Bénin political leaders urged to set aside bias against senate
Cotonou — During a high-level discussion on the rule of law and political transition in Africa held on August 6, 2026, former minister and lawmaker Lazare Maurice Sehouéto emphasized the importance of avoiding unfounded assumptions about the newly established Senate.
The gathering, organized by the Institute of Artisans for Justice and Peace (IAJP/Co), brought together political figures to explore the Senate’s role in strengthening democratic governance and ensuring smooth political transitions.
Senate as a pillar of democratic stability
Sehouéto, a prominent voice in Bénin’s political landscape, framed the Senate not as a source of division but as a stabilizing force designed to enhance institutional resilience. Addressing concerns raised by former parliamentarian Kamel Bio Sika Ouassagari regarding the chamber’s limited powers, he urged critics to focus on the legal framework rather than speculative fears.
“The Senate is not a threat but a safeguard,” he stated, adding that its creation aligns with democratic practices seen in other nations that adopted bicameral systems to address periods of institutional fragility.
Global precedents as a guide
To illustrate his point, Sehouéto cited two international models:
- France: The establishment of the Fifth Republic to curb instability in prior governments.
- Germany: Post-World War II reforms to reinforce constitutional protections against authoritarian overreach.
These examples, he argued, demonstrate how second chambers can serve as buffers against political turbulence when structured with clear mandates.
A call for fact-based discourse
Rejecting sensationalism, Sehouéto stressed that the Senate’s primary objectives are to foster national cohesion, stabilize political processes, and secure the country’s developmental trajectory. He urged political actors and civil society to engage in constructive dialogue grounded in facts, warning against premature judgments that could undermine the institution’s credibility.
“Let us discuss this institution with the rigor it deserves,” he concluded, “not through the lens of bias but through the clarity of the law.”
