CHAD: DECENTRALIZATION, LOCAL ABUSES, AND THE AUTHORITY OF THE STATE
Peace does not justify impunity, decentralization does not mean the fragmentation of the state, and dialogue must not be mistaken for weakness.
The statements made by the representative of the Toubou Sultan, who questions the President’s willingness to be the president of all Chadians and claims that “even the President does not know what he is doing,” raise a fundamental question: what is the relationship between traditional authorities, local powers, and the republican state?
If these claims are substantiated, they demonstrate efforts at reconciliation that must not, however, lead to the unequal application of the law.
Likewise, allegations of violence, torture, humiliation, and destruction of property must be subject to serious investigations. No individual, whether a member of a self-defense group, a traditional authority, or the public security forces, should enjoy de facto immunity.
Constitution and Decentralization: Understanding the Abuses
The problem, therefore, is not decentralization itself, but its flawed implementation and the lack of effective oversight mechanisms. Traditional authorities can play an important role in mediation, but they must not replace administrative, military, or judicial institutions.
The governor, as the representative of the state, must firmly uphold the republican framework while preserving dialogue and mutual respect. Public authority must be exercised in accordance with the law, without arbitrariness or leniency toward abuses.
Chad needs strong institutions, an impartial justice system, and common rules that apply across all regions of the country. Tibesti deserves peace, security, and development, just like every other province of Chad.
The real question is not whether the President represents one community or all Chadians, but whether the state guarantees every citizen the same rights, the same duties, and the same protection under the law.
One Republic, one law, equal justice for all.
Leave A Comment