(THIS ARTICLE IS MACHINE TRANSLATED by Google from Norwegian)
Of: Norunn Kjenstad
DEBATE: The situation in Burundi has been blown out of proportion by the opposition and civil society, which has done a good job of propaganda. Propaganda has also reached Norway, including in a post in Ny Tid in May, where Stian Antonsen from the Joint Council for Africa claims that the president of Burundi, Pierre Nkurunziza, defies the constitution by running for election a third time.
Controversy over constitutional articles. The two disputed articles of the Constitution are Articles 96 and 302. These two are contradictory, and thus independent in both meaning and interpretation. The members of the Burundian Senate challenged the case in the Constitutional Court, which ruled that the candidacy of President Nkurunziza is constitutional, that is, in accordance with the country's constitution.
According to Article 226 of the Burundian Constitution, the incumbent president is to appoint judges. The central question today is whether some members of the opposition and civil society in Burundi reject the verdict because they were appointed by President Nkurunziza. Consequently, any future president who appoints judges in the Constitutional Court will be subject to the same skewed treatment.
That the president has the opportunity to stand for the third time is thus determined in the judicial system – not a result of his "clinging to power".
As in other countries, the Constitutional Court is the final judge of the law, which in turn decides all constitutional litigation. One cannot wish for democracy and at the same time undermine democratic institutions by rejecting legal institutions and their enforcement.
That the president has the opportunity to stand for the "third" time is thus determined in the judicial system – not a result of his "clinging to power", as Antonsen claims.
Due process of law. Legal security is one of the most important features of a democratic country. With its institutions, Burundi has chosen legal security as the preferred instrument for regulating political and social organization with respect for the rule of law.
The critics point out that the vice president of the court refused to sign the verdict and fled the country. She is not the first, and most likely not the last public official to resign. One can also mention the Vice President and Administrator of the National Independent Electoral Commission. The officials are experiencing relentless pressure from demonstration leaders of the same ethnicity. They are forced to give false explanations, they are promised great gifts and asylum in the EU and the US. This is a known form of sabotage that is ongoing and which often has ethnic lines.
Ethnic demonstrations. In 1995, the United Nations Human Rights Commission reported in its report E / CN.4 / 1996/4 / Add.1 on how Tutsi youths set up barricades and threw stones and grenades. Amnesty International reported in report AI Index: AFR 16/34/96 that Tutsis civilians and militias expelled and chased the Hutu population from the districts of Mutakura, Cibitoke, Musaga, Nyakabiga and Ngagara in Bujumbura.
Is it a coincidence that the same neighborhoods that carried out ethnic cleansing in 1995 are the same as in 2015 rioting, setting up barricades, killing and throwing grenades? It can be compared to Anders Behring Breivik teaching Norway about democracy and tolerance.
Violent protesters. When it boiled in the streets during the Gothenburg riots in 2001, the Paris riots in 2006 and the Greece riots in 2008, the police had to use their authority to maintain calm. When protesters' actions escalate beyond legal boundaries, security authorities have to act.
When the police in an African country use the same authority, Western media report abuse of power. Demonstrators have proven on several occasions that they are not peaceful protesters: they kicked and kept killing a political woman. A passing hutu in Nyakabiga was taken by the protesters and burned alive in a car tire.
People are forced to participate in demonstrations – those who refuse can be killed. If there was a Tutsi being chased and burned alive in the streets, civil society would cry for genocide. Has the international community and Western media investigated this?
Contested independence. Privately owned newspapers and radio channels played a terrible role during the civil war in Burundi (1993–2005). An excerpt from the UN report E / CN.4 / 1996/4 / Add.1 concludes that the Burundian press conveys opinions rather than news. Opinions are linked to political and ethnic interest and stir up ethnic and social turmoil. It is therefore important that journalists carefully read the history of Burundi before reporting and concluding on the actual situation in the country.
It is argued that Norway provides a great deal of assistance to Burundi, and should therefore be clearer to the country's government. We know that peace is a prerequisite for democracy and development. Today, Burundi's government is not at war with itself, but with anarchists who do not want peace.
One cannot have both anarchy and democracy at the same time. Although the opposition disagrees with the current president, they must engage in democratic solutions – not encourage violence as a means of action.
Norway must also send clear messages both to the opposition and to civil society that they cannot practice violence in the name of democracy. If Western media want to emphasize a democracy in Burundi, they must not stir up war, but make sure to emphasize a political struggle with the same principled values as in Norway.
Kjenstad is a master's student in International Environmental Studies at NMBU.
