The public broadcaster RTS 1 has once again sparked controversy by choosing not to air live the plenary session on the constitutional revision bill currently under review in the National Assembly. The decision, which came to light on June 29, 2026, has reignited debates about media bias and transparency in Senegal’s public institutions.
The absence of live coverage of the parliamentary debate on proposal no. 17/2026 has drawn immediate criticism from citizens and political observers alike. While the session was widely expected to be broadcast, the channel’s decision to withhold it has fueled speculation about editorial motives and the treatment of certain political figures in national media.
Public reaction and social media uproar
Within minutes of the parliamentary proceedings beginning, social media platforms erupted with reactions. On X (formerly Twitter), users expressed a mix of frustration, confusion, and outright disapproval. The hashtag #RTS1Censure quickly trended as netizens questioned the channel’s decision to exclude a major political event from its programming.
Some commentators described the move as a deliberate attempt to silence dissenting voices, particularly those aligned with opposition leader Ousmane Sonko. Others framed it as part of a broader pattern of selective coverage by the public broadcaster, which has faced repeated accusations of favoring certain political narratives over others.
The channel’s decision not to broadcast the session—despite it being a constitutionally significant debate—has been met with accusations of undermining democratic transparency. Critics argue that public television, as a state-funded institution, has a responsibility to provide impartial coverage of legislative proceedings, regardless of the political affiliations involved.
Ongoing tensions in Senegal’s media landscape
This is not the first time RTS 1’s editorial choices have come under scrutiny. Past instances of excluded political figures and selective reporting have already strained public trust in the broadcaster. The latest incident has only deepened concerns about the channel’s role in shaping public perception of key national debates.
While some supporters of the government defend the decision as a matter of editorial discretion, opponents see it as further evidence of a troubling erosion of press freedom in Senegal. The controversy comes at a time when media independence and the role of public broadcasters are increasingly under the microscope across the country.
