Whether or not Andry Rajoelina’s toppling was a coup, the key is how long it takes to restore democratic civilian government.

Coups have once again become rather endemic in Africa, though they are not always acknowledged as such. Between 2020 and 2025, there were eleven successful putsches plus a few attempts. One of the latest was the toppling of Madagascar’s president Andry Rajoelina in October last year.

That came after a popular Gen Z uprising against poor service delivery, especially electricity blackouts and water shortages. When the powerful Army Corps of Personnel and Administrative and Technical Services (CAPSAT) military unit switched sides, Rajoelina realised the game was up and fled the country.

Parliament voted overwhelmingly to impeach him and the High Constitutional Court later installed CAPSAT head Colonel Michael Randrianirina as president. Randrianirina has invoked this decision to argue that his accession to power was not a coup.

The African Union (AU) disagreed and immediately suspended Madagascar in line with its policy against unconstitutional changes of government. The Southern African Development Community (SADC) decided to engage Randrianirina and his government to support his promised restoration of democratic civilian government within two years.

In line with that decision, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa, interim SADC chairperson, received Randrianirina, head of the so-called Refoundation of the Republic of Madagascar, in Pretoria on 16 January.

Ramaphosa’s office said in a statement that Randrianirina had briefed him ‘on the steps being taken towards a peaceful transitional process, which includes a national dialogue amongst all the people of Madagascar.’

‘President Ramaphosa welcomed the briefing and in line with the decision of SADC, took the opportunity to reiterate the need to support Madagascar’s transition to constitutional democracy with an inclusive national dialogue that will lead to elections as soon as possible.’

He also reaffirmed SADC’s decision to deploy its Panel of Elders to Madagascar. Former Malawian president Joyce Banda will lead that mission next week.

Diplomats told ISS Today the Malagasy leader had also urged Ramaphosa to intercede with the AU to persuade it to reverse its suspension of his government. They said there was some unhappiness in Addis Ababa about the Pretoria meeting, especially since Ramaphosa’s statement made no reference to the coup.

Nevertheless, Randrianirina’s government also seems to have gone down well with France, Madagascar’s most important European partner. French President Emmanuel Macron pledged support to the transition in a phone call with the Malagasy leader on 29 November.

On 19 January, Madagascar’s Foreign Minister Christine Razanamahasoa met French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot in Paris. In a joint statement they committed to ‘a renewed partnership agreement consistent with the Refoundation’s priorities.’

‘France remains committed to meeting the urgent needs of Madagascar and its people, especially young people,’ the statement said, pledging especially to support those services of which the lack of delivery had sparked the protests. ‘France … reaffirms its full support for continuing the process with a view to holding free and transparent elections according to the established timetable.’

This positive tone was particularly significant since Rajoelina had been seen by some of his political opponents as representing French interests. Paris though, was no doubt being pragmatic. It has many enduring interests in Madagascar – economic, political and strategic interests linked to its Indian Ocean military presence.

What is clear is that however Rajoelina went, most Malagasy would have thought he deserved to go. He was by many measures leading a corrupt, inept and autocratic government that was aggravating the plight of citizens, already among the poorest in the world.

That assessment is not strictly relevant to how his ouster is defined, though it should be part of the wider debate about how to prevent coups. It is another case in which the AU and regional economic communities should have been tougher on the bad governance that often provokes coups.

And variations in the responses of the AU and SADC to Rajoelina’s removal have inevitably added to the continuing continental debate about how to respond to coups – or more broadly, ‘unconstitutional changes of government’. The fact that such upheavals have become more frequent suggests that AU suspension alone is not an effective deterrent.

The AU, like SADC, has appointed a special envoy to Madagascar, top Djibouti diplomat Mohamed Idris Farah, who has been to the country and produced a report with an action plan that aligns with SADC’s. So although there is not a complete divergence between the AU and SADC approaches, the AU’s stance is clearly more punitive and less tolerant of coups than that of SADC.

For the long-suffering Malagasy, the new government has brought some small relief: fewer power cuts and better water supply. More important to monitor will be whether the promised national consultation concludes in time in May, and leads to either amendments or the drafting of a new constitution – and elections.

The think tank Amani Africa has expressed concern that Randrianirina has allowed himself two years to restore civilian government, especially since the High Constitutional Court ‘tasked him to hold elections within 60 days of its decision.’ That was according to ‘the Constitution’s Article 53, which requires a presidential election within 30 to 60 days after the High Constitutional Court declares the office vacant.’

Faced with a fait accompli, SADC, France and others have little choice but to place their trust in Randrianirina to keep his promise. But they should all remain vigilant to ensure the transition remains on track.

Written by Peter Fabricius, Consultant, ISS Pretoria