As central Mali sinks deeper into an unrelenting cycle of violence, the National Human Rights Commission’s (CNDH) response to the attacks on Ningari and Sarédina exposes critical gaps in the transitional government’s security approach.
The pattern has become tragically familiar: villages attacked, defenseless civilians executed, homes set ablaze, followed by the inevitable flood of official statements expressing outrage and sympathy. The recent horrors in the Bandiagara area, specifically in Ningari and Sarédina, highlight a stark truth that official rhetoric tries to obscure: despite confident claims about the growing strength of the Malian armed forces (FAMa), the daily protection of citizens remains a glaring failure.
The illusion of territorial control and civilian abandonment
The CNDH’s statement, signed by its interim president, Me Aissata Founè Tembely, serves as a blunt wake-up call to the authorities in Bamako. By stressing that ensuring the safety of people and property is the state’s ‘primary sovereign duty,’ the CNDH effectively points to administrative and military shortcomings on the ground.
In the Dogon country, the security vacuum left by the absence or ineffectiveness of state mechanisms leaves residents at the mercy of terrorist armed groups. While public discourse focuses on national sovereignty and managing the narrative, the fundamental social contract between the state and its citizens in the central region has been broken. Sovereignty cannot be measured by the firmness of speeches in Bamako, but by the real ability to protect the life of a farmer or trader in Ningari.
Institutionalized impunity and the rhetoric of stalled investigations
As with every tragedy, the CNDH calls for ‘independent and impartial’ investigations to bring perpetrators to justice. But how credible are these demands when the judicial system in conflict zones is effectively paralyzed?
The accumulation of massacres without any significant trial to assign responsibility fuels a devastating sense of impunity. Without concrete prosecutions, calls for investigations start to resemble a bureaucratic ritual meant to fill an institutional void. This absent justice erodes public trust in the state and inevitably pushes communities toward self-defense or opportunistic alliances, further fragmenting the social fabric.
The trap of a military-only approach and humanitarian law violations
By urging the FAMa to strictly adhere to International Humanitarian Law (IHL), the CNDH also highlights the dangers of a purely military strategy without safeguards. In their pursuit of terrorist groups, security forces and their auxiliaries are frequently accused by civil society of indiscriminate actions and abuses against local populations.
This approach, which prioritizes body counts and media-friendly operations over lasting community security, produces the opposite of the intended effect. Every mistake or summary execution becomes a powerful recruitment tool for extremist groups. By reminding that the fight against terrorism cannot disregard human rights, the CNDH warns: a military victory achieved at the expense of the law is merely an illusion that sows the seeds of future unrest.
The CNDH’s warning is unmistakable. If the transitional authorities continue to favor political posturing and security-focused communication over real, impartial, and judicial protection for their citizens, Mali risks losing far more than territory: it will lose the very legitimacy of its state.
