The High Military Court of the Democratic Republic of Congo, on Friday June 2, 2023, examined the case of national deputy Édouard Mwangachuchu, accused of illegal possession of a weapon of war. The public prosecutor indicated that the weapon in question was a weapon of war, and not a weapon of self-defense, the possession being conditioned by a presidential order. Mwangachuchu said he obtained the weapon upon request from the Minister of Interior and originally believed it to be a self-defense weapon.
Mwangachuchu’s lawyers have demanded an explanation from former interior minister Richard Muyej as to why their client was given a weapon of war when he asked for a self-defense weapon. The defendant is suspected of having participated in an insurrectionary movement, of having links with the M23 rebels, of having incited soldiers to commit acts contrary to duty and discipline, and of having illegally possessed ammunition of war.
Possession of a weapon of war is a material offence, and he is suspected of having had one because he is a member of the Rwandan diaspora and has investments in Rwanda. The court recalled that the possession of a weapon of war is a material offense and that its possession is incompatible with the function of parliamentarian.
What is disturbing in this story is that the DRC is plagued by rebellion movements, and that the presence of weapons of war in the hands of the population only aggravates the situation. Justice must carry out an in-depth investigation to determine the origin of obtaining the weapon of war in question. This incident also highlights the importance of verifying the origin of weapons before allowing them to be held to prevent them from falling into the wrong hands. In addition, it is imperative to strengthen controls and regulations on the arms trade