Since the military coup in August 2020 that ousted President Ibrahim Boubacar Keïta, Mali has been governed by a military junta led by Colonel Assimi Goïta. Initially promising a return to civilian rule within a transition period, the junta has repeatedly delayed elections and consolidated power, raising concerns about the future of democracy in the West African nation. In May 2025, these concerns erupted into widespread pro-democracy protests, reflecting growing frustration among Malians over the prolonged military rule and the erosion of political freedoms.
The immediate catalyst for the protests was the junta’s decision to dissolve all political parties and ban their activities. This move followed a controversial national conference organized by the military government in late April 2025, which recommended the dissolution as a means to “reset” Mali’s political landscape. Subsequently, President Goïta signed a decree officially outlawing all political parties, extending his mandate to 2030, and effectively sidelining civilian political actors.
The decision marked a significant shift away from the transition framework that was initially agreed upon after the coup, which envisaged elections and a civilian-led government by late 2024. Instead, the junta’s actions have effectively frozen the political process, provoking alarm both domestically and internationally.
In the capital, Bamako, hundreds of protesters took to the streets to express their dissent against the junta’s tightening grip on power. Demonstrations centered around key public squares and near government buildings, where citizens chanted slogans demanding a return to democratic governance and respect for political pluralism. The protesters included a diverse range of participants—youth activists, members of civil society organizations, former politicians, and ordinary citizens who see the military’s continued rule as a threat to Mali’s fragile stability.
One prominent figure among the demonstrators was Cheick Oumar Diarra, a youth leader who has been vocal in calling for the restoration of constitutional order. He emphasized the importance of political freedoms and peaceful participation in governance, highlighting that many Malians feel increasingly marginalized by the military’s unilateral decisions.
Despite the largely peaceful nature of the protests, the junta responded with a security crackdown. There were reports of arrests of activists, restrictions on public gatherings, and limitations on media coverage of the demonstrations. Such measures further intensified tensions, as many observers viewed them as an attempt to stifle dissent and prevent the mobilization of opposition forces.
International human rights organizations have expressed concern over the junta’s crackdown on political freedoms. Human Rights Watch noted that the dissolution of political parties constituted a major setback to Mali’s democratic transition and underscored a pattern of repression, including the arbitrary detention and enforced disappearances of political opponents and critics. The organization called on the Malian authorities to respect fundamental rights and ensure that political activities could resume freely.
Within Mali, opposition to the ban on political parties has been vocal. Over 100 political groups publicly rejected the dissolution decree and pledged to continue their struggle for democracy through lawful means. These parties condemned the military’s interference in political affairs and called on the international community to pressure the junta to restore civilian governance and hold credible elections.
Civil society organizations have also played a critical role in mobilizing public opinion against the junta’s measures. Various coalitions of activists, religious leaders, and community representatives have organized forums and issued statements reaffirming the importance of democratic institutions for Mali’s peace and development.
The junta, for its part, justifies its decisions as necessary to maintain national stability amid ongoing security challenges. Mali continues to grapple with violent insurgencies in its northern and central regions, involving jihadist groups and intercommunal conflicts. The military argues that a prolonged transition under their control is essential to consolidate security gains and prevent further chaos.
However, critics argue that the suppression of political competition and civil liberties risks undermining Mali’s long-term stability. Without inclusive governance and accountability, grievances could deepen, fueling further unrest and fragmentation.
The international response has been cautious but firm. Regional bodies like the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) and the African Union have condemned the dissolution of political parties and called for a swift return to civilian rule. Western governments, including the United States and the European Union, have urged the junta to adhere to the previously agreed transition roadmap and respect democratic norms.
Meanwhile, Mali’s security environment remains precarious. Despite ongoing military operations supported by international partners, jihadist violence and communal clashes persist. The political deadlock complicates efforts to address these security threats comprehensively, as the lack of a legitimate, civilian government limits coordination with international actors and weakens public trust.
In conclusion, the pro-democracy protests in Mali represent a critical juncture for the country’s political future. The junta’s dissolution of political parties and extension of military rule have galvanized opposition and drawn widespread criticism. While the military frames its actions as necessary for stability, the suppression of political freedoms risks alienating large segments of the population and undermining the very peace it seeks to preserve. The coming months will be decisive in determining whether Mali can reestablish a democratic path or remain under military control, with profound implications for its security and development.
