### Charles Blé Goudé and the stake of nationality and electorate in Côte d’Ivoire
On April 25, 2025, the decision of the Gagnoa Court of First Instance to reject the appeal of a militant of the Pan -African Congress for Justice and Equality of Peoples (COJEP) concerning the re -registration on the electoral lists of Charles Blé Goudé marked a significant step in the Ivorian political process. Acquitled by the International Criminal Court (ICC) of the accusations of crimes against humanity, Mr. Blé Goudé remains however under a conviction in his country, thus preventing his eligibility for the presidential election scheduled for October 25, 2025.
This situation raises complex questions about justice, political equity and civil rights in Côte d’Ivoire. To better understand the underlying issues, several dimensions should be explored.
### a examination of justice and civil rights
The Charles Blé Goudé affair questions both the principle of national justice and the implications of international justice. Supported by supporters who consider that his acquittal in The Hague should cancel his national conviction, Mr. Blé Goudé, former Minister of Youth, evokes what he considers as an “injustice” on the part of Ivorian justice. The latter stresses that his condemnation in absentia, while he participated in an international trial, raises the question of the legitimacy of such decisions in a context of separation of legal proceedings.
It is interesting to note that Ivorian justice is thus found at a crossroads: should it follow a path aligned with international decisions, or its own standards and legislation? This dichotomy highlights tensions which are often present in post-conflict states, where systems of national and international justice must coexist and interact.
#### An exclusion policy?
The declarations of Maître Serge Ouraga, spokesperson for COJEP, also evoke a perception widely shared by certain actors of the opposition: that of a will of the RHDP power (Rally of Houphouëttes for Democracy and Peace) to maintain a political framework which deliberately excludes opponents. This feeling emerges in a context where political tensions are often exacerbated by memories of the post-electoral crisis of 2010-2011, a period marked by human rights violence and violations.
The question that arises is to assess whether these accusations of systematic exclusion are founded. The authorities defend themselves by affirming that the laws in force must be respected. This raises questions about the necessary balance between democratic governance, electoral transparency and respect for civil rights.
#### to amnesty and dialogue
COJEP called for the adoption of an amnesty law to allow M. Blé Goudé and other political figures to reintegrate the electoral game. The outcome of this issue could be decisive for the political future of Côte d’Ivoire. A law of amnesty could not only bring a form of reconciliation, but also pave the way for a constructive dialogue between the government and the opposition parties.
However, this amnesty could also arouse concern. How could Ivorian society react to such a decision, which could be perceived as an impunity in the face of acts passed judged serious? The search for a balanced solution is therefore essential.
### Reflections and reflections
In the meantime, the question remaining open is: which direction will choose Côte d’Ivoire in the coming months as the presidential election approaches? The decisions that will be made around the question of Charles Blé Goudé and other opposition leaders could well orient the political climate, affect the public confidence in the electoral process and shape the country’s democratic trajectory.
It is important for all actors, whether supporters or opponents, to engage in a constructive dialogue, capable of promoting constructive reconciliation and lasting peace within the nation. This path to appeasement could not only benefit the current political situation, but also lay the foundations for a more solid and inclusive democracy for the future of Côte d’Ivoire.