Bandiagara mass killings: rights commission urges Mali state to uphold its sovereign duties
As central Mali descends ever deeper into an unrelenting spiral of violence, the public statement issued by the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) following the attacks on Ningari and Sarédina casts a harsh light on the structural weaknesses of the transitional government’s security approach.
The pattern has become tragically familiar: villages assaulted, unarmed civilians executed, homes torched, followed by the inevitable flood of official statements expressing outrage and sympathy. The latest atrocities in the Bandiagara area, specifically in Ningari and Sarédina, underscore a grim reality that official rhetoric tries hard to obscure: despite triumphant claims about the growing strength of the Malian armed forces (FAMa), the day-to-day protection of citizens remains a conspicuous failure.
The illusion of territorial control and the abandonment of civilians
The CNDH’s intervention, signed by its interim president, Aissata Founè Tembely, serves as a blunt reminder to the authorities in Bamako. By stressing that the security of people and property is the state’s “primary sovereign obligation,” the commission effectively exposes the administrative and military shortcomings on the ground.
In the Dogon country, the security vacuum left by the absence or ineffectiveness of continuous state deployments leaves residents at the mercy of armed terrorist groups. While the public discourse focuses on national sovereignty and managing the narrative, the fundamental social contract between the state and its citizens in the central region has been broken. Sovereignty cannot be measured by the firmness of speeches delivered in Bamako, but by the real capacity to safeguard the life of a farmer or trader in Ningari.
Institutionalised impunity and the rhetoric of inconclusive investigations
As with every tragedy, the CNDH calls for “independent and impartial” inquiries to bring those responsible to justice. But how credible are such appeals within a judicial system that remains largely paralysed in conflict zones?
The mounting toll of massacres, with no major trial to assign responsibility, fuels a corrosive sense of impunity. In the absence of concrete prosecutions, demands for investigations increasingly resemble a bureaucratic ritual designed to mask institutional emptiness. This justice system, which seems perpetually absent, erodes public trust in the state and inevitably pushes communities toward self-defence arrangements or opportunistic alliances, further fragmenting the social fabric.
The trap of a purely military approach and humanitarian law violations
By urging the FAMa to strictly adhere to international humanitarian law (IHL), the CNDH also highlights the dangers of a security strategy that relies exclusively on force and lacks safeguards. In their pursuit of terrorist groups, security forces and their auxiliaries are frequently accused by civil society of indiscriminate actions and abuses against local populations.
This approach, which prioritises body counts and media-friendly operations over the long-term security of communities, achieves the opposite of its intended effect. Every misstep or summary execution becomes a powerful recruiting tool for extremist groups. By reminding that counterterrorism efforts cannot disregard human rights, the CNDH warns: a military victory won at the expense of the law is merely an illusion that sows the seeds of future unrest.
The CNDH’s warning is unequivocal. If the transitional authorities continue to favour political posturing and security-related communication at the expense of genuine, impartial, and judicial protection for their citizens, Mali risks losing far more than territory—it risks forfeiting the very legitimacy of its state.
