** Tidjane Thiam: An electoral radiation in a political context tense in Côte d’Ivoire **
On April 22, 2025, Ivorian justice decided to raft Tidjane Thiam, head of the opposition and emblematic figure of the political landscape, of the electoral list. This decision, based on the complex question of nationality, raises many questions about the current political climate in Côte d’Ivoire, less than six months from the presidential elections.
Tidjane Thiam, born in Côte d’Ivoire, acquired French nationality in 1987. Article 48 of the Ivorian nationality code stipulates that the acquisition of a foreign nationality leads to the automatic loss of Ivorian nationality, a rule which was disputed by Thiam and its lawyers because of its origins. He renounced his French nationality in March 2025, in the hope of being able to be a candidate, an act which, according to his support, should have allowed his re-registration on the electoral lists.
The reaction of the Tidjane Camp Thiam to this judicial decision was unequivocal: they denounce “maneuvers” orchestrated by the power in place to rule out their candidate. This accusation is part of a broader context, where several opposition figures, such as ex-president Laurent Gbagbo and Prime Minister Guillaume Soro, are also radiated or excluded from electoral processes, which raises concerns about the equity and transparency of the upcoming elections.
The question of nationality in Côte d’Ivoire is particularly sensitive and has deep identity issues. Political rivalries are often exacerbated by ethnic and cultural considerations, resulting in polarization which can be harmful to national cohesion. Even though the country endeavors to advance towards political and social stability, decisions will impact not only political actors, but also citizens, in terms of democratic commitment and confidence in institutions.
This situation also questions the role that justice plays in the management of political affairs. For some, a strictly political separation should remain between legal proceedings and the political game, while others argue that judicial decisions are sometimes influenced by political considerations. The implications of these interactions on the legitimacy of decisions are numerous. In view of international bodies, the transparency of legal proceedings is essential to guarantee the confidence of citizens in the system.
While Tidjane Thiam is thus prevented from presenting himself to the elections, what would this exclusion represent for the Ivorian political landscape? The answer perhaps lies in the way in which political parties, opposition and power, choose to approach the elections to come. An election campaign marked by exclusion risks strengthening tensions and further weakening democracy.
At the dawn of these elections, it is imperative to ask the question of possible ways for a constructive dialogue between political actors. How to restore a climate of trust where all stakeholders feel represented and listened to? What reforms would be necessary to preserve the integrity of the electoral process while respecting the fundamental rights of candidates and voters?
The current situation calls for in -depth reflection on the need to integrate concerns related to nationality in a pluralist and inclusive framework. In this sense, Côte d’Ivoire is at a decisive crossroads in its history, where the choices made today can define the foundations of its political and social future. A future which, hopefully, will favor reconciliation and national solidarity to the detriment of rivalries and exclusion.
Through these dynamics, the evolution of the case of Tidjane Thiam could become a symbol of the challenges to be overcome to restore confidence in the democratic process and the rule of law in Côte d’Ivoire. Such a situation could encourage political and judicial actors to work hand in hand to ensure that the rights of citizens, and by extension democracy, are fully respected.