** The installation of arbitration centers in the DRC: a disputed initiative in a complex context **
On June 5, 2025, a press release from the Congolese Company for the rule of law (SCED) highlighted the installation of “arbitration centers” in areas under Rwandan occupation in the east of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). This development has aroused concerns about the legitimacy of these structures and their impact on the Congolese legal system. Through the words of John Fung Loy, secretary general of the SCED, it is said that this initiative constitutes “usurpation of the sovereign functions of the State” in matters of justice. This leads to reflect on several dimensions of this problem.
### context of the situation in the DRC
The DRC, a country rich in natural resources but historically tested by political conflicts and tensions, faces worrying challenges in matters of governance and justice. In the eastern areas, marked by armed conflicts and a foreign military presence, the establishment of unrecognized judicial structures may seem like an attempt to resolve disputes in a framework where the rule of law is weakened. However, this raises the question of the legitimacy of these arbitration centers and their compliance with national and international laws.
### Legitimacy and legal framework
In his press release, John Fung Loy recalls that the Congolese Constitution prohibits the creation of exceptional jurisdictions. This raises an important question: what are the legal and social consequences of the acceptance of these arbitral centers by local populations? If it is true that citizens have the right to a fair trial, as the Constitution points out, it is necessary to wonder if these centers offer a viable alternative in the absence of accessible state justice.
### Constitutional order consequences
The emergence of these arbitration centers can also be interpreted as a symptom of structural faults within the Congolese judicial system. In regions where the presence of the state is minimal, populations may be tempted to adopt alternative solutions, thus exacerbating the phenomenon of informality to the detriment of established institutions. This could lead to increased destabilization of state authority and make the situation even more chaotic.
### Vigilance calls
Constructively, John Fung Loy calls the central government and international vigilance partners. This advocacy highlights the need not only of an adequate response to this situation, but also a global awareness on the way in which internal and external dialogue could help stabilize the DRC. How can the government strengthen its judicial authority in these areas and meet the needs of justice of the populations?
### to sustainable solutions
The question of justice in the DRC is complex and requires a multidimensional approach. Political, legal actors and civil society must collaborate to identify solutions that respect the rights of citizens while consolidating the rule of law. Proposals could include transitional justice initiatives, which aim to establish reconciliation mechanisms while dealing with the deep causes of conflicts.
### Conclusion
The initiative of these “arbitration centers” in the east of the DRC opens a debate on the authority of the State and the expectations of the populations in matters of justice. Instead of seeing this situation only as a challenge, it would be beneficial to analyze it as an opportunity for initiatives strengthening the rule of law. By initiating an open discussion between the various stakeholders, it is possible to build a legal framework which is both respectful of the rights of citizens and capable of responding to complex realities on the ground. Vigilance, reflection and cooperation seem to be essential tools to sail in this delicate situation and promote a more stable future for the DRC.