Divergence on the need for political dialogue
As you all know, we started to support the holding of a political dialogue in 2013, following the adoption of resolution 2098 by the UN Security Council.
When instead of convening the political dialogue, the power had convened national consultations, fully organized and controlled by him, we refused to participate and had created, with other political opposition parties, the Coalition for a true Dialogue “CVD”. He had set up two camps. Our, that of those who rejected any dialogue with the government. With this time, all opponents who claimed the dialogue, had joined the anti-dialogues camp!
The camp of those who supported a technical meeting called “tripartite opposition-majority-CENI”. We had been practically alone to claim the dialogue so that, for that reason alone, some had bonded us more qualifiers, the pro-opposition powers, Kabila …
Broad consensus on the desirability of a political dialogue
Over time, all the opponents have come to understand the need for dialogue for several months, we have sensitized the national opinion on the danger facing our country in view of blocking the electoral process. Several international institutions and foreign governments have continued to support the holding of the dialogue. Despite several colleagues were unimpressed. Familiar with our political class, we told all the anti-dialogue colleagues would come to the dialogue despite their refusal, apparently categorical. Today we are pleased that the tripartite opposition-majority-CENI died a natural death. After several pressures and certain international institutions and some foreign powers, all political actors are now for dialogue despite muances on the nature of the dialogue. We trust that they have not become Kabilists, false opponents, opponents of pro-power!
Dialogue 2277 resolution and dialogue convened by the Presidential Order
While congratulating all colleagues for accepting the dialogue, we urge to go straight to the point and stop to continue to raise the stakes regardless of the danger on the horizon. There can be a difference between the 2277 resolution dialogue and dialogue prescription. We do not need any expertise to understand that when the Security Council voted a resolution on a country that is not under supervision, execution requires national implementing measures. These measures are contained in the Presidential Order. The UN and the states have adopted this resolution have repeatedly said the dialogue convened by presidential order and beautiful, well that provided by the resolutions of the UN Security Council. For the love of the homeland, we ask those political actors who knowingly blocking the dialogue by several pretexts to return to reason; to stop artificially create several obstacles; and go pre prerequisites.
The challenge of the Facilitator Kodjo
Long before the convening of the dialogue by the presidential order we demanded that the process of dialogue to be co-facilitated by two Congolese; one appointed by the opposition and the other appointed by the majority. Some of us rejected our proposal on the grounds that the Congolese are not trustworthy! They had argued that s an international facilitator would be neutral and credible. Soon after the nomination of Mr. Kodjo, we denounced the fact for him to give power to one political party to designate authority, the 12 opposition delegates to the preparatory committee. For us it was a bias on the part of a facilitator. The privileged party had supported the facilitator in his positions. Two months later, it is those who demanded an international facilitator who rejects it, asking OAU to appoint another. We believe that after having demanded and obtained the involvement of several international organizations, request the replacement of a foreign facilitator by another foreign discredits the Congolese political class. For this reason, and taking into account the time left to get into the zone of turbulence, New Social and Political Class opposes the recusal of the Facilitator Edem Kodjo not to delay the process. The NCPS reiterates its support to see this PrepCom start work with the political and social forces available even continue to negotiate with those who still linger not. We also believe that the requirement for the release of political prisoners is a concern of the entire opposition. We believe that this issue will be resolved during the Preparatory Committee. We insist that work begins with those who are ready. While it is true that in a country, there are more important people than others, it is also true that in the life of a nation no one is indispensable. Let the interest of the nation below personal interests.
National Labour Party chairman