March 2026 Election: CSLC Steps Up Consultations
With the March 2026 presidential election on the horizon, the Conseil supérieur de la liberté de communication (CSLC) has been intensifying its civic meetings with political stakeholders in an effort to entrench responsible electoral communication and to avert any rhetorical drift likely to weaken national cohesion. The approach is presented by the regulator as preventive rather than punitive: a programme of dialogue designed to shape the tone of the campaign before it hardens into polarisation.
In that context, on Friday 30 January 2026, a delegation led by the CSLC’s president, Médard Milandou Nsonga, travelled to Ouenzé, Brazzaville’s fifth arrondissement, to meet the leadership of the Alliance pour la république et la démocratie (ARD). The talks took place at the party’s headquarters, in the presence of its figurehead, the former finance minister and opposition leader Mathias Dzon, accompanied by senior members of his political platform. The timing, at the outset of a pre-electoral cycle, underlines the regulator’s intention to engage early with a wide range of actors, including those outside the governing coalition.
Peaceful Electoral Messaging and Media Pluralism
At the centre of the exchange was a shared recognition that elections are both a democratic rite and a stress test for public discourse. The CSLC emphasised the need for a calm, respectful campaign, framed around democratic issues and the principle of pluralism, particularly in public media. For the regulator, the objective is to ensure that the competition of ideas remains compatible with social peace and institutional stability.
Médard Milandou Nsonga reiterated that the CSLC’s mandate is to accompany all political formations in observing the rules governing electoral communication, while also seeking to prevent verbal excesses and divisive narratives. His remarks conveyed a consistent line: regulation is not meant to muzzle debate, but to discipline it, so that disagreement remains within the bounds of civility and law.
In his view, the presidential election constitutes a pivotal moment in national democratic life, yet one that can become a source of tension if candidates and parties fail to exercise restraint. He warned that imprudent, distorted, or manipulated messages may erode balances described as already delicate. The appeal, as framed by the CSLC, is therefore to privilege appeasement, unity, and a sense of collective responsibility—an ethics of speech intended to match the gravity of the electoral moment.
Mathias Dzon’s Position and Observations on Tele-Congo
Mathias Dzon welcomed the CSLC’s outreach, even as he located his own party’s stance outside the usual electoral calculus. According to the account of the meeting, the ARD has chosen not to field a candidate for the March 2026 presidential election. That decision did not prevent Dzon from treating the consultation as an opportunity to raise broader concerns about the public space for political expression.
In a lengthy intervention, he voiced a critical view of the state of freedom of expression, focusing in particular on the functioning of public broadcasting. Referring to his own viewing habits, he stated that he watches Télé-Congo each evening and perceives the airwaves as dominated by a single political voice, that of the Parti congolais du travail (PCT), while opposition parties are scarcely heard. The substance of his grievance was institutional: he argued that the media regulator allows public outlets to privilege the discourse of the PCT and its allies, leaving opposition formations without meaningful access.
Such statements, delivered in a regulated consultation rather than in a rally, illustrate the dual purpose of these meetings. They are at once an invitation to temper speech and a forum where political actors can articulate perceived imbalances. In this sense, the CSLC’s encounter with the ARD functions as a test of the regulator’s capacity to listen, to clarify its tools, and to reassure political stakeholders that procedures exist for redress.
CSLC Assurances on Fair Coverage in Public Media
Responding to these concerns, the CSLC’s secrétaire comptable, Jérôme Patrick Mavoungou, said that measures are being taken to guarantee equitable media coverage for all political sensitivities. His intervention shifted the conversation from principle to practice: beyond the call for calm language, the credibility of a peaceful campaign depends on perceptions of fairness in access to platforms that shape public opinion.
Mavoungou invited ARD officials to report any imbalance or breach they identify, and he indicated that corrective action would follow in cases of irregularity. The message was both procedural and political. Procedural, in that it encouraged parties to use institutional channels rather than public escalation; political, in that it signalled a willingness to address specific complaints within the regulator’s remit.
This assurance matters in a media environment where public outlets occupy a central place in national visibility. By asking political actors to document alleged disparities, the CSLC positions itself as an arbiter capable of intervening where necessary, while also distributing responsibility: parties are encouraged to move from general accusations to verifiable reporting.
Denis Sassou Nguesso Era: Dialogue as an Anti-Tension Mechanism
Set against the broader governance context of Denis Sassou Nguesso’s presidency, the episode illustrates a familiar but significant dynamic in Congolese political life: institutions seeking to reduce friction through structured dialogue. The CSLC’s démarche, as described, aims to keep the electoral period from becoming a contest of antagonisms that spills beyond politics into society.
The meeting in Ouenzé also highlights how the pre-electoral phase is increasingly understood as a matter of communication governance, not merely campaigning. By engaging an opposition leader who is not presenting a candidate, the CSLC signals that the objective is not limited to candidates alone, but extends to the broader ecosystem of parties, platforms, and media actors whose statements can shape the climate.
Ultimately, the encounter conveys a pragmatic lesson. Calls for appeasement gain traction when paired with mechanisms that address the practical conditions of pluralism. The CSLC’s promise of corrective measures, and the ARD’s willingness to present its grievances in a formal setting, together suggest that institutional dialogue remains a key instrument for preventing tensions as the March 2026 presidential election approaches.
Roland KOULOUNGOU
