New constitution in Guinea-Bissau will undermine democracy, opponents say

• Guinea‑Bissau voters approved a new constitution with about 70% support.
• The amendment expands presidential powers, cuts the number of parliamentary seats and tightens candidate eligibility.
• Opponents warn the changes will weaken democratic checks ahead of December elections.

In a referendum that drew a high turnout, Guinea‑Bissau’s electorate endorsed a sweeping constitutional amendment. The draft, which passed with roughly 70 % of votes, enlarges the authority of the presidency, reduces the size of the National People's Assembly and introduces stricter rules for who may stand for office. Critics argue the reforms tilt the balance of power toward the executive and erode the fragile democratic gains made since the country abandoned its one‑party socialist system more than three decades ago.

What the new constitution changes

The amendment lowers the number of seats in parliament, though the exact new figure is not disclosed in the provisional results. By shrinking the legislature, the reform concentrates legislative authority in fewer hands, making it easier for the president to influence parliamentary decisions.

It also grants the president broader powers, including the ability to appoint key officials without the previous level of parliamentary oversight. The text adds new eligibility criteria for candidates, tightening the pool of individuals who can run for office. These rules could exclude opposition figures who do not meet the newly defined standards.

These structural shifts come just months before the scheduled December elections, meaning parties will have to adapt quickly to a new electoral setting.

Why the reforms matter for democracy

Guinea‑Bissau’s political system has been characterized by frequent coups, short‑lived governments and a fragile party system since the end of the socialist era. By expanding presidential powers, the constitution reduces the checks that a robust parliament traditionally provides. Critics fear this will enable the incumbent to dominate the political arena, limiting opposition influence.

The reduction in parliamentary seats also means fewer opportunities for smaller parties to gain representation. In a country where coalition building has been essential for stability, a smaller assembly could marginalize minority voices and concentrate power among a limited elite.

New candidate rules further narrow the field. If the criteria are interpreted broadly, they could be used to bar dissenting candidates, effectively limiting voter choice and undermining the competitive nature of elections.

How the amendment fits into Guinea‑Bissau’s recent history

The country’s first constitutional amendment since the reforms that ended the one‑party socialist state marks a significant turning point. Those earlier changes opened the political space and introduced multiparty competition after decades of single‑party rule.

Now, the latest amendment reverses some of that opening by centralising authority. The timing—just before a national election—raises questions about the motives behind the changes. Opponents suggest the president may be seeking to secure an advantage before voters head to the polls in December.

International observers have previously warned about Guinea‑Bissau’s susceptibility to political instability. The new constitution could either stabilize the system by clarifying powers or, as critics argue, destabilise it by weakening institutional balances.

What the opposition says

Opposition leaders have condemned the referendum outcome, calling the new constitution a threat to democratic governance. They argue that expanding presidential powers and reducing parliamentary representation erode the checks and balances that safeguard against authoritarian drift.

Critics also point to the new candidate eligibility rules as a tool to sideline dissent. They warn that the reforms could lead to a less pluralistic political arena, limiting the ability of citizens to choose from a diverse set of candidates.

These concerns have been voiced in public statements and protests, though the government has defended the changes as necessary for more efficient governance.

What happens next

The new constitution now moves toward formal adoption. Implementation will require legislative action to adjust the size of parliament and to codify the new candidate rules. Political parties must recalibrate their strategies for the December elections under the altered rules.

If the opposition can organise effectively and challenge the new eligibility standards, the impact of the reforms may be mitigated. Conversely, if the president’s expanded powers are exercised without strong parliamentary resistance, the balance of power could shift permanently.

International partners will likely monitor the rollout closely, assessing whether the changes lead to greater stability or further democratic erosion. The outcome of the December elections will be the first test of how the new constitutional framework operates in practice.

Source: The Guardian.