Title: “The departure of the members of the commission maintaining the state of siege: a desertion which calls into question the discussions in Kinshasa”
Introduction :
The commission maintaining the state of siege in North Kivu and Ituri experienced a dramatic change during the round table which is taking place in Kinshasa. Indeed, several members have decided to slam the door and join the committee responsible for lifting this exceptional measure. This desertion raises questions about the relevance and effectiveness of the ongoing discussions. In this article, we will come back to the reasons for this departure and the consequences that this could have on the deliberations.
Dissatisfied members and against their will:
According to some of the members who left the commission maintaining the state of siege, they found themselves against their will in this commission. Arguments already put forward were ignored, and some speakers whose origin remains unknown sought to impose their point of view. This situation has created a climate of deadlock and misunderstanding within the commission. Alexis Bahunga, Masisi’s elected official, explains: “We had to discuss and examine in depth the pros and cons of each argument put forward, but our colleagues did not accept it, which is why we decided to leave”.
The need to give arguments:
This desertion was reframed by Jacquemin Shabani, delegate of the Presidency, who recalls that the purpose of a commission is to enrich the reflection by presenting different arguments, even if we disagree. He insists on the consultative nature of these discussions and the importance of being able to express his point of view. However, the lack of dialogue and the disrespect of differing opinions have led to this situation.
The commission on the lifting of the state of siege: a different view:
At the same time, the commission in charge of lifting the state of siege continues its work. Juvénal Munubo, elected national deputy of Walikale, member of this commission, underlines the importance of finding concrete recommendations to guarantee peace after the lifting of the state of siege. He highlights the need to avoid extensions of this type of encounter and to take action.
Conclusion :
The departure of the members of the commission maintaining the state of siege during the round table in Kinshasa calls into question the legitimacy and the effectiveness of the discussions in progress. This desertion highlights a lack of dialogue and listening within the commission and raises questions about decision-making. It is essential to find common ground to ensure thorough reflection and consideration of all points of view in order to arrive at solid recommendations