The Constitutional Court decision was published at Bangui Court Hall on 23 June further to a complaint lodged by Barrister Zarambaud Assingambi.

The former leader of the bar association based his complaint on Article 23 of the 27 December 2004 Constitution which provides for incompatibility between the functions of head of state and any other political and lucrative function, under pain of impeachment. It should be pointed out that Gen Bozize is currently cumulating the functions of head of state and that of defense minister, which is a flagrant violation of the constitution, and this situation prevents MPs from summoning him on security issues.

During the debates before the Constitutional Court, Bozizeʼs defense lawyers thoroughly exploited the judicial emptiness concerning the destitution of the head of state, since the constitution does not provides clearly which institution should pronounce the destitution.

As for the plaintiff, while taking note of the courtʼs decision, he deplored that the court did not tell him to which institution he should go in order to file his complaint.

However, observers believe that the move by Barrister Zarambaud consolidates democracy in CAR because the debates before the Constitutional Court allowed to admire the political courage of Gen Bozize who enabled the judiciary institutions do their works.
They further comment that CAR is a special country in Africa where pioneering experiences are tested. For instance, CAR was the first African country to restore multiparty system in 1979, the first country to openly try a former head of state (Emperor Bokassa) in 1987, the first country where MPs of the presidential majority impeached the prime minister from the same majority in 1994, the first country to decriminalize press offenses in 2006, and finally the first country where a citizen called for the impeachment of the head of state before court

Concluding, on can add that the lesson of the trial is that the constitution, when ordering the impeachment of the head of state for violation of Article 23, forgot to indicate which institution should pronounce the impeachment. This error can be solved in the framework of the coming inter-Central African dialogue.