DRC government’s 2025 commitments: a report reveals only 25% fully achieved

Only 25% of the decisions made during cabinet meetings in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) between April and December 2025 were fully implemented. This striking statistic comes from a new monitoring report on public action, released on Tuesday, June 2, 2026, by a collective of civil society organizations, supported by the Centre d’études pour l’action sociale (Cepas).

The broader execution index, when examined, reached 47 out of 100. According to the report, this score simultaneously reflects a “clear political will to steer” and a “significant gap between political impetus and the actual capacity for implementation.”

Christian Moleka, a member of the civil society collective that conducted the monitoring, stated that approximately 70 key structural decisions were reviewed over the nine-month period. Beyond the quarter of decisions fully executed, 45% were only partially carried out. A further 30% of decisions remained undocumented due to a lack of accessible information.

The observed decisions encompassed critical areas such as security and institutional stability, economic and financial governance, the management of natural resources, institutional reforms, strategic diplomacy, and various social policies.

The study highlights a “persistent difficulty” for the DRC government in transforming its decisions into fully observable and sustainable outcomes.

“The analysis also reveals that the most impactful structural decisions, particularly those concerning institutional, economic, or social reforms, frequently exhibit the lowest execution rates, whereas short-term or security-related measures tend to advance more swiftly,” explained Christian Moleka.

A new digital platform for monitoring and tracking public action, named “Jua 243,” was also introduced. This innovative tool is designed to provide real-time oversight of government initiatives.

Father Alain Nzadi, director of Cepas, clarified that the objective of this comprehensive study is neither to pass judgment, impose sanctions, nor to simply commend public action.

“Instead, it aims to contribute to the continuous improvement of governance by offering decision-makers, partners, and citizens analytical insights that foster a deeper understanding of policy implementation dynamics,” he stated.

He concluded by emphasizing, “These efforts are part of a constructive accountability framework, grounded in the principle that every public decision gains significant value when it can be tracked, evaluated, and assessed based on its tangible results.”