A laboratory of gendered disinformation
In recent weeks, online posts have attributed spectacular, unverified allegations to diplomatic adviser Françoise Joly, recycled by anonymous accounts and poorly sourced opposition sites. An Africa Radio article, widely shared on August 7, 2025, claims there is a French investigation into money laundering tied to the purchase of a jet, while acknowledging that no indictment has been issued “at this stage”—an ambiguity that, in the public arena, has been morphed into a premature conviction (Africa Radio, August 7, 2025).
By contrast, analyses published in late June and early July by Afrik.com document a pattern of attacks with sexist and xenophobic overtones targeting Joly and, beyond her, the presidential entourage—typical of campaigns in which women become vectors for indirectly delegitimizing the incumbent authorities (Afrik.com, June 30, 2025; July 8, 2025).
From legitimate controversy to organized insult
Debate over an aircraft procurement decision, an international negotiation, or a diplomatic portfolio is part and parcel of a pluralistic public sphere. Yet strategic anonymity and an “insinuation-as-proof” economy tip the discourse into gendered rhetoric. The content in question no longer contests policies; it sexualizes and essentializes the individual, insinuating “liaisons,” “dual loyalties,” or defective morality—tropes designed to degrade women’s professional authority and “punish” their visibility. Afrik.com explicitly notes that this slide—from political slogans to intimate rumor—marks a retreat from programmatic competition toward personal humiliation (Afrik.com, June 30, 2025).
A troubling continuum: from verbal abuse to the risk of physical harm
The central question is less whether a given rumor will “bring down” a public official than how costly its diffusion will be for society. International research on online violence against women shows a continuum: the repetition of verbal attacks normalizes hostility, lowers inhibitions, and can, over time, authorize offline acts. Hence the pressing question—“Does the verbal violence of certain activists against diplomat Françoise Joly augur physical violence?”—is not mere rhetoric. It should inform a democratic precautionary principle: what is industrialized in WhatsApp groups or on X often migrates, eventually, to the street.
What response framework: #MeTooCongo, regulation, or the courts?
Two imperatives follow. First, platform and media accountability: publishing grave accusations without supporting documents, then issuing minimal corrections after virality, entrenches a reputational asymmetry that is nearly impossible to repair for the target. Second, the restoration of law. Defamation, public insult, and incitement to hatred on grounds of sex are not “opinions” but justiciable offenses; that holds in Brazzaville as in the principal countries hosting the diaspora. A civic front—call it “#MeTooCongo” to signal zero tolerance—could bring together civil society, bar associations, women’s groups, and responsible media to support victims, document cases, and file actions before local courts or, where warranted, in foreign jurisdictions when content is produced, hosted, or relayed under their territorial competence. The aim is not to muzzle criticism but to draw a bright line between legitimate political contention and illegitimate sexist violence.
Reasserting the presumption of innocence and factual rigor
At this stage, no public evidence corroborates any indictment of Françoise Joly by the French judiciary, despite ambiguous phrasing circulating online. The Afrik.com articles highlight the manufactured, gendered storytelling that has surrounded the affair; they also relay Joly’s public response denouncing “sexist and xenophobic” attacks and affirming the legitimacy of her diplomatic career (Afrik.com, July 8, 2025).
Whether one endorses Congo’s diplomatic choices or not, upholding the presumption of innocence and rejecting sexist show trials is a test of democratic maturity. In an electoral season, this is no detail: it conditions both the credibility of the ballot and the safety of women in politics.
Escaping the trap
Congo-Brazzaville has nothing to gain by substituting calumny for contention. Congolese citizens—and first among them, Congolese women—know that the quality of public debate is measured by the capacity to evaluate policies, not to sully persons. An ethical and legal mobilization, at home and within the diaspora, is needed to choke off gendered disinformation that ultimately threatens women’s dignity and everyone’s right to reliable information. Otherwise, we will pretend tomorrow to be surprised that today’s words prepared tomorrow’s deeds.
