Guinea-Bissau is facing renewed political turmoil after voters approved a constitutional referendum that significantly expands presidential powers, raising concerns about the country's democratic trajectory and the legitimacy of the transitional process.

The referendum, held on Sunday, proposed a new charter that would grant the president the authority to appoint and dismiss the prime minister and cabinet members, while also reducing the number of parliamentary seats from 102 to 65. This vote came less than 10 months after a military coup and just three months before presidential and parliamentary elections scheduled for December 6.

Transitional authorities claim the constitutional reform is intended to bring stability to the impoverished West African nation and pave the way for a return to civilian rule. On Monday, the National Transitional Council declared victory for the "Yes" camp, with spokesman Alberto Pinto Pereira stating, "The majority of those who went to vote voted yes. In conclusion, the victory of yes is guaranteed."

The National Electoral Commission (NEC) confirmed the "Yes" victory on Tuesday, reporting that it had received 70% of the vote compared to 30% for the "No" camp, with voter turnout exceeding 50%. NEC chairperson Carmen Izaura Lobo described the referendum as a success, citing the "organizational capacity, professionalism and dedication" of teams on the ground, and praised the "transparency" and "credibility" of the process.

However, the opposition contends that the referendum lacks legal basis because it was organized by institutions created after the military coup. Domingos Simoes Pereira, leader of the African Party for the Independence of Guinea and Cape Verde (PAIGC), who was detained after the coup and later placed under house arrest, rejected the referendum as legally invalid. Speaking to DW from Portugal, he argued that the institutions established by the military have no democratic mandate to rewrite Guinea-Bissau's constitution.

Fernando Dias Costa, the main challenger to former President Umaro Sissoco Embalo in the annulled November 2025 presidential election, disputed the official turnout figures. "Very few citizens took part in this referendum," he said, emphasizing that the people have sent an important message that must not be ignored. "They are not prepared to simply accept political changes that are clearly unconstitutional and have not been publicly debated."

The proposed constitution would shift Guinea-Bissau toward a much stronger presidential system, with the president empowered to appoint and dismiss the prime minister and ministers, and to dissolve parliament. Supporters argue that the existing political system has repeatedly led to conflicts between the president, government, and parliament, and that stronger presidential authority would create greater stability.

Critics, however, warn of excessive concentration of power. Bubacar Ture, head of the Guinea-Bissau Human Rights League, told DW that the draft constitution would lead to "an excessive concentration of power in the person of the president." He contends that the proposed system could render parliamentary elections less meaningful, as the president would have greater control over the government regardless of the parliamentary balance. Ture also criticized the secretive drafting process, stating, "No one was consulted. Neither the parties nor civil-society organizations, nor traditional or religious authorities. Everything was produced in secret."

The referendum is part of a broader trend across Africa, where constitutional reforms have sparked debates over the concentration of presidential power. In recent years, leaders in Togo, Chad, Uganda, Zimbabwe, and Guinea have pursued constitutional changes that critics say strengthen executive authority.

Despite the "Yes" vote, opposition and civil society groups continue to challenge the legitimacy of the process. The December elections are intended to mark a return to civilian rule, but the controversy surrounding the referendum raises questions about the difficulty of that transition. The key point of contention remains whether the new constitutional order will strengthen democratic institutions or further concentrate power in the presidency.

Source: www.dw.com