“One day Congo will explode”: What now for the DRC’s “president-elect”?
Martin Fayulu is widely believed to have been the true victor of the DRC’s 2018 elections, but is not president. We spoke to him about his next steps.
Martin Fayulu on the campaign trail in December 2018. Credit: Martin Fayulu.
Martin Fayulu shouldn’t be here. He shouldn’t be sat across from me in this hastily-vacated office we commandeered after his modest event at the Royal African Society in London. He shouldn’t be here, leaning back and forth in his chair and banging on the table, as I try to hold him accountable with my scribbled notes.
The 62-year-old businessman and politician won the presidential election in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) less than four months ago. Selected by the high-powered opposition alliance Lamuka to be their candidate, he drew breathtaking crowds eager for change after 18 years of Joseph Kabila. Fayulu should be busy in Kinshasa, working out how to govern a complex nation of 80 million people, and instigating the urgent reforms that millions of voters demanded.
And yet here he is because, crucially, he is not president. Martin Fayulu’s business cards may call him “President Elect” – an act of self-branding that comes across as more endearing than audacious, a little reminiscent of “World’s Best Dad” mugs – but he is not.
Leaked numbers from the electoral commission and data from the Catholic Church’s thousands of observers suggest Fayulu garnered around 60% of the vote in the December 2018 elections. But when the official results were announced in January, opposition figure Felix Tshisekedi was declared the victor. Rumour has it that Tshisekedi and Kabila had struck a quick deal after the outgoing president’s intended successor, Emmanuel Ramazani Shadary, proved deeply unpopular in the polls.
As Tshisekedi became president, the world held its breath. Would voters accept this unholy compromise? They desperately wanted Kabila to step down and to pick their next president. They arguably got the former but not the latter.
In the end, there were not huge domestic protests and most international parties minced their words, seeing the election as illegitimate but its outcome as good enough for them.
Fayulu, however, fights on along with Lamuka, or at least some of it.
What is your strategy now going forwards ?
The will of the people should be respected. My strategy is based on that. Everybody wanted change in the Congo and said “don’t betray us”. I don’t consider myself as the opposition. I won the election. I am the president-elect. I have to facilitate the Congolese people to recover their victory.
I am trying to help them because I don’t want violence. In the eastern part of the country, the situation is very tense. My strategy is to talk and sit down together. We propose a solution of redoing the elections in 12-18 months.
Who will finance it? The international community said they will not, but they should put their hands in their pockets. What is the cost of continuing like this? People going on the streets, people resisting, even if it is passive resistance, business people not coming to the Congo. What will be the cost of redoing the elections? $200-300 million?
Why would anyone agree to fresh elections? Tshisekedi and Kabila are comfortable in power and the international community is happy to move on.
The international community gave lip service to Tshisekedi’s victory. The UK didn’t expressly welcome him.
If the government continues like they are, I will tell the people – with the popularity and legitimacy I got from the elections – “don’t follow the government”. The crisis will amount and then one day Congo will explode. In Algeria, President Bouteflika didn’t think he’d be sent out of power. In Sudan, the same. The government has to decide if they want the people to come to the streets to tell them to go or if they will have a peaceful transition.
At what point do you give up on talks, which seem unlikely, and go straight to calling for protests?
It will not take long because the people have already started to tell me “you have to let us go on the streets”. I think that before Easter we should have something. If not, there will be a disaster.
If you don’t hear anything by Easter, you’ll encourage people to take to the streets?
It’s not that I will encourage them, but I will not stop them. Today I’m stopping them. Tomorrow I will not stop anyone demonstrating.
You say people are ready to protest, but from a distance, it looks like most people just want to get on with their lives. They could have protested immediately after the elections.
They didn’t protest because they know the brutality of Kabila. People are calling for me everywhere in the Congo. This is a sign they are fed up. Sometimes protests go down, but I’ve decided not to let this go down. I’m touring the country. I think we have to fan the flames.
Are there any circumstances in which you would join the government to make change from within?
I cannot join the government. Not at all. The only thing is that, if we create a body for institutional reform and organise elections, Lamuka can manage it. And, if they say that because of my legitimacy I can calm the people, I could lead that organisation.
Kabila sent someone to ask me if we can meet. I said we cannot meet in the dark. We must meet openly. Kabila and Tshisekedi with a few others can meet with myself, Moise Katumbi, Jean-Pierre Bemba, Adolphe Muzito, Freddy Matungulu Mbuyamu, Jean Philibert Mabaya, Antipas Mbusa Nyamwisi. Six or seven on each side.
Some would say you have more chance of making change from inside the government than outside.
There is no chance, because Kabila will not let anyone succeed where he lost. He has 342 of 500 seats in the National Assembly, 92 of 108 in the Senate. He controls the local parliaments and most provinces. The regime spent a lot of money winning the Senate elections and paying MPs for their votes. People say Tshisekedi has to distance himself from Kabila but by force or what? Openly he cannot.
Does Tshisekedi have any chance of wresting meaningful control or is he completely at the mercy of Kabila?
He’s at the mercy of Kabila. He’s a nominated president. The president has to work closely with the Prime Minister, who is appointed by president but according to the make-up of parliament. That means Kabila’s Common Front for Congo (FCC) coalition will get the Prime Minister. Whatever Tshisekedi does, the Prime Minister has to sign everything.
The nature of the agreement I’ve heard about between Kabila and Tshisekedi says Tshisekedi will relinquish control in all economic areas, in mining, the finance ministry, the state miner Gecamines. Kabila is still there as well as in the army, police and interior. He is extremely rich and the people working for him have money too.
How can Tshisedeki manage the country or address corruption when Kabila and his people are surrounding him? He’s cornered. Also, article 165 and 166 of the constitution says that parliament can remove the president with a two-thirds majority. Kabila has it.
Do you think Tshiskedi agreed to be president because he is ambitious and self-interested or naïve?
I think he’s ambitious and self-interested. He really wanted to be president.
You don’t think he has the country’s best interests at heart and thought he could change things from within?
No. When he went to US recently, he was asked about sanctions. He said it was a mistake to sanction the Independent National Electoral Commission (CENI). He didn’t want to embarrass the people who elected him.
The opposition Lamuka coalition relied on broad support, particularly from former Katanga governor and businessman Moise Katumbi and former vice-president Jean-Pierre Bemba. There are reports that Katumbi has pulled away from the coalition and is looking to ally with Tshisekedi. Is everyone in Lamuka on the same page as you?
Lamuka isn’t one guy’s business. It’s a spirit that embodies the Congolese people. If somebody wants to leave it, he’ll be in trouble from the population. Even myself, I’m nothing. It’s the population who anoints you, not yourself.
I know Kabila is approaching some people, but they are not young boys. They know how to resist. Kabila considers Katumbi his enemy. I’m in close contact with him and Bemba. Bemba and the others will remain in the group. I think Katumbi will also be in the group, but if by any means someone goes, I don’t think Lamuka will suffer.
You’re not concerned that, like Tshisekedi, people might not be offered something better by the government and leave?
If you go out of Lamuka, you’re finished. Kabila is finished.
The Congo’s international partners – the West as well as the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and African Union – seem to be looking away at what is happening. What do you say to them?
They have to pay attention. This is the wrong strategy for Congo, for Africa, and for the whole world. Africa has about twenty elections in the next five years and dictators will think they can do what the Congo did and no one will take it seriously. Secondly, there’s the moral argument. Thirdly, what lesson are they teaching the youth?
SADC has strong presidents, who are working hard and want Africa to be developed. Some presidents are really happy Kabila has gone, but we have other presidents who are not happy.
The British have done a good job. They still think on principle. The UK position is the way forward, to ask for the truth and the truth today is to reorganise elections so no one loses face. We will spend money but this is the opportunity cost. I think they have to continue and convince others. Like Brexit, if you are committed to something and you really agree, you have to continue. I have esteem for Madame Theresa May. She’s a fighter. Like myself, I have to continue to be a fighter.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity.
Fayulu is a joker, he do not has lessons to teach us about elections, he was with Kabila. As a provincial and national MP. As provincial MP he was the one accept bribery to allow Kimbuta to sat as Kinshasa’s Governor for more a decade and we know how his act of irresponsility cost us. But I am not surprised to see him now claiming himself as a winner of the last election. But the worst on all of his stories is that he cannot prove it even one time that he had won that elections. He everytime rely on Cenco, western masse media. I am living in western countries and I know what it means to me as masse media. I know politician use media to design and create opinion and this is taken as reality. We know that those same western countries, are those who have driven Congo into his actual chaotic situation. They are those who had brought us Kabila the Father and The Son in Congo for more 20 years. We know that they have plaid a key role within their masse media such as RFI, TV5, France 24, RTBF, BBC and consort to put confusion. It is known that, those European countries were not notwitnesses during these elections. In Addition to that, we know that western countries were behind Lamuka, and designed these scenarios with masses media to distort Congolese public opinion on elections results on favour of Fayulu a day after Congolese vote. He, Fayulu, who is running the word to claim for victory, why did he not call for Congolese up raising after the publication of the presidential election? Why did he accepted to go to the High Court, knowing that Justice rely on facts and evidences but not on opinion? Why does he continue to claim the victory while all of his Lamuka partners and himself, on their last meeting in Geneva took in account the fact that Tshisekedi is the DRC’s
fact president and announced that they will transform lamuka from the election plateform to the opposition one? The question is: Opposition to whom? They to stop hypocrisy, They have to be clear and avoid ambiguity on their behavings, like calling for peope not to vote and later calling them to vote; and now looking the poll truth and planing to be opposition plateform. Overall, Martin Fayulu, Katumbi, Mbemba, Muzitu and consort are selfish and they owed west countries, this is why they fighting for their self interests and pay back to their sponsors but it is not for poor Congolese people. I am a ashamed when I read that UK does not welcome Félix Tshisekedi. UK is not a model in ekection, Brexit can tell us more. More, I do not think UK have clean hands on worst that happened in Congo. What Tony Blair advised Kagame to do in Congo when he was Kagame’s Advisor?
We are not dupe, Martin knows well what he want and we Congolese want the contry to raise.
The only way Martin can show that he loves the DRC is to talk with his friend Tshisekedi, they all share one country, one pastor, one political icon (Etienne Tshisekedi) and mistakes in some what have cost to Congolese people. We want to see them working together in Congo but not out of Congo
No Sir, the best person, Mr. Tshisekedi has won the election.
We know that at 1 month of the election President Tshisekedi was the favorite to win the Congolese election by all international polls and deservedly so because the UDPS, party of Mr. Tshisekedi has been the main opposition party for more than 30 years and won the election in 2011 but was not given the victory. We also know that Mr Fayulu, without any members on the ground was financed from outside by interests looking to control Congolese resources and got the support of french and Belgian media all along the election campaign to change that reality. Their mission was to diminish Mr. Tshisekedi image and make Mr. Fayulu look very big. Unfortunately other media and many of them just went blindly duplicating the messages of media and underground organizations that had a great appetite for that election and were well prepared for that.
Cenco, the Catholic Church monitoring organization that contested the election results in favor of Fayulu has had its credibility dented after this election. They had received 2 million dollars from abroad and 40 000 smart phones from Lamuka, the Fayulu electoral platform, to manage their activities. They had not aligned 40 000 observers as they claimed to have done but had received only 17 000 accreditation and found themselves with about 5000 observers on the day of the election probably because of the storm that visited the country that day, however sabotage cannot be ruled out. In fact, Cenco observers were people who were going to Church on Sunday but also visited political parties in the week and may have received other instructions from their parties. Why did Cenco claimed to have 40 000 observers up to the end? The reason I believe was for maintaining its strategic position as important political voice to serve obscure interests and also justify the use of all the money used that otherwise could not be all accounted for. All this has disqualified Cenco for being a serious monitoring partner in the eyes of many wise people. The use of smartphones supplied from abroad with no control over their software to relay election results by its observers, thus on a day when the internet was cut, is ironic when we know that up to the last minute Fayulu contested the use of the machine in voting for the reason that the software can be manipulated to rig the election. By scheduling and inviting the opposition to march against the use of the voting machine at the election eve, he was accused of trying to trick the opposition into the set up of allowing Mr. Kabila to find another reason to postpone an election that was already 2 years late. Mr. Fayulu is a deceiver. Nobody knows were he comes from and at what game he is playing. Here he is going around trying to convince everybody that he won ….with the same machine he complained about?
Fayulu has failed to present any single proof of his victory, which should have come in the form of minutes collected from each electoral office. There could only be 2 valid reasons for that. The first one is that he did not have them, which is strange because they had a organised a center for compiling the results or otherwise could have asked them from Cenco, which of course could not provide them because it was later found that Cenco had only less than 30% percent of their results in when they made their first declaration that they knew who won the election and less than 47% when they contested the final results. The second reason could have only been that Fayulu had the minutes but could not provide them because showing that he had lost and therefore he was taking a chance that day of judgement and as always he had to leave what I call a “political door” open he could use later in case things do not go his way, to continue to survive with fabricated stories, like the ones is telling today. He started it at the Court by arguing that the access to the minutes was made difficult by the Electoral Committee, which again leave a bad taste because the UDPS in the same position as opposition party had managed to have all its file in order. The open door he left, Fayulu used it well when the Cenco card he and his foreign partners was relying on came crashing down and a life line was thrown to him by his foreign boss by coming with a manufactured story of leaked results from the Electoral Committee that no one has ever seen until today published anywhere. It gave him the opportunity to sustain a campaign based on a big lie and to incite ethnic hatred just for power no matter if he has to use Congolese people cadavers as stepping stone to harvest that fruit and satisfy his masters interests. Aren’t leaked documents supposed to be published to confront a lie?
It is an amazing thing, a blessing in the sky that President Trump, in this time endured the most villain acts of what human beings can do to other human beings: directing planned attacks of fakes news and information destined to control and destroy on purpose. It was from this man that many people around the world have learned about 2 amazing words : “Fake News”, words without, which Congolese people could have not in a few words made sense of it all and deployed themselves quickly to face the war that the French and Belgian media brought on behalf of hidden powers to Mr. Tshisekedi and the Congolese people to influence their election. Without the Trump experience and warning, we will have not pulled this one out, and many innocent people have been killed by millions around the world or affected because of irresponsible reporting and propaganda. I am thinking about the 900 000 Rwandan and 6 millions Congolese who died in Eastern Congo and continue to die today. I am thinking of that beautiful 14 years girls with her two cut harms with machete but who still found a smile for the camera and do not stop asking myself if she still alive after we have not stopped fueling situations with our sensational writings.
There is something dangerous happening with our media that is not right and is calling for change. There could just be a group of media well organised for a certain cause and planning to take the world in a certain direction, million others will just be repeating that story and adding more fake news to be more sensational but all going in the same direction for fear of contradiction with the initiators who supposed to know more. The result of President Trump’s investigation by Muller call all us on revisit the powers of the mainstream media. I think social media is showing us the direction to take with the 2 sided stories: power not much in hand of the people who posted the story but who are commenting, reading and making their own judgement.
Il me semble que Fayulu a choisi de se battre contre Dieu en personne. Vous ne pouvez pas souhaiter malheur à tout un peuple après ce qui lui est arrivé à l’Est du pays. Vous ne pouvez pas mentir à chaque fois que vous ouvrez la bouche, changer de position à chaque fois que les circonstances changent et dire du mal sur une personne dont tout le monde et particulièrement le peuple Congolais entier sait qu’il est comme l’a été son père, rien que pour le peuple.
An Election duly constituted within norms relevant to procedure including process indeed convey a measure of ‘de jure’ probity recognizing as legitimate the peoples choice.
Whereas, an election fundamentally flawed in process inclusive of procedure merely conveys ‘de facto’ status illegitimate attributed specifically in that the peoples choice has been suborned rendering the de facto Leader lacking utterly in epistemic legitimacy as ascribed within a rule of law ethos.
DRCongo political social publics I suggest are in status roiling which may very well generate profound violent cleavage among the peoples living in DRCongo.