Rédaction Africa Links 24 with Roxanne Bouenguidi
Published on 2024-02-20 16:11:12
By questioning the uniqueness of the current period, public opinion points to shortcomings in identifying the fundamental causes of the power grab, understanding its significance, and formalizing certain decisions.
Every day and under various tones, people are questioning the uniqueness of the current period. After each statement from the Committee for Transition and Restoration of Institutions (CTRI), the same questions resurface. At the end of each Council of Ministers, the interrogations abound. Through each decision or appointment, public opinion tries to understand the direction taken by the country over the past six months. This indicates that in the eyes of many citizens, there is still confusion. It also indicates that some protagonists are creating a muddle through their actions. It finally indicates that many things require clarification. Even if a memorandum has been made public for this purpose, the authorities in place must realize that the Transition would benefit from being refined, clarified, and explained again. If necessary, some choices could be reconsidered.
Irrespective of the reasons, this misunderstanding highlights three major weaknesses. Firstly, in identifying the fundamental causes of the power grab. Except for the general elections in August 2023, the significant events of the last 14 years have not been thoroughly examined. Neither the four constitutional revisions, the restructuring of the administration in favor of public institutions often linked to the presidency, nor the administrative purging of September 2009 have been identified as abuses. The same applies to the 2016 presidential election, the assault on Jean Ping’s headquarters, the unilateral modification of numerous laws, and the risky management of the prevention of Ali Bongo’s incapacitation following a stroke in October 2018. Exploiting these shortcomings, actors and beneficiaries of these episodes have had no qualms about pledging allegiance to the new leaders in order to find themselves in the antechamber of power or in the Transitional institutions, much to the dismay of a part of the population.
Secondly, there is a weakness in understanding the significance of a power grab. Even at the highest level of the State, some reason as if Ali Bongo has never been deposed, but simply replaced. As if Brice Clotaire Oligui Nguéma is not his downfall, but his successor. As if the responsibility of the sycophants of the Gabonese Democratic Party (PDG) is not at all in question. As if the openness practiced by the CTRI is a sign of weakness, an encouragement to continue as before, and not an opportunity to amend. Certainly, thinking patterns cannot change completely in the blink of an eye. But it is astonishing to hear an institution president refer to his colleagues as representatives of the “opposition”, defining himself as “the only figure currently standing within the PDG”. Beyond that, it is astounding to hear him assert, “There is the president (of the Transition) that we can consider as part of the regime. But, since he is a military man, he is neutral.”
Lastly, there is a weakness in the formalization of certain decisions. Apart from the two chambers of Parliament, all Transitional institutions have not taken the trouble to establish their own legal texts adapted to the context. If the relations within the executive couple are governed by the Constitution of March 26, 1991, the relationship between the CTRI and the president of the Transition is not regulated. Similarly, the Transitional Constitutional Court operates without organic law or procedural regulations. As a result, it is tempted to use instruments designed by and for a dissolved institution, as revealed by the imbroglio resulting from the stillborn honorary positions of Marie-Madeleine Mborantsuo and Louise Angué. In such a context, reactionaries have no difficulty in instilling the idea of a supposed continuity, thus thwarting any idea of rupture. When considering how loaded the term “restoration” can be historically and ideologically, the alarm must be sounded.
Already, tendentious interpretations are being disseminated here and there. Therefore, the misunderstanding displayed by a certain opinion results from a misunderstanding. For six months, some have been re-reading history. Others question the political and institutional significance of a rupture in constitutional order. There are also those who seek to understand its implications for the future. In all cases, the notion of democratic transition is being examined from all angles. By formulating these questions, people expect explanations or corrective measures. If the CTRI wants to ensure popular support, it must respond to them. If it does not want to allow doubt to take root, it must resolutely turn its back on certain political practices.
Read the original article(French) on Gabon Review
