In a country where the airwaves often double as the principal arena of political contestation, the manner in which broadcasting time is apportioned among contenders is never a merely administrative detail. It is, in itself, a measure of how seriously an institution takes its mandate to hold the scales evenly. That conviction lay behind the exercise conducted in Brazzaville, where the Superior Council for the Freedom of Communication (CSLC) sought to remove from human discretion the delicate question of who would address the nation, and in what sequence, during the presidential campaign in the Republic of the Congo.
A lottery designed to take the regulator’s hand off the scale
On 26 February, in Brazzaville, the CSLC carried out a public draw to determine the order in which the seven candidates’ messages would be broadcast across the country’s public and private media outlets. The choice of a lottery rather than an assigned schedule is telling. By surrendering the decision to chance, the regulator deliberately stripped itself of the power to favour, however subtly, one contender over another. In a region where state broadcasters are frequently accused of tilting coverage toward incumbents, the symbolism of an order fixed by drawing rather than by fiat carries a weight that extends well beyond the mechanics of scheduling.
The draw produced a precise running order. The first messages to air will belong to Anguios Nganguia Engambe, candidate of the Party for the Action of the Republic (PAR). He will be followed by the independent candidate Dave Uphrem Mafoula, and then by Mabio Mavoungou Zinga of the Alliance. The fourth slot falls to Melaine Destin Gavet Elongo of the Republican Movement, while the fifth goes to the independent Vivien Romain Manangou. Joseph Kignoumbi Kia Mboungou, standing for the party known as “La Chaine,” occupies the sixth position. The final message will be that of the candidate of the presidential majority, Denis Sassou-N’Guesso.
A bailiff’s seal on a contested ritual
What distinguishes this exercise from a routine bureaucratic act is the apparatus of verification surrounding it. The draw unfolded in the presence of representatives of all seven candidates as well as media professionals, and the proceedings were certified by a judicial bailiff, Me Jean-Claude Olombo. The presence of an officer of the court transforms an internal procedure into something approaching a notarised public record, one that the candidates’ own delegates witnessed and can therefore scarcely dispute after the fact. In electoral environments where the legitimacy of results is perennially questioned, such procedural scaffolding is less a formality than an attempt to pre-empt accusations of manipulation.
The composition of the field itself merits attention. Seven candidates, ranging from established party figures to independents, will compete for the public’s ear. The inclusion of independents alongside representatives of structured political movements suggests a contest with at least the formal contours of pluralism, even if the relative weight of each contender varies considerably. That the sitting head of the presidential majority draws the final slot is, by the logic of the lottery, a matter of pure chance rather than design, a point the regulator will doubtless be keen to emphasise.
Equal access as the regulator’s defining test
Medard Milandou Nsonga, who presides over the CSLC, framed the operation as flowing directly from the institution’s foundational purpose. That mission, he explained, consists in guaranteeing candidates equal access to the media and in ensuring information that is balanced, transparent and consistent with the laws of the Republic. His words situate the draw within a broader doctrine: that the credibility of an election rests not only on the integrity of the ballot but on the fairness of the conversation that precedes it.
The CSLC president did not confine himself to procedural assurances. He called upon the candidates to deliver messages that are responsible and constructive, and he urged media outlets to respect strictly the established order of broadcast. The dual exhortation is significant. It places obligations on both sides of the microphone, binding the contenders to a standard of civic restraint and the broadcasters to a discipline of impartial execution. In effect, the regulator is asking the political class and the media to share custody of the campaign’s tone.
Whether such appeals translate into practice will become apparent only as the broadcasts unfold. The order of passage settles one variable in a process that contains many others, and a schedule fixed by lot cannot by itself guarantee the substance of fair coverage. Yet the exercise establishes a benchmark against which the conduct of the campaign can be measured. By anchoring the sequence to chance, certifying it through a bailiff and articulating the principles at stake, the CSLC has staked its authority on the proposition that even the smallest decisions of an electoral season deserve to be made in the open. For the Congolese electorate, that visible commitment to procedure may prove as consequential as the messages themselves.
