DRC debates popular sovereignty amid referendum law changes

Two decades after the 2005 referendum law, lawmakers have adopted new legislation outlining the conditions for organizing referendums, particularly in cases of constitutional reform. This development has sparked intense debate about the balance between political intentions and the principle of popular sovereignty.

Political observers have raised concerns that the new referendum law could enable President Félix Tshisekedi to push for a third consecutive term, a move his opponents strongly criticize. Supporters, however, argue that the legislation strengthens democratic principles by ensuring constitutional changes reflect the will of the people.

voices from Kinshasa

In the capital, opinions remain sharply divided. Maria Eloyi, a jurist, believes the referendum process is essential for any constitutional amendment. “The Constitution represents the voice of the people. Any change must go through a referendum to ensure their will is respected. This isn’t about political interests—some constitutional articles genuinely need updating,” she explains.

Placide Lukeka, a young resident of Kinshasa, shares this perspective. “I’ve always supported constitutional reform. Those who claim it’s purely political are mistaken. A new Republic could bring positive change for our country,” he states.

Others, like Ange Aloki, argue that the referendum debate distracts from more pressing national issues. “Why focus so much energy on this during an election year? When has the government addressed these constitutional concerns before? There are far more urgent priorities,” she questions.

legal and political challenges

The new law has also triggered a legal debate. Godefroy Mwanabwato, a lawyer based in Tshopo, believes the Constitutional Court may strike down parts of the legislation that exceed the legislature’s authority. “The court will likely remove provisions that overstep the boundaries of what the legislative body can regulate regarding referendums,” he asserts.

Political opposition has been vocal, with lawmakers walking out during debates and calling for a city-wide strike on June 3 and a sit-in on June 13. Critics argue the law undermines democratic safeguards and could be used to manipulate the constitution for political gain.