Éligibilité d’Ousmane Sonko : un débat artificiel et sans fondement juridique, selon le juriste Mouhamet Seyni Sow
Mouhamet Seyni Sow points out that during the last legislative elections, Ousmane Sonko was nominated as the lead candidate, elected as a member of parliament, and then chose to suspend his parliamentary mandate to assume the position of Prime Minister, in accordance with the rules governing the compatibility of offices. "The institutions have never considered that his electoral capacity was affected by any judicial decision," the lawyer emphasizes.
At the heart of recent controversies, the appeal against a ruling is frequently presented as potentially jeopardizing Ousmane Sonko's civil rights. This interpretation is entirely erroneous, according to Mouhamet Seyni Sow. He clarifies that an appeal against a ruling is neither a procedure for reopening a case nor an appeal capable of modifying a judicial decision already rendered. "An appeal against a ruling serves solely to consult the Supreme Court on a possible procedural flaw. It suspends nothing, modifies nothing, and has no impact whatsoever on the citizen's civil rights."
The legal expert also emphasizes the crucial role of the amnesty law adopted by the authorities. Unlike a pardon, which does not erase the conviction, amnesty retroactively erases the relevant facts, rendering them legally nonexistent. "With amnesty, the judgment is considered null and void. All its consequences disappear: conviction, electoral effects, restrictions on rights," he explains, citing in particular the fourth paragraph of Article 67 of the Constitution of January 22, 2001. The subsequent administrative acts clearly confirm this legal reality: Ousmane Sonko's reinstatement on the electoral lists, his eligibility to run for office, his right to vote, and his right to hold elected office. "These decisions are binding on everyone. No court has overturned them," Mouhamet Seyni Sow points out.
According to the legal expert, the current attempts to challenge Ousmane Sonko's eligibility are more a matter of political strategy than law. "Between an amnesty that erases political facts, a reversal of a court ruling with no legal effect on his eligibility, and administrative acts confirming his full electoral capacity, the question is legally closed. The rest is merely a charade designed to fuel an artificial controversy."
Commentaires (33)
Pourquoi il n’était pas candidat en 2024
La même cause qui va l empêcher d être candidat en 2029
Il suffit pas d'avoir une grande gueule pour gérer la cité..
Participer à la Discussion
Règles de la communauté :
💡 Astuce : Utilisez des emojis depuis votre téléphone ou le module emoji ci-dessous. Cliquez sur GIF pour ajouter un GIF animé. Collez un lien X/Twitter ou TikTok pour l'afficher automatiquement.