CIVICUS discusses the dissolution of political parties in Burkina Faso with a member of Burkinabe civil society, who has asked to stay anonymous for security reasons.

On 29 January, the military junta led by Captain Ibrahim Traoré, in power since a coup in September 2022, announced the dissolution of all political parties. The transitional parliament formally adopted the measure on 9 February. The regime justifies the decision by citing the need to end the divisions caused by the ‘proliferation’ of political parties. The international community has condemned it as an attack on pluralism and the state’s human rights obligations. Within Burkina Faso, many are saying that their priority is the restoration of peace.

What explains this decision and what will its consequences be?

According to the authorities, this measure aims to restore national security, intensify the fight against terrorism and political corruption and rebuild institutions deemed incapable of responding to the ongoing security crisis.

The dissolution of parties reduces the formal framework for political participation and weakens pluralism, while risking increasing distrust between the government, political actors and the international community. The absence of parties could also complicate the return to constitutional order and raises questions about the legitimacy and organisation of future elections.

The measure could nevertheless help to limit political corruption and clientelism linked to partisan politics. However, this effect will depend on the authorities’’ ability to organise a credible transition to stable democratic institutions.

How has Burkinabe civil society reacted?

In a context of persistent armed attacks, many in civil society favour national cohesion. Citizen associations, community organisations and opinion leaders widely believe that the priority remains the fight against terrorism and the restoration of peace throughout Burkina Faso.

This partly explains the measured reactions following the announcement. Some political leaders have expressed their support for the decision, believing it will enable more effective national mobilisation in the face of insecurity. A leader of the Congress for Democracy and Progress publicly spoke out in this vein.

However, some organisations remain focused on preserving democratic gains and the future of civic space, aware that security stability will one day have to be accompanied by a return to political pluralism.

What room for manoeuvre does the opposition have left?

In the current context, the opposition’s room for manoeuvre remains limited: the dissolution of parties reduces the possibilities for formal organisation and forces political figures to adopt a cautious stance.

Many opposition leaders share the view that security stabilisation is a prerequisite for democratic debate. They support the national effort against terrorism while calling for a gradual reopening of the political space.

Some, however, point out that political pluralism is inseparable from the existence of the state. For them, a lasting improvement in the security situation would allow for a gradual return to open political competition.

What can the international community do to support a return to democracy?

External leverage is limited. The authorities invoke national sovereignty and the security emergency to resist conventional diplomatic pressure. Targeted sanctions, aid conditionality and political mediation initiatives are difficult to implement effectively, particularly because the support of some national actors for the security priority strengthens the government’’s domestic legitimacy.

Under these circumstances, the international community favours humanitarian assistance, security cooperation and technical support over coercive measures that could be counterproductive.

What scenarios can be envisaged for the coming months?

In the short term, maintaining the status quo seems the most likely scenario: continued dissolution, efforts focused on combating terrorism and regaining territory and calls for national unity.

If the security situation improves significantly, a gradual lifting of exceptional measures becomes conceivable. This could lead to the rehabilitation of political parties and the organisation of elections, marking the resumption of the democratic process.

CIVICUS interviews a wide range of civil society activists, experts and leaders to gather diverse perspectives on civil society action and current issues for publication on its CIVICUS Lens platform. The views expressed in interviews are the interviewees’ and do not necessarily reflect those of CIVICUS. Publication does not imply endorsement of interviewees or the organisations they represent.