### Reflection on the suspension of teachers: towards an enlightened reform within the dinacope
The semantic change imposed by the National Directorate of Control, the Preparation of Payroll and Mastery of the Termination of Teachers and Administrative Staff of Schools (Dinacope) represents an attempt to revise practices within the education system. By replacing the term “deactivation” with “suspension”, the director, Boniface Mbaka Ngapembe, echoes an increasing concern concerning the well-being of state agents, in particular teachers, and the impacts of these decisions on the educational environment. However, this initiative raises essential questions on the application of standards, compliance with the rights of agents and the future of education in the country.
#### History and context
From 2021, human resources management in the Ministry of National Education was marked by sometimes controversial decisions, including the deactivation of personnel, perceived by some as an excessive control measure. Teachers, having suffered deactivations considered abusive, expressed concerns in the face of a potentile violation of their rights. Deactivation, which involved the withdrawal of wages and the exclusion of pay files, was experienced by many teachers as a form of illegitimate sanction, generating discomfort and tensions within schools.
It is important to note that the criticisms formulated at the time, in particular those of Matthieu Mukenge Bakina, the secretary general for national education and new citizenship, indicated that this practice unbalanced the education system and affected the motivation of educational staff. Thus, the terminological evolution is part of a quest for clarification and reconciliation with the principles set out in ordinance n ° 232 of August 15, 1991. This order clearly stipulates the conditions by which a teacher can be deprived of his salary, stressing the importance of protecting the rights of agents.
#### Why the terminology change?
The choice of the term “suspension” breathes a new dimension into the relationship between the ministry and its agents. In other words, it makes it possible to adopt a less pejorative language and more in line with traditional administrative practices. The national director stresses that the term “deactivation” could be perceived as violent, thus creating an atmosphere of distrust. By integrating the term “suspension”, the ministry may aim to restore a certain dignity to the status of teachers, while preserving a disciplinary framework.
Recognition of the harmful impact of deactivations on school dynamics also challenges decision -makers to a broader reflection on human resources management in education. The question then arises: how to establish a disciplinary framework which is both fair and respectful of the rights of agents?
### Paid discomfort
Despite this semantic reform approach, it remains essential to question the concrete application of these decisions. The recent mobilization of a group of teachers to denounce abusive deactivations testifies to the depth of accumulated frustrations. What is at stake here is confidence in schools, which is fundamental for the proper functioning of education. The suspension, although below the severity of deactivations, must be applied with discernment and justice.
In addition, concerns leading to massive mobilizations indicate the need for a dialogue between the different stakeholders. Who are really the beneficiaries of these reforms? Can we consider more transparent and participative mechanisms to address discipline issues in the educational sector?
#### to a constructive reform
In order for this semantic revision to be followed by effect, it seems crucial to support these changes in a real human resources management policy. The implementation of clear and transparent procedures could appease tensions and allow a better understanding of the issues. Avenues such as mediation between teachers and administration, or the creation of a performance assessment framework, could also help restore confidence.
On a national level, current reflection on the management of the educational body could constitute an opportunity to re -examine the practices in place and learn from it. The experience of teachers, intrinsically linked to their professional commitment, must be valued and taken into account in the development of educational policies.
#### Conclusion
The replacement of the term “deactivation” with “suspension” within the dinacope, even if it is a first step towards better management of staff, cannot by itself solve the complex issues that haunt the education system. This approach invites us to think deep about the practices in force and the treatment of teachers. Beyond words, it is a call for a truly human reformation and respectful of everyone’s rights, a potential lever to improve the school climate and promote more constructive relationships within education. The road to a quality and respectful education will have to pass, without a doubt, through attentive listening and a co-construction of the solutions.