The new Gabonese nationality code, supported by the Constitution promulgated by presidential decree No. 0004/PR/2026, introduces a distinction between “Gabonese by birth”, “Gabonese by adoption” and “Gabonese by descent”. This text, adopted without passage through Parliament, consecrates a differentiation of citizenship statuses with immediate implications: in this framework, neither a profile like Bally Bagayoko, nor a profile comparable to that of Zohran Mamdani could claim to hold the position of mayor in Libreville.
The case of Bally Bagayoko is illustrative. Elected mayor of Saint-Denis in France and of Malian descent, he embodies a system in which political citizenship takes precedence over origin. In the Gabonese system, such a trajectory is legally impossible. Naturalized citizens or those who have acquired nationality are prohibited, in the first generation, from accessing several strategic functions, including the judiciary, government positions, or collaboration with the head of state.
The case of Zohran Mamdani offers a contrast. Born in Uganda and settling in the United States at a young age, he was able to integrate into American political life. In the United States, once citizenship is acquired, it is legally full and complete, opening access to local elective positions without distinction of origin.
Contrasts with certain African trajectories are documented. The example of Alassane Ouattara remains emblematic: despite being a former Prime Minister and international figure, his nationality was contested at the turn of the 2000s in a context marked by the notion of “Ivoirianess”.
The case of Kenneth Kaunda illustrates another dynamic. President from 1964 to 1991, his nationality was not contested during his exercise of power. However, in the 1990s, a constitutional reform introduced a requirement that presidential candidates must be born to Zambian parents by birth. This provision was politically aimed at Kaunda, whose parents were originally from Malawi (former Nyasaland). It was not a challenge to his nationality, but a tightening of eligibility conditions.
In Gabon, the new code formalizes this type of logic upstream. It establishes a lasting differentiation between categories of citizens. The text also provides for a tightening of conditions for retaining nationality. Article 64 introduces the possibility of deprivation for any citizen involved in a foreign institution deemed contrary to national interests, as well as for anyone involved in “subversive and destabilizing actions” against institutions, in case of refusal to comply within three months.
Furthermore, Article 57 states that naturalized persons, as well as those who have acquired nationality through jus soli, marriage, or residence, cannot run for presidential or parliamentary office, nor be on a local electoral list until a period of ten years has elapsed. Article 58 complements this provision by prohibiting them, in the first generation, from accessing several public functions, particularly ministerial, judicial, or military positions at strategic levels.
Criticisms have been made. In a column published by Gabon Actu, Ali Akbar Onanga Y’Obegue believes that this text “introduces mechanisms of exclusion” and could accentuate divisions.
The debate now revolves around the nature of citizenship as defined. On one hand, systems where citizenship constitutes a unified legal status opening access to political participation. On the other hand, frameworks where it remains conditioned by origin or ancestry.
In the Gabonese case, the new code marks a shift towards a differentiated legal structuring of citizenship, with direct effects on access to elective positions and public responsibilities.
