By Lemmy Ughegbe, Ph.D
The Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) stands on the threshold of some of its most important meetings in years.
From 9 to 12 December 2025, Ministers and senior officials will gather in Abuja for the 55th Meeting of the Mediation and Security Council and the 95th Ordinary Session of the ECOWAS Council of Ministers.
Days later, on 14 December, the Heads of State and Government will convene for their 68th Ordinary Session.
These gatherings were expected to confront the region’s worsening security landscape and the deepening political fractures across West Africa. Instead, they are likely to be overshadowed by an internal crisis that strikes at the heart of the institution’s credibility.
That crisis centres on the actions of the President of the ECOWAS Commission, Dr Omar Alieu Touray, who is accused of breaching the organisation’s foundational Treaty by unilaterally stripping a Nigerian Commissioner, Prof Nazifi Abdullahi Darma, of all delegated authority.
The matter is now before the ECOWAS Court of Justice. What appears on the surface as an administrative dispute is, in reality, a profound challenge to the legality, stability and moral authority of ECOWAS.
On 30 October 2025, the Commission President issued a memo revoking all powers previously assigned to Professor Darma, citing insubordination and poor performance as the reasons. The Commissioner maintains that these allegations were never brought to his attention and that no formal disciplinary procedures were initiated against him.
Most importantly, the ECOWAS Council of Ministers, which under Articles 18 and 19 of the 2006 Supplementary Protocol is the only body empowered to discipline or remove Commissioners, was bypassed entirely. The affected Commissioner has now sought judicial relief, arguing that the President acted outside the bounds of the Treaty.
From a governance standpoint, this is no small matter. ECOWAS was designed to be a community governed by rules, not the whims of individuals. The Commission itself was structured as a college of Commissioners, each appointed by sovereign member states and protected by clear legal frameworks.
As a prominent official of Make A Difference Initiative, MADI, put it: “The actions attributed to the ECOWAS Commission President are not just improper. They strike at the very heart of the Treaty that holds this institution together.”
What makes this situation even more troubling is the emerging pattern of concentration of power around the President. The Director of the Cabinet of the ECOWAS Commission, one of the most influential positions within the institution, is Mr Abdou Kolley, a Gambian national appointed under the current administration.
This means that the two most powerful offices within the Commission, the President and the Director of the Cabinet, are both held by nationals of The Gambia. The Director of the Cabinet serves as the gatekeeper to the Commission President, the coordinator of policy execution, and the interface between Commissioners and the Presidency.
When nationals of the same country occupy both positions, and serious allegations arise about unilateral decision-making, it inevitably heightens public concern about balance, fairness and institutional neutrality.
This context becomes even more consequential in light of allegations that Dr Touray attempted to assign commissioner-level responsibilities to his personal appointee from The Gambia. If established, such a move would not only violate the Treaty and the principle of equitable representation but would also give The Gambia disproportionate influence within the Commission at the expense of other member states, especially Nigeria.
Nigeria, which provides nearly 90 per cent of ECOWAS’ financial and logistical resources, cannot be marginalised without profound implications for the organisation’s legitimacy. As MADI clearly stated: “Nigeria carries the weight of ECOWAS. It funds the organisation, stabilises it and provides its strongest institutions. Undermining Nigeria’s Commissioner is undermining ECOWAS itself.”
No responsible country would want its reputation entangled in allegations of institutional imbalance or unilateralism. It is therefore in the interest of The Gambia, as well as that of ECOWAS, to ensure that no individual action creates the perception that one state is overreaching within the institution.
Suppose the allegations against the Commission President are substantiated. In that case, the Gambian Government may need to consider reining in or recalling its national to protect its longstanding friendship with Nigeria and to maintain regional harmony.
Failing to take remedial steps suggests that the Gambian Government is acting on its own agenda to spite Nigeria and promote a power imbalance, thereby detracting from the stability of ECOWAS.
The crisis also unfolds against a backdrop of broader institutional fragility. The past three years have seen ECOWAS confronted by a wave of military coups, contested transitions and the withdrawal of three member states.
Public confidence in the organisation is dramatically lower than it has been in decades. Critics argue that ECOWAS has sometimes appeared inconsistent, firm with military regimes but lenient with civilian leaders who manipulate constitutional provisions to extend their stay in power.
In such a climate, internal violations of the Treaty by the Commission’s highest officeholder cannot be dismissed as merely administrative. They go to the root of ECOWAS’ identity as a guardian of constitutional order. If the institution cannot uphold legality within its own structures, it cannot credibly insist on legality within its member states. If it cannot maintain fairness among its own Commissioners, it cannot demand fairness across the region. If it cannot restrain its own President, it cannot expect to restrain autocrats or military juntas.
This is why the December statutory meetings in Abuja are pivotal. They offer a unique opportunity for ECOWAS to confront the crisis, restore institutional balance and reassert the supremacy of the Treaty. These meetings must not be reduced to routine proceedings or ceremonial speeches. They must address this issue directly, firmly and transparently. As MADI emphasised:
“The December meetings must not gloss over this matter. The Council of Ministers must reopen the Treaty and restate clearly what no office holder may do.”
There must be an unambiguous reaffirmation that the President of the Commission cannot discipline or strip a commissioner of authority. The Council of Ministers must reclaim its disciplinary jurisdiction.
The Heads of State must remind every official that the Treaty is binding, not optional. And The Gambia, whose nationals currently occupy both the Presidency and the Director of Cabinet positions, must act to ensure its reputation is not jeopardised.
The December meetings must articulate a clear agenda anchored on three essential tasks: restoring legality, reining in executive excesses and reaffirming the collegial structure that defines the ECOWAS Commission. Anything short of this would send a dangerous message that the organisation is willing to tolerate violations within even its highest office.
This is a pivotal moment for ECOWAS. It must choose between principle and permissiveness, between institutional integrity and quiet indulgence. As MADI summarised it powerfully:
“This is the moment for ECOWAS to choose between weakness and principle. It must rein in excesses now to prevent deeper institutional damage.”
ECOWAS is too important to drift further into moral free-fall. The December sessions must be the beginning of its renewal.
*Dr Lemmy Ughegbe, FIMC, CMC writes from Abuja
Email: lemmyughegbeofficial@gmail.com
WhatsApp ONLY: +2348069716645
