A promise under pressure
The military rulers of Guinea-Bissau are facing a decisive test of their central commitment: handing power back to civilians after seizing control in November 2025. With the scheduled 6 December elections now in doubt, the junta’s credibility hangs in the balance. This is the turning point that will define whether the transition delivers on its word or drifts into indefinite military rule.
How the crisis unfolded
The political turmoil began after the November 2025 presidential election. While the national electoral commission was still tallying votes, both incumbent president Umaro Sissoco Embaló and opposition candidate Fernando Dias da Costa claimed victory. On 25 November, the army stepped in, halting the electoral process. The military said it acted to prevent destabilisation and thwart a plot, though these claims were never independently verified.
The coup upended the vote before final results could be announced. According to the Africa Center for Strategic Studies, ballots were subsequently destroyed and opposition figures imprisoned. The takeover left a fundamental question unanswered: who had actually won the interrupted election?
Commitment to civilian rule
The junta presented its intervention as a move to restore stability. It then established a transition led by General Horta N’Tam and pledged to return the country to civilian rule through presidential and legislative elections.
In January 2026, transitional authorities set those elections for 6 December 2026. A presidential decree stated that conditions were in place for a credible vote and specified that the junta leader would not be a candidate. Yet even at that announcement, several obstacles to credibility were evident: opposition figures were imprisoned or in exile, and the revision of the Constitution by the transitional legislative body raised questions about its legality.
A new Constitution sparks controversy
The transition also launched an overhaul of state institutions. A constitutional referendum held in August 2026 aimed to replace the semi-presidential system with a presidential one, concentrating more power in the presidency. The proposal also sought to reduce the number of parliamentarians from 102 to 65 and districts from 29 to 12.
Authorities defended these changes as a step toward institutional stability. But the opposition, particularly the PAIGC, denounced a process likely to strengthen the executive and entrench the junta’s grip. Parties and civil society organisations boycotted the referendum. The new Constitution thus crystallised a contradiction: the transition promises elections, but political rules are being reshaped by institutions established under military rule.
The electoral calendar under strain
As the vote approaches, holding elections on 6 December appears uncertain. The electoral commission believes technical conditions will not be met in time, and the Prime Minister says parties are not ready to participate in a reliable vote. A postponement would therefore pose a direct risk to the main deadline meant to justify the transition’s duration.
Authorities may cite organisational constraints to explain a delay. But for part of the opposition and observers, a postponement would also prolong military control over the political process. The issue is not limited to the date of the vote: it concerns the ability of parties to compete freely, access to media, the safety of candidates and voters, and the neutrality of security forces.
Credibility will be measured by actions
The promise of a return to civilian order cannot be judged solely on an official calendar. It will depend on concrete guarantees: allowing the opposition to participate, clarifying the situation of imprisoned or exiled officials, ensuring freedom of expression, and guaranteeing that electoral institutions can act without military pressure.
A vote held in a climate of fear or exclusion risks prolonging the crisis instead of resolving it. Conversely, an inclusive process, with rules accepted by key actors and a respected timeline, could open the way out of the transition. In Guinea-Bissau, the question now is whether the promise made after the coup will become a genuine transfer of power—or remain an commitment with no certain deadline.