Politics often shapes and reshapes alliances. Yesterday’s companions can become today’s adversaries, particularly when positions of power, their inherent prerogatives, and the ambitions they ignite challenge established trust. The evolving relationship between President Bassirou Diomaye Faye and his former Prime Minister, Ousmane Sonko, appears to follow this familiar pattern. After enduring significant trials together, both men now find themselves in a complex arrangement where every action is scrutinized, every statement interpreted, and every decision seems to play out against the backdrop of a potential power struggle.

Against this charged political backdrop, the convocation of an extraordinary session of the National Assembly by the Pastef-aligned parliamentary majority represents a significant move. This formidable political force’s engagement with the executive raises an unavoidable and crucial question: what are the limits of parliamentary influence when it seeks to assert its will over the President of the Republic’s strategic choices?

The delicate balance of legality versus legitimacy

Herein lies the core of the current unease. The boundary between legal authority and legitimate power can become perilously narrow. While a parliamentary majority may be perfectly within its legal rights to exercise its prerogatives, the lawful application of power must never jeopardize institutional stability.

Even less should it lead to the country being plunged into a sustained state of institutional confrontation. Senegal does not require another high-level power struggle. Instead, it needs stability, clarity, and robust institutions capable of enduring beyond personal disputes.

Indeed, behind the unfolding Faye-Sonko narrative, the very foundation of the Republic is at stake. The most concerning outcome would be for political competition to ultimately overshadow the national interest.

President Bassirou Diomaye Faye was elected by universal suffrage for a five-year term. He still has three years remaining to fulfill the mandate entrusted to him by the Senegalese people. This democratic reality should impose a simple principle on all, both the majority and the opposition: it is permissible to challenge, criticize, oversee, and even oppose, but not to transform national institutions into battlegrounds.

Avoiding the risks of a perpetual political crisis

The events of today must therefore be viewed with gravity. It is not merely about who will emerge victorious in this latest test of wills. More critically, it is about preventing Senegal from descending into a permanent political crisis, where each institution attempts to gain supremacy over the others.

Political friendships may fade, alliances may dissolve, and ambitions may clash. Yet, the Republic must stand firm. This underscores why the urgent priority might no longer be finding an understanding between two men, but rather safeguarding the Republic from divergent internal conflicts.

Diomaye and Sonko may pursue distinct political paths. They might even engage in a power struggle. However, their disagreements must never become those of the state itself, nor should they undermine the remaining three years of the elected President’s mandate.

Senegal deserves more than another episode in the graveyard of political friendships. It deserves legality to serve popular legitimacy, and for its institutions to remain more resilient than the individuals who temporarily lead them.