Families of the missing continue to voice their distress, demanding answers about the whereabouts of their loved ones, the conditions of their detention, and their legal status. They insist that if any offenses have been committed, cases must be formally referred to the judicial system. Meanwhile, supporters of Mali’s transitional authorities argue that national security imperatives and the fight against terrorism justify these extraordinary measures.

State necessity vs. legal boundaries

«There is a military prosecutor’s investigation underway, which requires exceptional resources,» explains Tiambel Guimbayara, a Malian journalist and editor-in-chief of La Voix du Mali, a vocal advocate for the current regime. The principle of state necessity permits all investigations necessary to ensure national security. After all, the April 25 attacks resulted in the death of the Defense Minister, General Sadio Camara—one of the most pivotal figures in the country’s leadership. In such exceptional circumstances, particularly when facing terrorist groups, state necessity must prevail over all other considerations.

This argument, however, stands in stark contrast to Mali’s Constitution and international human rights obligations. The Mali Pact on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights—both treaties Mali has ratified—stipulate a delicate balance between a state’s right to self-defense and its duty to protect its citizens. This balance is precisely what Jean-François Akandji-Kombé, a professor of international and African law at Sorbonne University, highlights.

When security trumps rights

«The Malian state has every legitimacy to defend itself against terrorism,» Professor Akandji-Kombé asserts. However, in protecting Malian society, the state cannot suspend fundamental freedoms or bypass due process. Rights such as access to a judge, the presumption of innocence, and legal representation cannot be waived. These are cornerstones of societal cohesion and essential to ensuring the state does not forfeit its moral compass in the fight against terrorism or any other existential threat to the nation.

Critics argue that the transitional authorities are exploiting the April 25 attacks and the subsequent manhunt for suspected accomplices as a pretext to eliminate political opponents advocating for democratic reforms.

Over the past three weeks, multiple disappearances have occurred with no official statements from the transitional authorities.

In a statement released on Tuesday, the legal team representing the family of Maître Mountaga Tall expressed «deep dismay» following the May 16 disappearance of their colleague’s son, Cheikh Mamadou Tall. The collective urged «the competent administrative and judicial authorities to take all necessary measures to secure the release of both individuals and to clarify the circumstances surrounding their disappearance.»