Home | News    Tuesday 25 January 2011

South Sudan to retain its name as an independent state: report

separation
increase
decrease
separation
separation

January 24, 2011 (NAIROBI) – South Sudan has decided to name itself the Republic of South Sudan upon the near-certain declaration of its independence as a result of a referendum vote whose final result is due to be announced mid-February, the region’s officials revealed on Sunday.

JPEG - 8.6 kb
South Sudan flag (AP Photos)

South Sudan is being groomed for statehood after its citizens voted almost unanimously for secession from the north in a referendum vote that took place early this month. The plebiscite was the centerpiece of a 2005’s peace deal that ended decades of civil war with the north.

A steering committee formed by the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS) has been working to decide on a number of issues concerning the attributes of the potential state, including the adoption of an official coat of arms, a national flag and a national anthem.

Benjamin Marial, GoSS’s minister of information and a member of the steering committee, revealed on Sunday in the region’s capital Juba that south Sudan would retain its current name as an independent state, according to a report published on Monday by the New York Times.

"The majority preference is for South Sudan," he said, adding that the decision was made last week and its official announcement could be made on 14 February to coincide with the announcement of the referendum results.

"We’ve had South Korea, North Korea, South Vietnam, North Vietnam, South Sudan and North Sudan,” Marial said.

Marial said that the committee had discussed a dozen of potential name but finally agreed to adopt the Republic of South Sudan due to the familiarity and convenience of the name.

Among the names discussed, according to the minister, were Azania, Nile Republic, Kush Republic and even Juwama, an acronym for Juba, Wau and Malakal, three major southern cities.

Explaining the rationale of the choice, the minister said “It is the easiest one for the time being; there are already many things with that name. It makes it easy to transform the government.”

But the committee’s decision is not final, Marial said that the committee would refer its decisions to a higher authority for final approval, but later added that he did not expect any resistance.

However, the minister did not slam the door shut in front of future reconsideration of the name.

"But should the people of South Sudan in the future want a new name, they will have that chance,” Marial said.

South Sudan is yet to thrash out a host of post-referendum issues with the north, including security, citizenship, oil and water resources, currency matters, assets and liabilities and international treaties and agreements.

(ST)

Comments on the Sudan Tribune website must abide by the following rules. Contravention of these rules will lead to the user losing their Sudan Tribune account with immediate effect.

- No inciting violence
- No inappropriate or offensive language
- No racism, tribalism or sectarianism
- No inappropriate or derogatory remarks
- No deviation from the topic of the article
- No advertising, spamming or links
- No incomprehensible comments

Due to the unprecedented amount of racist and offensive language on the site, Sudan Tribune tries to vet all comments on the site.

There is now also a limit of 400 words per comment. If you want to express yourself in more detail than this allows, please e-mail your comment as an article to comment@sudantribune.com

Kind regards,

The Sudan Tribune editorial team.
  • 25 January 2011 08:05, by Anyang

    That’s right, no need of name change.S.Sudan Oyeeeeeeee!

    repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 14:08, by Gatwech

      Dear readers,

      Of course, for sure ’Republic of South Sudan’ is the name of the new nation.

      From now to July 9, 2011, artists will continue to work on the national anthem. New scripts will be written and competitive artists will work on the national anthem so that it will be sung on declaration of independence day (D-Day) on 9th July.

      And on the new flag, some positions of colors (strips) will be changed. The star will be removed and replaced with buffalo.

      Star is so common in many countries and therefore lost its uniqueness. In some countries like in Israel it means the star of King David or one nation, while in USA, it means fifty states, represented each by a star. In UK, Australia and so forth, the star is there.

      But buffalo is a unique animal in the South and it represents ’stiff resistence.’ Buffalo is a brave and courageous animal.

      repondre message

      • 26 January 2011 01:53, by padiit gaga

        Do not wast your time for name it does not matter to create any name,but the fact is that we live in the land of freedom that is most important things in life.

        South Sudan is better name too if not we can call it SUD,because south now is independent stat it will not be called Arab stat like the previose time. SUD mean Black or Africa ,south is pure with out any Arab tribe who live in it, she will be called Africa stat like other countries who call themselves African. SUD Oyeeeee!

        repondre message

      • 26 January 2011 19:08, by Manyieldit

        Dear Readers, Is this mad man called Gatwic a person of his own or it is Mr. Riek Machar who has changed his name to Gatwic so that he can’t be known? how come the star be changed with Buffalo? Buffalo was a symbol of Nasir faction which was led by Riek Machar himself, and is now an official symbol of Central Equatorial State (CES) Mr. Gatwic and Machar should leave the people of South Sudan alone and not to cause us an other confusion.

        repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 14:23, by Nhomlawda

      That report is shallow and did not examine well why we should avoid South Sudan as a name of our new country.
      Check this article from New Sudan Vision - opinion section for better analysis. A Sudanese in UK analysed the disadvantages of South Sudan - excerpt below.

      "Republic of South Sudan: Another name frequently mentioned in recent literature is the Republic of South Sudan. During colonial administration, the term South Sudanese was adopted as an official reference to people inhabiting southern part of the Sudan. People of South Sudan are now debating whether to change the name or retain it as the official name of 54th African state to be inaugurated on July 9, 2011.

      According to my opinion, South Sudan should not be the official name of our new country due to the following reasons.

      South Sudan as the official name of our new country will encourage rise of hard-line unionist movements both within South and North Sudan. Currently, people in the Sudan and especially in the north are divided on the issue of South Sudan separation. There are some political parties supporting separation while others perceive division of Sudan as foreign forced solution to South North crisis. Political parties and religious groups against separation of south Sudan from rest of the country will continue to be reminded about division of the Sudan by the name use in the south and may likely adopt a long term reunion strategy which in the future may lead to a rise of hard-line unionist moments both within the South and North. Such hard-line unionist moments may go to the extreme and reunion strategy may be a source of future political dispute or even military confrontation within South Sudan and between the two independent Sudanese states. In addition, some Southern Sudanese politicians under the pretext of brotherly people had already started calling for an open door policy on immigration with the north which can easily be utilized to grow South Sudan unionists. Such calls are signs of favorable conditions for hard-line unionists to develop in the near future in South Sudan in case South Sudan is retained as official name.

      South Sudan without North Sudan is illogical. After separation, north Sudan will likely retain Republic of the Sudan or modify it to Islamic Republic of the Sudan or in a rare case to Arab Republic of the Sudan. Therefore, Republic of South Sudan without Republic of North Sudan will cause a national identity crisis among peoples of the two countries. North Sudan will definitely claim to be the legitimate owner of the Sudan and development of attractive and easily marketable national identity around South Sudan will be greatly affected by influence of already built Sudanese national identity. Some people may cite South Africa as an example of a country name without north. The answer is, there is no another neighboring country called Africa for which South Africa may compete for identity. Others such as Republic of Congo and D.R Congo, Guinea Conakry and Guinea Bissau had never fought identity wars between them and cannot be compared with North Sudan and South Sudan issue.

      Sudan had been classified as a state sponsor of terrorism and this has affected country’s image globally. Less informed investors and other potential friends may perceive South Sudan to be geographically and politically independent but ideologically and culturally linked to Republic of the Sudan. Such perceptions may take time and resources to change through aggressive marketing of South Sudan as a different brand from Republic of the Sudan. Those resources needed to brand South Sudan as a different entity ideologically in western media are not there right now. In such a circumstance, it is a feasible idea to name a country with a name that encourages curiosity and therefore, markets itself.

      Sharing of a name may cause arms race between the two Sudanese states due to fear of renewed conflict in the future. This will also cause the two states to undermine each other’s development efforts so that one is projected as a failed state to justify move to re-unite the country through either peaceful mean or military force. An example of two countries sharing a name locked into arms race is Republic of Korea (South Korea) and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). In addition, patriotic euphoria among northerners and other Arab states that view South Sudan as a breakaway region of the Sudan or hijacked part of Arab country by Zionists and has to be reunited with the Sudan in the future may fade over time if different country name is adopted but may increase if the name South Sudan is still in use.

      During Sudan’s protracted civil war between north and south Sudan, Junubi (Southerner) meaning was shortchanged to a disparaging term almost equivalent to a slave. Southerners were considered less equal to northerners. With such experience of unspeakable humiliation in the name of Junubin, South Sudanese may still be viewed by their fellow northerners as the same people perceived to be inferior to them. Therefore, South Sudanese is not an ideal national identity for the people of a new hard won state who want to break away from bad past and project themselves as free people with equal rights like any other people in the world".

      You can read full article on newsudanvision.com, opinion section.

      repondre message

      • 25 January 2011 15:58, by Gatwech

        Nhomlawda,

        The argument you copied and pasted from New Sudan Vision doesn’t make a logical sense to override the name South Sudan.

        Ideologies are not based on names, but names are based on ideologies.

        Having the name South Sudan would not bring future hardline unionists like you or those in the so-called New Sudan Vision. If that is the case, 99% of southerners would not have voted for separation in the first place at a time we are still in the country called Sudan. Is that clear!

        The name Republic of South Sudan is the best and has more advantages than merely trying to avoid so-called future unionists. After all the unionists have already been defeated and they represent only less than 1% in each state. From where will they crop up again? And could you blame it on the name?

        If you change the name of your child and make it sound like somebody’s else child, it wouldn’t deny him being your own child. And besides, Sudan belongs to us all.

        Your argument doesn’t make sense at all!

        repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 08:07, by Kolnyang youth

    South Sudan will retain the same name after independent because everybody in South proud of being a Southerner.

    Anti-tribalism

    repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 08:26, by $iong mayom

    This is the right name for our new country. We should not lose the title "Sudan" to Jalaba by calling our new Nation something different like Cush, Nile Republic and so on. South Sudan to qualify for 2018 World Cup in Russia.

    repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 09:19, by Rev John Khamis Kamunde

    That is a wonderful and wise decision,congratulation.
    I was fearing may be our leaders will not listern to the comments of the majority who suported the idea of keeping the original name,may God bless our new nation the republic of SOUTH SUDAN cheers.

    Rev Kamunde.

    repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 09:52, by Victory

      That is a great job Mr, minister,i prefer for our country to continue to carry on the name,SOUTH SUDAN,because it show our identity as true black african.

      repondre message

      • 25 January 2011 11:16, by Marchelo Mathang

        Dear southerners;

        Those who say that name of the South Sudan will be change Are stupid people or leaders and i think this stupid decision came from stupid people/leaders e.g Pieng Deng, Kuol Manyang and Nyandeng malek of Warrap state.
        The name must be south Sudan becuase of black colour of the African people.
        Southern Sudan Oyeeeee
        SPLM/A Oyeeeee

        Mototo

        repondre message

        • 25 January 2011 11:54, by Nhomlawda

          That report is shallow and did not examine well why we should avoid South Sudan as a name of our new country.
          Check this article from New Sudan Vision - opinion section for better analysis. A Sudanese in UK analysed the disadvantages of South Sudan - excerpt below.

          "Republic of South Sudan: Another name frequently mentioned in recent literature is the Republic of South Sudan. During colonial administration, the term South Sudanese was adopted as an official reference to people inhabiting southern part of the Sudan. People of South Sudan are now debating whether to change the name or retain it as the official name of 54th African state to be inaugurated on July 9, 2011.

          According to my opinion, South Sudan should not be the official name of our new country due to the following reasons.

          South Sudan as the official name of our new country will encourage rise of hard-line unionist movements both within South and North Sudan. Currently, people in the Sudan and especially in the north are divided on the issue of South Sudan separation. There are some political parties supporting separation while others perceive division of Sudan as foreign forced solution to South North crisis. Political parties and religious groups against separation of south Sudan from rest of the country will continue to be reminded about division of the Sudan by the name use in the south and may likely adopt a long term reunion strategy which in the future may lead to a rise of hard-line unionist moments both within the South and North. Such hard-line unionist moments may go to the extreme and reunion strategy may be a source of future political dispute or even military confrontation within South Sudan and between the two independent Sudanese states. In addition, some Southern Sudanese politicians under the pretext of brotherly people had already started calling for an open door policy on immigration with the north which can easily be utilized to grow South Sudan unionists. Such calls are signs of favorable conditions for hard-line unionists to develop in the near future in South Sudan in case South Sudan is retained as official name.

          South Sudan without North Sudan is illogical. After separation, north Sudan will likely retain Republic of the Sudan or modify it to Islamic Republic of the Sudan or in a rare case to Arab Republic of the Sudan. Therefore, Republic of South Sudan without Republic of North Sudan will cause a national identity crisis among peoples of the two countries. North Sudan will definitely claim to be the legitimate owner of the Sudan and development of attractive and easily marketable national identity around South Sudan will be greatly affected by influence of already built Sudanese national identity. Some people may cite South Africa as an example of a country name without north. The answer is, there is no another neighboring country called Africa for which South Africa may compete for identity. Others such as Republic of Congo and D.R Congo, Guinea Conakry and Guinea Bissau had never fought identity wars between them and cannot be compared with North Sudan and South Sudan issue.

          Sudan had been classified as a state sponsor of terrorism and this has affected country’s image globally. Less informed investors and other potential friends may perceive South Sudan to be geographically and politically independent but ideologically and culturally linked to Republic of the Sudan. Such perceptions may take time and resources to change through aggressive marketing of South Sudan as a different brand from Republic of the Sudan. Those resources needed to brand South Sudan as a different entity ideologically in western media are not there right now. In such a circumstance, it is a feasible idea to name a country with a name that encourages curiosity and therefore, markets itself.

          Sharing of a name may cause arms race between the two Sudanese states due to fear of renewed conflict in the future. This will also cause the two states to undermine each other’s development efforts so that one is projected as a failed state to justify move to re-unite the country through either peaceful mean or military force. An example of two countries sharing a name locked into arms race is Republic of Korea (South Korea) and Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea). In addition, patriotic euphoria among northerners and other Arab states that view South Sudan as a breakaway region of the Sudan or hijacked part of Arab country by Zionists and has to be reunited with the Sudan in the future may fade over time if different country name is adopted but may increase if the name South Sudan is still in use.

          During Sudan’s protracted civil war between north and south Sudan, Junubi (Southerner) meaning was shortchanged to a disparaging term almost equivalent to a slave. Southerners were considered less equal to northerners. With such experience of unspeakable humiliation in the name of Junubin, South Sudanese may still be viewed by their fellow northerners as the same people perceived to be inferior to them. Therefore, South Sudanese is not an ideal national identity for the people of a new hard won state who want to break away from bad past and project themselves as free people with equal rights like any other people in the world".

          You can read full article on newsudanvision.com, opinion section.

          repondre message

          • 25 January 2011 12:26, by CHUOL RUEI

            It would be better if the "NAME SOUTH SUDAN" could be changed ,because it could avoid future re-unification of Sudan if we are not longer retaining the name south Sudan.

            As matter of fact, we are real sudanese.But for sake of avoiding future trouble we should call our country "land of kush"
            by nyatay

            repondre message

            • 25 January 2011 15:21, by South Elite Eye (see)

              To Mr Chol Ruei,
              You are gone far beyond imagination. How could Pyongyang and Seoul reunite? How can Eriterea go back into Ethiopia?
              I am just saying there is no way we shall reunite with the northerners.
              You SEE
              by
              SEE

              repondre message

              • 25 January 2011 16:04, by Gatwech

                Nhomlawda,

                The argument you copied and pasted from New Sudan Vision doesn’t make a logical sense to override the name South Sudan.

                Ideologies are not based on names, but names are based on ideologies.

                Having the name South Sudan would not bring future hardline unionists like you or those in the so-called New Sudan Vision. If that is the case, 99% of southerners would not have voted for separation in the first place at a time we are still in the country called Sudan. Is that clear!

                The name Republic of South Sudan is the best and has more advantages than merely trying to avoid so-called future unionists. After all the unionists have already been defeated and they represent only less than 1% in each state. From where will they crop up again? And could you blame it on the name?

                If you change the name of your child and make it sound like somebody’s else child, it wouldn’t deny him being your own child. And besides, Sudan belongs to us all.

                Your argument doesn’t make sense at all!

                It is better for South Korea to reunite with North Korea because they share the same race, culture, religion, language, etc, etc.

                West and East Germany reunited because they are from the same race, culture, religion, language, etc.

                But South Sudan and North Sudan don’t share such commonalities. They will mentally continue to separate more and more as years pass by. They will even forget that they ever existed as one nation before.

                repondre message

                • 25 January 2011 16:12, by Gatwech

                  However, having said that, this doesn’t mean that we may not review the name in the near future. Let us give it at least ten years to review the name after.

                  Currently as the minister stated, there are many legal issues to settle that are attached to the current name, South Sudan or Sudan in general. After we are done with them, we can review the name in order to confirm it or come up with another one.

                  Ten years review from now would be appropriate!

                  repondre message

                  • 25 January 2011 22:04, by Nhomlawda

                    Gatwech

                    It is really absurd to hear intellectuals supporting South Sudan as the best name they had gotten.

                    First South Sudan without North Sudan makes our new country subordinate to main Sudan in literal thinking. North Sudan will not accept to change its official name from Republic of the Sudan to Republic of North Sudan which makes the two countries equal.
                    If South Sudanese are getting mad with the word Sudan than let them use Democratic Republic of the Sudan and the North Sudan continues with it official name Republic of the Sudan. That makes us equal owners of the Sudan. But Republic of South Sudan and Republic of the Sudan makes us subordinate to the north Sudan.

                    repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 16:35, by Jague

    Dear Southerners:
    No need to change the name of the new born state, We are Southerners & we are proud of that.

    repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 17:26, by Peter Mading

      Just before that let it reads "Democratic Republic of South Sudan" (DROSS). It will give a free and fair Good governance in the Country.

      repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 18:46, by mack waweru

    I beg to disagree with the Minister and his steering committee for deciding to choose the name "Republic of South Sudan" for the new state. They should have come up with a new name instead of retaining the old geographical location of the Old Sudan for the following reasons.

    First, I think all can agree with me that it sounds absurd for us who will be in the south of the new state to be called Southern Sudanese of the South Sudan or its southern location as south of South Sudan.
    Secondly, the remaining Old Sudan – North, will have its geographical location called South Sudan- whatever name they will adopt, still they will name it south.
    Thirdly, former old South Sudan was a region associated with oppression, wars, disease and poverty and it was named as part of Old Sudan which has done us unforgettable harm. Therefore, we need to start afresh and discard everything that has connection with the Old entity.
    Some of our people still say that they are proud to be called "Southern Sudanese. This is total naivety! You just separated and still want to be called part of what you recently abandoned!
    Others cite the example of other countries like the Koreans, but mind you that Koreans are one people with one language and religion who were divided as they got themselves caught in early 1950s between the capitalists Western World and Communist Russia. These two countries of South Korea and North Korea can re-unite at anytime. But for us in Old Sudan then, nothing common between us and them in the north, whether culture, religion and language, except some created social attachments, like marriages which require Southerners to convert into Islam.

    I suggest that the steering committee should come up an alternative name instead of retaining the old one or allow the citizens to choose the new name in a referendum. There is no need to leave the door open for further options as others suggest which will bring conflicts in the future.

    The Suitable name is " Juba", the Republic of Juba with its capital "Juba City". We can be "Jubanese", or " Nilotia and we can be called Nilotians.

    Otherwise, our leaders have to explain it very clearly why they decided to retain the old name.

    Mack Awer Riak

    repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 20:10, by Victory

      Mack,

      Can you define the meaning of word Sudan?changing name will deny us of our identity,& as well it will not make the people of S.Sudan to forget the things they have gone through such as oppression, deseas..etc as you mentioned you & your likes are not making sens at all.. may God bless South Sudan.

      repondre message

      • 26 January 2011 17:27, by mack waweru

        Victory, reason like a mature minded creature, but not insulting. If our arguments don’t make sense, why comment on them? Let’s accept each other’s ideas and put our reasons constructively.

        Returning to explain what "Sudan" means, it’s as elementary as ABC. Sudan was coined by Arabs when they first entered Africa to refer the vast land south of Egypt and west of Abyssinia (Ethiopia) up to West Africa, meaning Ard el Sud or Land of black. An was later on added when they managed to depopulated the indigenous people from present Sudan and refer to it "Sud An" I am Black and they named the country "Sudan". It was not named by us or the Turks and the British. So why you want to attach yourself to what you didn’t invent? Do you have word Sudan in your mother tongue, leave Arabic and English?
        Ghana was once called Sudan and later on named by the British Upper Volta and the Ghanaians gained their independence, they named it "Ghana", a term in their language. If we say are blacks and have to go by the name Sudan because its mean the "Land of Blacks", hence many African countries have to be named Sudan.

        Advise you also not to insult people when we are merely expressing views on core issue regarding South Sudan because are all stakeholders and have to consider ourselves as such. South Sudan is an ownership where by you want what suits you be supreme.

        Mack Awer

        repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 21:20, by Achol John

    Fellow citizens,

    Republic of South Sudan is the only and final best title suitable to remain unchangeable. All other names that have been aforementioned as senseless and meaningless.

    repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 22:01, by Nhomlawda

      It is really absurd to hear intellectuals supporting South Sudan as the best name they had gotten.

      First South Sudan without North Sudan makes our new country subordinate to main Sudan in literal thinking. North Sudan will not accept to change its official name from Republic of the Sudan to Republic of North Sudan which makes the two countries equal.
      If South Sudanese are getting mad with the word Sudan than let them use Democratic Republic of the Sudan and the North Sudan continues with it official name Republic of the Sudan. That makes us equal owners of the Sudan. But Republic of South Sudan and Republic of the Sudan makes us subordinate to the north Sudan.

      repondre message

  • 25 January 2011 22:26, by Kim Deng

    Garang’s disciples,

    Where is your King’s vision you have been disturbing people with all these years?

    You went further on your one-sided imagination which base on your King’s vision to call our beloved South Sudan "New Sudan." Now, where is the "New Sudan," your King was claiming about before he went to hell along with his poor "New Sudan?"

    Shame on you all!!!!!!!!!!!!

    repondre message

    • 25 January 2011 22:48, by Nhomlawda

      Kim,

      You call John Garang useless but he had gone down in history as the founding father of South Sudan together with his deputy Salva Kiir.
      Every city and town in South Sudan or Kush will have John Garang Street. Two to three universities will be named after John Garang, several hospitals will be named after John Garang.
      Think a little bit, why is he going to be praised more than one of those living leaders if he was a useless person.
      Go with your retarded brain and claim in hell.

      repondre message

    • 26 January 2011 00:45, by Dengcol malual

      Kim,

      why don’t you think about things which are important to the Southerners who are still alive? when people of South Sudan are talking about how to move forward together and leave the past to the history, then your little psychopath world doesn’t click.

      Garang is hero and you are nothing politically campared to him. he signed the CPA and you will never changed, he stood up for what he believed in without changing his mind and move back and forth between the warring parties.

      what we need in south right now is peace and unity.

      repondre message

Comment on this article



The following ads are provided by Google. SudanTribune has no authority on it.



Sudan Tribune

Promote your Page too

Latest Comments & Analysis


Who can unlock the current impasse in Sudan? 2019-07-01 06:44:52 By Luka Biong Deng Kuol Since the eruption of the Sudanese popular uprising on 19th December 2018, the protesters have made history. Not only have they unseated one of the longest-serving (...)

Victims of Sexual Violence in Sudan Deserve Justice 2019-06-19 07:16:08 by Tchérina Jérolon, and Daisy Schmitt Today, as we commemorate the International Day for the Elimination of Sexual Violence in Conflict, we demand accountability for sexual crimes committed in (...)

Ezekiel Lol reignites political begging as a Freedom of Expression 2019-06-14 22:49:39 Gatdiet Peter Here, the question is: to what extent does a politician become a “political beggar”? A politician becomes a beggar and (re)focuses on the “politics of begging” as soon as (s)he has (...)


MORE






Latest Press Releases


Sudanese lawyers and Human rights defenders back calls for civil rule 2019-04-26 10:22:06 Press statement by 55 Sudanese lawyers and Human rights defenders on Sudan Sit-in and Peaceful Protest Khartoum -24/04/2019 We, the undersigned (55) Sudanese lawyers and human rights defenders, (...)

South Sudan’s Lafon youth condemn killings of civilians by Pari community 2019-04-03 21:54:29 Press Statement on the Fighting between Pari/ Pacidi and Lotuko/Lokiri on 24/3/2019 Release by The Lafon County Youth Union: We, the Lafon County Youth Union hereby condemn the atrocities and (...)

Joseph Malwal Dong joined the SPLM/A -IO 2019-04-02 08:35:02 SPLM/A (IO) Press Release 1/4/2019 On Hon. Joseph Malwal Dong Joined the SPLM/A (IO) The leadership of the SPLM/A (IO) would like to seize this precious opportunity to announce to members and (...)


MORE

Copyright © 2003-2019 SudanTribune - All rights reserved.