Sénégal: why the constitutional reform proposal led by the PASTEF will be put to a referendum

Photo credit, ASSEMBLEE NATIONALE SENEGAL

The constitutional reform bill approved by the Senegalese National Assembly on June 29 will be submitted to a referendum, as announced by Justice Minister Moussa Sarr. The decision follows President Bassirou Diomaye Faye’s invocation of Article 103 of the Constitution, which allows direct consultation of the people on major institutional changes.

The reform, championed by the PASTEF-led majority, seeks to overhaul the country’s institutional framework. Key objectives include strengthening the Parliament’s role, redefining the balance of power between the presidency and the Prime Minister, and replacing the Constitutional Council with a new Constitutional Court.

The referendum route was chosen amid intense political debate. While supporters view the reform as a historic step toward modernizing governance, critics warn it could disrupt the delicate balance of powers in Senegal’s democracy.

Photo credit, AFP via Getty Images

Why now for a constitutional reform?

The reform was a cornerstone of PASTEF’s 2024 presidential campaign, promising to break away from a political system accused of concentrating excessive power in the hands of the presidency. Since his election, President Faye has distanced himself from his former party, adding complexity to the political landscape.

Proponents argue the reform is essential to modernize Senegal’s institutions and correct decades of power imbalances. Opponents, however, express concerns that the changes could destabilize the political equilibrium.

Key reforms in the proposed text

The creation of a Constitutional Court

The reform replaces the existing Constitutional Council with a new Constitutional Court, expanding its jurisdiction. The Council currently comprises seven members, but the new Court would include nine, with seven judges serving non-renewable six-year terms.

The Court’s authority would extend to constitutional, electoral, and referendum oversight, with the power to regulate institutional functioning. It would also have jurisdiction over administrative acts related to national elections and the review of constitutional challenges raised in higher courts. Decisions by the Court would be binding on all individuals and entities.

A significant innovation is granting the Prime Minister the right to directly refer matters to the Constitutional Court—a power previously reserved for the President and a tenth of lawmakers.

A redefined executive balance

The reform redefines the executive branch without eliminating the President’s central role. While the President will still set national policy, this will now be done “in consultation with the Prime Minister.” This introduces a cooperative logic, though the President retains their role as head of state.

The Prime Minister could preside over Council of Ministers meetings, but only under explicit delegation from the President and with a predefined agenda. The reform also formally recognizes the role of junior ministers in the government.

Strengthening the separation between the presidency and political parties

The reform prohibits the President from holding leadership roles in political parties or coalitions. They may only hold honorary positions and can only participate in election campaigns if running for re-election. The President would also be barred from holding any other public or private positions, paid or unpaid.

Supporters see this as a safeguard for institutional impartiality, while critics argue it could weaken the President’s political ties with their supporting majority.

A stronger Parliament

The reform enhances the National Assembly’s oversight powers, including expanded investigative commissions and the ability to adopt policy resolutions. The government will also be required to provide greater transparency on the management of natural resources and strategic investment agreements.

Additionally, the reform bans the accumulation of ministerial positions with local mandates, such as mayor or departmental council president.

Regulating presidential transitions

Photo credit, Getty Images

The reform introduces legal safeguards during the transition period between presidential elections and the swearing-in of a new President. The outgoing President would be restricted from making binding decisions that could have long-term consequences, such as signing major international agreements or initiating large financial operations, unless necessary for state continuity.

This measure aims to prevent outgoing leaders from making irreversible decisions just before leaving office.

What remains unchanged?

The reform maintains several fundamental aspects of Senegal’s political system. The President will continue to be elected by universal suffrage for two consecutive five-year terms, and the republican form of the state remains intact. The Constitution’s Article 103 principles are also preserved, meaning the reform does not mark the advent of a new Republic but rather a reorganization of institutional dynamics.