Families of the missing are raising the alarm, demanding answers about the whereabouts of their loved ones, the conditions of their detention, and their legal status. Above all, they insist that if any wrongdoing is alleged, their cases must be referred to the judiciary. Yet, defenders of the transitional authorities argue that national security imperatives and the fight against terrorism justify these extraordinary measures.

State necessity or overreach?

«There is a military prosecutor’s investigation underway, which requires exceptional resources,» explains Tiambel Guimbayara, Malian journalist and editor-in-chief of La Voix du Mali, a vocal supporter of the current regime. The principle of state necessity allows authorities to take any measure deemed necessary for national security. After all, the April 25 attacks claimed the life of Defense Minister General Sadio Camara, one of the regime’s most pivotal figures. In the face of terrorism, I firmly believe state necessity must prevail—especially in exceptional circumstances.»

Protecting the nation without losing its soul

This justification, however, clashes with Mali’s Constitution and international obligations, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights. Both treaties, to which Mali is a signatory, establish a delicate balance: the state’s right to self-defense must not come at the cost of fundamental freedoms. This is the stance emphasized by Jean-François Akandji-Kombé, a professor at the Sorbonne and an expert in international and African community law.

«The Malian state has every right to protect its citizens from terrorism,» states Professor Akandji-Kombé. Yet, in doing so, it cannot suspend due process or fundamental rights such as the presumption of innocence, access to legal counsel, or the right to a fair trial. These are not negotiable—they are the bedrock of a cohesive society. The state must not sacrifice its moral integrity in the name of security, no matter the threat.»

Critics argue that the regime is exploiting the post-April 25 attacks narrative to eliminate political opponents advocating for democratic governance.

Since the wave of detentions began three weeks ago, no official statement has been issued by the transitional authorities.

The legal team representing the family of human rights lawyer Mountaga Tall released a statement on Tuesday, expressing «deep dismay» over the disappearance of his son, Cheikh Mamadou Tall, on May 16. The collective called on «competent administrative and judicial authorities to take all necessary steps to secure the release of both individuals and to clarify the circumstances of their disappearance.»