In Goma, the political and security situation reflects a growing tension between the aspirations of a population seeking change and the often coercive measures of local authorities. The recent ban on the peaceful march of the citizen movement LUCHA (Lutte pour le Changement) raises critical questions about respect for civil rights and how local governments manage security in a context of crisis.
### Context of the Ban
The ban issued by the interim mayor, Faustin Kapend Kamand, amounts to posing a dilemma: how to protect the security of citizens while respecting their constitutional right to peaceful protest? This question is not new in the Congolese political landscape. Article 26 of the Constitution of the Democratic Republic of Congo guarantees the right to protest, but its implementation is often nuanced by security considerations.
It is pertinent to recall that this willingness to peacefully express grievances is not without precedent. In 2022, a similar incident took place in Goma when social movements tried to raise awareness about the plight of displaced people. The government’s response was identical, illustrating a recurring pattern of repression of dissenting voices under the guise of security.
### A Reaction Justified by Insecurity?
The official motivations put forward by the authorities often involve the notion of insecurity. North Kivu is, in fact, one of the most unstable provinces in the DRC, with the territory having been the scene of repeated armed violence. The recent advances by the M23 rebels and the Rwandan army are exacerbating the situation, leading to immeasurable human suffering. From this point of view, the authorities feel legally and morally obliged to act to protect the population. However, can this logic of protection justify the restriction of fundamental freedoms?
A look at the statistics on internal displacement gives an overview of the scale of the crisis. According to recent reports from the UN Office for Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), North Kivu province is home to more than 1.5 million internally displaced people, a figure that is increasing year after year due to ongoing violence. This phenomenon underscores not only the urgent need for a humanitarian response, but also the need for a platform where civilians can express their frustrations and demand accountability.
### Possible Alternatives to Repression
In this difficult context, local authorities could adopt another approach. Instead of banning markets, they could consider integrating citizen movements like LUCHA into a constructive dialogue. This could involve regular discussion forums where citizens’ concerns are heard and addressed..
The experience of other countries facing similar crises shows that cooperation between the government and social movements can lead to effective solutions. For example, in Colombia, despite decades of armed conflict, the state has begun to establish channels of communication with social movements to promote peace and reconciliation. Although the contexts and issues are distinct, this demonstrates that open dialogue can contribute to a peaceful resolution of conflicts.
### The Future of LUCHA and Civil Liberties
With this ban, LUCHA finds itself at a crossroads. The coming weeks could see a massive surge in citizen mobilization, armed with various means of communication and advocacy to ensure that their concerns are not stifled by fear of repression. This dynamic could well be the precursor to a broader social movement, ready to engage in critical discourse on the way the government manages security while respecting civil rights.
Respect for fundamental freedoms and security should not be seen as antagonistic. On the contrary, they should influence each other. The authorities in Goma must realize that constructive engagement with citizens, especially in a context of growing insecurity, is essential to legitimize their actions while working towards a climate of lasting peace and stability.
The situation in Goma is therefore emblematic of a broader struggle that is being played out throughout the DRC: that of the right to express oneself in the face of a changing system, in the face of a population that, despite fear and oppression, continues to claim its right to dignity and security. LUCHA, through its actions and commitment, is part of this fundamental dynamic that calls for change and social justice, reminding everyone that the voices of citizens cannot and must not be stifled.
The evolution of this crisis and of LUCHA’s future actions will decide whether citizen mobilization will be seen as a vector of change or as a challenge to the stability of the country. The coming days will be crucial to observe the future of civil society in the DRC.
Franck Kaky / Fatshimetrie.org