Press conference by CÔte D’Ivoire

 

(Issued on 28 October 2004.)

The north of Côte d’Ivoire was still held hostage by armed groups made up of up to 70 per cent foreigners; systematic plundering of the country’s resources was continuing; and the population went on suffering, in the north, as well as in the south, where there were displaced persons, Philippe Djangone-Bi, Permanent Representative of Côte d’Ivoire to the United nations, told a headquarters press conference this morning.  The press conference was called to announce the beginning of disarmament in Côte d’Ivoire and to discuss the contributions promised by the international community for the country’s reconstruction.

Mr. Djangone-Bi said that since the signing of the 2002 ceasefire agreement, the ex-rebellion had not implemented any of the provisions of that agreement, which had it freely committed to comply with and whose integral implementation it was vocal about.  For that reason, the situation today was in an impasse as demonstrated by the reality on the ground.  The obstacle to peace was the refusal of the ex-rebels to start the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process.  The international community needed to understand the deep motivation for such a behaviour.  It was necessary to get the rebels to agree to disarm by resorting to the incentive or coercive measures already envisaged several times by the Security Council.

Although the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement clearly provided that the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process should start as soon as the Government of National Reconciliation was formed, the ex-rebellion, although a part of that Government, was still in arms, he said.  The country remained divided, and its national resources were being plundered in the zones under its control.

It was important that, while the Parliament was examining the reforms envisaged in the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement, the ex-rebels began the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process in accordance with that agreement and as recommended by the Security Council and the European Union, without any preconditions, he continued.  That was the condition for lasting peace in the country and the subregion.  Delay tactics aimed at reaching the election deadline of October 2005 with the current “no war, no peace” situation so as to remove the President from power through an “end of tenure” could not succeed.  According to him, article 38 of the Constitution provides that if presidential elections could be held, because of serious obstacles such as war, the President should remain in power until such elections were held and the results proclaimed, so, there will be no power vacuum”.

Côte d’Ivoire’s legal authorities had made huge sacrifices in compliance with the peace agreement, including calling the ex-rebels into the Government and voting an amnesty law for them on 6 August 2003, he said. Of the 16 amendments recommended in the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement, seven had already been adopted, five were being examined by the Parliament, and three were awaited by the Council of Ministers.  However, the ex-rebels were evading responsibility by hiding behind preconditions.  There was no concrete action to establish a climate of mutual confidence.  The Accra III Agreement had given new momentum to the peace process on 30 July 2004 and exhorted each party to implement the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement without any precondition.  That position had been reinforced by the statement to the press made by the Security Council on 27 September 2004.

Mr. Djangone-Bi said that the heads of mission of the European Union in Côte d’Ivoire had been well informed of the reality on the ground and had made a salutary statement to the press after that of the Security Council to give coherence to the position of the international community in the search for peace in Côte d’Ivoire.  That statement substantially exhorted the Forces Nouvelles to disarm without waiting for the complete adoption of all the reforms by the Parliament.

He argued that the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement did not make the disarmament, demobilization and reintegration process dependent on the prior adoption of the envisaged political reforms.  On the contrary, it recommended disarmament as soon as the Government of National Reconciliation was formed.  The amendment to the conditions of eligibility for the presidency was one of the bills that had been adopted by the Council of Ministers and which would be introduced to the Parliament.  That amendment procedure could be started only when the conditions set by the Constitution –- disarmament, reunification of the country, and re-establishment of the authority of the State over the whole national territory -- were met.

The President could not void the Constitution adopted by the people with an overwhelming majority of more than 86 per cent, he said.  The Constitution stated that no referendum could be organized as long as the integrity of the country was undermined.  That Constitution had been adopted before the election that brought President Laurent Gbagbo to power.  The international community could not logically plead for democracy and good governance and, at the same time, ask the President to violate the Constitution.  That was one reason why many observers had welcomed the address by the Secretary-General to the African Summit in Addis Ababa, in which he exhorted the leaders not to modify their respective constitutions as they liked.

In response to a question by a correspondent, he noted that the Security Council had said in the past that specific actions would be taken against those found to be a hindrance or obstacles to the achievement of peace.  The case of the ex-rebels was a case of obstacles to peace.

Asked to identify which countries the foreigners in his country came from, Mr. Djangone-Bi responded that everybody knew what he was referring to.  In the subregion, the borders were porous, and there were war-torn areas.  There were also areas where there were no civil wars.  There were foreigners from those countries in the armed groups in Côte d’Ivoire.  That situation was something to be taken care of by the United Nations forces that were there.  The foreign fighters were going through the borders, and that was a visible thing.  Effort should be made to deal with that problem through a global and holistic approach.  The presence of the foreign fighters could also be linked to the fact that more than 26 per cent of Côte d’Ivoire’s population was made up of foreigners.  The country was one that welcomed foreigners and was an open country.

Asked why he put the blame for the impasse solely on the rebels when the Secretary-General had reported that the Government had also failed to meet some of its own obligations under the Linas-Marcoussis Agreement, Mr. Djangone-Bi said that the Government did not commit to implement all the reforms by 30 September.  The President had committed himself in Accra to convene the National Assembly to discuss and adopt the amendments mentioned by the Agreement.  He did convene the Assembly, and when that was not enough for them to finish their job, he convened them again for a special session.  The non-adoption of the amendments by Parliament could not be blamed on the President who was not a parliamentarian.  The Parliament discussed and made amendments.  It was still discussing amendments and voting, so that the recommendations would be adopted according to the rules of procedure.

On the qualifications for the presidency, a correspondent wondered why the President had agreed to use his constitutional powers to have the constitutional amendment carried out, but had, instead, called for a national referendum.  Mr. Djangone-Bi responded that the procedure for amending the Constitution was clearly stipulated in that Constitution.  That procedure was that the amendment would go through the Parliament, have a two-third majority and then be submitted to the National Assembly.  No other powers were given to the President.  The President had to apply the law.  The President never made the commitment to change the law by himself because he had no power to do so.

In response to another question, he said that the resources being plundered by the ex-rebels included cocoa, coffee, gold, diamonds, cotton and other product.  That plunder was, however, not expected to result in any significant reduction in national production.  There was actually likely to be increased production.

* *** *