Within the Central African Economic and Monetary Community (CEMAC), a new front is opening between two strategic entities. According to official sources, the Caisse des dépôts et consignations of Cameroon (CDEC) is contesting a regulatory project by the Central African Banking Commission (COBAC) aiming to classify regulated deposits and consignments as banking operations.
The Cameroonian public institution has declined to participate in the consultations opened by the community banking regulator. Behind this refusal lies a battle of competencies with major legal and economic implications.
Two regulatory projects are at stake. The first project focuses on governance, internal control, and prudential standards applicable to Deposit Funds in the CEMAC. The second concerns the treatment of inactive accounts and unclaimed assets.
The breaking point lies in the definition of “banking operations.” The text assimilates the reception, conservation, and management of consignments, regulated deposits, and unclaimed assets to these operations. It also includes granting credits, guarantees, and payment services.
For COBAC, this approach extends the community regulation of July 2025 regulating the activity of Deposit Funds. The stated objective is to harmonize governance and financial prudence rules within the community space.
On the contrary, CDEC sees it as a change in nature. In a letter dated June 15, 2026, its director general, Richard Evina Obam, accuses COBAC of excessively broadening the definition of banking operations.
According to CDEC, the 1992 banking convention signed in Douala does not classify consignments or unclaimed assets as banking operations. These activities would fall under a public service mission, not the traditional banking sector.
The central argument is based on the very status of Deposit Funds. They do not have ordinary banking approval, private shareholding, or capital comparable to that of a commercial bank. They are created to manage specific funds within a strict legal framework.
Assimilating these activities to banking operations would, according to CDEC, subject a sovereign public service to prudential standards designed for credit institutions. Banking supervision would therefore be legally and economically inappropriate.
However, the project foresees the application, “mutatis mutandis,” of banking prudential rules. Governance, solvency, liquidity, risk division, and prior authorizations would become the norm for Deposit Funds.
CDEC believes that this approach ignores the state guarantee covering its operations. In this logic, financial strength relies less on banking capital than on the continuity of public service.
Beyond the law, the issue is strategic. Deposit Funds are presented as instruments of economic sovereignty, capable of centralizing resources and financing long-term public policies.
The dispute is now brought before the Community Court of Justice of CEMAC, in Ndjamena. Appeals for annulment have been filed against the July 2025 regulations, with no decision known at this stage.
The outcome of this litigation could set a precedent. A victory for CDEC would weaken the legal basis of the COBAC system. A rejection, on the other hand, would strengthen the extension of banking supervision.
For CEMAC, the debate goes beyond the Cameroonian case. It questions the institutional model to apply to Deposit Funds.
