Thursday, March 28, 2024

Sudan Tribune

Plural news and views on Sudan

South Sudan constitution under microscope

By Jacob K. Lupai

May 9, 2011 — The Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 is under microscope because it seems the wider public has received it with mixed feelings. The various political parties have reservations and one party in particular has expressed an outright rejection of the transitional constitution. For this reason the transitional constitution is under microscope to find out why people have mixed feelings or indifferent to the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011.

The problem started when the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) initiated the review of the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, 2005. It is worth noting that the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) is the lead political party in GOSS. In effecting the review of the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, 2005, the President of GOSS issued a decree appointing a constitutional review committee of 24 persons of whom 23 were SPLM members. The reaction of the other South Sudan political parties was swift. The parties rejected the action of the President as unilateral and claimed to be contrary to earlier resolutions of all South Sudanese political parties’ conference. To resolve the matter 11 persons from the other South Sudan political parties, 1 from civil society and 2 from faith-based groups were added to the constitutional review committee.

Again another decree was issued by the President of GOSS adding 17 more SPLM members to the constitutional review committee. This pushed the number of SPLM members to 40. This shows that the SPLM membership of the constitutional review committee was about 73 per cent. This obviously suggests that the SPLM members were the majority in the constitutional review committee. It was therefore not strange when the constitutional review committee would be influenced by the majority SPLM members. This was one of the problems.

One question of relevance to ask is does the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 reflect dominant values within South Sudan? If the Transitional Constitution does not reflect dominant values then prospects for stability in South Sudan may be poor. For example, democracy is highly valued in the SPLM vision, programme and constitution. In the Constitution of the SPLM 1998, Article 4.1 reads, “The complete destruction of the minority, oppressive clique regime of the Old Sudan in all its forms; and its replacement by the New Sudan that shall be built on a free, just, democratic and secular system of governance based on the free will and popular participation of all the people of the New Sudan, as came in the programme of the SPLM”.

One phrase that captures the eye in Article 4.1 of the Constitution of the SPLM 1998 is “popular participation of all the people”. It is therefore difficult to see how the SPLM could disregard its own Constitution by being exclusive in the review of the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, 2005. This may make the SPLM to be perceived as preaching what it does not intend to honour, hence being of double standards and untrustworthy promoter of dictatorship through the back door. This may alienate the SPLM members who hold dearly democratic values.

In an open debate or forum it is difficult to see how the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 can stand the test of democracy. Clearly the SPLM is ardently promoting dictatorship similar to that of the National Congress Party (NCP) in the North. The call for a federal system of governance is not only popular but it is enshrined in the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, 2005 as decentralization. However, in the Transitional Constitution decentralization has not been articulated as expected. Worse the Transitional Constitution is centralizing power. In contrast the three States of Equatoria are definitively for a federal system of governance. Northern and Western Bahr el Ghazal States may most likely opt for a federal system and so do Upper Nile and Unity States.

It can be seen that statistically the majority of southern states and political parties are for a federal system of governance. The majority of South Sudan political parties are also ready for a federal system. It is only some elements in the SPLM that are the odd ones out. It is most probable that in an election the SPLM will suffer massively because of this reactionary behavior. No one in their right senses will vote for a party that is out of touch and worse is perceived as of double standards not only lacking in principles but with a blurred vision.

It is not difficult to see how the SPLM is leaning towards dictatorship. For example, Article 101 (r and s) of the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 clearly states that the President can remove state Governor and/or dissolve a state legislative assembly and can also appoint a state Governor. Article 164(2) also shows that the Governor of each State shall appoint and relieve constitutional post holders in consultation with the President. The implication here is that the President may have veto powers to block the appointment and relief of a State constitutional post holder such as a deputy governor, advisor and a minister. In a federal system this may be a gross interference in State affairs. This will be a clear concentration of power at the centre. In other words this is centralization which is a contradiction to Articles 1(4) and 47(b) of the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011. Clearly the SPLM is leaning towards dictatorship which is likely to appall its principled democratic members.

The Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 is a blatant contradiction to what the SPLM has stood for since its inception. In the Vision, Programme and Constitution of the SPLM, 1998 and specifically in its 15-point programme, the SPLM is crystal clear that it “shall establish and base itself on the democratic path of development, which empowers and encourages active participation of all citizens at all levels in their liberation and in their own governance, and where the people in positions of authority or decision-making are mandated periodically by the people”.

On governance the SPLM has said it shall setup and establish good governance, where the exercise of political, economic and administrative authority in the management of the country’s affairs at all levels shall be people-based, so that individuals and groups have an effective say in the allocation and management of resources and in decisions that affect their lives. The SPLM couldn’t have been abundantly clearer in its 15-point programme that the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 seems to undermine. It is unfortunate that we now have a bunch of reactionaries masquerading as revolutionary grossly misleading people.

In conclusion, the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 is a controversial kind of a present to the people of South Sudan in the eve of independence. Let’s hope that this will not spoil the festive mood of the people on 9 July 2011. A federal system is being disregarded contrary to the concepts in the Vision, Programme and Constitution of the SPLM, 1998. However, it is obvious that the majority of southern States will opt for a federal system and so do the majority of southern political parties. There are probably some few reactionaries in the SPLM who do not care about the future of the Republic of South Sudan but only their narrow interest. The paper on which the Transitional Constitution has been printed could better be recycled into quality office tissue paper as a present in the eve of independence. This may be the contempt in which the Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 is held.

The author can be reached at [email protected]

4 Comments

  • Cibaipiath Junub Sudan
    Cibaipiath Junub Sudan

    South Sudan constitution under microscope
    South Sudan Constitution under Microscope as well as SPLM is protecting its prey from hijackers. It is when the prey get discomposed and rots when SPLM leaves the carcase to birds of nature and those could be vultures or etc. Therefore, by quoting SPLM 1998 constitution which was a resemble of the SPLM manifesto of 1983 is of no use or reference. Leave the matter to SPLM and after all it is the South that we want. Let everybody go back to his/her cacoon.

    Reply
  • Emmanuel Ajang Solomon
    Emmanuel Ajang Solomon

    South Sudan constitution under microscope
    Brother, Jacob you are not, go to what Dr. James Okuk wrote and see whether anyone cares or not.
    I think it will take us 7 to 9 decades to see some change the way U know what it means to do what U said in politics,
    Most of the words were spoken by late Dr. John Garan but where is he unless U want to go and asked him which is the only person to answer U in that regards.
    let us pray so that we are not like Somalia which is the idea of all those who are left out in the so called power sharing with Goss.Wait for that time and history will not be cheated.
    If our president is insulted or shoe thrown at him like in the case of former president of USA Bush in Irag, he can declare war, or even his child beaten in any foreign country he can declare war without consulting the ROSSLA.
    we don’t know what is called political parties because during the war it was SPLA/M and the rest of parties were with Khartoum that is why they are doing it like that.
    all the issues are not big deal all the parties will be quiet soon my brother because the coming time, will be for internal discipline,to see those who are sabotaging our new country we don’t even want the children to cry for your information leave alone to question the mighty SPLM party my brother, wait and prove me wrong soon after 8 moth.

    Reply
  • Jourkin Tombe
    Jourkin Tombe

    South Sudan constitution under microscope
    We need a bicameral or parliamentary democracy in the new South Sudan nation. We’re fed up with a monarchy and autocracy of governments. Let the Southerners be relieve. We need the people to rule themselves. Democracy is the government of/by/for the people not of the person.

    Reply
  • b-f mcdonald
    b-f mcdonald

    South Sudan constitution under microscope
    Those of us outside Sudan who have prayed for peace for the south, for so many decades of the civil war, and supported your efforts with humanitarian aid look forward to a New South Sudan that respects/honors all of its people and celebrates all its diversity. That can only be done with a truly democratic form of government. And that is what I hear is the desire of the civil society; the women, the youth, those brave souls who fought for such a long time, those who have lost loved ones and homelands. I have never heard anyone say “we want a dictatorship or an autocracy.”

    So, when I read the draft of the Transitional Constitution in which there are inconsistencies with what I understand to be a democratic form of government, I am concerned. This journey to freedom that the southerners have traveled has been too costly, too traumatic, to have taken and then to not attain the goal they sought because they let a weak, and flawed constitution pass. It is harder to redo a flawed government document in the future than to pass the best piece of legislation possible in the first place.

    Those of us who criticize some areas of the Transitional Constitution have had the luxury of living in democratic nations which have had centuries to fine tune our government. But the world is different place than it was when our countries began. It is more connected via the Internet, it is more dependent on world peace just for us all to survive. And you do not have centuries to evolve. You need to get it “right” very quickly.

    My hope is that the new south will come into this next phase of its life as best prepared as possible, to not only survive but to do that so that ALL those who call themselves citizens of this newest nation will be blessed with the kind of life everyone deserves.

    “Peace Be With You”…each and every one.

    Reply
Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.