Senegal: why PASTEF’s constitutional reform is heading to a referendum

The constitutional amendment proposal approved by Senegal’s National Assembly on Monday, June 29 will ultimately be submitted to a referendum.

Justice Minister Moussa Sarr announced the decision before deputies, stating that President Bassirou Diomaye Faye had opted to use the procedure under Article 103 of the Constitution. “The president wanted to inform the president of the National Assembly that he has decided to submit the adopted text to a referendum,” Sarr said.

This reform, championed by the PASTEF-led majority, aims to comprehensively overhaul the country’s institutional architecture. It seeks to strengthen the role of Parliament, modify the distribution of powers between the president and the prime minister, and replace the Constitutional Council with a Constitutional Court.

The decision to hold a referendum comes as the text adopted by lawmakers triggers intense debate within Senegal’s political class. Supporters view it as a major step toward new institutional governance, while critics warn it could further destabilize the balance of powers.

The popular vote will allow Senegalese to directly decide on this reform, one of the flagship institutional transformation promises made by PASTEF during the 2024 presidential election.

Why a constitutional reform now?

Constitutional reform was a central pledge of the PASTEF project during the 2024 presidential election. It was meant to embody a break from the old political system, which its promoters accused of concentrating too much power in the hands of the head of state.

President Bassirou Diomaye Faye’s election in March 2024 raised hopes for swift institutional change. But the political landscape has since shifted: the president has distanced himself from the party leadership that brought him to power, even while formally remaining a PASTEF member.

This adds a particular dimension to the debate. The majority party now champions an institutional reform that directly affects the balance between different branches, even as political ties between the president and his former party have grown more complicated.

The reform, which does not create a new republic, is already generating lively discussion. Its proponents see it as necessary to modernize Senegal’s institutions and correct imbalances accumulated over decades. Its opponents, however, fear a transformation of the political system that could alter the equilibrium of powers.

What are the main reforms proposed in the new text?

One of the most significant changes is the replacement of the current Constitutional Council with a Constitutional Court endowed with broadened powers. The council, now composed of seven members (a president, a vice-president, and five judges), would expand to nine members, including seven judges. The term remains six years, non-renewable.

But the major shift lies in the court’s mandate. The new body would become “the highest jurisdiction” in three areas: constitutional, electoral, and referendum matters. It would also regulate the functioning of institutions.

New powers include oversight of administrative acts related to national elections, review of constitutional challenges raised before higher courts, and enhanced authority of its decisions, which would be binding on all natural and legal persons.

Another novelty: the prime minister would be able to directly petition the constitutional jurisdiction. Until now, only the president and one-tenth of deputies could do so.

For reform supporters, this evolution would strengthen the independence of constitutional justice. Critics, however, say the key issue remains the court’s composition and real guarantees of its autonomy.

A new balance between the president and the prime minister

The reform redefines the executive branch without abolishing the president’s central role. The current constitution states the president “determines the policy of the Nation.” The new version specifies the president determines it “in concertation with the prime minister.”

This introduces a logic of shared executive power. It does not strip the president of his sovereign role as head of state and keystone of institutions, but it adds a dimension of institutional cooperation.

The president retains a policy-setting function, but the conduct of government action could fall more to the prime minister. Another innovation: Article 57 would allow the prime minister to chair the Council of Ministers, but only under strict conditions—by express delegation from the president and with an agenda fixed by the head of state.

The reform also explicitly recognizes delegate ministers as part of the government. The text thus seeks to reduce the concentration of executive power around the presidency, but it does not transform Senegal into a parliamentary system. The president remains the central executive figure, but the stated goal is a better distribution of responsibilities.

A stronger separation between the presidency and political parties

Under the current system, the president can retain party responsibilities. The reform bans the head of state from leading a party or coalition. He would only be allowed an honorary role and could participate in an electoral campaign only when he himself is a candidate for reelection.

The text also broadens incompatibility rules: the president could hold no other public or private office, even unpaid. The stated aim is to reinforce the neutrality of the presidency and avoid confusion between the state and the party apparatus.

Supporters of the text view this as a guarantee of institutional impartiality, while opponents argue the rule could limit the political link between an elected president and the majority that brought him to power.

A strengthened Parliament in its oversight role

The constitutional reform enhances the powers of the National Assembly. Deputies would gain stronger oversight tools, including investigative commissions that can summon any relevant person, and a resolution power allowing Parliament to adopt policy texts.

The government would also be more accountable for managing natural resources, with an obligation to inform deputies about investment agreements in strategic sectors. The reform also prohibits holding both a ministerial position and a local mandate such as mayor or departmental council president.

Better regulating the transition between presidents

The reform creates a legal framework for the transition period between a presidential election and the new head of state’s inauguration. During this phase, the outgoing president would be limited in certain decisions that could bind the country over the long term.

Specifically, he could not conclude certain strategic contracts, sign certain international agreements, or launch major financial operations unless required for state continuity. The goal is to prevent an outgoing administration from making consequential decisions just before leaving office.

What does not change in the reform project

Despite the proposed transformations, the constitutional reform does not alter several foundations of Senegal’s political system. The president will continue to be elected by direct universal suffrage, with a term limited to two consecutive five-year periods.

The republican form of the state remains unchanged, as do the fundamental principles protected by Article 103 of the Constitution. The text does not mark the advent of a new republic; instead, it aims to reorganize institutional functioning and rebalance the relationships between powers without modifying the overall nature of the regime.