Senegal: the people’s mandate is incompatible with the IMF and World Bank’s prescriptions

On 22 May 2026, President Bassirou Diomaye Faye brought an end to a rather unprecedented form of cohabitation, as it was the first time such a situation had arisen in Senegal.

In essence, the Senegalese people had brought a ‘Diomaye-Sonko’ ticket to power.

It therefore seems appropriate to ask ourselves two simple questions:

Is the victory of this ticket compatible with maintaining a constitution (a strong presidential system), largely inspired by that of the current Fifth Republic in France? This type of top-down political management is in crisis across the world and causes a great deal of internal and external damage to people.

Is it appropriate to build, on the ruins of the old system defeated on 24 March 2024, another model of political and institutional organisation that is far more in line with the needs of the people, who brought a duo to power rather than a single individual, as a ‘Bonapartist’ constitution would require – that is to say, a strong president with the powers of a demigod?

Answering this two-part question means delving deeper to identify the roots of the issue at hand.

This split is the culmination of two years of mounting tensions, revealing two opposing political visions: that of the president, seen as more conciliatory, and that of Ousmane Sonko, which is more geared towards a radical break.

However, the immediate trigger raises questions: were the Prime Minister’s statements to MPs a few hours before his dismissal the straw that broke the camel’s back? In which he stated that the “President was wrong”, alluding to the way political funds are managed – a sort of slush fund where a certain lack of transparency has always been the norm.

Was this what precipitated the clash between the two? Before being sacked, Ousmane Sonko addressed MPs. “The President was wrong,” he said, before adding, “I hope he will come to his senses,” setting an ultimatum for his own leader regarding the adoption of a reform bill.

In our view, this aspect is certainly interesting from the perspective of the chronology of events, but we believe the crux of the matter lies elsewhere.

It is common knowledge that the World Bank-IMF system had suspended all disbursements and was pressing for debt restructuring, resulting in the implementation of an austerity programme – a harsh treatment whose secrets are known only to the sinister ‘experts’ of the IMF and the World Bank. Sonko rejected all of this.

An IMF recommendation calling for Sonko’s departure as a precondition for any resumption of relations with Senegal is, in our view, the starting point for any serious analysis that takes into account the legitimate aspirations of the Senegalese people.

The Pastef programme, on the basis of which the Diomaye-Sonko team was given a mandate by the people, is incompatible with the prescriptions of the IMF and World Bank. This constitutes the political basis for the rift between the two leaders. We might add that an oversized ego may be a factor accelerating the split between the duo at the top of the state.

This is, of course, also aided by the machinations of sectors of the ‘deep state’ in various forms, that is to say, all the upholders of the patronage system shaken up in March 2024; the conservative forces linked to the former corrupt system that contributed to the people’s impoverishment and precariousness.

The political phase that is now unfolding is unprecedented: Sonko and his party, who hold a majority in the National Assembly, find themselves in opposition to the president they brought to power.

In any case, the diverse group of citizens who rallied to dismantle a neo-colonial system in March 2024 remain the key driving force and decisive factor in the current political climate. It is on them that the deepening of the political and social course set in motion during the 2024 presidential elections depends.

We remain attentive to this majority of the people, for it is they, in their vibrant multitude and their joyful, creative diversity, who will be able to write the future pages and chapters of a meaningful journey, and we call with all our strength for this to be done under the banner of non-violence. ‘That meaning so often lost and so often found’ which opens up a radiant future, thus reconnecting with our forebears who, in various ways, left this country, Africa and the world a little better off.

The emergence of young people and women, of the people, is certain to happen. When? In what forms? Under what conditions? Let us hope that violence will be absent from this inevitable confrontation. For our own sake, for Africa and for people of good will.