Beyond Democratic Coup d'État. Legitimate Coup d'État : When State Survival Challenges Electoral Legitimacy

Since the 1990s, African Union protocols and global actors have promoted a strong norm against coup d’État. Viewing all military interventions as threats to democracy. However, African political histories show that not all coups have the same goals or outcomes. Ozan Varol’s concept of the “democratic coup d’État,” a military takeover aimed at restoring constitutional order and holding elections, remains influential but does not fully capture the complexities of African situations. This approach, which emphasizes quick electoral transfers, often overlooks the deeper issues related to governance, security, and state stability that underpin the legitimacy of many coups across the continent. This article presents a different perspective: the idea of the “legitimate coup d’État.” These coups gain legitimacy not primarily by restoring elections, but by preventing systemic failure, handling governance crises, and renegotiating key social agreements. Using examples from Burkina Faso, Ghana, Mali, and Gabon, the article demonstrates that legitimacy in African contexts is relational and relies on civic support, crisis management, and historical background—rather than just procedural outcomes. The analysis highlights a key dilemma: when the survival of the state conflicts with electoral legitimacy, how should legitimacy be judged? Although legitimate coups might provide short-term stability in fragile situations, they also risk perpetuating cycles of military rule. This article advocates for a more comprehensive, context-aware understanding of legitimacy in Africa, moving beyond the narrow procedural view of democratic coup theory. It recognizes coups as contested tools for crisis management that can both stabilize and destabilize.