by Chernor M. Jalloh
When General Mamady Doumbouya seized power in Guinea in 2021, he promised a swift return to civilian rule. Four years later, that promise has been replaced by a referendum that rewrites the rules in his favor. On September 21, 2025, Guineans were asked to vote on a new constitution. The official results claimed an 89 percent “yes” vote with turnout above 86 percent. But behind the numbers lies a process that looks less like democracy and more like democracy by decree. The new constitution extends the presidential term from five to seven years, creates a partly presidentially appointed Senate, and—most significantly—removes the ban that once barred junta members from running for office. With one stroke of the pen, Doumbouya has paved his way to the presidency under a legal framework of his own design.
A Hollow Victory
The referendum was hailed by the junta as a step toward constitutional order. Yet the context tells a different story. Opposition parties were suspended. Protests remained banned. Media outlets critical of the regime were silenced. Reports of pre-marked ballots and coercive tactics circulated on voting day. Human rights groups argue that Guinea’s civic space has shrunk drastically since the coup. In such an environment, can a near-unanimous “yes” vote be trusted? “Numbers alone do not confer legitimacy when the playing field is tilted so heavily.”
Why It Matters Beyond Guinea
For Sierra Leone, Liberia, and the wider West African region, what happens in Conakry cannot be dismissed as a domestic affair. Guinea sits at the heart of the Mano River basin, a zone with a fragile history of cross-border conflict. Instability in one state has a way of spilling into its neighbors. But there is also a broader, regional trend. Across West Africa, we are witnessing a worrying pattern: military rulers using referendums or constitutional revisions to launder coups into legitimacy. “Guinea’s constitutional shortcut risks normalizing coups dressed in democratic clothing.” Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger have all experimented with similar maneuvers. If Guinea’s constitutional gamble goes unchallenged, it risks setting a precedent that undermines democratic governance across the region. ECOWAS, once celebrated for defending democracy, now faces a credibility crisis. Its inconsistent responses to recent coups have already weakened its authority. Failing to respond meaningfully in Guinea would only accelerate that decline.
What Can Be Done?
There are three possible paths forward.
- Non-interference: Accept the referendum as Guinea’s sovereign decision and maintain relations. This may preserve trade and security ties but undermines ECOWAS’s democratic charter.
- Coercive pressure: Impose sanctions and isolate the junta. While this sends a strong message, sanctions in the region often harden military regimes rather than soften them.
- Conditional engagement: Recognize the political reality of the referendum but tie further cooperation to clear conditions: reinstating opposition parties, reopening the media space, and committing to credible elections within a fixed timeframe. This approach balances principle with pragmatism.
The Case for Conditional Engagement
Of these options, conditional engagement is the most sensible. Guinea cannot be bullied back into democracy, but nor should its slide into authoritarianism be ignored. A calibrated approach—firm yet constructive—offers the best chance to influence outcomes without destabilizing the country further.
Sierra Leone, with its own history of conflict and recovery, has a special role to play. It should press for an ECOWAS-led mediation that pushes Doumbouya to:
- Lift restrictions on political parties and civil society.
Without functioning parties and civic organizations, there can be no credible competition or citizen representation in the electoral process. - Guarantee freedom of assembly and media.
Public debate and independent reporting are essential safeguards for transparency and accountability, ensuring that elections reflect genuine choice. - Commit to elections in December 2025 under international observation.
A clear, time-bound roadmap—monitored by regional and international observers—would anchor the transition and reassure both citizens and partners. - Release all political prisoners.
Releasing those detained for political reasons is a necessary step toward national reconciliation, restoring public trust, and reducing the risk of renewed unrest.
These are not maximalist demands. They are minimum steps to restore legitimacy and avoid regional fallout.
The Bigger Picture
Guinea’s referendum is not simply about a seven-year term or a presidentially appointed Senate. It is about whether West Africa allows constitutional manipulation to become the new normal. It is about whether citizens across the region will have the chance to choose their leaders freely, or whether leaders will continue to choose the rules that keep them in power. History teaches us that imposed legitimacy rarely lasts. Constitutions crafted to serve incumbents often unravel in the face of public discontent. The Guinean people have shown resilience before, and they may yet again. But regional leadership is needed now to ensure that Guinea’s gamble does not destabilize the entire Mano River basin.
Conclusion
ECOWAS must choose: reclaim its role as defender of democracy—or fade into irrelevance. Sierra Leone, as a neighbor and stakeholder in regional peace, should lead the call for conditional engagement. Guinea’s referendum may be over, but the struggle for genuine constitutional order is not. The region cannot afford to look away.
Copyright –Published in Expo Times News on Friday, 26th September, 2025 (ExpoTimes News – Expo Media Group (expomediasl.com)
