The illegitimacy of the government is based in the following list of undermining factors:
1. The coup was led by a selection of young military officers who not only deposed the government, but arrested and gaoled the generals. This was not only a coup but a mutiny. The mutiny has not been rectified; those junior officers remain in power over the military. The military holds the strings here, they have the monopoly on violence, and those responsible for the coup have only stepped back from public responsibility for the power they hold.
2. The President was forced to flee the country and was then replaced with someone (following ECOWAS pressure) who the military had flex with. This flex resided in the fact that they led a mob to his office and hospitalised him through a brutal beating. This pressure, the threat of violence, was accompanied by the military defeat and torture of the Presidential guard, which was formerly the only thing standing between the President and the military. That threat has not gone away.
3. The former Prime Minister, when he looked to act independently of the military, was kidnapped and threatened until he resigned publicly, not stating a reason. His replacement was appointed by the military.
4. The most central player who shaped the makeup of the cabinet was Sanogo, who appointed men loyal to him in position related to defence and security. The military is still in control of key institutions in the country, something that ECOWAS has flagged as an immense problem.
5. The previous government was famed for its corruption, with politicians living lives far in excess of their salaries. This is one of the factors that led to the coup, with the young officers wanting a piece of the pie.
All of these factors, were they in a country without an ideological imperative towards painting the country as democratic in order to justify intervention, would represent to any person of sound mind a fundamental indication that the government was not legitimate. ECOWAS has repeatedly called for Sanogo to step back from his influence on politics, calling for elections at multiple occasions, calls that have been ignored.
Now if ECOWAS doesn't view the government as legitimate, I find that individuals accusing me of trumping up the illegitimacy of the government for my own ideological ends fall a bit flat. This may be an appeal to authority but over the last few weeks I have been reading a huge volume of literature on the subject, none of them use the kind of language that people here use to describe the government. It is a given that the military is in de facto control of the South.
Now, Mael, if the above factors were in play in my country, could you look me in the eye and tell me that you viewed your government as being legitimate? Simplet, could you?
I'll be frank the subject is of little interest to me in the 1rst place, so you won't see me long here.
I won't argue that the coup was legitimate (although if it was to remove a "corrupt" government legitimacy can be lent here as it is always the case when a coup succeed).
I'd argue however that if the status of the constitution are followed and the current government got to its positions through a strict adherence to it there's no arguing the legitimacy or you're arguing that the constitution ITSELF is without value (just so that we're clear to me there's no arguing that the constitution absolutely trumps sharia law as far as legitimacy goes for obvious reasons).
We won't even discuss the rebels here as they're not trying to put back the elected officials but want to take the country for themselves anyway, this has as much legitimacy as nigeria claiming the land.
I'm not arguing that the situation is ideal and that birds were singing the praise of the officials and everything was all and well.
I'm saying that if the law state that if anything happen to the president another elected official take its place, that alone doesn't make the new official illegitimate and a rebellion by armed forces looking to basically destroy the country and its constitution is a better solution.
The new official being taken for president is not illegitimate, him being pressured is another thing entirely.