Current situation: Civil society is raising the alarm about a transition perceived as opaque

Mis à jour le 21 May 2026

In 2026, the global and national situation finds itself at a crucial crossroads, where civil society plays a decisive role in raising profound alarm about a political, economic, and social transition that, despite its promise of change, appears increasingly opaque. Citizen mobilization and criticism of governments illustrate a landscape where transparency is severely tested, revealing a collective anxiety about the true intentions behind decisions made behind closed doors. At the heart of this crisis lies the fundamental question: how can we ensure a truly participatory democracy, where every actor can contribute to just and informed governance? Rarely has citizen engagement been so palpable, demonstrating an unwavering will to make the popular voice heard in the face of political practices that tend to reproduce outdated patterns. Protest movements, often repressed or manipulated, indicate that the population is not prepared to passively accept decisions that concern its future. The ongoing transition cannot be reduced to a mere succession of people or strategies, but should be part of a transparent process, uniting all stakeholders around a common project. However, the reality appears quite different, fueling distrust and rekindling suspicion towards the political class and its methods. This situation thus opens up a crucial debate on the need to broaden citizen participation by establishing a sincere and credible dialogue.

The alarming signs of opacity in the management of the transition

For several months, numerous indicators have pointed to a growing climate of distrust towards the authorities in power. The appointment of the government, for example, took place in a context where no consultation with key stakeholders was prioritized. The presentation of the General State Policy was also devoid of any inclusive process, illustrating a desire to control official communication and exclude any genuine participation. This approach can only increase doubts about the legitimacy of the decisions made and their alignment with public expectations.

Simultaneously, sensitive issues, such as the sale of rosewood stockpiles in violation of the international embargo, reveal a worrying tendency to prioritize special interests at the expense of responsible and transparent management. This practice, if confirmed, would jeopardize the credibility of a state that, in a global context marked by the fight against illicit trafficking, should be strengthening its efforts to respect its international commitments. The ecological and humanitarian crisis, caused by unregulated exploitation practices, can only worsen if concrete measures are not adopted to restore trust in credible governance.

The worrying trends and the democratic divide

The constitutional violations and acts of impunity reported by civil society are all signs that the current transition could be a sham for a nascent dictatorship. The release of prisoners and the preferential treatment afforded to corrupt politicians illustrate abuses that undermine trust in the legal and administrative system. The question then arises: is this transitional phase merely a cosmetic change, devoid of any real commitment to reform?

This phenomenon exacerbates the disconnect between the population and its representatives, fueling a sense of exclusion and abandonment of crucial issues facing the country. The transition, which should be an opportunity to rebuild state structures and establish a truly participatory democracy, seems, on the contrary, to be following a pattern of continuity with past practices, where communication remains tightly controlled and opacity becomes the norm. Under these conditions, the democratic process in its most authentic form is compromised, necessitating collective mobilization to make it a genuine catalyst for change. International Stakes and the Crisis of Legitimacy

In a context where the international community emphasizes the importance of transparent and responsible governance, the issue of national governance has become a matter of global significance. A state’s credibility now rests on its ability to honor its commitments, particularly within the framework of international agreements related to environmental protection and the fight against corruption. The sale of rosewood stockpiles, mentioned earlier, illustrates a clear failure to comply with international rules, threatening the legitimacy of the government in the eyes of its foreign partners.

Furthermore, the crisis of legitimacy also fuels the rejection of a democracy that, under the guise of transition, conceals opaque governance. Transnational mistrust encourages civic actors to mobilize to strengthen transparency and information sharing, in order to prevent opaque practices from weakening a system on the verge of democratic collapse. Transparency thus becomes an essential principle for restoring trust and maintaining strong civic engagement.

Challenges to be met for a strengthened participatory democracyTo meet the expectations of civil society and overcome the shadow of opacity, several concrete actions must be undertaken. The first consists of establishing permanent consultation mechanisms, allowing citizens to actively participate at each stage of the decision-making processes. The implementation of digital platforms, accessible to all, could play a key role in this approach.Transparent communication is essential for establishing a constructive dialogue,

fostering collective accountability. Next, it is imperative to strengthen civil society by giving it a more central role in overseeing public policy and managing resources. Numerous examples worldwide demonstrate that organized civil society can be a pillar for ensuring good governance and international respectability. The training and emergence of citizen leaders, supported by NGOs and institutions, could finally bridge the gap between power and the people.

The relationship between law and practice: ensuring compliance with rights

Securing the transition, reducing opacity

The risks of a failed transition

The main danger lies in the persistence of an opaque system under the guise of transition, which could lead to a major social crisis, or even institutional collapse. The loss of trust in institutions, combined with growing disillusionment, could pave the way for simmering conflicts, instability, and a rise in populism. If no genuine dialogue is initiated, it becomes likely that the transition will be nothing more than a smokescreen, concealing further dysfunction and deep social divisions.

Success therefore depends on a collective will to reject opacity, strengthen transparency, and ensure that every citizen can fully participate in shaping the future of their society. Civil society must position itself as the driving force behind genuine participatory democracy to prevent the current crisis from becoming the prelude to institutional decay.

FAQs

How can civil society strengthen transparency during the transition?

By organizing regular consultations, establishing participatory digital platforms, and monitoring the implementation of public policies, civil society can play a crucial role in promoting transparency and accountability.

What are the signs of an opaque transition?