One trend in human rights and development activism seems to be “think local,” perhaps a reflection of a desire to side-step often distant, corruption-prone federal governments and instead foster empowerment in traditionally marginalized areas. It’s an idea that makes some sense—but can be dangerously over-extended or co-opted.
Such is currently the case in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, where President Joseph Kabila, constitutionally prohibited from seeking a third term, is currently searching for a way to prolong his tenure. Having been forced in January to back down from a census law that would have postponed the election—due to be held in November 2016—he’s now returned to an idea that was supposed to be implemented a long time ago: découpage. This process would divide the DRC’s eleven provinces into twenty-six, a change which was set in motion in 2006 and that was supposed to have occurred by 2010. Given all the delay, why has Kabila suddenly set a June 30 deadline to institute découpage, despite numerous reports indicating the Congolese government is underprepared? Likely because he sees it as an alternate way to maintain power—and because, whether or not the June 30 deadline is met, he wins.
If découpage actually—and surprisingly—manages to take place before June 30, Kabila will have succeeded in dissolving the large provincial power bases of some of his primary rivals who, even if elected to lead their new, smaller provinces, will have fewer resources at their disposal and therefore be less viable candidates at the national level. As a result, Kabila’s opponents would be less able to rally against any power grab and less able to challenge any anointed successor. On the other hand, if DRC can’t meet the June 30 deadline, the elections may be delayed, allowing Kabila to hold onto the presidency.
Further dividing up DRC’s provinces, and potentially engaging in general decentralization efforts, isn’t necessarily an inherently bad idea, though there should be real concerns about how it would play out in DRC given the country’s past experiments with it. However, even if one supports the end goal, the timing of this particular process should create real concerns about any already fragile hopes of shifting DRC in a more truly democratic direction. After so many years of delays, waiting a little bit longer seems like a much better option than rushing into a sloppy, politicized process.