Union for Change” or Union for Confusion? Tchiroma’s “Consensus” Candidacy Falls Apart

The designation of Issa Tchiroma Bakary as “consensus candidate” for the 2025 presidential election unfolded in Yaoundé last Saturday with all the trappings of ceremony but little of the substance. Organized by the new Union for Change platform, the proclamation was intended to project unity among opposition forces. Instead, it has underscored just how divided Cameroon’s opposition remains in the run-up to the October 12 vote.

An empty hall of allies

The Union for Change was launched barely a week ago by Djeukam Tchameni and Anicet Ekane, with the stated aim of rallying fragmented opposition parties around a transitional agenda. That agenda promised a five-year mandate, constitutional reforms, and even a government of national unity.

But in practice, the Yaoundé event revealed a lonely scene. Only Tchiroma’s FSNC party was present. The rest of the field — from the UNDP of Bello Bouba Maïgari, to Serge Espoir Matomba’s PURS, Pierre Kwemo’s UMS, Jean-Michel Nintcheu’s APC, and the MRC — chose to stay away. Even Cyril Sam Mbaka, once part of the Douala grouping behind this initiative, was absent. Without them, the “consensus” label rang hollow.

Tchiroma’s political baggage

For Cameroonians, Issa Tchiroma is a familiar figure. A veteran politician and communications minister in previous governments, he has long been known for his combative defense of ruling elites in public debates. His sudden reinvention as a candidate for national unity has therefore been met with widespread skepticism.

Critics argue that Tchiroma lacks the credibility to carry an opposition flag, given his history of proximity to power. Rather than uniting a fractured movement, his candidacy risks alienating key players who see the move as opportunistic.

Opposition hopes dashed

For months, many citizens had been anticipating a broad-based coalition to challenge the CPDM in October. The logic was clear: only a united opposition candidate could stand a chance of breaking through the dominance of the ruling party’s machinery. But the proclamation of Tchiroma, absent any broad negotiation or participation from other parties, has dashed those hopes.

Instead of building trust, the move has reinforced suspicion among opposition ranks. Leaders who already mistrust one another see this initiative as another ploy to secure visibility rather than a serious plan to wrest power.

The illusion of unity

The optics of the event said it all. Organizers spoke of “consensus,” but the seats around them were empty of the heavyweights who might have lent legitimacy to the project. Observers quickly pointed out the contradiction: consensus requires inclusion, yet this process excluded most of the opposition.

Some analysts suggest the Union for Change was launched too hastily, without the groundwork of dialogue and compromise needed to convince wary leaders. Announcing a candidate without genuine buy-in from peers has only made the fragmentation more visible.

A message to voters

For voters already disillusioned with politics, Saturday’s ceremony risked reinforcing cynicism. Instead of the long-awaited coalition, they saw another splinter group advancing its own candidate. Instead of the language of inclusion, they heard speeches that glossed over the glaring absence of the main opposition forces.

In a country where citizens have endured decades of political stagnation, this spectacle failed to inspire hope. If anything, it reinforced the view that opposition leaders are more interested in positioning themselves than in building the alliances needed for real change.

Conclusion

Issa Tchiroma’s nomination as “consensus candidate” was meant to mark a turning point in Cameroon’s opposition politics. Instead, it has highlighted the chronic divisions and mistrust that continue to plague the opposition. With the presidential election only weeks away, the move looks less like a unifying breakthrough and more like another episode in the long saga of disunity.

For Cameroonians longing for a credible alternative, the Yaoundé proclamation offered little more than déjà vu: grand words without collective will.