Conflict in the National Assembly: the executive branch asserts its untouchable position

Mis à jour le 21 May 2026

In 2026, the Malagasy political landscape is marked by open conflict between the National Assembly and the executive branch, whose position now appears unshakeable in the face of opposition attempts or external forces. The crisis, fueled by growing tension surrounding power and its limits, raises numerous questions about the legitimacy and democratic stability of the current regime. The current context reveals an executive branch solidified by a rigid legal framework, developed during the political transition, which grants it near-total immunity from any institutional or citizen challenge. Yet, this seemingly unassailable power raises fundamental issues for the country’s future governance, particularly in the face of an opposition seeking to rebalance authority between the different branches of government.

This conflict, while perceptible in the political arena, also has its roots in a strained economic situation, high levels of corruption, and a persistent social crisis. The systemic crises facing Madagascar in 2026, particularly those related to land, security, and governance, fuel public distrust of the state and its representatives. The government, whether intentionally or not, plays a catalytic role in this ongoing crisis by entrenching its institutions and consolidating its position with the argument that any challenge to it could jeopardize national stability. However, this stance inevitably sparks heated debates about the legitimacy of authority, transparency, and genuine democracy. The central question remains: how far can the executive branch remain untouchable without undermining democratic legitimacy?

The main issues at stake in the conflict between the National Assembly and the executive branch in 2026 This conflict hinges on crucial constitutional and political issues that will determine the country’s institutional future. The division of powers, the Assembly’s capacity to oversee the government, and the limits of presidential authority are at the heart of the debates. The current position of the executive branch, asserting that its institutions are inviolable until the end of the transition, rests on a specific legal interpretation, reinforced by the decision of the High Constitutional Court (HCC). During the transfer of power to Colonel Michaël Randrianirina following the removal of Andry Rajoelina, the HCC confirmed the legal stability of these transitional institutions, which no motion of censure could call into question, according to recent political analysis.

Opposition forces, particularly within the National Assembly, are seeking concrete solutions to what appears to be excessive and near-absolute executive domination. The attempted motion of no confidence, mentioned by some members of parliament, would be a major step, but according to institutional sources, any such initiative is now considered unlikely, given how much the current legal framework and jurisprudence favor the authority of the central government. The parliamentary majority, for its part, is showing unwavering support for the government, even going so far as to dismiss any opposition as purely political, or even fabricated as a form of settling scores, according to some analysts. The legal framework strengthens the executive’s position in the face of institutional challenges.

A thorough analysis of the legal framework, revealing the robustness of Madagascar’s institutional structure, shows that the 2026 constitution was designed to guarantee state stability in the face of any crisis. The legal doctrine applied during the transfer of power, particularly by the High Constitutional Court (HCC), establishes legal immunity for the incumbent president and, by extension, for the government. The specific nature of this legal ambiguity lies in the fact that neither political rotation nor threats of removal by the Assembly can, in practice, challenge the existing majority, except by considering a constitutional revision. However, this option now seems unattainable, as the presidential majority enjoys strong legislative support and a caucus of loyal deputies. Legal stability thus becomes an ultimate weapon for the executive branch, which sees it as a guarantee against any attempt at destabilization or dissolution.

This legal safeguard, however, raises serious concerns, particularly regarding democracy and the balance of powers. The concentration of power in the hands of the government creates a climate of frustration among dissidents and requires increased vigilance, particularly from civil society and international observers. The persistence of this conflict could also undermine the credibility of Malagasy institutions globally, especially since several reports highlight a worrying trend toward disguised authoritarianism, according to some analyses.

The key question remains: how to ensure effective control without jeopardizing this legal stability, which currently seems untouchable? The role of political actors in the 2026 institutional crisisPolitical actors operating within this context play a decisive role in either escalating or resolving tensions. The Speaker of the National Assembly, Siteny Randrianasoloniako, and Prime Minister Herintsalama Rajaonarivelo are two key figures in this crisis. Despite rumors of a potential no-confidence motion, the Speaker insists on the legitimacy of the current government, reiterating the Assembly’s unanimous support for the functioning of the institutions. Siteny Randrianasoloniako’s firm response to those seeking to destabilize the government illustrates his determination to preserve legitimate authority in the face of partisan pressure, according to a recent study.

For their part, some opposition members accuse Siteny Randrianasoloniako of orchestrating a modernized version of an institutional coup, arguing that the current majority relies more on a legal framework than on genuine political debate. Citizen mobilization, despite everything, is beginning to gain momentum, with calls for a revision of the rules to restore a more balanced power structure. Tensions remain high, and the opposition’s ability to make its voice heard in this entrenched context will be crucial to the evolution of the conflict within Malagasy institutions. The risks of a power structure excessively strengthened by current legislation.

A major risk lies in the authoritarian drift that this legal immutability could provoke. The excessive concentration of power could, in the long run, seriously limit citizen participation and eliminate any possibility of genuine criticism, in favor of an executive branch that presents itself as unassailable. The current crisis also reflects a disconnect between existing legislation and modern democratic requirements. If this situation persists, Madagascar’s international image could suffer lasting damage, particularly in light of growing concerns about the rule of law and fundamental rights.

The following table summarizes the main risks and challenges related to institutional conflict in 2026:

⚠️ Risks 📝 Challenges

A reform of essential rules, allowing for a better balance of power, could also contribute to restoring democracy. Revising certain articles of the constitution to limit the concentration of power is a possible avenue, but it must be carried out within a consensual and democratic framework so as not to further fuel the crisis. The country must also commit firmly to the fight against corruption and strengthen local governance, in order to remind everyone that legitimate authority must remain a service to the people and not a weapon against its own citizens. The current situation demands collective mobilization around a stabilizing and inclusive project.

The Impact of Systemic Crises on Malagasy Sovereignty in 2026

Beyond the institutional conflict, Madagascar faces major challenges related to its systemic crises. The land issue, which fuels conflicts like that of Sakatia, remains a barrier to economic stability. The opaque and contested management of these crises weakens national sovereignty and strengthens the power of certain lobbies or hidden interest groups. The fight against the illegal trafficking of heavy weapons, often smuggled through clandestine routes, is also a security challenge requiring a collective and coordinated response to the security threat.

Systemic crises also affect the management of natural resources, particularly in the Mantasoa region, where searches have uncovered illicit activities, exacerbating distrust of the state. The persistence of these problems contributes to a deterioration of the social fabric and a weakening of sovereignty, making a genuine commitment to improved governance the only way to restore trust and stability. International actors and their role in the Malagasy crisisIn this context of systemic and political conflict, the international community plays an increasingly decisive role in supporting Madagascar’s stability.

UN support and SADC’s efforts toward institutional reform offer a glimmer of hope for a lasting resolution to the crisis. Regional cooperation and diplomatic support are essential to prevent a slide toward authoritarianism and to foster genuine dialogue among all parties.

To this end, it is imperative that the international community bring together all stakeholders to develop a balanced dialogue framework that respects fundamental rights and laws. Mediation must be based on a better understanding of the roots of the conflict, particularly regarding the legitimacy of the transitional institutions, while avoiding partisan interference in Malagasy sovereignty.

Institutional reforms for balanced power by 2026

A key path to breaking the deadlock lies in a profound reform of the institutional frameworks, which would establish a lasting balance between legislative, executive, and judicial powers. The current context, marked by entrenched legislation, hinders any progress towards a more participatory and responsive democracy in the face of social and economic problems. A consensual revision of the articles relating to the separation of powers, in consultation with civil society and the international community, must become a priority in order to build more transparent governance grounded in legality, according to a recent study.

Investing in civic education and modernizing the administration would also strengthen the state’s capacity to meet the legitimate expectations of its citizens. Institutional consolidation, while respecting democracy, appears to be the key to sustainably overcoming this complex crisis and preserving national sovereignty in the face of challenges that an excessively strong power could exacerbate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xD4cVOcEzjI

How does the legislation strengthen the executive branch’s position?

The 2026 constitution, supported by the High Constitutional Court, solidified the legal framework protecting the executive branch against any motion of censure or attempt at dissolution. What are the risks associated with this legal irremovability?

The main risk is a slide towards authoritarianism, where the excessive concentration of power limits any citizen participation and weakens Malagasy democracy.

What role do international actors play in resolving the conflict?

The UN and SADC are trying to support Madagascar towards institutional reform and a peaceful dialogue, while also supporting stability and respect for fundamental rights.

What institutional reforms could ease the crisis?

A consensual reform of the fundamental texts, aimed at balancing powers while consolidating democratic legitimacy, would represent a crucial step towards breaking the deadlock.