New post for Togo leader could see him rule for life
The Togolese leader, Faure Gnassingbé, has been sworn in as "President of the Council of Ministers" - a new post which is the highest office in the government's executive branch and has no official term limits.
This follows constitutional reform that ended presidential elections, and introduced a parliamentary system.
The opposition said the change was in order to allow President Gnassingbé to stay in power indefinitely.
His family has ruled the country for 58 years - Faure Gnassingbé took over in 2005 from his father, Gnassingbé Eyadéma, in 2005, who had ruled for almost four decades.
This latest change results from a new constitution approved by lawmakers last year, labelled by critics and opposition figures as an "institutional coup d'état".
Gnassingbé's government had paused some of the changes following huge backlash, but has moved ahead with his new role.
Togo's municipal elections in July will be the first under the new constitution, which has replaced the presidential system with a parliamentary one.
In theory, the role of president of the republic is now only an honorary title, but analysts say Gnassingbé's power is more entrenched than ever with his new post of council president.
His party, the Union for the Republic, won a huge majority in last year's parliamentary election, taking of 108 out of 113 seats in the National Assembly.
'Helping a human is better than scoring a goal' - Adebayor
Why ex-French colonies are joining the Commonwealth
Meet the football grannies of Africa
Go to BBCAfrica.com for more news from the African continent.
Follow us on Twitter @BBCAfrica, on Facebook at BBC Africa or on Instagram at bbcafrica
Africa Daily
Focus on Africa
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
38 minutes ago
- New York Post
Elon Musk's estranged daughter has brutal reaction to Trump feud: ‘I love being proven right'
Elon Musk's estranged daughter appeared to gloat Friday about her billionaire dad's epic public feud with President Trump — saying 'I love being proven right' and cackling with glee on social media. Vivian Wilson, 21 — who vowed to leave the US after Trump was elected president last year — seemingly mocked her tech mogul dad's explosive fallout with his former president ally in an Instagram post. 'I do not want to comment,' she says before howling in a fit of laughter. Advertisement The Tesla CEO and Trump faced off in an ugly verbal spat Thursday after Musk insulted the commander-in-chief's 'big, beautiful bill,' prompting the president to question whether the pair could ever mend their relationship. 3 Elon Musk's daughter Vivian Wilson appeared to mock her dad's explosive feud with the president. Instagram/vivllainous The nasty fight between the world's richest man and the world's most powerful man quickly spiraled — with Musk calling for Trump's impeachment and declaring that the president has links to the late pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. Advertisement Wilson's post came as the feud simmered Thursday, but it didn't specifically mention Trump or her father by name. It's captioned, 'I love being proven right.' Wilson, who is transgender, cut ties with the increasingly volatile Tesla founder in 2022 when she filed a petition to change her gender and name. She has previously bashed Trump's 'anti-trans regulations' and called her dad, who supported the president's 2024 campaign, a 'pathetic man-child,' who hasn't been accepting of her gender. 3 Former allies Trump and Musk faced off in an epic public spat Thursday. Advertisement In past interviews, Musk has claimed Wilson — who is one of the billionaire's 14 children — was 'killed by the woke mind virus' and that he was 'tricked' into letting her transition at age 16. 3 Wilson has previously bashed Trump's anti-trans policies and called her dad a 'man child.' Wildfang On Friday, Trump said he has no interest in speaking to Musk after White House aides scrambled to set up a call between the two men.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
Pope meets with child protection advisory board as survivors call for zero tolerance of abuse
VATICAN CITY — Pope Leo XIV met with members of the Vatican's child protection advisory commission on Thursday for the first time amid questions about his past handling of clergy sex abuse cases and demands from survivors that he enact a true policy of zero tolerance for abuse across the Catholic Church. The Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors, which is made up of religious and lay experts in fighting abuse as well as supporting survivors, called the hourlong audience a 'significant moment of reflection, dialogue, and renewal of the church's unwavering commitment to the safeguarding of children and vulnerable people.' The group said it updated history's first American pope on its activities, including an initiative to help church communities in poorer parts of the world prevent abuse and care for victims. The Vatican did not provide the text of Leo's remarks or make the audio of the audience available to reporters. Pope Francis created the commission early on in his pontificate to advise the church on best practices and placed a trusted official, Boston's then-archbishop, Cardinal Sean O'Malley, in charge. But as the abuse scandal spread globally during Francis' 12-year pontificate, the commission lost its influence its crowning recommendation — the creation of a tribunal to judge bishops who covered up for predator priests — went nowhere. After many years of reform and new members, it has become a place where victims can go to be heard and bishops can get advice on crafting guidelines to fight abuse. O'Malley turned 80 last year and retired as archbishop of Boston, but he remains president of the commission and headed the delegation meeting with Leo in the Apostolic Palace. It has often fallen to O'Malley to speak out on egregious cases that have arrived at the Vatican, including one that remains on Leo's desk: The fate of the ex-Jesuit artist, the Rev. Marko Rupnik, who has been accused by two dozen women of sexual, psychological and spiritual abuse over decades. After coming under criticism that a fellow Jesuit had apparently received preferential treatment, Francis in 2023 ordered the Vatican to waive the statute of limitations on the case and prosecute him canonically. But as recently as March, the Vatican still hadn't found judges to open the trial. Meanwhile, the victims are still waiting for justice and Rupnik continues to minister, with his supporters defending him and denouncing a 'media lynching' campaign against him. Leo, the Chicago-born former Cardinal Robert Prevost, has been credited by victims of helping to dismantle an abusive Catholic movement in Peru, where he served as bishop for many years. But other survivors have asked him to account for other cases while he was a superior in the Augustinian religious order, bishop in Peru and head of the Vatican's bishops' office. The main U.S. survivor group, SNAP, has also called for Leo to adopt the U.S. policy calling for any priest who has been credibly accused of abuse to be permanently removed from ministry. Winfield writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Cheerleaders for Violence: The Troubling Defense of Terror in Boulder
It was supposed to be a peaceful demonstration. Instead, it ended in flames. But what came after the attack in Boulder may be even more incendiary, especially online, where some users in their teens and 20s were not condemning the violence. They were endorsing it. On a clear afternoon in late May, a pro-Israel demonstration on Boulder, Colorados iconic Pearl Street Mall turned into a scene of terror. An Egyptian citizen, wielding improvised firebombs, attacked the crowd, injuring 15 people and igniting panic in a city more often associated with peaceful protests and college town calm. Authorities swiftly arrested the suspect, now charged with multiple felonies including attempted murder and arson. Law enforcement has labeled the incident an act of terrorism. But while the violence rattled the city and the Jewish community in particular, a very different response was unfolding online. Videos posted by major outlets such as ABC News, Daily Mail, and MSNBC quickly amassed thousands of views on TikTok and Instagram. In the comment sections, a disturbing trend emerged: Rather than denouncing the attack, many young users applauded it. "He just wanted freedom for Palestine." "Keep up the good work brother! Hero." "Free him, he did no wrong. He did what we all wanted." "I was about to comment about how terrible this is and then I realized it was a pro-Israel rally and I suddenly didnt feel bad anymore." Some expressed outright Jew-hatred, writing things like, "Reduce their population" and "We owe Germany an apology." Others painted the attacker as a martyr or revolutionary. Several claimed the incident was staged entirely, a so-called "false flag" to build sympathy for Israel. This chorus of justification, denial, and celebration is jarring but not entirely surprising given the current climate. Recent polling shows a dramatic shift in how young Americans view the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. According to Pew Research Center, 53% of U.S. adults now hold an unfavorable view of Israel. Support for the Palestinian cause has grown, particularly among Democrats and younger voters. In one RealClearPolling analysis,respondentsunder 28 years old were more likely than any other age group to sympathize with Palestinians over Israelis and to view Israels military actions in Gaza as unjustified. As someone from this generation, and from Boulder, Ive watched these sentiments evolve online, where politics blur with memes and moral lines often collapse under the weight of outrage or irony. Seeing this unfold in my own hometown made it feel less like an aberration and more like a wake-up call. Whats chilling isnt just the cruelty of the comments. Its how natural they seem to the people posting them, many of whom are my peers. Layered atop this political shift is a deepening distrust of institutions. A significant share of younger Americans express skepticism toward government narratives, traditional news media, and even the legitimacy of domestic law enforcement. According to the spring 2025 Harvard Youth Poll, fewer than one in three express trust in major institutions. But when that skepticism is applied to something as clear and violent as the Boulder attack, is it truly thoughtful or is it reflexive, corrosive doubt - the kind that opens the door to conspiracism and moral disengagement? That mindset helps explain the abundance of conspiracy-laden responses: "Yeah they set this up. Dont believe it at all," read one comment. Another called it a "planned distraction," while others insisted it was staged with actors. Though many of these reactions remain anonymous and ephemeral, they point to a generational divide not just in foreign policy, but in the moral frameworks through which violence is interpreted. Zoe Mardiks, a recent graduate of the University of Colorado Boulder and a Jewish student leader, was at her apartment when she learned of the attack. "My first reaction was to text some of my other Jewish friends to check in and ensure that everyone was okay and safe," she said. "I felt very scared that this had happened in my community." What disturbed her just as much as the attack itself was the flood of online comments defending it. "The ongoing justification for violence significantly downplays the rights of Jews and Israel to exist," Mardiks said. In her view, social media has warpedher generations sense of moral clarity. "Because of how the war has been broadcast on social media, everyone feels they have a say in the issue and believes they possess all the knowledge," she said. Mardiks said her response to those defending the attacker is simple: "If you truly care about saving or freeing anyone, we can only do that by educating each other in a non-attacking way … the line is drawn when you praise violence." The Boulder attack marks a grim milestone: a foreign conflict spilling onto American soil in the form of violence, and met, in some corners of the Internet, with tacit approval. That many of those corners are populated by Americans under 30 raises hard questions about what this generation, my generation, believes, whom they stand with, and what they consider justifiable resistance. For us, the line between protest and terrorism used to feel clear. Now, for too many, that line seems negotiable. "He did what we all wanted." If thats true, we may need to start asking what "we" really means now. Adair Teuton is a 2025 intern with RealClearPolitics.
