Youth in Benin, Friday, November 4, 2011, 15:47
Since the last presidential and legislative elections, marked by the electoral hold-up as everyone knows, events of unusual severity assail your daily life. The slump in the vendors market, torture recurring the academic for parents with its share of problems, education destroyed by the devastating ravages of NPE, the factories that are closing due to lack of raw materials (textile mills , oil factories of all kinds), the abrupt rise in the prices of basic commodities following the implementation of the famous seals Import Verification Program and the misery that entails for the vast majority of the population, unemployment that hits all the youth, many of bullying soldier diplomacy failed, and so on. this is known. And complaints from markets, shops, fields, offices, lecture halls, barracks, resound from all sides and come to me.
But what is even more notable since the last hold-up is where the climbing starts Boni Yayi power for the establishment of a tyranny to Ben Ali or Eyadema Father. It is the frontal attack against the fundamental freedoms that are so far the pride of people of Benin and the adoption by the authority of an array of laws autocratic nature.
This is the area I want to talk about today.
In an address to the Deputies on 27 September 2011, I wrote: “Recently, a spate of projects or legislative proposals are laid before you in the National Assembly to be voted. The common feature of these projects and proposed legislation is the restriction if the liquidation of the fundamental freedoms gained popular struggles of 1989 and consecrated by the National Conference. It is as a combination of actions to each other from the government from the presidential majority in parliament. All have one goal: to muzzle the people and return to the dark period of the despotism Kérékou-PRPB. ” The momentum after the adoption of the law prohibiting strikes by customs and other officers, that the proposed referendum law which has just been made and soon it will be the law on strikes in fact an anti -strike, that is to say, the practice of prohibiting the strike to all workers.
In this regard, the final decision of the Constitutional Court Decision DCC 11-067 of 20 October 2011 by which the Constitutional Court ruled the compliance of the Organic Law on conditions for a referendum, is a milestone that sounds like a culmination of the plot of placing the gag completely to our people.
This decision is announced in newspapers of Monday, October 25, 2011 a strong positive feedback. “The Court shows its independence vis-à-vis YAYI” (The Morning). “The Court frustrates supporters YAYI” “The Court sent a strong signal to the presidential majority in Parliament,” etc.. Much that is written emphasize the ignorance of the authors in the field, or are sponsored by the very people who are interested in make-up of this thing that has committed so many crimes against democracy and the people of Benin.
Let us look at the famous decision. Apart from the additions to the Referendum Act which are also rewriting the statute, the essential element that is the subject of media stream of praise is the rejection of Article 6 of the law passed, declaring it contrary to the Constitution and redrafting. I quote: “Considering that the review of the law shows that Article 6 is unconstitutional in that it does not cite all the basic options of the National Conference of February 1990 and are included in sections 42, 44 and 54 of the Constitution, it is the number of presidential terms, the age limit for candidates in the presidential election and the presidential nature of the political system in our country that the Article 6 should be reworded as follows:
“May not be the subject of questions to submit to referendum the basic options of the National Conference of February 1990, namely:
– The republican and secular state
– The attack on the integrity of national territory
– The presidential term of five years renewable once
– The age limit of at least 40 years and 70 years at most for any candidate in the presidential election;
– The type of presidential system of government in Benin “(Emphasis added)
Such a decision raises the following questions:
1 – The Constitution of Benin did she stay silent on issues that can not be subject to review? Certainly not. It was formal. She deals with Article 156 which provides: “No amendment procedure may be commenced or continued when he damaged the integrity of the territory. The republican and secular state can not be revised. ” Where the Court of Holo-Dossou she pulled the other elements not subject to review such as: – the presidential term of five years renewable once, – the age limit of at least 40 years and 70 years more to any candidate for the presidential election – the presidential form of political regime in Benin? Of his imagination. Even the issue of territorial integrity is not a question in such terms directed by the Court decision. The issue of territorial integrity arises only when a condition of non-revision of the Constitution and is to be attached to an annexation of territory by foreign military action. What is said in the Constitution is that it can not initiate constitutional revision when part of the national territory is occupied by foreign forces. The case of transfer or gain of territory by the border delimitation agreement between Benin and its neighbors such is not considered here as the loss by Benin to the island of Lete before the ICJ is not a constitutional issue.
Where the Court of Holo-Dossou is she went to get these other things? The “fundamental options of the National Conference of February 1990 and which are set by Articles 42, 44 and 54 of the Constitution.” Yet among these famous elements of “basic options of the National Conference of February 1990,” one finds that have never been discussed at the National Conference, which were introduced only later with the High Council of the Republic (UNHCR). Some of these superimposed as for example the question of the conditions for age 40 and 70, were the subject of controversy to the point that the UNHCR had to introduce a third question from the “yes” and “no “with the” yes but “in the constitutional referendum. How the issue of presidential system, the age for presidential candidate, the presidential term, such questions are they not subject to revision by the people? France, which adopted a parliamentary system in 1958 did she not changed by referendum in semi-presidential system in 1962? And recently has it not changed by constitutional amendment the term of 7 years to 5 years?
First conclusion: The Court of Holo-Dossou which is an organ of the Constitution, gets over it, for the use of false rewrite their own way.
2 – Where is the sovereignty in the state? All first-year student of law knows that the state sovereignty belongs to the people and is therefore called “the original constituent.” The people can delegate the exercise of that sovereignty to the parliament which is so called “derived constituent.” Section 4 of the Constitution expresses this as follows: “The people exercise their sovereignty through their elected representatives and by referendum …” with the understanding that the issue of the popular uprising that led to the advent of the Constitution remains current. And if the Constitutional Court is already forming a flange from, of course that is derived for the constituent parliament and a review by parliament will be subject to the same limitations.
But according to the principle of democracy and republican expressed in Article 4 above cited, no limits, no bridle, no muzzle can not be put to the people in the exercise of that sovereignty. The people must be free to revise any provisions allowing the exercise of this sovereign right. It is well understood that the two items excluded from review under section 156 namely “The republican form and secularity of the state” are intrinsic to the exercise by the people’s sovereignty, for a royalty for example, the sovereignty belongs to the monarch and not the people. Besides these two there can be no limit to the people.
Second conclusion: By expanding the areas excluded from review, the Court of Holo-Dossou, which has already assumed the exercise of sovereignty delegated to the Parliament (by replacing the national representation in its legislative role), has so Finally, assume for the benefit of popular sovereignty at the expense of the people.
Thus, the Associate Professor of Private Law, Joseph DJOGBENOU which is “reassuring” such a decision described by him as “wise” and “bridge between the people and the National Conference of active forces of the nation” consciously or unconsciously falls in the game of plotters. Body of the Constitution which usurps the sovereignty of the people by defining the limits of this extra-constitutional sovereignty? That is the sad reality to what the people are facing. The anti-people approach of the Court is of diabolical duplicity. The people want the departure of Boni Yayi and believes that the current Constitution guarantees him at his departure later in 2016. A referendum on the revision of the Constitution explicitly including elements that may allow a return of the new autocrat in 2016 would be difficult to pass. While the Court holds that a ruse remains the people’s sovereignty by making the people believe it stands for. President Yayi Boni has always protested his determination not to revise the Articles 42 and 44 of our Constitution. From this point of view, the Court does not say anything. But can it prevent the camp Boni Yayi, to declare after adoption of the revision by referendum (or parliamentary means) that we are faced with a New Republic “refounded” and therefore it sets the record straight zero provide the means to rebuild a double five-year term (after 2016)? And with the blessing of that Court!? Examples of Wade, Compaore, etc. Biya. are they not there to inspire us? The Dossou Robert Holo and Theodore who fabricated Boni Yayi II bound up with it and surely await the return of the elevator for a second term at the head of this Court in 2013. Moreover, it is not surprising that members of the majority mechanical pro-Yayi Parliament have applauded with both hands the constitutional decision. The division of roles is perfect.
By adopting the referendum law which tears the citizen individually or with other organized into various associations such as various NGOs, the right to participate in the referendum campaign supposed to address existential questions of the state, which subjects prior authorization freedom enshrined in Article 5 of the Constitution on the one hand, and also the constitutional revision, the loop is made. The people are stripped of their sovereignty and the new constitution (adopted by referendum with a fake LEPI or by parliamentary vote) will be a carbon copy of the Basic Law of Kérékou PRPB-less with only one-party state and a Central Committee control the state. We are open in a new autocracy.
So now closed to workers and the people, any way formally prescribed by the Constitution for Democracy and Development in Benin. It will now remained that the revolutionary way in which we forced the power to Boni Yayi and is particularly rehabilitation and up to date globally by the examples of Tunisia and Egypt.
Organisations responsible for the patriotic, democratic, labor and Defense of Human Rights, workers, youth, women of Benin
Since ko election in March, many Beninese are like in a daze, groggy from the blow they have just received. And we hear: “What! What is happening to us? The Beninese becomes like all the citizens of other countries languishing in autocracies. There was more courageous youth. We must return to the years 1985-1990 where young heroes were ready to face even death to defeat autocracy and so on. “. Yes, I hear you well.
In this sense, in a statement dated 03 October 2011, called on my party workers and people to “deepen the reflection and the global movement to empower you to break by force the new autocracy that Boni Yayi. That’s where we are today and that’s the challenge. The challenge for all workers and peoples. You can do it. ”
Indeed, I trust. I trust my valiant people who have achieved great popular movement of 11 December 1989 that led to the overthrow of the hated-PRPB Kérékou, the people who could withstand the vicissitudes of centuries-old history of our country.
The last conference held under the initiative of my party with your massive and enthusiastic participation and whose theme was “Managing the public good and the future of Benin” was evidence that the patriotic and democratic forces in this country can fight and defeat all the economic and political criminals. Both crimes are often inextricably linked. For if the power to Boni Yayi uses autocratic dictatorship is to try to stem any protest against gross violations of the public good which he is guilty.
That is why party leaders and organizations, patriotic, democratic, labor and Defense of Human Rights, you should never give in to discouragement and defeatism. I call you a patriotic union to meet the challenge of poor governance, dictatorship and build a country freed. I invite you to raise an insuperable barrier against the wave of fascist “Refoundation”.
To you young, you have to do this expression of yours Danton, French revolutionary, “Audacity, more audacity, always audacity” to ward off bad luck that you weave the power corrupt and dictatorial YAYI Boni. The country’s future depends on it. Your future depends on it.
To all of you, workers of all categories, youth, women, the country is completely destroyed and that, regardless of the compartment to which it refers. To rebuild, you must make sacrifices because of difficult days ahead. All democrats, all patriots are invited. Each must go its forces and means. The smallest contribution will be welcome in the tide of tasks for the emancipation of that country. And the day of reckoning, everyone can say with satisfaction of a job well done: “I was there.”
Forward we will win!
First Secretary of the Communist Party of Benin.