Senegal: adoption of the dual asset declaration for high-ranking state officials

The National Assembly of Senegal approved the reform proposed by the parliamentary group Pastef by a large majority. This reform complements the existing system, which already provides for a declaration of assets at the beginning of the mandates of the main public authorities.

A government amendment expanded the initial scope of the text. The second declaration will now involve the head of state, the Prime Minister, and the President of the National Assembly. According to the adopted text, these declarations will be made public by the Constitutional Council.

The reform is presented by its proponents as a tool aimed at enhancing the transparency of public management and monitoring the evolution of the assets of the highest state officials. These principles are among the commitments made by Bassirou Diomaye Faye and Ousmane Sonko when they were still part of the same political tandem.

A reform already censured by the Constitutional Council

The vote comes after an initial legal setback. In early July, the Constitutional Council, petitioned by the President of the Republic, censured a previous constitutional revision that included a provision on the declaration of assets.

The Pastef deputy Amadou Ba, who initiated the proposal, now demands that the text be promulgated without a new appeal. The majority parliamentarians wish for a promulgation before the end of August.

However, the adoption of the reform occurs in a context of tensions between the main figures in power. The opposition argues that the constitutional modification could serve as leverage in the political disputes involving Ousmane Sonko, the President of the National Assembly, and President Bassirou Diomaye Faye.

The independent deputy Thierno Alassane Sall notably denounced an approach he considers political. According to him, the proposal aims to create difficulties for the head of state rather than solely addressing an objective of institutional transparency. These accusations fall under the interpretation of the opposition and do not constitute an established conclusion on the intentions of the text’s proponents.