In a tense political context in the Democratic Republic of Congo, the debate over the revision of the constitution is provoking passionate and divergent reactions within the political class and Congolese society. At the heart of this controversy is the desire displayed by President Félix Tshisekedi and his political party, the Union for Democracy and Social Progress (UDPS), to amend the constitution in force since 2006.
The opposition, notably represented by emblematic figures such as Moïse Katumbi and Martin Fayulu, is speaking out against this initiative, calling it a maneuver aimed at perpetuating the power in place. For these political actors, touching Article 220 of the constitution, which governs the provisions relating to presidential mandates, would be an attack on democracy and a regression for the country.
Olivier Kamitatu, senior advisor to Moïse Katumbi, openly expresses his doubts about President Tshisekedi’s intentions, denouncing a possible unlocking of Article 220 to allow a new presidential term. He recalls with emotion the past struggles to preserve democratic gains and the sacrifices made by militants and activists during the demonstrations against any change to the constitution.
In this debate, civil society and some actors formerly in favor of the 2006 constitution, such as André Mbata, express their concern about the consequences of a constitutional revision. They highlight the social and democratic advances contained in this founding text and warn against any questioning for partisan interests.
Faced with these tensions, the UDPS, through its secretary general, Augustin Kabuya, announces a popular mobilization in favor of the constitutional change carried by President Tshisekedi. This position further divides the country and revives political divisions, raising fears of an escalation of social and political tensions.
In this context, the position of the National Episcopal Conference of Congo (CENCO) and the National Office of CALCC, which doubt the legitimacy and stability of such an initiative in the current climate of the country, underlines the crucial issues of this debate for the democratic future of the DRC.
While the country seems divided and prey to political tensions, it appears urgent to favor dialogue and consensus to avoid a social and political destabilization detrimental to the democratic aspirations and the well-being of the Congolese people. This tumultuous period invites reflection on the political and constitutional choices that will shape the future of the DRC and its nascent democracy.