Right of reply: Sani Mouhamadou denies citing Maxime Eko Eko in statement about state institutions

Cameroon-based legal practitioner Sani Mouhamadou has issued a formal response through his attorney, Me Mélissa Nyoth, categorically denying claims made in a recent press release attributed to his professional network.

Timeline of events and conflicting claims

The dispute began when a press statement dated August 9 alleged that Sani Mouhamadou had referenced the Direction Générale de la Recherche Extérieure (DGRE) as one of several Cameroonian state bodies that had “engaged his services” in 2020. The statement, signed by attorneys representing Léopold Maxime Eko Eko, not only refuted this claim but also accused Mouhamadou of lacking verifiable credentials and technical proposals.

In response, Mouhamadou’s legal team has now released a detailed rebuttal, asserting that no mention of Maxime Eko Eko was made in the original communication—believed to have been published to clarify misinformation circulating in videos released on July 24 and 25, 2026.

Evidence of initial contact presented

Central to Mouhamadou’s defense is a documented exchange from February 1, 2020, at 7:09 AM, in which Maxime Eko Eko allegedly reached out directly via messaging with the words: ‘I urgently need your help’. This, according to the rebuttal, establishes that the initiative came from Eko Eko himself, not the other way around.

The response also emphasizes Mouhamadou’s certified expertise through the Institut des Hautes Études de Défense Nationale, challenging the assertion that he failed to substantiate his professional qualifications.

Call for retraction and legal recourse

In a stern warning, the rebuttal demands the immediate withdrawal of the August 9 communiqué within 48 hours, warning that failure to comply will result in the presentation of supporting evidence and the initiation of defamation proceedings. The document, signed by Me Mélissa Nyoth of the Cameroon Bar Association (Barreau du Cameroun), underscores Mouhamadou’s commitment to protecting his professional reputation against unfounded allegations.

The situation now hinges on whether the parties can resolve the dispute amicably or if legal escalation will follow.