Gambiaj.com – (BAMAKO) – In Mali, the Constitutional Court’s recent judgment on the end of the transition period has sparked controversy. The ruling, issued on Thursday, April 25, was published in the Official Journal on the 26th and revealed to the general public on Saturday.

The judgment comes after a request made on March 28 by organizations of magistrates and prosecutors, as well as a Malian political association, regarding the end of the transition period, which officially concluded on March 26. The Constitutional Court took a month to respond and ultimately declared the requests “inadmissible.”

Disputed status and the Court’s limited response

The Court first questioned the status of magistrate Cheik Mohamed Cherif Kone, who referred the matter to the Court as president of the Reference Union of Magistrates (Refsyma) and the Malian Association of Prosecutors and Prosecutors (AMPP). Kone was dismissed from the bench last August, a disbarment he considers “political” and has contested, stating that he filed a suspensive appeal before the Supreme Court.

The Court further argued that the organizations of magistrates and prosecutors, along with the political association Mouvement Reconstruction-Baara nor yiriwa, lacked the “qualification to seize the Court to have the vacancy of the presidency of the Transition declared.” According to the Court, such a request should come from the President of the National Transitional Council (CNT) or the Prime Minister.

However, the applicants dispute this, stating that their referral aimed to establish a general legal and institutional void created by the end of the transition period, leading to the “absence of mandate” of all the bodies of the Transition. They accuse the Court of distorting their request “on purpose” to favor the current military leaders.

Political Activities Suspension

In a separate judgment, the Constitutional Court declared itself “incompetent” regarding the suspension of political activities of parties and associations in Mali. The Court stated that such a request falls within the competence of the administrative section of the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court was seized last week on the contested suspension of political activities by organizations signatories of the declaration of March 31, which brings together almost all of Mali’s political parties and associations. Mali now awaits the decision of the Supreme Court on this matter.

Expert Analysis

Oumar Berté, a Malian lawyer and political scientist, believes that the Constitutional Court missed an opportunity to mark its independence and meet the expectations of Malians. Berté argues that the Court should have ruled on the decree setting the transition at 24 months from March 26, 2022, to establish its credibility in the eyes of Malian citizens.

According to the Malian attorney and political scientist, the Constitutional Court “carefully avoided” making a decision regarding the implications of the presidential decree that Colonel Assimi Goita signed in June 2022 regarding the length of the transition period, despite the fact that it was nonetheless seized. Instead, it purposefully limited its ruling to the case of the presidential vacancy.

“It was a very good opportunity that the Court had to gain the people’s trust and establish its credibility in the eyes of Malian citizens,” Oumar Berté stated. The order that established the transition period at 24 months starting on March 26, 2022, should have been decided by the court. And it appears that I’m not alone! A lot of Malians would have enjoyed hearing the Court’s legal analysis, which it unfortunately did not have the courage to do. »