By Zechariah Manyok Biar
November 3, 2009 — The President of the Government of South Sudan (GoSS), General Salva Kiir Mayardit caused a storm of angry reactions from the National Congress Party (NCP) officials on November 1, 2009, when he urged Southern Sudanese to vote for independence in the 2011 referendum so that they avoid being treated like “second class citizens” in a unified Sudan. According to Sudan Tribune report, Mandoor Al-Mahdi of NCP leadership council said that Kiir’s remarks amounted to “backtracking on the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA)”. Al-Mahdi thinks that Kiir’s remark is inappropriate for someone who works in the Sudanese presidency. Sudanese presidential adviser Mustafa Ismail even doubted the accuracy of the remarks attributed to President Kiir.
Other Northern opposition parties like National Umma Party bemoaned Kiir’s remarks, as expressed by its Secretary General Sideeg Ismail, by regretting that Kiir “favored the choice of separation over unity.”
Those who have different understanding of Kiir’s position are Sudan Liberation Movement (SLM) of Abdel-Wahid Al-Nur and Darfur Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), who believe that Kiir’s remark is the result of NCP’s “foot dragging” and “delaying tactics” regarding CPA’s implementation.
Even though SPLM refuted later on that Kiir’s remarks were taken out of context, NCP’s reaction to the remarks has raised very interesting questions that I will deal with in series of articles in the coming weeks. I will examine the idea behind the spirit of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) and the spirit of its implementation. I will point out some contradictions that are threatening the spirit of both CPA and the unity of Sudan.
Under the agreed upon principles of CPA, principle 1.5.5 mentions that CPA partners “Design and implement the Peace Agreement so as to make the unity of the Sudan an attractive option especially to the people of South Sudan.” This may mean that the NCP and the SPLM would do everything they can to win the hearts of Southerners to vote for unity of Sudan in 2011.
However, principle 1.1 makes it clear that the “unity of the Sudan, based on the free will of its people democratic governance, accountability, equality, respect, and justice for all citizens of the Sudan is and shall be the priority of the Parties and that it is possible to redress the grievances of the people of South Sudan and to meet their aspirations within such a framework.”
This principle does not make any suggestion about the need for cohesive unity of Sudan by any party. If President Kiir is wrong in telling South Sudanese that they should vote for separation to avoid being treated as second class citizens in the united Sudan, then the Speaker of Sudan parliament, who is from NCP, was wrong when he said that his understanding of CPA was for the two parties to make separation difficult. The Speaker’s position is for unity of Sudan as President Kiir’s position is for separation of South Sudan. None of the two positions may apply to the will of the people of South Sudan as per the above mentioned CPA principle. But the fact is that President Kiir’s position in favor of separation of South Sudan is preceded by the NCP’s position of making separation difficult.
Making peace attractive means the winning of people’s hearts through democratic governance, accountability, equality, respect, and justice for all citizens of the Sudan as shown in principle 1.1 of CPA. A lack of the above mentioned elements means that unity is not made attractive in Sudan. It does not matter who says what to the people of South Sudan, they know what they want to choose.
The idea about Sudan’s unity that NCP has is based on the notion that the laws that make separation difficult or the rigging of South Sudan people’s choice would make Sudan’s unity attractive. This position contradicts democratic governance, accountability, equality, respect, and justice for all citizens of the Sudan.
Some days ago, I urged SPLM not to boycott parliamentary sessions, not because SPLM is not frustrated by the rigidity of NCP in changing laws that threaten freedom and good governance in Sudan, but because I want the parliamentary debate to give us more reasons on why we should separate from the North.
Wrong laws were part of the reasons for the North-South civil war. If NCP is still forcing people to abide by the same oppressive laws, then why should one think that President Kiir was wrong in saying that South Sudanese should vote for separation to avoid being treated as second class citizens in the united Sudan as it was in the past?
There is no freedom where law wrongly dictates issues. We know that. Political Philosopher Rousseau says that law is the beginning of liberty whereby people act in conformity with self-imposed law. Rousseau believes that laws are legitimate only if everyone has a direct share in making them. This means that freedom of the citizens is taking active role in the determination of the laws of one’s own community.
Even though John Locke believes that the direct involvement of the citizens in making laws is a secondary good, he still thinks that laws must be applied by impartial judges, which is also missing in the current system of Sudan. Locke’s position is that the voice of the citizens is communicated through their representatives in parliament. But if a dominant party like NCP uses its majority number of Members of Parliament to maintain the wrong laws that caused the North-South war, then what is the evidence in their intention to make unity attractive in Sudan?
NCP needs to think about what the spirit of CPA means before condemning anybody who is frustrated with the lack of the implementation of CPA. The grievances of the people of South Sudan and their aspirations within the above framework are not addressed yet.
My next article will be about the implication of Sharia Law for the unity of Sudan.
Zechariah Manyok Biar is a graduate student at Abilene Christian University, Texas, USA. He is pursuing a Master of Arts in Christian Ministry and a Master of Science in Social Work, specializing in Administration and Planning. For comments, contact him at email: manyok34@gmail.com
Are Arabs evil simply because they are Arabs?
Tuesday 9 February 2010
By Zechariah Manyok Biar February 8, 2010 — The struggle for freedom is a complicated thing. Oppressed people who struggle for freedom can sometimes turn oppressors if they are not careful in the (...)
When did the SPLM turn separatist?
Monday 8 February 2010
By Charles B. Kisanga February 7, 2010 — In their desperate attempt to mislead Southern opinion, Salva Kiir and the clique around him are going around claiming that they are the champions of the (...)
Maintain Arman candidacy for Sudanese presidency
Sunday 7 February 2010
By Koang Tut Jing February 6, 2010 — The National Congress Party’s latest political maneuvering must not blindfolds the SPLM from looking outside the box. The endorsement of Kiir by the NCP (...)