Of “Doubtful Nationality”: Political Manipulation of Citizenship in the D. R. Congo

Politically fomented restrictions on citizenship eligibility are on the rise in Africa. This has proven particularly so in the Democratic Republic of Congo, where, over more than 40 years since independence, the citizenship of the “Rwandophone” minority (peoples of Rwandan/Burundese heritage, including the much-discussed “Banyamulenge”), has been switched on and off as expediency dictated, a key element in the divide-and-rule strategies of political elites, and in the outbreak of two recent wars. Recognizing this, in 2004, the post-war Transition Government promulgated a new law on nationality. But it is far from clear that this will resolve the core problem. First, at the level of legal principle, this law does not seem likely to eliminate the many ambiguities concerning the national status of Rwandophones. Second, citizenship in the DRC has as much to do with the politics of implementing the law on the ground as with the law itself. Third, does the political relationship between the individual and the state really encompass everything that it means to be a full “citizen”? There are two important dimensions of full citizenship in Africa which continue to be denied to Rwandophones: local rights and obligations between the individual and customary authority, with implications for land allocation and other vital entitlements; and the ethically vital, lived sense of belonging and existential security for the individual within society as a whole. Without addressing these other dimensions, the question of Rwandophone citizenship remains open to further manipulation—an injustice and a potential cause for conflict to resume.     

‘Wrong Persons-Are Making Right Decisions without Hearing Us’: Political Trust,Responsiveness of Politicians and Satisfaction with Governmental Policies in Finland*

That low trust in politicians in general endangers the political stability of a democratic political system is conventional wisdom even within the political science community. It is the purpose of the article to challenge this notion. It is claimed that, on the contrary, distrust of politicians in general may just be evidence of healthy scepticism. It should, on the other hand, be clear that high trust in politicians in general may also endanger the stability of a political system, even the whole existence of the democratic order. Total faith is blind faith. The main argument of the paper is supported with empirical evidence From Gallup polls in Finland (1974–1984), which show, among other things, that the overall satisfaction with governmental policies has been exceptionally high in our country.     

Political theory in historical context. Reflections on Democratic Justice and the Social Contract by Albert Weale

In Democratic Justice and the Social Contract, Weale defends a contractarian theory of social justice following what he calls the ‘empirical method’, which consists in grounding ethics and politics on the observation of concrete examples of social contracts, rather than abstract speculations. In this paper, I will make three critical remarks. First, the empirical method is open to the same objections usually raised against more abstract approaches to social contract theory: by an appropriate choice of the starting point, one can justify any ethical or political position. Second, Weale’s focus on the societies that were successful in managing common pool resources appears arbitrary: other social organizations (e.g. hunters and gatherers societies) would be a more obvious choice. Finally, in following the empirical method, philosophers must be willing to import into ethics and politics the same problems of interpretation one encounters in theoretical social sciences. As an example, I will show that Weale’s position on the welfare state depends on the interpretation he gives of some practices observed in the societies he chooses as models. Different interpretations of the same practices would induce Weale to revise his positions.