Self-custodial wallet / non-custodial software in Cameroon
Publisher of software where users hold their own private keys. The publisher never holds, controls, or has access to user funds.
Self-custodial wallet is conditionally permitted in Cameroon with a local entity, subject to AML obligations and high licensing burden.
Verdict Details
- Permitted
- conditional
- Local entity required
- Yes
- Licensing burden
- High
- Last updated
- 2026-07-13
AML Obligations
- CEMAC Regulation No. 02/CEMAC/UMAC/CM/22 defines 'virtual asset service providers' broadly and may capture software publishers distributing non-custodial wallets if they are deemed to facilitate exchange/transfer of virtual assets (cm.aml.cemac-regulation-no-02cemacumaccm22-on)
- If classified as a VASP: Customer identification and verification using independent reliable sources before establishing a business relationship or above EUR 1,000 threshold (cm.aml.identification-and-verification-of-customers, cm.aml.verifying-identity-before-establishing-a)
- If classified as a VASP: Beneficial ownership identification (25% ownership threshold or effective control) (cm.aml.identification-of-beneficial-owners, cm.aml.identifying-the-natural-persons-who)
- If classified as a VASP: Continuous transaction monitoring and relationship monitoring (cm.aml.continuously-monitoring-business-relationships-and)
- If classified as a VASP: Suspicious transaction reporting to ANIF (Cameroon's FIU) 'without delay' regardless of amount (cm.aml.reporting-obligation-vasps-must-report, cm.aml.reporting-body-reports-must-be, cm.aml.timing-reports-must-be-submitted)
- If classified as a VASP: Enhanced Due Diligence for PEPs, high-risk countries, complex transactions, and non-face-to-face customers (cm.aml.applying-edd-measures-for-high-risk, cm.aml.politically-exposed-persons-peps-and, cm.aml.complex-unusually-large-transactions-or, cm.aml.business-relationships-with-non-face-to-face-customers)
- General AML law (Law No. 2016/007) requires obliged entities to register and comply; unclear if self-custodial wallet publishers are 'obliged entities' absent custody (cm.licensing.cameroon-has-a-general-law, cm.aml.law-no-2016007-of-july)
Key Restrictions
- BEAC communiqué (December 2021 / May 2022) imposes a CEMAC-wide ban on crypto-asset activities, making any crypto-related operations illegal at the central-bank level (cm.enforcement.the-cemac-wide-ban-on-crypto-assets-by-beac, cm.enforcement.outcome-established-a-clear-and)
- However, the ban appears no longer broadly enforced, as evidenced by significant crypto adoption in Cameroon as of 2023 (cm.enforcement.violation-type-establishment-of-a)
- No VASP licensing or registration framework exists in Cameroon — entities face a 'lack of legal recognition' and significant banking hurdles (cm.licensing.neither-a-specific-registration-nor, cm.licensing.entities-seeking-to-operate-in)
- Financial institutions are prohibited from holding or facilitating virtual assets, making banking services for crypto operations effectively inaccessible (cm.licensing.custody-providers-similar-to-exchanges)
- A local corporate entity and physical presence would likely be required if any future license regime is established (cm.licensing.local-presence-for-most-regulated)
Key Risks
- Legal uncertainty: The BEAC ban on crypto activities is technically in force but not consistently enforced, creating a gray-zone operating environment where enforcement could be applied selectively (cm.enforcement.violation-type-establishment-of-a)
- No VASP licensing pathway means any crypto business operates outside the legal framework — no legal recognition, no banking access, and risk of being deemed an illegal financial operation (cm.licensing.neither-a-specific-registration-nor, cm.licensing.entities-seeking-to-operate-in)
- Enforcement precedent: The Global Investment Trading (GIT) Ponzi scheme case shows aggressive enforcement against unregistered financial/crypto operations, including arrests and asset seizures (cm.enforcement.entity-targeted-global-investment-trading, cm.enforcement.arrests-and-detention-of-the)
- Self-custodial wallet publishers may not be clearly classified as VASPs under CEMAC Regulation No. 02/CEMAC/UMAC/CM/22 since they do not hold or control assets — but the definition is untested in local law, creating classification risk
- Banking access risk: No licensed bank in Cameroon can facilitate crypto-related accounts, making fiat on/off ramps and operational banking effectively impossible (cm.licensing.custody-providers-similar-to-exchanges, cm.licensing.payment-processors-payment-processors-dealing)
Evidence
This verdict synthesizes the following facts. Each fact links to its primary source(s).
A VASP/PSAN authorisation regime does exist and covers Cameroon, at CEMAC level. (i) The COSUMAF Reglement general du 23 mai 2023 (in force 24 May 2023) creates the prestataire de services sur actifs numeriques status, defines jetons numeriques functionally (art. 336: 'tout bien incorporel representant, sous forme numerique, un ou plusieurs droits'), reserves digital-token placement to PSAN, and requires COSUMAF agrement for buying/selling digital assets against legal currency, third-party custody, operating a trading platform, order reception/transmission, portfolio management, advice and placement. (ii) Reglement n° 02/24/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 20 decembre 2024 defines 'actifs virtuels' and 'prestataires de services d'actifs virtuels', makes them assujettis, and at art. 42(1) provides that no one may carry on VASP activity professionally without prior approval or authorisation from the competent authority (art. 39: 10-year record retention; art. 42(5)(a): originator/beneficiary travel-rule information). The record's practical conclusion is nevertheless close to reality: no implementing instructions have been published, no PSAN agrement is publicly known, and COBAC D-2022/071 continues to prohibit supervised institutions from any crypto dealing. The accurate framing is 'a regime exists in law but is not operational', not 'no regime exists'.
Entities seeking to operate in the crypto space would likely face a lack of legal recognition and significant operational hurdles, particularly concerning banking relationships.
Second half is correct: COBAC-supervised institutions (banks, microfinance, payment institutions, bureaux de change) are prohibited by Decision COBAC D-2022/071 from holding, exchanging or converting crypto-assets, so regulated-sector custody is indeed impossible. First half is wrong as of 2026: 'conservation d'actifs numeriques pour le compte de tiers' is an enumerated PSAN service under the COSUMAF Reglement general du 23 mai 2023 and requires COSUMAF agrement, and the CEMAC VASP definition in Reglement n° 02/24/CEMAC/UMAC/CM expressly covers safekeeping of virtual assets.
Substantially right, with the issuer mis-stated. Payment services and e-money in CEMAC are governed by Reglement n° 04/18/CEMAC/UMAC/COBAC du 21 decembre 2018 relatif aux services de paiement dans la CEMAC (with COBAC prudential norms, e.g. Reglement COBAC R-2019/02 for etablissements de paiement); the licensing/prudential authority is COBAC, not BEAC alone. Etablissements de paiement are among the assujettis covered by COBAC D-2022/071 and so may not handle crypto-assets, and there is indeed no crypto-specific payment licence at the COBAC layer.
Local Presence: For most regulated financial activities in Cameroon, a local corporate entity and physical presence are mandatory. This would likely extend to any future crypto licensing.
Loi n° 2016/007 du 12 juillet 2016 is Cameroon's PENAL CODE (portant Code Pénal), not an AML/CFT law. Cameroon has no free-standing 2016 AML statute: AML/CFT in Cameroon is governed by the directly applicable CEMAC instrument — Règlement n° 02/24/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 20 décembre 2024 (signed at Libreville), which revises Règlement n° 01/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 11 avril 2016. The national layer consists of implementing acts, principally Décret n° 2005/187 du 31 mai 2005 creating ANIF.
Evidence fact cm.licensing.beac-communiqu-on-cryptocurrencies-december not found (may have been renamed).
The substantive claim is right but the instrument identity is wrong. There is no "Regulation No. 02/CEMAC/UMAC/CM/22" and no 2022 CEMAC AML regulation. The instrument is Reglement n° 02/24/CEMAC/UMAC/CM, signed at Libreville on 20 December 2024 (CEMAC/UMAC Ministerial Committee, extraordinary session), effective on signature and abrogating all contrary provisions of Reglement n° 01/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 11 avril 2016. It does define virtual assets - art. 2(72): "Digital representation of a value that can be digitally traded, transferred or used for payment or investment purposes... does not include digital representations of fiat currencies, securities and other financial assets already covered by specific regulatory provisions" - and defines prestataires de services d'actifs virtuels; art. 6(e) lists "virtual or digital asset service providers" among the assujettis, so VASPs carry the same AML/CFT obligations as financial institutions. It is a FATF-aligned revision (approved by GABAC Plenary Resolution No. 10 of 28 September 2024). The 2022 CEMAC instrument that touches digital assets is a different one: Reglement n° 01/22/CEMAC/UMAC/CM/COSUMAF du 21 juillet 2022 on the regional financial market.
Loi n° 2016/007 du 12 juillet 2016 is Cameroon's Code Penal, not an AML/CFT law, and it did not create ANIF. Cameroon has no standalone national AML/CFT statute: the framework is the directly applicable CEMAC regulation - today Reglement n° 02/24/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 20 decembre 2024, previously Reglement n° 01/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 11 avril 2016 and before that Reglement n° 01/03-CEMAC-UMAC-CM du 4 avril 2003 - supplemented for supervised financial institutions by Reglement COBAC R-2023/01 on LBC/FT diligences (in force 1 July 2024). ANIF was created by Decret n° 2005/187 du 31 mai 2005 (organisation and functioning of the Agence Nationale d'Investigation Financiere), operational since January 2006 and attached to the Ministere des Finances; its regional legal basis is art. 25 of Reglement n° 01/03-CEMAC-UMAC-CM, which instituted an ANIF in every Central African state.
Evidence fact cm.aml.identification-and-verification-of-customers not found (may have been renamed).
Verifying identity before establishing a business relationship or conducting transactions above a certain threshold (often EUR 1,000 or equivalent).
Evidence fact cm.aml.identification-of-beneficial-owners not found (may have been renamed).
Identifying the natural person(s) who ultimately own or control the customer (typically 25% ownership or more, or effective control).
Continuously monitoring business relationships and transactions to ensure they are consistent with the VASP's knowledge of the customer, their business, and their risk profile, including, where necessary, the source of funds.
Reporting Obligation: VASPs must report any transaction (or attempted transaction) that they suspect, or have reasonable grounds to suspect, is related to money laundering or terrorist financing, regardless of the amount.
Reporting Body: Reports must be made to the Agence Nationale d'Investigation Financière (ANIF), Cameroon's FIU.
Timing: Reports must be submitted "without delay" once suspicion is formed.
Evidence fact cm.aml.applying-edd-measures-for-high-risk not found (may have been renamed).
Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs) and their family members/close associates.
Complex, unusually large transactions, or unusual patterns of transactions that have no apparent economic or lawful purpose.
Business relationships with non-face-to-face customers (where additional risk factors are present).
Evidence fact cm.enforcement.the-cemac-wide-ban-on-crypto-assets-by-beac not found (may have been renamed).
Aucune prohibition générale des activités liées aux crypto-actifs n'a été établie en zone CEMAC. L'exploitation d'une plateforme d'échange n'est pas 'hautement illégale' : elle constitue au contraire un service sur actifs numériques soumis à l'agrément de la COSUMAF depuis le Règlement n° 01/22/CEMAC/UMAC/CM du 21 juillet 2022 et le Règlement Général COSUMAF du 23 mai 2023. Le minage n'est visé par aucun texte CEMAC. Seuls les établissements assujettis à la COBAC sont soumis à une interdiction, en vertu de la Décision COBAC D-2022/071.
Il est exact qu'aucune interdiction générale des crypto-actifs n'est appliquée au Cameroun — mais parce qu'aucune n'a jamais été édictée, et non parce qu'une interdiction antérieure serait tombée en désuétude. La Décision COBAC D-2022/071 du 6 mai 2022 ne visait que les établissements assujettis à la COBAC et reste en vigueur pour eux ; l'usage des cryptoactifs par le public n'a jamais été prohibé, le gouverneur de la BEAC s'étant borné à déconseiller l'investissement (nov. 2022).
Le fondateur de Global Investment Trading (GIT), promoteur de la plateforme Liyeplimal, est Émile Parfait SIMB — et non 'Emile Parfait Mbori', qui n'existe pas. Le jeton était le Limo / Limo dollar (commercialisé aussi sous le nom LimoCoin) — et non un 'Mofor Coin'. Les faits reprochés sont l'escroquerie et la collecte illégale de fonds : le MINFI avait mis en demeure GIT, parmi 17 entités, de cesser ses collectes illégales de fonds (communiqué d'octobre 2020) et la COSUMAF avait publié des mises en garde en octobre 2020 et juin 2021 pour exercice sans agrément.
Émile Parfait Simb a été interpellé le 26 mai 2022 à l'aéroport de Douala sur mandat du parquet de Yaoundé, puis remis en liberté sous caution le 28 mai 2022 ; il a ensuite quitté le Cameroun pour la République centrafricaine. Il n'y a pas eu de détention prolongée au Cameroun. L'arrestation de 'complices' au Cameroun n'est étayée par aucune source vérifiée.
Verdict Attribution
- Source:
- AI-Generated · Unreviewed
- AI synthesized:
- 2026-07-13 (deepseek-chat)
- Last updated:
- 2026-07-13
- Confidence:
- low
This verdict was produced by an AI model from the underlying facts. Confirm with counsel before relying on it for material decisions.
Conditional — self-custodial wallet software publishing in Cameroon operates in a legally ambiguous environment: technically subject to a CEMAC-wide ban on crypto activities (not consistently enforced), with no VASP licensing framework available, unclear classification under AML rules since no custody is involved, and severe banking-access barriers, but a non-custodial software publisher that does not handle user funds may avoid VASP classification if the definition is narrowly interpreted.
Questions this verdict aims to answer
- Does software publishing trigger VASP / MSB classification?
- Do AML obligations attach when no custody exists?
- What disclosure or consumer-protection rules apply?