Togolese authorities swiftly responded. Following the ECOWAS Court of Justice’s ruling on January 29, which characterized Togo’s March 2024 constitutional revision as an “unconstitutional change of government,” the government issued a firm rebuttal this Sunday. For the Togolese executive, the regional judicial body had unequivocally exceeded its mandate.

“no constitutional review competence”

In its initial official statement, the Togolese government set the record straight regarding the actual prerogatives of the Abuja-based regional institution:

“The Court holds no competence to review the constitutionality of domestic law, nor does it have the authority to judge a national constituent power,” the official communiqué emphatically stated.

The executive reiterated that while the regional Court is empowered to oversee human rights compliance and adherence to community law, it cannot substitute itself for the Constitutional Court of a sovereign state.

Furthermore, authorities clarified that the sole regional instrument designed to govern constitutional revisions—the Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance—can only be invoked by member states themselves, not by private individuals.

deficiencies in applicant standing and absence of violations

The government highlighted several significant weaknesses in the process that led to this judgment:

• Inadmissibility of certain applicants: The Court itself dismissed the Association of Torture Victims in Togo (ASVITTO) and the ADDI political party due to a lack of proof of legal registration.

• No violation of participation rights: The regional court found no failure on Togo’s part regarding its citizens’ right to participate in public affairs.

• Absence of evidence: The executive denounced qualifications based on speculative intentions, lacking any substantiating evidence to support an alleged “anti-democratic agenda.”

no impact on the current constitutional order

For Lomé, the logical conclusion drawn by the Court itself confirms the applicability of the new fundamental text: the judicial body refused to order the withdrawal of the 2024 constitutional law, despite express demands from the applicants, and pronounced no financial reparations.

“No obligation to dismantle the existing constitutional order arises from this,” stated the authorities, who underscored that the reform establishing the 5th Republic was adopted after an open public debate and extensive consultations with the nation’s vital forces.