Building democracy in Senegal citizen power and institutional challenges

The concept of citizen power in Senegal has taken center stage since the historic presidential election of March 2024, which propelled Bassirou Diomaye Faye to victory with over 54% of the vote in the first round. This electoral milestone was achieved after a period of intense civic mobilization, political maneuvering, and the intervention of the Constitutional Council. Yet, two years into Faye’s term, the debate has shifted from celebration to scrutiny: can Senegal’s democratic resurgence be sustained without robust institutional channels for citizen engagement?

Examining the foundations of citizen power

Citizen power is not merely about casting a vote or participating in protests—it is a multifaceted concept that encompasses participation, rights, vigilance, and ethical responsibility. To understand its potential in Senegal, we must trace its evolution through both modern democratic theory and traditional West African civic traditions. The philosophical underpinnings of citizen power extend beyond the ballot box to include the moral virtues that have long guided social and political behavior in Senegalese society.

The article explores the paradox of a post-electoral Senegal where hope for democratic renewal is palpable, yet the institutional mechanisms needed to sustain it remain fragile. The abandonment of the direct citizen petition to the Constitutional Court—despite being a key recommendation from the 2024 and 2025 national dialogues—serves as a stark example of this institutional gap. Without such avenues, citizens risk being reduced to passive spectators in their own democracy, unable to hold power to account directly.

Modern democracy and its discontents

Pierre Rosanvallon’s theory of “counter-democracy” offers a valuable lens through which to analyze Senegal’s current situation. He argues that contemporary democracies are increasingly defined not by the trust citizens place in their representatives, but by the mechanisms of vigilance, resistance, and judgment that emerge in response to systemic distrust. These include monitoring government actions, challenging policies through protests, and using legal avenues to correct injustices. However, Rosanvallon cautions that this “counter-democracy” can devolve into populism if it lacks institutional anchors, turning vigilance into perpetual opposition rather than constructive engagement.

Complementing Rosanvallon’s structural analysis, philosopher Cynthia Fleury examines the psychological and ethical dimensions of citizenship. She highlights the importance of individuation—the process by which individuals develop the capacity to act as autonomous, responsible agents within society. Fleury warns that modern democracies face a crisis of courage, where citizens are increasingly resigned or disillusioned, and resentment festers in the absence of recognition and justice. For Fleury, healing this resentment requires not just policy changes, but a broader cultural and symbolic effort to restore dignity and trust in institutions.

A cultural bridge: traditional civic virtues in Senegal

The article emphasizes that Senegal’s democratic potential lies in its ability to integrate modern institutions with indigenous ethical frameworks. Concepts such as jom (honor and dignity), kersa (respect and restraint), ngor (integrity), and teranga (hospitality and generosity) are not merely cultural relics; they represent a living ethical grammar that can inform democratic practice. These virtues, embedded in Wolof traditions, offer a counterbalance to the individualism and alienation often associated with modern politics. By reviving and institutionalizing these values, Senegal can cultivate citizens who are not only rights-bearing individuals but also active, responsible participants in public life.

The penc (village assembly) is another example of an indigenous institution that can inform modern democratic practices. Held under the shade of a central tree, the penc is a forum for collective deliberation where decisions are reached through consensus and participation is open to all. While not without its limitations—such as potential exclusion of marginalized voices or slow decision-making—the penc model challenges the Western ideal of agonistic debate and offers a more inclusive, relational approach to governance.

Diagnosing Senegal’s democratic moment

The period between 2021 and 2024 in Senegal was marked by intense civic mobilization, from mass protests triggered by the arrest of opposition leader Ousmane Sonko to the successful overturning of a presidential election postponement by the Constitutional Council. These events demonstrated the power of citizen vigilance and resistance. However, they also revealed the fragility of Senegal’s democratic institutions. The high human cost of protests, the deep polarization of public discourse, and the judiciarization of political conflicts have left a legacy of distrust. While the election of Bassirou Diomaye Faye in 2024 signaled a shift toward institutional channels, there is a real risk that the energy of counter-democracy could dissipate into perpetual protest cycles, breeding cynicism and undermining democratic renewal.

Cynthia Fleury’s analysis of resentment is particularly relevant here. In Senegal, resentment manifests in multiple forms: youth unemployment (affecting 20-30% of those under 35), disillusionment with political elites perceived as corrupt, distrust of a justice system long seen as politicized, and the humiliation of Senegalese youth facing restrictive European migration policies. This emotional climate fueled the demand for change that brought Faye to power. Yet, without addressing these underlying grievances through tangible reforms and symbolic gestures of recognition, the resentment risks hardening into a lasting cynicism toward democracy itself.

Several Senegalese intellectuals, including Mary Teuw Niane, have decried the erosion of traditional civic virtues such as jom, ngor, and kersa in public life. While this critique might be dismissed as nostalgic, it highlights a critical issue: modern political reforms in Senegal have often been implemented without an accompanying ethical framework. Institutions such as a reformed constitution or an independent judiciary cannot, on their own, ensure a vibrant democracy. They require citizens who act with jom in holding leaders accountable, who debate with kersa to temper confrontation, and who negotiate with masla (tact and reconciliation) to preserve communal bonds. Without this ethical foundation, formal institutions risk operating in a cultural and moral vacuum.

Institutional pathways for citizen power

Senegal’s Constitution of 2001, while progressive in many respects, contains a critical flaw: it does not allow citizens to directly petition the Constitutional Council. Currently, only the President or one-tenth of deputies can initiate a constitutional review. This exclusion leaves ordinary citizens without a legal avenue to challenge unconstitutional laws or actions. Despite recommendations from the 2024 and 2025 national dialogues to introduce direct citizen petitions, this proposal was notably absent from the draft laws presented in early 2026. The failure to implement this reform risks undermining the very promise of citizen power that propelled Faye to office.

The third phase of decentralization, enacted in 2013, aimed to empower local communities by transferring significant responsibilities to municipalities. However, the reform has struggled to deliver on its promises due to insufficient funding and a lack of participatory culture. Municipal councils often function as administrative bodies rather than spaces for deliberation. Yet, there is potential for revitalizing local democracy by integrating traditional deliberative spaces like the penc with modern municipal structures. Initiatives by NGOs such as Enda Tiers-Monde and local pioneers have demonstrated the viability of such hybrid models. To scale these efforts, Senegal could legally recognize penc and other traditional assemblies as mandatory consultation bodies for certain municipal decisions, provide adequate funding to municipalities, and train local leaders in participatory governance.

The national dialogues of 2024 (on justice) and 2025 (on the political system) represent an innovative attempt to involve citizens in shaping reforms. President Faye’s commitment to transparency and public consultation signals a willingness to revive the consensual electoral code of 1992, which was a hallmark of Senegalese democratic culture. However, these dialogues face a credibility challenge: if their recommendations are ignored in the final texts, they risk becoming mere window dressing. For example, the recommendation to allow direct citizen petitions to the Constitutional Council was notably excluded from the draft laws. A transparent process that accounts for discrepancies between recommendations and final laws is essential to maintain trust in these deliberative mechanisms.

Several oversight bodies have been established or reformed in recent years, including the Court of Auditors, the National Office for the Fight against Fraud and Corruption (OFNAC), and the General Inspectorate of State. While these institutions are critical for ensuring transparency and accountability, their effectiveness depends on independence, adequate resources, and the ability of citizens to engage with them directly. For instance, citizens should be able to file complaints or request audits through a unified digital platform. Without these safeguards, oversight bodies risk becoming ineffective symbols rather than genuine engines of accountability.

Toward a refoundation of citizen power

Based on the challenges and opportunities identified, the article proposes seven interconnected reforms to strengthen citizen power in Senegal:

• Direct citizen petitions: Allow citizens to petition the Constitutional Court directly when they believe their constitutional rights have been violated. This reform would institutionalize the “people-as-judge” model and empower citizens to hold institutions accountable without relying on political intermediaries.
• Recognition of traditional deliberative spaces: Legally recognize assemblies like the penc, gokh (neighborhood councils), and mbootaay (youth and women’s associations) as mandatory consultation bodies for certain municipal decisions. This would bridge traditional and modern governance structures, fostering inclusive participation.
• Civic education rooted in ethics: Revise the national civic education curriculum to integrate traditional virtues such as jom, kersa, and ngor alongside modern democratic theory. This education should aim to cultivate citizens who are both rights-bearing individuals and ethically grounded participants in public life.
• Independent oversight bodies: Ensure the autonomy of oversight institutions like the Court of Auditors and OFNAC by guaranteeing constitutional independence in their leadership selection, fixed terms, and budgetary autonomy. Empower citizens to directly petition these bodies and track the implementation of their recommendations.
• Transparent national dialogues: Establish a public charter to govern national dialogues, including rules for participant selection (with quotas for randomly selected citizens), deliberation processes, and mandatory public explanations for any discrepancies between recommendations and final laws. This would ensure that these dialogues are not merely symbolic but lead to meaningful reforms.
• Democratic care policies: Implement policies that address material grievances while also fostering symbolic recognition. This includes tackling youth unemployment, improving access to healthcare and education, and establishing a truth and reconciliation commission to acknowledge historical injustices and restore dignity to affected communities.
• Participatory budgets and citizen audits: Revitalize decentralization by mandating participatory budgets in municipalities, where a portion of the budget is allocated based on community input. Additionally, introduce citizen audits of local government accounts and hold annual public assemblies where local leaders report on their actions. These measures would transform citizens from passive recipients of services into active co-managers of their communities.

The article emphasizes that these reforms are not merely procedural but require a deep cultural and ethical shift. Citizen power in Senegal cannot thrive on institutions alone; it must be nourished by a shared ethical framework that values honor, respect, integrity, and hospitality. This hybrid model—combining modern democratic institutions with traditional civic virtues—offers a unique pathway for Senegal to reimagine democracy on its own terms.

Lessons from comparative experiences

Senegal’s journey toward refounding citizen power is not without precedent. South Africa’s 1996 Constitution, which allows direct citizen petitions to the Constitutional Court, demonstrates the transformative potential of such reforms when coupled with a robust culture of accountability and reconciliation. Tunisia’s 2014 Constitution, crafted through broad national dialogue, also highlights the importance of inclusive deliberation—though its subsequent erosion underscores the need for sustained vigilance. Benin’s 1990 National Conference, a model for many African transitions, serves as a reminder that democratic gains can be reversed without strong institutional safeguards. Meanwhile, France’s 2019 Citizens’ Convention for the Climate illustrates both the potential and the challenges of citizen deliberation: while the convention’s proposals were innovative, political leaders ultimately rejected many of them, signaling the fragility of such processes without genuine commitment.

These examples underscore a critical lesson: democratic reforms are only as strong as the culture that supports them. Institutions alone cannot sustain a democracy; they require citizens who are engaged, informed, and willing to hold leaders accountable. Senegal’s challenge is to build a model that integrates its modern institutions with its rich civic traditions, creating a democracy that is both robust and uniquely Senegalese.

Conclusion: the path forward

Senegal stands at a pivotal moment. The election of Bassirou Diomaye Faye in 2024 was a victory for citizen power, but its sustainability depends on the choices made today. Will Senegal’s institutions be reformed to empower citizens, or will they remain closed to direct participation? Will the ethical virtues that have long guided Senegalese society be revived as a foundation for democracy, or will they be relegated to the realm of folklore? Will the energy of counter-democracy be channeled into constructive engagement, or will it dissipate into cynicism and despair?

The answers to these questions lie not only with political leaders but with citizens themselves. A true citizen is not merely a voter or a protester, but an active, responsible participant in public life. In Senegal, this means acting with jom (honor) to challenge injustice, with kersa (respect) to temper confrontation, with ngor (integrity) to hold leaders accountable, and with masla (tact) to seek reconciliation. By combining institutional reforms with a revival of traditional civic virtues, Senegal can cultivate a democracy that is both modern and authentically Senegalese—one that is capable of meeting the challenges of the 21st century.