DRC opposition warns Tshisekedi’s new referendum law threatens term limits
Opposition parties in the Democratic Republic of Congo have condemned a new law easing the rules for constitutional referendums, arguing it could clear the way for President Félix Tshisekedi to stay in power beyond 2028. The dispute revives fears of another long crisis over term limits in a country whose last political transition was marred by violence.
In Kinshasa, a new fight over the rules of the game is opening before the next election cycle even begins. Opposition groups in the Democratic Republic of Congo say a law signed by President Félix Tshisekedi that loosens requirements for constitutional referendums is really about one thing: removing the barrier that would force him from office in 2028.
The law was announced in an order read on national television, signaling that the presidency wants the public to understand this as a formal political step, not a technical adjustment. Opposition figures have condemned it as an attempt to pave the way for constitutional amendments that could lift or blur existing term limits, a pattern that has played out elsewhere in Central and West Africa with destabilizing results.
For millions of Congolese who lived through the drawn-out end of Joseph Kabila’s presidency, the stakes feel familiar. Kabila stayed on beyond his final constitutional term as elections were delayed, a crisis that fueled protests, a bloody crackdown by security forces and deepened mistrust between citizens and the state. Any sign that term limits might be softened or reinterpreted now risks reawakening that trauma.
The opposition’s warning is straightforward: change the rules on how easily the constitution can be revised, and you change the balance of power between voters and the presidency. Easing the path to a referendum can make it technically and legally simpler for a sitting leader to put sensitive questions to the electorate under conditions the government largely controls, from timing to security to media access.
Operationally, the new law will matter most if it is followed by concrete proposals to amend specific constitutional articles, especially those governing presidential mandates. Civil society organizations, churches and regional observers will be watching for drafts that touch term limits, electoral calendars or the independence of electoral institutions, all flashpoints in previous Congolese crises.
The broader regional context gives the opposition’s concerns extra weight. Across the continent, changes to constitutions or referendum rules have frequently preceded controversial third terms or extended stays in office, from Central Africa to the Sahel. Each time, the human impact has been measured in protests broken up by force, opposition figures jailed or exiled, and ordinary citizens pushed back into a struggle over basic political accountability.
For Congo, a country still wrestling with armed groups in its east, mass displacement and a fragile economy, another cycle of contestation around the presidency could have wide repercussions. Political instability in Kinshasa can distract attention and resources from security operations on the other side of the country, where civilians already live under threat from militias and underpaid military units.
The law also carries implications for foreign partners. International backers who supported Tshisekedi’s ascent as a break from the Kabila years will have to decide how forcefully to respond if they see credible steps toward loosening term limits. Aid, security cooperation and investment in Congo’s vital mining sector—particularly cobalt and copper—are all shaped by perceptions of political risk and the likelihood of orderly transitions.
The most telling measure of where this is heading will not be in legal language alone but in how ordinary political activity is treated. If opposition rallies against the law are allowed, if media can criticize it openly and if courts show some independence in reviewing challenges, that would suggest boundaries remain. If, instead, the law is followed by intimidation or arrests of critics, it will be a signal that the path from technical change to entrenched rule is already being walked.
Sources
- OSINT