Bandiagara civilian massacre: CNDH calls on Mali to uphold state duties

As central Mali sinks deeper into an unrelenting spiral of violence, the National Human Rights Commission (CNDH) has broken its silence following the attacks on Ningari and Sarédina, exposing the structural weaknesses in the transitional state’s security approach.

The pattern has become tragically predictable: villages attacked, defenceless civilians executed, homes set ablaze, followed by the inevitable flood of official statements expressing outrage and sympathy. The recent atrocities in the Bandiagara area, specifically in Ningari and Sarédina, underscore a harsh truth that official rhetoric struggles to hide: despite triumphant claims about the growing strength of the Malian Armed Forces (FAMa), the day-to-day protection of citizens remains a glaring failure.

The illusion of territorial control and civilian abandonment

The CNDH’s statement, signed by its interim president, lawyer Aissata Founè Tembely, serves as a stark wake-up call to the authorities in Bamako. By stressing that the safety of people and property is the state’s ‘primary sovereign duty’, the CNDH effectively highlights administrative and military shortcomings on the ground.

In the Dogon Country, the security vacuum created by the absence or ineffectiveness of continuous state operations leaves populations at the mercy of armed terrorist groups. While public discourse focuses on national sovereignty and media management, the fundamental social contract between the state and its citizens in central Mali has been shattered. Sovereignty cannot be measured by the firmness of speeches in Bamako, but by the real ability to protect a farmer or trader in Ningari.

Institutionalised impunity and the rhetoric of futile investigations

As with every tragedy, the CNDH calls for ‘independent and impartial’ investigations to bring those responsible to justice. But how credible are these calls when the judicial system is effectively paralysed in conflict zones?

The accumulation of massacres without any major trial to assign responsibility fuels a devastating sense of impunity. Without concrete prosecutions, demands for investigations begin to look like a bureaucratic ritual meant to fill an institutional void. This absent justice erodes public trust in the state and inevitably pushes communities toward self-defence or opportunistic alliances, worsening the fragmentation of the social fabric.

The all-military trap and humanitarian law violations

By urging FAMa to strictly respect International Humanitarian Law (IHL), the CNDH also highlights the risks of a purely military strategy without safeguards. In their pursuit of terrorist groups, security forces and their auxiliaries are frequently accused by civil society of indiscriminate actions and abuses against local populations.

This approach, which prioritises numbers and media-friendly operations over lasting community security, produces the opposite of the desired effect. Each mistake or summary execution becomes a powerful recruitment tool for extremist groups. By reminding that the fight against terrorism cannot disregard human rights, the CNDH warns: a military victory achieved at the expense of the law is an illusion that sows the seeds of future unrest.

The CNDH’s warning is clear. If transitional authorities continue to favour political posturing and security-focused communication over real, impartial, and judicial protection of citizens, Mali risks losing far more than territory—it risks losing the very legitimacy of its state.