The ECOWAS Court of Justice issued a ruling on January 29, 2026, regarding Togo's 2024 constitutional reform. The court found a violation of Article 23 of the African Charter on Democracy, Elections, and Governance. However, the court did not order the annulment of the 2024 constitution, the restoration of the 1992 constitution, or the dissolution of existing institutions. Instead, it instructed the Togolese state to take necessary measures to ensure future constitutional or institutional reforms comply with international obligations.
A recent correspondence dated October 23, 2026, raised concerns about the execution of the court's ruling. The issue revolves around the temporal nature of the obligations prescribed by the court. With no new reforms officially announced or underway, it is unclear what concrete elements would support the evaluation of the execution of such an obligation. The court's prescription focuses on future actions, which may include preventative obligations that are immediately enforceable. However, these obligations must be precisely identified in the court's decision.
The Togolese context adds complexity to this issue, as certain actors interpret the ECOWAS court's ruling as a judicial reversal of the 2024 constitution. However, the court explicitly did not annul or suspend the constitution. Administrative correspondence with unclear scope can lead to contradictory interpretations, revive tensions, and make a simple request for information appear as a new judicial injunction.
Institutional prudence would have required precise clarification on the object of the requested follow-up. This would prevent confusion between the obligation to respect democratic rules in future reforms and a supposed obligation to immediately dismantle institutions established by the 2024 reform. The legitimacy of community justice relies on the clarity of its prescriptions, predictability of their effects, and strict respect for the separation of competencies among its organs.
The issue at hand highlights the challenges of implementing prospective obligations. In the absence of a new reform, it is difficult to assess the execution of such an obligation. The ECOWAS court's ruling did not provide specific measures to be taken by the Togolese state. Therefore, it is uncertain what actions the state must take to comply with the court's ruling.
The situation in Togo underscores the importance of clear communication and well-defined obligations in judicial decisions. The ECOWAS court's ruling has sparked debate and confusion, which can be detrimental to the country's stability and the legitimacy of the community justice system.
Ultimately, it is essential to approach this issue with caution and precision. The Togolese state must carefully consider the court's ruling and its implications for future constitutional reforms. The execution of the court's ruling will require a deep understanding of the obligations imposed and the steps necessary to comply with them.
Key points
- The ECOWAS court's ruling did not order the annulment of Togo's 2024 constitution.
- The court's decision instructed the Togolese state to take measures to ensure future reforms comply with international obligations.
- The execution of the court's ruling is uncertain due to the lack of clarity on the obligations imposed.
