Jëf Jël party urges swift supreme court appeal in Ousmane Sonko case
The Jëf Jël Alliance party, led by Talla Sylla, has formally acknowledged the Constitutional Council’s decision N° 5/C/2026, issued on Wednesday, June 17, 2026. This ruling came in response to an appeal lodged on June 1 by eighteen opposition deputies. Their initial appeal sought to invalidate the National Assembly Bureau’s resolution from May 24, 2026, which confirmed Ousmane Sonko’s integration as a parliamentarian. In a public statement, Jëf Jël, a political entity deeply committed to the rule of law, reiterated its unwavering respect for judicial pronouncements. The party emphasized that the Constitutional Council’s judgments are binding on all public authorities, administrative bodies, and judicial institutions.
However, Jëf Jël provided crucial clarifications regarding the decision:
“1. A declaration of incompetence is not a constitutional validation. Contrary to potential misinformation, the Constitutional Council did not, in any manner, validate Mr. Ousmane Sonko’s reintegration. The ‘Sages’ merely declared themselves incompetent to assess the legality of this act. As a prominent legal scholar rightly observed, the high court chose to seek refuge in the ‘comfort of incompetence,’ thereby avoiding a definitive ruling on the fundamental constitutional question of incompatibility and the conditions governing parliamentary mandates.”
“1. A declaration of incompetence is not a constitutional validation. Contrary to potential misinformation, the Constitutional Council did not, in any manner, validate Mr. Ousmane Sonko’s reintegration. The ‘Sages’ merely declared themselves incompetent to assess the legality of this act. As a prominent legal scholar rightly observed, the high court chose to seek refuge in the ‘comfort of incompetence,’ thereby avoiding a definitive ruling on the fundamental constitutional question of incompatibility and the conditions governing parliamentary mandates.”
2. A clear path towards administrative review.
“Far from closing the case, the Constitutional Council made a significant legal determination. In its deliberations, it explicitly characterized the National Assembly Bureau’s decision as an ‘internal administrative act,’ asserting that it does not directly pertain to the electoral process. By doing so, the constitutional judge effectively indicated the appropriate jurisdiction for this matter: the Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court.”
3. The call to continue the legal struggle.
“Jëf Jël believes there is no immediate danger as long as the law remains our guide and the courtroom remains our battleground. While some might be tempted by a policy of absence or other forms of confrontation, we choose the strength of the Law.”
Consequently, Jëf Jël solemnly calls upon the appealing deputies not to concede, but to promptly file an Appeal for Abuse of Power before the Supreme Court. Currently, only parliamentarians possess the necessary legal standing to pursue this ultimate battle for the integrity of the National Assembly. The fight for the Republic, the party asserts, is a demanding legal and political marathon.
Finally, the Jëf Jël alliance pledged to “remain vigilant, steadfast, and supportive of all democrats who reject institutional power grabs.”