launch of the 2025 presidential election campaigns in Cameroon on September 27, the public space has been saturated with a familiar cacophony—calls for continuity from the ruling CPDM and its presidential candidate, Paul Biya, and cries for change from the 11 opposition contenders.
While CPDM lieutenants, deployed across the nation, have been weaving a narrative reminiscent of the “White Savior” trope in American films—where Black characters struggle until rescued by a white protagonist—President Biya is being marketed as the only one capable of saving Cameroon.
This portrayal aligns with a “dependency theory” worldview, sharply contrasting with the “liberation theology” espoused by the opposition. Although the CPDM campaign team has attempted to explain Biya’s conspicuous absence by emphasizing the collective nature of their governance, this justification collapses under the weight of the very narrative that presents Biya as the nation’s sole savior.
This strategy severely undermines the agency and resilience of Cameroonians, fostering a paternalistic approach to governance rather than a collaborative one. It also misrepresents the lived experiences of marginalized communities.
While opposition candidates have pushed back against the Biya savior narrative—one that has delivered little tangible progress over the past 43 years—their efforts are also lacking. Though many invoke Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed to critique Biya’s policies, they struggle to translate these critiques into actionable campaign agendas. Their emphasis on political liberation and social justice often lacks strategic clarity. Despite acknowledging the failures of the Biya administration—particularly in areas such as unemployment and underdevelopment—they have yet to offer concrete, realistic alternatives. Their messaging in the first week has largely consisted of broad generalizations.
For instance, SDF candidate Joshua Osih claims he can resolve the nine-year conflict in the Anglophone regions within 100 days. Yet, he provides little detail on how this would be achieved.
As previously noted, the two dominant campaign themes remain continuity and change. The 2025 Biya campaign echoes that of 2018, with the notable addition of a promise to create a new status for the parliamentary opposition and citizenry. On the other hand, opposition candidates call for systemic change—particularly through the reintroduction of federalism.
Unfortunately, with the exception of the SDF—whose historical foundation supports a federal structure—most candidates appear to only superficially grasp the concept. None has adequately explained when or why their party shifted from advocating decentralization to federalism. If federalism is to be a central campaign issue, then candidates must clearly articulate why it is necessary. Is it because of its historical precedent in the 1960s, or because decentralization, while effective in homogeneous societies, is ill-suited for a culturally and linguistically diverse country like Cameroon?
Back to the basics. Although the CPDM candidate is only now beginning to make his first campaign appearance, and although the 2025 campaign lacks the energy of 2018, the ruling party has been remarkably intentional in its strategy: retain power at Etoudi by any means necessary. So far, the CPDM has organized 10 regional mega rallies, over 340 council-level rallies, 58 divisional meetings, and numerous humanitarian or “meet-the-people” stopovers.
Apart from Issa Tchiroma Bakary—who has organized about 15 major rallies—Joshua Osih (10 rallies), Bello Bouba Maigari (7), and Cabral Libii (4), the remaining candidates have campaigned as if running for president were a leisurely affair. Many have relied on guerrilla-style, hit-and-run tactics, lacking consistent nationwide engagement.
On the issue of campaign financing, most opposition candidates appear to have been caught unprepared. Only the disqualified Maurice Kamto undertook a fundraiser of significant scope. In contrast, the CPDM has had a clear advantage: in addition to the nearly 1.5 billion FCFA raised by party officials across regions and divisions, contributions from the Central Committee and candidate Biya himself are estimated to bring the total to nearly 3 billion FCFA—about 375 FCFA per vote. In comparison, the combined campaign funds of the other 11 candidates likely do not exceed 3 billion FCFA. Considering that the total cost of the campaigns is expected to reach 6 billion FCFA, that represents approximately 750 FCFA per vote, based on Cameroon’s 8+ million registered voters.
Worse still, opposition candidates seem to be spending reactively and out-of-pocket. None appeared to anticipate the critical importance of logistics and finance in modern campaigning. Only Paul Biya seems to have factored aircraft rentals into his campaign plan.
Money has always played a decisive role in Cameroon’s elections, and all candidates have had seven years to prepare for this election cycle. The current lack of funding may explain the outdated campaign strategies still in use—rallies and hit-and-run operations—with no sign of more modern tactics such as direct mail campaigns or targeted phone outreach. Campaign paraphernalia is also in short supply; only the CPDM has produced sufficient literature and campaign fabric. The others have barely managed to display posters in key areas.
As the final week of campaigning intensifies, paid advertisements in newspapers and media outlets remain scarce. So far, only Paul Biya and Issa Tchiroma Bakary appear to be evenly matched in campaign visibility.
One trend is clear: in Cameroon, political campaign financing flows from the top and middle levels down to the grassroots—not the other way around. From the way most campaigns are being run, it seems many candidates are aware their chances are slim and are thus unwilling to spend on a race they believe they cannot win. Instead, they seem to be using the presidential campaign as a springboard for next year’s council and parliamentary elections.
Politics in the 21st century is a different beast from that of the 20th. Today, it’s big business—requiring a professional class of campaign experts, advertising and PR specialists, media planners, and consultants. Except for Paul Biya, most candidates have neglected these critical roles. Few have well-organized or clearly defined campaign teams.
It is to be hoped that, in the remaining days and hours, candidates will transform the vague promises in their manifestos into clear, campaignable issues. To capture voters’ attention, they must now translate abstract ideals into practical proposals—concrete plans upon which actual votes can be cast.
Colbert Gwain
