In Sénégal, the ongoing debate surrounding opaque funds attributed to the previous administration has taken a more personal turn. Babacar Bâ, a prominent civil society figure consistently engaged in discussions about public governance, has publicly questioned the consistency of Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko. Bâ criticizes the head of government for basing a significant part of his anti-corruption rhetoric on denouncing undisclosed funds, while simultaneously acknowledging that his own political party, Pastef, mobilized a political fund amounting to 1.7 billion FCFA.

Contradiction highlighted on opaque financial practices

Since the political shift in March 2024, the executive branch, led by the tandem of Diomaye Faye and Ousmane Sonko, has made the fight against opaque financial circuits inherited from the former regime a cornerstone of its reform agenda. The condemnation of so-called ‘black funds’ – discretionary envelopes that bypass standard budgetary procedures – forms a substantial part of the official narrative on accountability.

Babacar Bâ asserts that this stance does not withstand close scrutiny. He points out that the Prime Minister himself publicly acknowledged the existence of substantial resources collected by his party, yet the channels of mobilization and the contributors have not been precisely documented. The figure of 1.7 billion FCFA, in the eyes of critics, represents an amount far exceeding the ordinary standards for partisan financing within Sénégal.

The paradox of a 1.7 billion FCFA political fund

The financing of political parties remains a significant blind spot in Senegalese law. The nation currently lacks a legal framework as stringent as those found in several other West African democracies concerning donation limits or the oversight of party resources. This regulatory gray area frequently fuels mutual suspicions among political factions.

For Babacar Bâ, the paradox lies precisely in this disparity between the government’s firm anti-corruption discourse and the relative opacity surrounding the ruling party’s declared financial resources. His argument questions the very nature of this fund: if it stems from militant contributions, its sheer scale raises questions given the demographics of party members. If it originates from identified donors, Bâ contends that transparency would necessitate a detailed public disclosure.

It is important to note that a political party’s legitimacy to raise resources for its campaigns is not inherently disputed. The criticism primarily targets the symmetry of expectations. A government that elevates the traceability of public funds to a core principle should, according to this perspective, apply the same rigorous standards to its own political apparatus.

A lasting debate on transparency

Babacar Bâ’s intervention comes amidst a charged political atmosphere in Sénégal. Investigations initiated by the Court of Accounts and various administrative commissions into the previous management of public finances have dominated headlines for several months. Each revelation fuels a historical confrontation between supporters of the former majority and the new administration.

In this context, Babacar Bâ’s challenge aims to shift the focus of the debate. Rather than simply pitting one side against the other, he raises the fundamental question of normative consistency: the fight against opaque funds can only be credible, in his view, if it is applied uniformly to public actors and the political formations they represent. The question of Pastef’s financing, long overshadowed by the 2024 electoral dynamic, thus resurfaces just as the party consolidates its institutional influence.

For international investors and partners closely monitoring Sénégal’s governance trajectory, this debate is far from trivial. The quality of political financing transparency mechanisms is among the key indicators followed by donors and rating agencies. A legislative tightening, frequently discussed within civil society circles, could emerge as a natural consequence of this controversy. Babacar Bâ calls for a public clarification from the Prime Minister regarding this 1.7 billion FCFA fund.