Abdoulaye Daouda Diallo: Contests Senegal Parliamentary Convocation

• Abdoulaye Daouda Diallo, President of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council of Senegal, has contested his convocation by a Senegalese parliamentary inquiry.
• He cited concerns over receiving the summons via WhatsApp and the lack of clarity regarding the specific subject of his testimony.
• Diallo argued that official documents from his ministerial tenure are state archives, not his personal responsibility to produce.
• The inquiry focuses on alleged irregularities in the "One Student, One Computer" program's contracts.
• Diallo formally informed the commission president of his inability to comply under the current conditions.

He explicitly stated that a former government official cannot be considered the personal custodian of the archives belonging to their previous department.

Abdoulaye Daouda Diallo, who currently serves as the President of the Economic, Social and Environmental Council of Senegal, and is a former Minister, has formally challenged the terms of his summons to appear before a parliamentary inquiry in Senegal. The `Commission d’enquête parlementaire Sénégal` is investigating alleged `irrégularités programme Un étudiant un ordinateur` related to procurement and execution contracts.

Diallo received a convocation for Thursday, October 15, 2026, at 3 PM. However, in a letter dated October 14, 2026, dispatched from Boké Dialloube, he communicated his inability to comply under the existing conditions. His primary concerns revolve around the method of notification, the clarity of the hearing's purpose, and the expectation for him to personally provide administrative documents.

A key point of contention for Diallo is the manner in which he received the summons. He explicitly noted that the convocation was transmitted via WhatsApp, a method he argues falls short of appropriate institutional courtesy for such an official request. He suggested that a preliminary contact to discuss scheduling would have been more suitable, allowing for mutual agreement on a date and time that accommodates his availability and facilitates proper preparation for the hearing.

Furthermore, the former minister raised significant questions regarding the specificity of the inquiry. The commission's stated aim to clarify the circumstances and basis of "the eventual authorization of the guarantee fund constituted in 2012-2013 with Ecobank" was deemed insufficiently precise by Diallo. He contended that for an effective and fair hearing, the specific act under scrutiny, his presumed involvement, and the exact questions to be addressed should be clearly outlined and supported by previously shared documentation.

Another critical issue highlighted by Diallo concerns the request for him to bring official documents, notes, and other relevant materials to the hearing. He emphasized that all acts and correspondence generated during his tenure as a minister are classified as state archives. These records, he clarified, are legally under the custody of the relevant administrative bodies, not the personal possession of former officials. Consequently, he argued that the parliamentary commission should directly solicit any necessary documents from the government departments responsible for their safekeeping, rather than placing this burden on him.

Diallo's stance underscores a fundamental principle regarding the `gestion archives administratives Sénégal` and the `droit ancien ministre convocation parlementaire`. He explicitly stated that a former government official cannot be considered the personal custodian of the archives belonging to their previous department. This position challenges the commission's expectation that he would personally produce such records, redirecting the responsibility for document retrieval back to the state's administrative apparatus.

His contestation of the `convocation WhatsApp légalité Sénégal` also raises broader questions about the procedural standards for official communications in parliamentary inquiries. By highlighting the lack of prior consultation and the informal nature of the notification, Diallo implicitly calls for adherence to established protocols that ensure respect for institutional roles and facilitate a more structured investigative process. His letter ultimately served as a formal notification to the commission president of his inability to comply with the summons under the conditions as they were presented.

The "One Student, One Computer" program, which is at the heart of this inquiry, falls under the purview of the Ministry of Higher Education, Research, and Innovation. The ongoing investigation into alleged irregularities in its procurement and execution contracts continues, with Diallo's challenge adding a layer of procedural complexity to the commission's work.

Lawyers advising former government officials or entities subject to parliamentary inquiries in Senegal should note the procedural challenges raised regarding summons validity (e.g., WhatsApp notification, lack of specific charges) and the responsibility for state archives. This case highlights potential grounds for contesting the conditions of such convocations.

Source: Original reporting via source news outlet.