Madagascar Suspends Corruption Cases Involving Former President Andry Rajoelina

Madagascar’s Anti-Corruption Unit (PAC) has temporarily suspended judicial proceedings linked to several complaints against former government officials, including ex-president Andry Rajoelina and former prime minister Christian Ntsay.

In a statement released on Wednesday, the PAC said the suspension would remain in effect pending a ruling by the country’s High Constitutional Court (HCC) on whether the cases can legally be examined by the anti-corruption authorities.

The complaints were filed by the Directorate of Legislation and Litigation (DLC) and concern alleged financial misconduct, suspected misappropriation of public funds and other potential offences involving government institutions.

The decision introduces a legal hurdle in several high-profile cases involving former members of Madagascar’s political leadership.

Three Major Cases Under Review

The PAC outlined three principal complaints that have been referred to the High Constitutional Court for a determination on jurisdiction.

1. Alleged Disappearance of 36 Kilograms of Gold

The first complaint concerns the alleged misappropriation of 36 kilograms of gold linked to the Ministry of Mines and Strategic Resources.

The case raises questions about the management and accountability of valuable state resources. However, the allegations remain subject to the relevant judicial processes, and the referral to the High Constitutional Court means proceedings have been paused while the legal questions are considered.

2. School Furniture Contracts Under Investigation

The second complaint involves suspected financial irregularities and the alleged misappropriation of public funds in contracts for supplying school desks and benches to educational institutions.

Rajoelina, Ntsay and former education minister Marie Michelle Sahondrarimalala are named in the case.

The PAC also referred to other investigations involving alleged forgery, the use of forged documents and money laundering connected to the Ministry of National Education.

Separately, Sahondrarimalala was sentenced on September 30 to five years in prison for undermining state security, according to the supplied report. That case is distinct from the allegations concerning school furniture contracts.

3. Management of the Sovereign Wealth Fund

The third complaint concerns the management of Madagascar’s sovereign wealth fund, which is intended to support the country’s long-term economic and financial interests.

The PAC has asked the High Constitutional Court to clarify whether it has the authority to examine the complaints, taking into account the constitutional status of the individuals involved.

The court’s decision will determine how the proceedings can move forward within the applicable legal framework.

Why the High Constitutional Court Must Decide

Madagascar’s Constitution provides a mechanism for resolving questions about the constitutionality of proceedings before ordinary courts.

The constitutional provision cited in the PAC statement states: “If, before a court, a party raises an objection of unconstitutionality, that court shall stay proceedings and refer the matter to the High Constitutional Court, which shall rule within one month.”

The referral places the immediate focus on jurisdiction rather than the merits of the allegations themselves.

The High Constitutional Court must determine whether the anti-corruption authorities can proceed with the cases in light of the legal status of the individuals named.

Until that question is resolved, the temporary suspension prevents the affected proceedings from advancing.

Implications for Accountability in Madagascar

The cases come amid continuing scrutiny of public financial management and the accountability of former senior officials in Madagascar.

The allegations concern areas of significant public interest, including natural resources, education procurement and the management of state investment funds.

Their outcome could have implications for efforts to strengthen transparency, protect public resources and ensure that allegations involving senior officials are handled through lawful judicial procedures.

At the same time, the jurisdictional question highlights the importance of constitutional safeguards when legal proceedings involve individuals who have held high public office.

The temporary suspension does not amount to a finding of guilt or innocence. The allegations must be assessed through the appropriate legal processes, and the High Constitutional Court’s decision will clarify whether the PAC can proceed.

For now, attention remains on the court’s ruling and its potential impact on the future of the cases involving Rajoelina, Ntsay and other former officials.