World Youth Movement for Democracy
|
|
World Youth Movement for Democracy |
|
 |
Home |
 |
 |
|
About |
|
|
|
Participate |
|
|
|
Resources |
|
|
|
Events |
|
|
|
WYMD Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
Contact Us |
|
|
|
Join Now! |
|
|
|||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Guelord Bahati Mbaenda Congo Kinshasa: "One Step Forward, One Step Backwards - The Difficult March Towards Democratisation" Introduction For some time now, the term "democracy" has appeared in the language of almost all segments of the Congolese community. Educational institutions, the media, civil society organisations and think tanks of all kinds alike have adopted this word, each one defining it according to the interests suitable for itself or for a group to which it is identified. It thus appears clearly that, in the current context, the definition and the analysis of democracy are possible from several angles. If, however, democracy must be reflected in particular through popular participation in the exercise of power, the effective respect of citizens' rights and fundamental freedoms, transparent management of public finances and a clear definition of the relationship between various bodies of the State, then the Democratic Republic of Congo (RDC) has a long way to go before achieving it in its real political culture. Indeed, a glance through years past, reveals painful experiences endured by the Congolese people in their attempts to participate in the management of the country. Today still, it is not certain that this struggle will bear fruit. The population remains on the whole a passive spectator of public life, but the incipient awakening is a promising omen for the future. My thoughts in the lines which follow are an attempt to diagnose the process of democratization on-going in the RDC for almost two decades now. With due humility, I propose to point out the obstacles, contradictions and reasons for a status quo. The paths towards change which conclude this essay are an anthem to the will to see, at last, democratization on the move. DEMOCRACY: A PAINFUL GENESIS In this beginning of the Third Millennium, the democratisation of political life remains a headache for many African countries. While wanting to be "democratic", successive national leaders seem to stick to this immemorial model of "Chief" towards whom all the "subjects" have the duty of allegiance, blind obedience and sacrifice while the so-called chief only protects those he considers as completely cowed thus enabling him to remain in power forever. The RDC is among those countries where people continue to suffer from the weight of a pseudo-democratic management of public affairs. This situation is linked to several factors, among which those that we stigmatise hereafter. A LEGITIMACY CRISIS As recognition, validation and endorsement of a power exercised by the people, legitimacy has remained for too long denied to all wishing to lead public affairs in the RDC. Since accession to independence in 1960 and until very recently (with the organisation of the first democratic elections in the history of the country in 2006), the Congolese population had not a single chance to choose its leaders. During the long reign of Mobutu (1965-1997), the Congolese faced a man that made his way to power by a putsch and governed alone, supported by his family and a frightening praetorian guard, without the slightest possibility of the people playing any rôle in determining the way to be followed. Indeed, it was Mobutu who dictated everything: "olinga olinga te ". (1) This experience showed that the legitimacy of armed force (as well as of other means that exclude free expression of the people's choices) does not lead to democratic governance because it excludes the obligation for the leaders to be accountable and deprives the people of any means to oppose a man or a group of men that proclaim at all times: " I rose to power by my own force, so nobody can tell me how to rule ". THE STATE AS PREDATOR In a country where functions relating to national leadership are reputed to be "juicy jobs", it is not surprising that prospective leaders constantly keep in mind the idea of getting rich once in power. During his reign, Mobutu ran the country like a private enterprise. Especially after Zaïrianisation (2), everyone had to work to please the "boss". In return, he would distribute "parcels" (large sums of money) to those who danced or sang well for him or praised him the best. Ten years after the departure of Mobutu, the Congolese leaders still remain more motivated by the search to satisfy personal interests than by a genuine concern for the wellbeing of the great majority of the population. One only hears about the country's wealth through deplorable revelations, such as the Report of the UN Panel on the Illegal Exploitation of the RDC's Natural Resources, a document which revealed the implication of different figures in "deals" that bleed an already skeletal economy. Today still, one finds everywhere in the country's interior barriers, with small roadside offices "under trees", that hold to ransom small farmers and peaceful travelers. Taxes are imposed in the name of any and all reasons on almost all goods and activities. Any individual working for the State, even at the lowest rung of the hierarchy, can surprise you by inventing a royalty owed the State, a royalty which when paid will go straight into his own pocket. In such a context, leaders often resort to repressive measures to silence any call for change. Thus the only remaining hope for a powerless population faced by such predatory practices - the local and national movement of human rights - is confronted with traps laid craftily by the ruling class. "Disappearances", assassinations, iniquitous trials, forced exile and other forms of repression are used by both non-military and military national organs specially created to harass activists and the civil society; (3) DEMOCRACY: MORE SLOGAN THAN REALITY While agreeing to sit around a table to discuss the need for democracy in the RDC (4), the political actors inaugurated a process bearing hope. It was nonetheless they who were the first to send everything back to square one. Indeed, while berating the consequences of armed seizure of power they themselves ended up resorting to the same procedure (from 1996 to 1997 as concerns the "Alliance des Forces Démocratiques pour la Libération du Congo" "AFDL" and the attempts of the "Rassemblement Congolais pour la Démocratie" RCD, all wings included, and of the "Mouvement pour la Libération du Congo" from 1998 to 2003). While condemning opaque and exclusive governance, and the clientelism of Mobutu regime, the new leaders have rejected any ideology going counter to theirs (a phantom multi-party system under which the opposition is constantly repressed). While "claiming for the people" the right to enjoy at long last the country's potentialities, they have inaugurated a cycle of new massive plundering, sometimes in complicity with foreign countries. The RDC's current situation gives credence to the conviction that the politicians exploit the advent of democracy for personal ends. Today, however, this "democracy" seems to be a cosmetic cover-up of chaos, the misleading facade before which leaders and other political actors lacking true legitimacy present themselves and seek to gain at all costs credibility in the international community The elections of 2006 gave birth to a hope of improving the political situation; but they should not be understood as an end in themselves, a magic key immediately opening the door to democracy. They were a step towards a process that will be long and laborious, requiring frankness, a commitment to collective wellbeing, and determination. REASONS FOR COMMITMENT Faced with a situation of recurring ups and downs, we share with several other Congolese the ambition whose principal motivations are:
SOME PATHWAYS TO THE FUTURE Taking into account these needs, our commitment to reverse the current trend stems from thinking-and-doing, popular education and advocacy in order in particular to achieve: Provision Of New Foundations For Legitimacy In 2006, the still-traumatised population was led to choose its leaders among the former actors of the crisis which had ravaged the country, without preliminary sensitisation, except of course the noisy campaigns of the candidates. It would be necessary that, in the future, the population profit from citizen education campaigns in order to vote with full awareness. The legitimacy to be promoted should not be obtained through hypnosis of voters' critical faculty through gifts and deceitful promises, or by force. The choice can be democratic only if the voter masters the stakes of his/her choice. Promotion Of Accountability With the passing of years, we have acquired the conviction that the good governance is possible only when a monitoring relationship is set in place between those governing and those who are governed. The people must be able supervise and to sanction - on a permanent basis - the implementation of the functions entrusted to the elected officials. As a pledge of legitimacy, control mechanisms must be set up. Referendums will have to be organised in order to ascertain the opinion of the people on any vital issue. Moreover, within the same framework of accountability, the opinions of civil society actors (human rights reports, various research projects and studies...) must be taken into account as specific mechanisms for reorienting the State's rôle. Enabling Participation By All The international community, which finances in good part the reconstruction of the country, should insist that programmes of the new Congolese government include the broadest participation of the populations to which they are addressed. It is not enough that the government promise everyone's participation; it must do so and prove it has done so. Within the framework of the reorientation of the rôle of the State (from predatory to democratic), leaders must particularly stress the delegation of power to local entities. The promotion of governance will then install among long-excluded populations the reassuring feeling of being at last taken into account in the definition of the country's priorities. Cleansing Public Financial Management Sources and modes of national financial management must be clarified. The anarchic structures should no longer continue to enrich themselves by exploiting populations already impoverished by the long State crisis. Tax mechanisms must be reduced to the bare minimum necessary. Moreover, the monitoring of public leaders' financial holdings, as well as incompatibility measures (for example prohibition to undertake profit-making activities while in office) should be set up to prevent embezzlement of public resources.
NOTES 1) Formula regularly used by Mobutu and meaning, in Lingala, "like it or not". 2) In 1973, Mobutu nationalised all large companies of the country. From then on, they were to belong to "Zaïrians", i.e. to the President's cronies who took charge of the national economy's vital sectors, managing without the least concern for the collective interest of the people. 3) While Mobutu had "Owls", a night squadron which hunted down opponents and the rare activists of the time, today we have what is called "Démiap" (military detection of the anti-national activities) and other central organs that perpetuate restrictions on citizens' fundamental rights. 4) In particular as was the case at the time of the National Sovereign Conference (1991-1992) and of the People's Palace Conclave (1993). |