Democratic Republic of Congo President Félix Tshisekedi is under growing public pressure following a viral post on X that accuses his family of having ties to a £1.66 million ($2.2 million) bridge project. The allegation, which surged across social platforms in recent days, has fuelled debate over transparency in public spending and raised questions about potential conflicts of interest among those close to the presidency.

So far, no major news organisations or official bodies have substantiated the claim that the contract was awarded to a company connected to a member of Tshisekedi’s family. Despite this lack of verification, online criticism continues to expand.

The controversy gained traction after Africa Today, a politically focused social media account, circulated video footage purportedly showing a wooden bridge collapsing on the day it was commissioned. The clip triggered strong reactions, yet key details—including whether the structure shown is part of an official project, its actual cost, and the identity of the contractor—remain unverified.

The viral post suggested that the £1.66 million project had been secured by a firm allegedly run by a relative of the President, though no documentation has surfaced to confirm this. Procurement files, contractor lists, or government statements addressing the accusation have not been released.

Local news outlets have likewise been unable to authenticate the video or link it definitively to any recorded public works initiative. With no confirmed evidence, it remains uncertain whether the bridge in question was part of a state-funded project or an unrelated local construction effort.

The absence of clear information has allowed speculation to flourish. Critics are using the moment to renew calls for greater transparency surrounding government-funded infrastructure and to urge authorities to clarify the origins and oversight of the bridge project.

Until official records or credible investigations emerge, much of the public debate continues to revolve around unanswered questions and circulating online claims rather than verifiable facts.