Elections in the DRC Compromising UN Intervention
Recent amendments made to the DRC constitution will have serious implications for the legitimacy of the government and subsequently the UN mission in the DRC.
Melanie Roberts, ISS coordinator for L’Observatoire de l’Afrique, Peace Missions Programme, ISS Pretoria Office
After decades of unrest and authoritarian rule, the adoption of an inclusive constitution and a democratic election in 2006 seemed to mark the beginning of a new chapter in the history of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC). Since President Joseph Kabila’s victory in the 2006 elections it has however become increasingly apparent that the optimism about the credibility of the new regime has been misplaced.
Five years into Kabila’s rule and the people of the DRC are yet to experience the dividends of peace and democracy. In January 2011 the vision of a democratic and constitutional DRC was dealt a serious blow when the government made amendments to 8 of the 229 articles of the current constitution. The amendments essentially augment the powers of the state, and the presidency in particular. The amendment posing the greatest threat to the DRC’s democracy in the immediate future is the elimination of the majority vote system, favouring a single-round plurality vote instead.
Kabila’s administration has defended this amendment arguing that a single round of elections cuts the cost of elections by half, as well as avoiding tensions which may arise during the run-off between the two main candidates - citing Kenya and the Ivory Coast as examples of this danger. However noble this reasoning may appear, Kabila has been widely criticized domestically and internationally for attempting to cement his party into power.
The opposition has voiced strong concern regarding the possibility of a government that could come into power without receiving a majority vote. The opposition will have to put aside personal and party interests and form a credible coalition prior to elections in November 2011. Vital Kamerhe, head of one of the main opposition parties, has already identified this issue, but has also acknowledged the fact that there will have to be a single presidential candidate, which may prove easier said than done.Kamerhe, who ran Kabila’s campaign in 2006 and longtime opposition leader Etienne Tshisekedi have emerged as the strongest contestants for the top spot in 2011. Kabila’s 2006 rival, Jean-Pierre Bemba, is being tried in The Hague for war crimes and will therefore not represent a threat to Kabila’s campaign, the substantial number of votes from Bemba supporters are yet to find a new home.
Should the opposition manage to set party and personal interests aside, forming a unified opposition which is able to secure votes from the Kamerhe, Tshisekedi and Bemba camps, democracy in the DRC might still stand a chance. Should the opposition fail in creating a unified front, it is possible Kabila could win the election without having to attain a majority. A government formed from a party that does not represent the majority vote has obvious implications for the fate of democracy and legitimate governance in the DRC.
The outcome of the election will have serious implications for the future of the long-standing UN mission in the DRC (Monusco). In 2010 the UN altered its mandate, tasking the mission specifically with stabilisation, protection of civilians and “the consolidation of State authority throughout the territory”. Should Kabila emerge victorious from the rapidly approaching elections without majority support, the legitimacy of democracy in the DRC will be compromised. At this point the international community, through the UN, will be put between a rock and a hard place.
The alternatives will boil down to continuing to assist (what may then be) an illegitimate regime consolidate its authority, or withdrawing UN troops, which will have a significantly detrimental effect on the civilian population that it has been tasked to protect.
