Across much of Africa, the debate over political leadership has increasingly moved beyond campaign promises and electoral contests to a more fundamental question: How should political power be acquired, exercised, and transferred in democratic societies?
That conversation has intensified following the Republic of Togo’s constitutional reforms, which replaced the country’s long-standing presidential system with a parliamentary model and ended the direct election of the president by universal suffrage. Supporters describe the reforms as an institutional restructuring designed to improve governance and align the country’s political framework with parliamentary democracies practiced elsewhere. Critics, however, argue that the constitutional changes reduce direct electoral participation while reinforcing the political dominance of an already entrenched ruling family. The developments in Togo have consequently reignited a wider continental discussion about constitutional reform, leadership succession, democratic accountability, and the balance between political stability and public participation.
A Constitutional Turning Point
Under Togo’s revised constitutional framework, promulgated on 6 May 2024 after adoption by the National Assembly on 25 March and a second reading on 19 April, citizens no longer elect the President of the Republic through nationwide popular voting. Instead, the President is elected by members of parliament and assumes a largely ceremonial role. Executive authority is transferred to a newly created office, the President of the Council of Ministers, who leads government policy and is expected to emerge from the parliamentary majority. The President of the Council serves a six-year mandate, renewable indefinitely so long as the ruling power retains legislative confidence, while the ceremonial President of the Republic serves a four-year term, renewable once.
Government officials have presented the reform as a transition from a presidential model to a parliamentary democracy, arguing that such systems often encourage closer cooperation between the executive and legislature while reducing institutional friction. They point to established parliamentary republics across Europe and Asia that operate successfully without directly electing their heads of state, noting that governments in those systems derive legitimacy through parliamentary elections while executive leadership depends on legislative confidence rather than direct presidential mandate.
Opposition parties, constitutional analysts, and several civil society organisations have questioned both the process and the political implications of the reforms. Their concerns stem largely from the country’s long political history, during which the Gnassingbé family has remained at the centre of national leadership for 57 years. Critics contend that although governmental titles have changed, political authority may remain concentrated within the same ruling structure, thereby reducing opportunities for genuine electoral contestation. The reform was adopted by a parliament whose mandate had technically expired in December 2023, without a popular referendum, and amid protests that were banned by authorities. Opposition figures have labelled the legislative action a “constitutional coup,” arguing that it effectively circumvents the two-term presidential limit reintroduced in 2019 after widespread civic pressure.
Continue reading with Eandel
Subscribe to unlock the complete story and receive your subscriber benefits.
