Faye And The Challenge Of Governance In Senegal -By Usman Sarki

“My practice of reflection had also convinced me that there is nothing on earth that turns quicker on its pivot than political idealism when touched by the breath of practical politics” – Joseph Conrad

Field Marshall Helmut Von Moltke’s dictum that “No plan of operations extends with certainty beyond the first encounter with the enemy’s main strength”, is among the most quoted remarks about the realities of war. As it is in the field of battle, so it is in the arena of politics! No plan survives the first contact with reality, which is the “enemy” in politics. Plans must be revised, redrawn, improvised, corrected, ascertained and even abandoned, when they come in contact with the objective conditions of life and circumstances in the field.

Plans drawn up in the political party rooms and offices, when brought in contact with the realities of societal chaos, group or personal interests, political and economic complexities and the general convolutions of public policy, might no longer look the same or even seem appropriate to the conditions confronting the leader at any given time or moment. Coming into office from the opposition with a mindset to undo what the predecessor government has done may seem logical, however, it may be perilous as well, when tested against the obligations that have been assumed in the name of the people and the country at large.

As such, when leaders make pronouncements, they must make allowance for “unforeseen circumstances” and room for adjustments should be made in case things turn out different from their earlier supposition. It is with these possibilities in mind that I write today about the challenges awaiting President Bassirou Diomaye Faye of Senegal, who was sworn into office on Wednesday, April 2, 2024. In his inauguration address, President Faye outlined his vision for his country in terms of what he could deliver while in office. His vision is clear, forthright and laudable. But the notion of “Mission, Vision and Objectives” are corporate fictions that are usually made up to provide a semblance of respectability to the outlooks of companies while in reality, they may not necessarily be what they stand for.

In government, caution is the best accompaniment of policies, which serves to restrain the policy-makers from being carried away by enthusiasm and a sense of “mission” that might end up in disappointment and apathy. Accordingly, in order to stay within the boundaries of objectivity and realism, a dose of caution, creative thinking and decisiveness is required when all the facts and factors are put into the scale of chance and weighed carefully in the estimation of the policy-makers.

President Bassirou Diomaye Faye has stated that he would review some major contracts that have been executed by the erstwhile government of his predecessor, President Macky Sall, especially in the oil, gas and minerals sectors. This is within his right as a president, but the implication is that the sacrosanct nature of contractual obligations will now be put into question in Senegal, while the appropriateness of decisions of an elected government acting in sovereign capacity in the name and the interest of the people may be subjected to second guessing.

Under these circumstances, any future government that comes into office may as well decide to revise any decisions or contracts that would be executed by President Faye, and invalidate them as a matter of “policy”. The stability for which Senegal is renowned and the sense of certainty around which government activities are carried out, will now be put into question, and doubts about Senegal’s commitment to meeting its obligations might become a new sentiment at home and abroad.

President Faye may seem eager to keep his campaign promises to renegotiate the terms of oil, gas and mineral contracts entered into with foreign companies in the country. However, for practical purposes and in line with observing legal niceties, it would be much better if he would defer to the advice of his government departments that were responsible for making the initial arrangements with these foreign operators. At the moment, the decision to review the contracts might affect some notable companies that have received concessions to explore and produce oil and gas as well as minerals like gold in Senegal.

Among these are the following: British Petroleum, BP, which operates the Greater Tortue Ahmeyin liquified natural gas, LNG, assets; Kosmo Energy of the USA which is responsible for developing the Yakaar-Teranga gas field together with BP; Woodside Energy of Australia that works the Sangomar oil and gas assets; Total of France that searches for oil and gas offshore in the Rufisque area; Oranto of Nigeria that is involved in exploration in the Cayer offshore area; Endeavour of Australia that is working the Sabodala-Massawa goldfields and others; Managem of Morocco that is also involved in the Boto Gold Project; as well as Dangote Cement of Nigeria that is producing about 1.5 million tons of the product per year in Senegal.

These and other projects involving foreign investors and their local partners no doubt contribute to the development of the Senegalese economy from any angle that they may be viewed. Regardless of this however, any measures that may be taken to ensure probity in reaching contractual agreements should be welcomed so long as they do not appear contradictory to the spirit of mutual understanding and benefits in the exploitation of the country’s natural resources.

The political-economy of extracting natural resources in Africa or any other parts of the world is a complex issue that would require careful handling and appropriate recourse to existing best practices. As such, the Diomaye Faye government will be well advised to consult broadly before undertaking the intended review of contracts in the extractive sector. This is because of longterm impacts like legal actions against it for breaches of contracts and reneging on contractual obligations.

African governments do have recourse to sound and professional advice when negotiating contracts with multinational corporations in the field of extractive industries. Institutional leverage provided by groups like the African Development Bank, AfDB, and the UN Economic Commission for Africa, UN-ECA, for instance, could be taken advantage of, in order to arrive at better deals for the countries involved in such transactions with foreign corporations. The Norwegian Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative, EITI, is also another facility that could be leveraged by African governments to ensure the soundness of contracts with foreign corporations and the observance of appropriate probity in the policies of concessions in exploitation of resources.

Where there are fears of malpractices or untoward behaviours, international anti-corruption agencies like GIABA which is located in Dakar, Senegal, and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime, UNODC, as well as national anti-corruption agencies and professional bodies, could be involved in the negotiation processes, to ensure probity and protect the integrity of the contracts. Also, reflecting the relevant provisions of the legally binding United Nations Convention Against Corruption (2003) in contracts could be another measure that may be adopted to prevent unwholesome practices creeping into the award of concessions in our countries.

The declared intention of carrying out an ‘audit’ of the contracts for extraction of natural resources in Senegal may seem timely, especially against the background of pervasive corruption in such situations in most of Africa. However, if such an exercise is done with a mind to embarrass an exiting government, then it would seem inappropriate by the standards of political judgement that does not distinguish between obligations and reciprocal trust in given commitments. Contractual obligations no matter how odious must be deemed sacrosanct until and unless they are proven detrimental in their substance and purpose to the commonwealth, or to one party to the deal in particular.

Where no such facts are established, it would be better to carry on with the projects while carefully determining the pace of their execution, with an intended purpose of reviewing the provisions of their terms and conditions at opportune moments. This may sound conservative and even reactionary to the radical mind, but it should be realised that between 1918 and 1922 or thereabouts, contracts that were entered into by the Tsarit government in Russia, including those to do with loans from the capitalist countries, were honoured by the Bolsheviks under Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. That was purposefully done for the sake of survival of the new regime and the possibilities of accessing much needed capital from the Western countries.

Likewise, for Senegal to retain its image as a favoured destination of investment in Africa, as well as live up to its name as a stable democracy in the continent, the policy of reviewing contractual obligations should be weighed carefully against the consequences that might imperil the larger economic interests of the country.

I would therefore urge President Faye to be seized more with finding ways to address the growing youth unemployment in his country and the protection of his key natural resource which is the fisheries industry, from the ravages of uncontrolled exploitation by foreign fishing fleets.

He should also immediately seek ways to diversify the economy of Senegal to create more opportunities for value addition especially in the agricultural sector, in order to generate more capital and employment. Stemming the migration of Senegalese making the perilous journey across the Atlantic to Europe, should also be an urgent task of the government, by which the lives of young Senegalese might be preserved, and their dignity and respect enhanced.