Credible or timeous elections? a dilemma for the DRC Opposition.
The question of whether the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) could afford another postponement of its second post-transition elections planned for later this year dominated discussions at an Inter-Congolese Dialogue that took place in Pretoria on 11 and 12 March 2011. The meeting was the brainchild of the Pretoria-based Institute for Global Dialogue (IGD) – a foreign policy and international diplomacy think tank. It brought together representatives of the major political alliances and civil society formations in the DRC, with a view to reflecting on the country’s upcoming elections. While the frankness and robustness with which the Congolese engaged with each other could hardly go unnoticed, it was the dilemma revealed in their debates over the electoral calendar that really got me thinking.
It is not uncommon in Africa for incumbent regimes to manipulate the electoral timetable for some ulterior motive, not the least of which is to prolong the mandate of the incumbent and give it an unfair advantage over the opposition. It therefore came as no surprise that a majority of opposition parties represented at the dialogue expressed bitter unease at the possibility of presidential and legislative elections being held outside the constitutionally mandated period. Ironically, the call for President Joseph Kabila’s government to respect the constitutional timeframe for holding elections was articulated in the same breadth as concerns about the country’s political and logistical preparedness to organize credible elections. As a neutral observer, having the advantage of putting these debates into perspective, I could not help contemplating on the possibility that, caught in the political heat of Kabila’s Machiavellism, the Congolese opposition may have lost the ability to discern the opportunities that are open to them in what appears to be an attempt by the incumbent to manipulate the system.
The opposition is not without reason to suggest that, in the event of the incumbent regime failing to duly organize elections, it would have effectively abrogated its contract with the Congolese people, and thus runs the risk of finding itself in a legitimacy crisis at the end of its mandate in December 2011. As plausible as this argument may sound, it does not, in my view, translate into a solid ground for doggedly opposing any delay in elections, given the current state of affairs in the country. In fact, if the logistical and integrity deficiencies attributed to the DRC’s independent electoral commission at the meeting are to be believed, there is no gainsaying that the twin goals of credible and timeous elections are mutually exclusive in this case, and that a tradeoff would have to be made between them. Attempts to pursue both objectives, as some opposition parties argue, could at best amount to vain efforts, and at worst plunge the country into political mayhem akin to what is currently being observed in Cote d’ivoire.
Conversely, the opposition in the DRC could become resourceful and turn the current quagmire into an opportunity to beat the incumbent at its own game. While it cannot be expected to compromise on the quality of elections, it could play along with any reasonable postponement of the vote, making use of the delay to push for reforms that would level the playing field and strengthen the capacity of the electoral commission to conduct credible elections.
Besides, this window of opportunity could offer the time required for the opposition and concerned civil society groups to explore, crystallize and mobilize support for some of the brilliant ideas that were proposed at the IGD-sponsored dialogue. These include the following:
The establishment of a special electoral tribunal to adjudicate in election disputes and creating an active electoral role for the UN mission in the DRC are just two proposals with the potential to make even the electoral landscape. This would, however, not see the light of day if elections were to be held in November 2011.
What is more, a possible delay in holding elections would also present the highly fragmented Congolese opposition another chance to seek common ground and perhaps present a united front against Kabila’s presidential majority alliance.
Clearly, there needs to be more dialogue within the opposition and between the opposition and the majority alliance on how they could take forward the Pretoria declaration as the basis of building sustainable national consensus on democratic consolidation in the DRC.
By Fritz Nganje, IGD Research Assistant
*The opinions expressed do not necessarily represent those of the Institute for Global Dialogue, but belong to authors of opinion pieces in their person.