Algeria Gate: Have the trio of the FFS, the Workers’ Party and the RCD committed a strategic error against the will of the Algerian people by refusing to activate the death penalty against those who set fire to the country’s resources?

It is a natural question at a time when the parties are preparing for the local elections; the first real measure of popular support for the political formations taking part.
Although the death penalty that the President of the Republic announced would be activated came after long seasonal calls; beginning since his first term, to stop the targeting of Algerians and the country’s wealth with fires, and despite the wide welcome from the majority of Algerians for this long-awaited decision (in the words and statements of citizens to various media outlets and the rejoicing of millions on social media), Algerian public opinion is left surprised.



Through a wide range of comments on both verified and unverified accounts, people notice the agreement of the RCD, the FFS and the Workers’ Party with external calls; from Tunisia, Morocco and France, to reject the implementation of the death penalty against the killers of people and nature in Algeria.
The rejection of the death penalty by these parties is not fundamentally linked to the recent fires. It is a political orientation, an old alignment with certain foreign human-rights organizations. But their coming out, in the heart of the national ordeal, against the single Algerian popular voice, including the voice of the Association of Muslim Scholars supporting the decision of the President of the Republic, automatically activates among those following public affairs the thesis of “political suicide” on the eve of local elections, in which the rate of popular participation is known to be by far the highest compared with presidential and legislative elections.
Here it may appear to the Algerian people that those party formations that did not stand in solidarity with them in their ordeal, by supporting the punishment of those who created their tragedies by burning lives and property, have committed an explicit betrayal of the principle of popular solidarity. That solidarity goes beyond material aid to moral positions. The implementation of the death penalty here was never a comprehensive resort but a partial one, a last resort against a heinous crime that is repeated and has taken on the character of a seasonal phenomenon. A crime that exhausts the country’s climate, starting with its oxygen and the air it breathes, all the way to the lives that are taken.
In addition, the margin of error in pronouncing judicial rulings in such cases is almost non-existent, given the availability of technical and scientific evidence and the highly precise investigations led by specialized teams, not to mention the conscience that surrounds everyone who will work on this file and directs them instinctively toward high credibility, since it concerns human lives.

No one, under these circumstances, should seize the opportunity to emerge from isolation and political unemployment in order to create a political program that is already a losing one in advance; giving the impression to anyone tempted to interfere from outside in Algeria’s internal affairs that there is a popular division over the implementation of the death penalty against those who executed Algerians by fire.
The reality is the opposite. How similar yesterday is to today, when some Algerians stood against the independence of their homeland from France in 1962. They were not all necessarily harkis… but that does not negate that some of them were indeed harkis.









