Title: State of siege in the DRC: differences within the commission, members slam the door
Introduction :
The situation of the state of siege in North Kivu and Ituri in the Democratic Republic of Congo continues to generate heated debates. At a recent roundtable in Kinshasa, members of the commission responsible for maintaining the state of siege decided to walk out, expressing their dissatisfaction with disagreements within the group. This dissent highlights the different views on the issue of the state of siege and raises questions about its legitimacy and effectiveness. In this article, we will analyze the reasons for this divergence within the commission and the implications of this situation.
Points of divergence within the committee:
According to the members who left the commission, they felt compelled to leave because of arguments put forward by people whose origin was unknown. They believe it is essential to discuss and understand the pros and cons of each argument in order to make informed decisions. However, their colleagues in the commission refused this approach, thus causing their departure. This dissent highlights the need for open discussion and an exchange of opinions within the committee.
Debate on the lifting of the state of siege:
On the other hand, some members of the commission on the lifting of the state of siege stressed the importance of preserving certain achievements in terms of recommendations. They recognize the need to lift the state of siege, but also stress that this is not enough to guarantee peace. They support the implementation of concrete recommendations to ensure a smooth transition after the lifting of the state of siege.
Importance of consultation and enrichment of debates:
A delegate from the Presidency recalled that taking part in a committee implies contributing to the enrichment of the debates, even if one disagrees with certain positions. He underlined that the participants should bring their arguments and their points of view, in order to reinforce the quality of the exchanges. However, he also stressed that the deliberations were consultative and everyone should respect the deliberative process.
Conclusion :
The dissension within the commission responsible for maintaining the state of siege highlights the differences of opinion on this exceptional measure in the DRC. While some members defend the idea of a thorough discussion and understanding of the different arguments, others highlight the importance of lifting the state of siege while offering recommendations to ensure a peaceful transition.. This situation raises questions about the legitimacy and effectiveness of the state of siege and highlights the need for in-depth reflection to find lasting solutions to the problems affecting the provinces of Ituri and North Kivu