Kanka-Malik Natchaba: ECOWAS Ruling Does Not Annul Togo Constitutional Reform

• Kanka-Malik Natchaba, from UNIR, emphasized that the ECOWAS Court's ruling on Togo's 2024 constitutional reform does not mandate its annulment or withdrawal.
• He noted the court's decision did not use terms like "annulment" or "return to" and contains no binding mechanisms for Togolese institutions.
• The court rejected several applicant requests and relied on an African Union text due to a lack of specific ECOWAS provisions.
• Natchaba clarified that the court recognized no political actor was barred from participating in political life during the constitutional reform process.
• He dismissed claims of automatic international sanctions, stating such measures are typically specified within a judgment's operative part.

He highlighted that the operative part of the ECOWAS Court Togo judgment never employed terms such as "annulment," "withdrawal," or "return to a previous state," contrary to assertions made by certain political figures.

Kanka-Malik Natchaba, the National Delegate for the youth movement of the ruling UNIR party, recently addressed public discourse surrounding the ECOWAS Court of Justice ruling concerning Togo's constitutional changes enacted in April 2024. Speaking on Canal FM's "Club de la Presse" on August 31, 2026, Natchaba urged a focus on the actual judicial decision rather than the interpretations put forth, particularly by the opposition. He expressed concern that public debate had disproportionately centered on the opposition's memorandum, diverting attention from the court's precise findings.

Natchaba underscored the importance of adhering strictly to the court's judgment. He highlighted that the operative part of the ECOWAS Court Togo judgment never employed terms such as "annulment," "withdrawal," or "return to a previous state," contrary to assertions made by certain political figures. This distinction, he argued, is crucial for an accurate understanding of the legal implications of the Cour de justice CEDEAO Togo's decision.

According to Natchaba, the ECOWAS Court's ruling in no way undermines the legitimacy of the constitutional reforms undertaken in Togo. He firmly stated that the decision itself contains no elements that would render the advancements or reforms illegitimate. He further noted that the court, while making recommendations to the government regarding future reforms, did not include any binding mechanisms that would compel Togolese institutions to alter the established constitutional order.

He elaborated that the court dismissed several requests from the applicants, with some even being deemed to lack the necessary legal standing to bring their claims. Furthermore, in its deliberations, the court relied on a text from the African Union, indicating a lack of specific provisions within the ECOWAS framework to address the particular issues at hand. This reliance, Natchaba suggested, further supports the conclusion that the judgment does not challenge the existing constitutional framework or necessitate its reversal.

Natchaba also addressed the opposition's memorandum, which contended that the ECOWAS Court had mandated the withdrawal of the constitutional reform and the initiation of a national dialogue. While maintaining UNIR's policy of refraining from commenting on other parties' positions, he reiterated that the terms "withdrawal" or "return to an earlier situation" are conspicuously absent from the court's ruling. He also pointed out that the court acknowledged that no political actor was ever prevented from participating in political life during the period of the Togo constitutional reform 2024.

Regarding the broader issue of political alternation, often a point of contention, Natchaba presented an institutional perspective. He argued that alternation is inherent in the electoral designation process itself, given that leaders are chosen through elections and the parliament is a product of universal suffrage. Therefore, he concluded, the mechanism for political change remains fully open to electoral competition. Finally, Natchaba criticized what he termed a "reflexe d'extraversion" (outward-looking reflex) among some Togolese actors concerning international sanctions, which were mentioned in the opposition's memorandum and sought by civil society groups from the European Union and ECOWAS. He clarified that sanctions, when applicable, are typically stipulated within the operative part of a judicial decision, making it erroneous to assume automatic sanctions in this instance. He advocated for internal solutions to the nation's challenges, centered on shared national development goals.

Lawyers advising on Togolese constitutional matters or regional compliance should be aware that, despite opposition claims, the ECOWAS Court's decision on the 2024 constitutional reforms is interpreted as *not* invalidating them or requiring their reversal. This clarifies the legal stability of the current constitutional order in Togo and underscores the importance of relying on the actual court judgment rather than political interpretations when assessing legal risk.

Source: Original reporting via Canal FM