Guinea-Bissau, a small West African nation of 2.2 million people sandwiched between Senegal and Guinea, has been thrust into political turmoil following a military takeover that prominent regional figures allege may have been staged. The November 26 seizure of power came just one day before authorities were scheduled to announce results from the country’s presidential and legislative elections held on November 23.

Background: A Nation Haunted by Instability

Guinea-Bissau has experienced profound political instability since gaining independence from Portugal in 1974. The country has endured nine coups or attempted coups over five decades, with the last successful military takeover occurring in 2012. The nation has also become a significant transit point for drug trafficking between Latin America and Europe, a problem that analysts say has fueled ongoing political crises and corruption.

The recent elections took place against a backdrop of contested legitimacy. President Umaro Sissoco Embaló, who first took office in February 2020, faced questions about whether his five-year term had expired. While the opposition argued his tenure should have ended in February 2025, the Supreme Court ruled it would extend until September. The election was delayed until November amid ongoing disputes about electoral legitimacy and candidate eligibility that civil society organizations criticized.

The Events of November 26

On the morning of the planned coup, gunfire erupted near the presidential palace in the capital, Bissau. What followed was an unusual sequence of events that has sparked widespread skepticism about the takeover’s authenticity. President Embaló himself was among the first to announce his detention, contacting international media outlets including France 24 and Jeune Afrique to report that he had been arrested and removed from power.

The fact that a detained leader maintained access to his phone and could conduct international interviews immediately raised questions among observers. Later that day, military officers calling themselves the High Military Command for the Restoration of National Security and Public Order appeared on state television to announce they had taken complete control of the country. They suspended the electoral process, closed borders, and imposed a curfew. The military justified their intervention by citing the need to prevent manipulation of electoral results by unnamed individuals working with drug traffickers.

Claims of a “Simulated Coup”

Both before official results could be announced, President Embaló and opposition candidate Fernando Dias da Costa claimed victory in the election. According to unofficial tallies circulated by opposition groups, Dias da Costa was leading with a substantial margin.

The Popular Front, a civil society coalition in Guinea-Bissau, immediately accused Embaló and the military of orchestrating a simulated coup designed to block the release of election results. The group suggested the maneuver was intended to allow Embaló to install allies in leadership positions and organize new elections in which he could compete again.

These suspicions gained credibility from multiple regional figures. Senegalese Prime Minister Ousmane Sonko characterized the events as a sham when addressing lawmakers. Former Nigerian President Goodluck Jonathan, who led an election observation mission from the West African Elders Forum, described it as a ceremonial coup, questioning why Embaló would be the first to announce his own overthrow rather than the military leaders themselves. Jonathan noted that military takeovers typically do not allow deposed leaders to conduct press conferences announcing their own arrests.

Adding to the unusual nature of events, on November 27, General Horta Inta-A, the army chief of staff and a close associate of Embaló, was installed as head of a one-year transitional government. Days later, he appointed a new transitional cabinet composed largely of figures aligned with the ousted president. Critics viewed this as further evidence that the coup may have been coordinated with Embaló’s knowledge or consent.

Election Results Destroyed

On December 2, Guinea-Bissau’s electoral commission delivered devastating news: the election results could not be published because armed men had destroyed most of the vote tallies. Electoral commission officials explained that masked gunmen burst into the tabulation center on the morning of November 26, arrested senior electoral officials and judges overseeing the process, and seized or destroyed tally sheets from regions outside the capital.

According to the commission’s account, the attackers confiscated phones and computers from electoral staff, destroyed servers containing vote data, and intercepted tally sheets being transported from other regions. Electoral officials were detained for several days before being released. The destruction of electoral materials means it is now impossible to determine the legitimate winner of the presidential race.

When asked by ECOWAS representatives whether results could still be released, the commission replied negatively, citing the complete loss of materials and equipment necessary to complete the electoral process.

Regional and International Response

The military takeover has drawn widespread condemnation from international bodies. Both the Economic Community of West African States and the African Union suspended Guinea-Bissau’s membership following the coup. United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres called for the immediate restoration of constitutional order and the release of all detained officials, stating that disregarding the will of voters who peacefully cast ballots constitutes an unacceptable violation of democratic principles.

An ECOWAS delegation led by Sierra Leone’s President Julius Maada Bio visited Guinea-Bissau on December 1 to mediate and urge the military to restore democratic governance. The bloc has threatened sanctions and is scheduled to meet on December 14 to discuss the crisis.

Opposition leader Domingos Simões Pereira was arrested during the turmoil, while Fernando Dias da Costa sought protection at the Nigerian embassy in Bissau. Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu authorized protection for Dias da Costa, citing an imminent threat to his life.

President Embaló, after being released by military forces, fled first to Senegal on a chartered ECOWAS aircraft and then to Brazzaville, Republic of Congo, where he remains.

Human Rights Concerns

UN human rights officials have reported multiple arbitrary detentions since the coup, including government officials, magistrates, and opposition figures, with many held without communication. Independent radio stations have been temporarily shut down, internet access has been disrupted, and live ammunition was reportedly used to disperse peaceful protesters in the capital.

The military has since banned all demonstrations and strikes, tightening its grip on the country during what it promises will be a one-year transition period. Party headquarters of opposition groups were reportedly invaded by armed forces following the takeover.

Historical Context and Pattern

For observers of West African politics, the events in Guinea-Bissau follow a troubling pattern. President Embaló had previously been accused by critics of fabricating or exaggerating coup threats to justify crackdowns on dissent. During his time in office, he claimed to have survived multiple coup attempts, leading some to question the authenticity of these incidents. After an alleged coup attempt in December 2023, Embaló dissolved parliament, and the country has operated without a functioning legislature since then.

The erosion of democratic governance in West Africa has accelerated in recent years, with military takeovers occurring in Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger, and now Guinea-Bissau. The region has seen established democratic norms deteriorate as military interventions become more frequent.

Mixed Public Reaction

Residents of Bissau have expressed varied reactions to the military takeover. Some citizens reported fleeing their homes when gunfire broke out, expressing frustration that the chaos erupted just as they were expecting to hear election results. One resident described the situation as unhelpful because it plunges the country into disorder.

However, reactions have not been uniformly negative. Some residents expressed hope that military leadership might improve living conditions in the country, indicating a level of frustration with civilian governance that has failed to address endemic poverty and corruption.

What Lies Ahead

With the electoral commission unable to determine a winner and General Inta-A promising a one-year transition before new elections, Guinea-Bissau’s political future remains deeply uncertain. Whether the events of November 26 constituted a genuine military coup or an orchestrated political maneuver may never be definitively established, particularly given the destruction of evidence and the flight of key figures from the country.

What is clear is that the will of Guinea-Bissau’s voters—more than 65 percent of whom turned out to cast ballots on November 23—has been effectively nullified. As the nation enters yet another period of military-led transition, its citizens face the prospect of delayed democracy and continued instability in one of the world’s poorest countries.

The international community, through ECOWAS and the African Union, continues to demand the restoration of constitutional order and the completion of the electoral process. However, with the physical evidence of the vote destroyed and competing narratives about the coup’s legitimacy, Guinea-Bissau’s path back to democratic governance appears more uncertain than ever.

The situation highlights broader challenges facing West African democracy, where disputed elections, constitutional manipulation, and military interventions have become increasingly common. As regional bodies struggle to maintain democratic standards, Guinea-Bissau serves as a stark reminder of how fragile electoral processes can be when institutional safeguards fail and armed forces become political actors.