In a correspondence addressed to the President and members of the Council of the Cameroon Bar Association, Me Nlend denounces a decision limiting the sponsorship of candidates for the Lawyer Internship Aptitude Examination (EASA) 2026 session.
Tension is rising within the Cameroon Bar Association (OABC) following a press release published on February 13, 2026, by the President of the Bar. At issue: a resolution resulting from a meeting of the Bar Council, held the same day, relating to the application procedures for the Lawyer Internship Aptitude Examination (EASA), 2026 session.
Read more A new FSNC activist announces the imminent return of Issa Tchiroma Bakaray to Cameroon
In his letter of protest signed on February 24, 2026, Me Nlend, a lawyer and industrial property counsel based in Yaoundé, says he “takes note” of the press release, while expressing strong reservations, particularly on “point 3 relating to the limitation of sponsorship”.
The lawyer believes that the Bar Council exceeded the powers conferred upon it by Article 55 of Law No. 90/059 of December 19, 1990, organizing the legal profession in Cameroon. He also notes the absence of publication of the minutes of the deliberations, which he considers contrary to the provisions of Article 11 paragraph 3 of Decree No. 41/DPJ/SG/MJ of April 12, 2005, approving and publishing the internal regulations of the Bar.
According to him, the Council’s interpretation of the texts governing sponsorship constitutes an unjustified restriction of a right recognized for lawyers who meet the legal conditions.
Me Nlend also highlights an inconsistency that he considers worrying: the current list of interns reportedly shows that some firms, including those of members of the Bar Council, already have more than three, or even up to ten interns.
“Are we therefore in a Bar of favor where a few are entitled to certain privileges while others are deprived of their rights?”, he asks in his correspondence.
Read more Online casino and sports betting, two distinct gaming experiences
For the lawyer, limiting the number of sponsorships would amount to establishing inequality between colleagues, even though Article 9 of the aforementioned law defines the objective conditions allowing a lawyer to sponsor a candidate.
Acting “in his own name and on his own behalf”, Me Nlend makes two main requests:
The outright revision of the limitation on the right to sponsorship, in order to allow all lawyers meeting the legal conditions to sponsor in accordance with the texts in force;
The publication and communication of the minutes of the Bar Council session that led to the announced resolutions, in order to allow, if necessary, the exercise of legal remedies.
Pending a response from the President of the Bar, this challenge could open a broader debate on the internal governance of the Bar and the equality of lawyers regarding the rules governing access to the profession.
