***Fatshimetrie***: The Decision to Extend the State of Siege in North Kivu and Ituri Divides the Senate
Within the Senate, deliberations are never taken lightly. Every vote counts, every argument is weighed and scrutinized in the smallest details. This Saturday, December 7, 2024, the thorny issue of extending the state of siege in North Kivu and Ituri was once again at the heart of parliamentary debates. With 72 votes in favor of the extension, no votes against and only 3 abstentions out of 75 senators present, the vote was unequivocal.
The bill authorizing this new extension was presented by Constant Mutamba, Minister of State, Minister of Justice and Keeper of the Seals. He managed to convince a large majority of senators of the need to maintain this exceptional measure for an additional 15 days starting on December 8, 2024. But this displayed unanimity actually hides deep divisions within the chamber.
Indeed, while the vote was largely in favor of the extension, this does not necessarily mean a total consensus. The speeches of the various senators revealed divergent, even discordant, positions on the issue of the state of siege in these two provinces, which have been ravaged by armed violence for years. Some advocate maintaining this measure as a means of combating persistent insecurity, while others believe that it has not produced the expected results and that it is time to explore other solutions.
The recent joint mission of the government and parliamentarians to North Kivu and Ituri also shed new light on the situation on the ground. Prime Minister Judith Suminwa led this mission to assess the effectiveness of the state of siege and gather the opinions of local populations. The conclusions of this mission were presented at a meeting chaired by Judith Suminwa Tuluka, where it was decided that the final decision would rest with the President of the Republic.
The question of lifting or maintaining the state of siege therefore remains unresolved, with arguments for and against clashing. Those in favor of the extension emphasize the need to restore state authority in these regions plagued by armed group activism, while opponents point to the ineffectiveness of this measure and call for more effective alternatives.
In this complex and changing context, one thing is certain: the decision that will be taken regarding the future of the state of siege in North Kivu and Ituri will have major repercussions on the lives of the inhabitants of these regions ravaged by violence. It is now up to the President of the Republic to decide, in the name of stability and peace so awaited by a population in search of security and justice.