Category: More Views

Proposed Federal system for future South Sudan: Part 6 – Bill of Rights in Federal South Sudan

BY: SINDANI SEBIT, NAIROBI, JUL/29/2014, SSN;

Bill of Rights in Federal South Sudan: First part

Introduction

Part 6 of this series focuses on part of the Bill of Rights in a proposed Federal system in South Sudan. This includes right to life, equality and freedom from discrimination, human dignity, right to have a family, language and culture, freedom of movement and residence, right to privacy, protection right and property, freedom and security of the person, slavery, servitude and forced labour, labour relations, right to clean environment, economic, social and consumer rights, right to fair administrative action and freedom of conscience, religion, belief and opinion.

The Bill of Rights is deemed as the fundamental framework for social, economic and cultural policies and thus forms an integral part of federal democratic South Sudan. This is because human rights and fundamental freedoms of the people must not only be recognized but also protected by enshrining these principles into the federal and state constitutions. The aim is to preserve the dignity of individuals and communities in addition to promoting social justice and the realization of the potential of all human beings.

Therefore, these rights and fundamental freedoms belong to each individual and are not granted by the federal or state governments. They do not exclude other rights and fundamental freedoms that may not be in the Bill of Rights but are recognized or conferred by law or traditions. However, some of these rights and fundamental freedoms may be subject to limitations when they are inconsistent with state laws enacted in accordance with the principle of separation of powers between the federal and state powers. The purpose here is to prevent anybody trying to violate state laws by evoking the federal laws to override state laws. Pursuant to this, the states shall always enact laws that strive to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms consistent with the federal laws.

Any bill of Rights enacted by the federal constitution shall apply to all laws and binds all federal organs and all persons. This means every person is entitled to enjoy the rights and fundamental freedoms as enshrined in the bill of rights. As result the courts whether at federal or states levels should apply the provisions in the bill of rights in way that should not infringe the right or fundamental freedoms on individuals or the communities in South Sudan. The courts must interpret laws in ways that most favour the enforcement of a right or fundamental freedoms. The interpretation of the bill of rights shall aim at promoting the values that underlie an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality, equity and freedom.

In order for the federal and state authorities guarantee these rights and fundamental freedoms in the country, these institutions shall avail resources aimed at prioritizing the rights and fundamental freedoms. This is to ensure widest possible enjoyment of the right or fundamental freedoms by all, including the vulnerable groups in the country. On the other hand, the courts or tribunal or other authority shall be deemed to not interfere with a decision by a federal or State organ concerning the allocation of available resources for protection of the rights and fundamental freedoms, solely on the basis that these resources will not meet the objectives for which they are intended.

Having outlined the principles of the proposed bill of right, it is important to look in details the rights and fundamental freedoms that shall be enshrined in the bill of right of South Sudan federal constitution. These should include the following:
1. Right to life
2. Equality and freedom from discrimination
3. Human dignity
4. Right to have a family
5. Language and culture
6. Freedom of movement and residence
7. Right to privacy
8. Protection right and property
9. Freedom and security of the person
10. Slavery, servitude and forced labour
11. Labour relations
12. Right to clean environment
13. Economic, social and consumer rights
14. Right to fair administrative action
15. Freedom of conscience, religion, belief and opinion
16. Freedom of expression
17. Freedom of the media
18. Right to access to information
19. Freedom of association, assembly, demonstration, picketing and petition
20. Political rights
21. Right to access justice and rights of arrested persons
22. Rights of persons detained, held in custody or imprisoned
23. Right to fair hearing
24. Specific application to rights such as children, persons with disabilities, youth, minorities, marginalized and other members of society.

Right to life
Every person has the right to life and life begins at conception. This means abortion should not be allowed unless under medical consideration or when there is need for emergency treatment or when the life of the mother is in danger. No person shall be deprived of life except sanctioned by federal or state laws following conviction by competent court.

Equality and freedom from discrimination
It must be stated that every person is equal before the law. He/she has the right to equal protection and equal benefit of the law. Equality means having full and equal enjoyment of all rights and fundamental freedoms. Women and men have the right to equal treatment, including the right to equal opportunities in political, economic, cultural and social spheres. Nobody shall be discriminated directly or indirectly on any ground, including race, sex, pregnancy, marital status, health status, ethnic or social origin, colour, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, dress, language or birth. On the other hand, no person shall discriminate directly or indirectly against another person on any of the grounds specified or contemplated above.

In order to guarantee these rights federal and state assemblies shall enact laws and other measures designed to redress any disadvantage suffered by individuals or groups because of past discrimination. This should include affirmative action programs. These measures should adequately provide for any benefits to the needs of the people or communities.

Human dignity
It is crucial that the law recognizes that every person has inherent dignity. He/she has the right to have that dignity respected and protected.

Right to have a family
Every adult has the right to marry a person of the opposite sex based on free consent of the parties. This is because family is a natural and fundamental unit of society. It is the basis of social order, and therefore shall enjoy the recognition and protection of federal and state authorities. Adults that have consented to marriage shall be entitled to equal rights at the time of the marriage, during the marriage and at the dissolution of the marriage. Laws enacted to recognize marriage shall also recognize marriages concluded under any tradition, or system of religious, personal or family law. This can also include any system of personal and family law provided that such marriages or systems of law are consistent with federal or state constitutions.

Language and culture
Language and culture are fundamental elements in social development and integration because they create the diversity that typifies the unity of a country. Therefore, the bill of rights shall enshrine the fact every person has the right to use his/her language and has the right to participate in the cultural life of the person’s choice. A person belonging to a cultural or linguistic community has the right, with other members of that community to enjoy the person’s culture and use the person’s language. He/she can form, join and maintain cultural and linguistic associations and other organs of civil society. He/she likewise shall not compel another person to perform, observe or undergo any cultural practice or rite.

Freedom of movement and residence
Every person has the right to freedom of movement. Every person has the right to leave and enter, remain in and reside in any state of the Federal Republic of South Sudan. The right to freedom of movement and residence within South Sudan and within any state of South Sudan is important for the citizen to have the freedom of choice provided that this choice is not inconsistent with the laws of the state to which a person would like to move or reside. In such cases the laws of the state regulating free movement and residence take precedence over the federal law. The aim of compliance with state laws is to mitigate the rampant tendencies of land grabbing, trying to impose behaviours that are inconsistent with the norms of the hosting state and ensure that nobody is above the laws of the state that he/she has decided to move to, settle or work in.

Right to privacy
To protect the privacy of the individual, the constitution shall ensure that every person has the right to privacy. This includes the right not to have the person, home or property searched, property or possessions seized, information relating to their family or private affairs unnecessarily required or revealed and privacy of their communications infringed.

Protection of right to property
In Federal Republic of South Sudan, every person shall have the right, either individually or in association with others, to acquire and own property of any description in any part of Republic provided acquisition of such property is based on the laws of the state regulating transaction in such property. The purpose here is to ensure legal acquisition of property, transparency and to avoid any conflict with the federal laws. Nobody shall evoke any laws other than that of the state to fraudulently acquire property.
On the other hand the federal or state parliament shall not enact a law that permits the federal or state government or any person to arbitrarily deprive a person of property of any description or of any interest in, or right over. On the contrary, the state parliament shall enact a law depriving any person, property or interest in, or right in property because:
a) Such property was fraudulently acquired
b) Land or property is public property
c) Land or property requires prompt payment or compensation
d) Land or property has pending court case
The Federal government shall support, promote and protect the intellectual property rights of the people. However this shall not include property found to have been unlawfully acquired.

Freedom and security of a person
Personal security is the responsibility of the government and therefore in federal South Sudan, every person shall have the right to freedom and security. This includes the right not to be deprived of freedom arbitrarily or without just cause, detained without trial, except during a state of emergency. No person shall be subjected to any form of violence from either public or private sources. No person shall also be subjected to torture in any manner, whether physical or psychological or subjected to corporal punishment, treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading manner.

Slavery, servitude and forced labour and labour relations
In federal South Sudan, nobody person shall be held in slavery or servitude. A person shall not be required to perform forced labour. However, every person shall have the right to fair labour practices. This includes:
a) Fair remuneration
b) Reasonable working conditions
c) Form, join or participate in the activities and programs of a trade union except federal army and federal security organs
d) Go on strike.
On the other hand all employers shall have their rights in accordance to the law. They will have rights to form and join an employers’ organization and to participate in the activities and programs of an employers’ organization. Meanwhile every trade union and every employer’s organization shall have the right to determine its own administration, programs and activities, organize and form and join a federation. The trade union, employers’ organization and employer shall have the right to engage in collective bargaining.

Right to clean environment
Protection of the environment is essential for the present and future generation and therefore in a federal South Sudan, every person shall have the right to a clean and healthy environment by ensuring that the environment shall be protected for the benefit of present and future generations through legislative and other measures such as:
a) Sustainable exploitation, utilization, management and conservation of the environment and natural resources
b) Work to achieve and maintain minimum tree cover
c) Protect intellectual property
d) Protect genetic resources and biodiversity
e) Prevent activities that endanger the environment
f) Utilize the environment and natural resources for benefit of all
g) Ensure that every one has the obligations relating to the environment

Economic, social and consumer rights
The economic and social status of the people usually underscores the prosperity and posterity of a nation. Therefore to ensure that the people of South Sudan enjoy the high economic and social status, federal South Sudan shall ensure that the every person shall have the following rights:
a) Highest attainable standard of health, which includes the right to health care services
b) Accessible and adequate housing, and to reasonable standards of sanitation
c) Free from hunger, and to have adequate food of acceptable quality
d) Clean and safe water in adequate quantities
e) Social security
f) Education
Failure to guarantee these basic rights has characterized the current regime in Juba. This is because of rampant corruption; poor planning, failed leadership and inability to prioritize the peoples’ needs. In addition every person shall not be denied emergency medical treatment.
The right of the consumers shall also be recognized and protected. These include the right to:
a) Goods and services of reasonable quality
b) Information necessary for them to gain full benefit from goods and services
c) Protection of their health, safety, and economic interests
d) Compensation for loss or injury arising from defects in goods or services.

Right to fair administrative actions
Any administrative actions taken by authority, employer or any person responsible to others may have adverse effect on the person and so every person has a right to administrative action that is expeditious, efficient, lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. If a right or fundamental freedoms of a person has been or is likely to be adversely affected by administrative action, the person has the right to be given written reasons for the action. Laws shall be enacted to provide for the review of administrative action by a court or if appropriate, an independent and impartial tribunal so as to promote efficient administration.

Freedom of conscience, religion, belief and opinion
The above mentioned freedoms are considered cardinal if South Sudan is to leap away from the current state of dictatorship to achieve equality and tolerance. Many countries have plunged into chaos because of intolerance to different opinions, beliefs and religion and currently the same seeds are being planted in South Sudan. In order to nip this mushrooming cancer in the bud, in federal South Sudan every person shall have the right to:
a) Freedom of conscience, religion, thought, belief and opinion.
b) Manifest individually or in community with others, in public or in private, any religion or belief
c) Freedom of conscience, religion, belief and opinion through worship, practice, teaching or observance, including observance of a day of worship.
No person shall be denied access to any institution, employment or facility, or the enjoyment of any right because of the person’s belief or religion. In addition no person shall be compelled to act or engage in any act that is contrary to the person’s belief or religion.

Freedom of expression
Under federal South Sudan, freedom of expression shall be guaranteed to all except in situations that are now allowed by federal law. Therefore every person shall enjoy the freedom to seek, receive or impart information or ideas, freedom of artistic creativity; academic freedom and freedom of scientific research. However, an article shall be inserted in the federal constitution that shall make the following a federal offense:
• Incitement of violence
• Ethnic incitement
• Vilification and incitement to cause harm
• Propaganda for war
• Discrimination
• Advocacy for hatred
It is stipulated that when exercising the right to freedom of expression, every person shall respect the rights and reputation of others. This is important for peaceful coexistence and harmony in the country.

In conclusion, the aim of the bill of rights and fundamental freedoms is to accord South Sudanese self steam, confidence and guarantee that the federal authorities are there to serve them but not to oppress, suppress, subjugate and exploit them. It is further to provide the necessary atmosphere d for them to enjoy their rights and fundamental freedoms, live in harmony with one another and participate freely in building the country. The rest of the bill of right will be described in part 7 of these series. These will include freedom media, right to access information, freedom of association, assembly, demonstration, picketing and petition, political rights, right to access justice, rights of arrested and detained persons, right of persons held in custody, right fair hearing and specific application to rights such as children, persons with disabilities, youth, minorities, marginalized and other members of the society. The role of the South Sudan human right Commission will also be dealt with in the next article

Sindani Sebit
Nairobi; Kenya.


Federal decentralization versus dictatorial centralization in South Sudan

By: Lul Gatkuoth Gatluakn, Minnesota, USA, JUL/27/2014, SN;

The debate over federalism to be adopted as the system of the governance in South Sudan and dictatorial centralization, has generated excitation in the country’s political spectrum. Many South Sudanese politicians had excessively overused jargon accusations which could cause malapropism to the word “federalism” among ordinary citizens.

When Dr. Riek came out of South Sudan in the first week of May, following the United States and the United Nations’ pressure to involve high profile leaders in the stagnant peace talks in Addis Ababa Ethiopia, Riek brought with him the idea of adopting federal system, as the basis of ruling South Sudan once peace prevailed.

As soon as Dr. Riek revealed his intention to push for federalism, some politicians including James Wani Igga, the current vice president, threw it as rubbish, and denied the fact that federalism demand is Dr. Riek making and pointing at Nyakuron cultural center as a base of federal demand origination out of Equatorian convention.

The country’s vice president openly reacted and opposed the federalism proposal. A demand he previously agreed to support in 2010 before independence.

In his reaction, Wani cautioned his fellow Equatorians against buying the concept as majority of equatorians have seen that Dr. Riek idea on federation: will rescue them from others’ domination. In his own words quoted by Sudantribune news outlet, James Wani stated “this federation here is not the creation of Riek, we all know that Riek actually stole this renewed call for federalism in this Hall here—Nyakuron—during Equatorian consultative conference like this.”

On the other hand, President Salva Kiir has also reacted swiftly that, “it was not Riek Machar who tabled the quest of federation, federal system was what Southern Sudan demanded from North Sudan during Juba conference in 1947.” He further acknowledged, “South Sudanese politicians also asked for federalism in 1955 in Torit and 1963 during a meeting in Khartoum.”

Salva Kiir was somehow right when he said South Sudanese demanded federalism in above mentioned occasions and he is wrong that federation is meant only between North and South excluding our internal administration in awaiting. Then, James Wani is wrong when he said Riek did not start the demand of federalism.

Below are the historical facts in regard of what Southern Sudanese people wanted and whether Dr. Riek previously demanded federalism or is he just borrowing it out of Equatorian convention.

But first, one must highlight our forebearers’ historical demands before dipping and plunging into this current featuring debate.

Initially, during Sudanese nationalism, which developed to oppose to British indirect rule and advocated for a centralized national government that would be responsible for both North and South in the period of 1920-1947, (similar to what Salva Kiir is demanding at the moment), after Arab nationalists perceived British policy toward Southern Sudan as a tactical agenda that dividing Sudan and preventing its unification under an Arabized and Islamized State.

Southerners at that particular period, weren’t prepared for a statehood loyalty. Their loyalties laid or accustomed to a traditional way of life, which is cultivating the soil or grazing their herds of cattle. They were overwhelmingly illiterate and not aware of any changing world around them and how it is passing through.

Due to the lack of political consciousness or experiences, a conference of 1946 was convened in Khartoum without participation of any single southern Sudanese. Thank to British officials in the South who argued that—–another conference must be called, which will include Southern Sudanese. This culminated into the historical Juba conference of June 12-13, 1947. In that conference, thirteen Southern Sudanese delegates included herein Clement Mboro, Both Diu Thong, James Tambura, Philemon Majiok among others, had reacted by demanding a federal system of governance opposing centralization system.

When British had finally decided to give up its colonization and its stand for Southern Sudan, it drastically allowed referendum consultation. This turned into open hostility after the results of the Sudanization were announced, given the fact that, the whole process was favoring northern Sudanese interest or aspiration.

In this regard, political active southerners —–call a meeting again in Juba on October 1954 to discuss the political future of the Sudan as a whole, and the political future of Southern Sudan within the Sudan.

In their deliberations, southerners agreed they must vote for independence Sudan from condominium partners, but on a condition that a federal system for the entire country is adopted, and southern Sudan must have its own autonomy. If this demand does not prevail, the region must opt for the rights of self-determination.

Apparently, northerners reviewed this call as a tactical demand by Southerners to secure full independence within the preceded independence process of the whole country. Then, they responded by rapidly increasing the number of northerners in the South as administrators, senior officers in the army and police, teachers in government schools, and as merchants.

Such an action brought fear to southern Sudanese that Arabs had declared themselves as new colonial masters and this increased the mistrust that resulted into the disturbance of August 18, 1955 in Torit, when members of the Equatorian army unit refused to be transferred to Khartoum.

In preference, the soldiers have done what the army supposed to be doing beforehand and later deserted to bushes of southern Sudan under two grievances i.e. the demands of “federalism and independence South Sudan.”

The rebellion stunned the northern Sudanese impatient for independence, and the twenty-two southern Sudanese members of the parliament at that time became unwilling to agree to a declaration of independence which would perpetuate Northern control over the country. They stuck on the demand of federal system, as a form of the government that the country could adopt in governing itself.

Southern politicians proposed this ideology as a way of protecting southern provinces from being completely subordinated to a northern dominated central government. Ideologically in their intention, they were in a mood that, if northerners refused this demand, all southern members of the parliament should vote against independence.

On the other hand, Northern politicians were ironically left for nothing other than hastily consented to consider a federal solution for the Sudan. That pledge won the hearts of southern representatives and dissuaded them to vote for an independent Sudan on December 19, 1955 which led to the declaration of independence on January 1, 1956.

Moreover, the debate over southern Sudan issue resurfaced again ignited by students, teachers, ordinary workers and other professional staffs in 1964 followed by round table conference in 1965. Southern Sudanese political groups were pushing for the same two objectives. For instance, William Deng Nhial who represented Sudan African National Union (SANU) inside the country, was campaigning for federal system in the united Sudan.

Clement Mboro, Darius Bashir and Both Diu Thong also insiders aimed for federalism, and then SANU in exile represented by Elia Lupe, Rv. Fr. Saturnino Ohure, Joseph Oduho, and Aggrey Jaden among others were advocating for a complete independence for southern Sudan.

Then, in 1972 when the historic negotiations between Sudan and South Sudan Liberation Movement (SSLM) was opened on February 16, 1972 in Addis Ababa at Hilton Hotel with the blessing of his majesty Emperor Haile Selassie on the fundamental understanding that the talks were to produce a plan for regional autonomy within a united Sudan, not the separate State as originally demanded by SSLM, many southerners opposed the move despite the fact that their interest laid on separation and forming a federal democratic State.

This by far became the reason why those who were not satisfied with the deal returned to bush as early as 1975 under the command of Vincent Kuany Latjor.

By 1981-2, the High Executive Council mismanagement of self-autonomous Southern Sudan affairs reached to the point where majority of Southern Sudanese especially Equatorians were dissatisfied. Under such failure, wealth, political positions, among other grievances were not equitably sha

red. This led to the claim of decentralization or division of power equally which is where Bari speaking word “Kokora” find its root in South Sudanese political system.

This claim coincided with the northerners’ decision to abrogate or get rid of the Addis Ababa Agreement by opposing a single Southern Sudan region, the secular constitution, self-autonomy for the south, English language usage, and the security arrangements; which gave southern Sudanese an equal role just as northerners.

Based on such action, Southern Sudanese rebelled and slipped to bushes of Southern Sudan which was spearheaded by Kerubino Kuanyin Bol on May 16, 1983 in Bor and Pochalla and William Nyuon Bany on June 6, 1983 in Ayod and Waat respectively.

Following the Ayod, Bor, Pochalla and Waat uprisings, many Southern Sudanese leaders start moving to Ethiopia to establish a rebellion aiming to solve the problem of Sudan one and for all. The new movement must include former 1975 and 1983 mutineers. However, the situation were soon turned in different angle when different ideologies regarding the objective of the movement emerged.

One group wanted to fight for independence South Sudan and another one wanted to fight to liberate the whole country and replace the old Sudan with the new Sudan within the context of united Sudan under socialist system that afford democracy and human rights to all nationalist and guarantee freedom to all religious believes and cultures.

This ideology became foreign to Southern Sudanese whether in government or in the rebel held areas. Unfortunately, the strangeness of the United Sudan objective, trigger the 1991 internal division.

The split brought about by the dissatisfaction of the movement’s misguiding objective, absence of democratic principle, human rights abuses and lack of a decent strategy among the leadership.

When Dr. John Garang realized the genuineness of Southern Sudanese quest for self-determination and democratization, he called 1994 first SPLM Convention in Chukudum to resolve the grievances rised by the Nasir group and later incorporated all the demands into the movement policies.

From there, the rights to self-determination had become a solid objective and some sort of democratic debates start rooting. While those grievances were being pushed to be adopted in the movement, in many occasions, southern Sudanese slowly sought each other in terms of reuniting their forces.

Hence, on February 5-6, 2002 in Nairobi Kenya, Southerners became one again through a deal that was christened Nairobi declaration marking the end of 1991 quest for objective and internal institutional democratization.

After the reunification of all Southern Sudanese Factions besides remaining forces that formed alliances with the north, the move coincided with the international community rising to pressure Sudanese warring parties, to come to negotiating table and debate peace.

As the result, the first peace talks among Sudanese was opened at Karen Nairobi on May 2-5, 2002 under able, energetic, persevering lieutenant general Lazarus Sumbeiywo as Kenya special envoy for IGAD peace process toward Sudan. The second session took place on June 18, 2002 at Machakos Kenya. After a month of intense negotiations, the machakos conference ended on July 20, 2002 with a signing of self-determination document.

It was a landmark agreement where the Sudanese government and the SPLM/A agreed that the right to self-determination will be settled by a referendum after six years interim period. During the heady atmosphere at Machakos, the three critical issues brought on the table, predicated on extensive sharing of power, wealth, security arrangement and the establishment of asymmetrical federal system, with the government of Southern Sudan to exist as buffer between the central government and southern Sudan.

In 2005, the Comprehensive Peace Agreement was finalized, as a good clean document emphasis good governance in Southern Sudan, democracy, institutional transformation and reconstruction of southern Sudan under federal structured system.

In the beginning of the interim period, both government of national unity (GONU) and government of southern Sudan (GOSS) were formed. In the government of southern Sudan, all functions of the federal system were put in place. On top of these functions has been the establishment of the institution of presidency, Southern Sudan council of ministers, southern Sudan legislative assembly, the judiciary of southern Sudan (Supreme Court and courts of appeal) and southern Sudan States’ governors, States’ council of ministers and legislative assemblies.

According to the structure, counties in ten Southern Sudan States will be led by commissioners, Payams and Bomas/Bumas administrations will be run by administrators, who will be appointed locally in their respective areas. Then, the newly adopted constitution of the southern Sudan (ICSS) provides the framework for assigning governmental powers and decision-making that included protecting of basic human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

It also outlined fundamental objectives and guiding principles for the GOSS related to citizenship, the decentralization system of governance, the judicial system, independent institutions and commissions, local government and finally economic functioning governance.

Based on the above structure, south Sudanese began to hope that democratic system where public servants should enter political arena through adult franchise is rooting. However, that turned out not to be the case.

Kiir turned the country around and began ruling the nation by the so-called presidential decrees. He can appoint, order court persecution, and most of all fire elected public servants. That kind of practice is picked up by governors to appoint individuals who are loyal to them. Commissioners as well appoint close aids or relatives to available jobs or send them to training which will later result into their employment once they return.

Federal functioning practices where leaders can be elected by ordinary citizens is absent and the whole system became a big mess or an ultimate nightmare. Citizens particularly journalists are daily harassed, censored and even killed. Dictatorship, corruption, nepotism, tribalism and brutalization has engulfed the country. Ordinary folks are only expressing dismay given the fact that none is for them and the bread is for elite.

To reverse and correct the trend and how Salva Kiir is running the country, many political players particularly in Equatoria region, setup public gatherings in 2011-14 aiming to discuss system of governance or how South Sudan as a nation should adopt and rule itself.

Majority of Equatorians since the dawn of CPA negotiation, started to debate on how sustainable peace will be implemented throughout post-conflict Sudan. Many of them believe during the war time, they have been driven out from their homes or faced with economic and political oppression under the SPLA occupation.

Therefore, they wanted a government by and for the people where accountability and transparency transcended. However, when people start talking too much about democracy, federalism or multi-partism, Salva Kiir is always seen as very reluctant in allowing such a change.

He is only interesting in centralizations where wealth of the country concentrated on him and his chosen few that is why he had driven the country to war and adamantly stated if anything touched his position, war is eminent and it is the only solution.

His worry is dwelling only on keeping the power not on solving the suffering or the flight of the people.

As the world is tirelessly engaging on finding a solution to stop the spilling the blood of South Sudanese, they must know beyond the reasonable doubt that—-Salva Kiir is the only problem—who perpetrated and implanted the hatred among South Sudanese tribes, who almost coexist and mutually live side by side.

He has proven to be a pure dictator who does not know how to share power with different organs of the government. In that regard, he will not bring back the trust South Sudanese started building during the interim period.

The only person who will bring mutual understanding is Dr. Riek Machar who is a natural democratic oriented person. James Wani was wrong when he said “Riek borrowed the idea of federalism out of Equatorian convention,” for the reason that, when Dr. Riek signed the political Charter with Khartoum on April 10, 1996, he was aiming to resolve the conflict in the Sudan through peaceful and political means.

He has recognized that during the interim period, a constitution will be developed to form the relations between the South and north. Such relations shall be based on federalism and this type of federal structure have to be built on the values of participatory democracy, so that the people of then Southern Sudan can behave and act freely without any sort of intimidation or fear of blackmailing.

This is the idea he has carrying all along and not just borrowing it yesterday. This writer hope James Wani, Salva Kiir and all their likes, had now satisfied Dr. Riek meant democracy in all its functionalities.

The proposal of 11 more States plus Abyei…God willing, is an indication of federal model similar to American federalism. This kind of leader needs to be given a chance to pave the way so that South Sudan has to be ruled under constitutional supremacy.

It will be a country where the president, governor and/or commissioner will only appoint their cabinet members. All civil and public servants starting from president, governors, commissioners and members of the parliament in both national and State governments, in addition to Payams and Bomas administrators, must be elected and rule for a short specified time frame else one has a potentiality to convince people to bring him/her back to power.

Sycophancy, nepotism, and loyalty will stop. Members of the media outlets, will not be censored or killed. Wealth will be shared and businesses will start booming. Life in that given occasion will start going back to normalcy.

Creating a transitional government under Salva Kiir, the country will not be a democratic State. It will be a country similar to that of Russia under Stalin, Germany under Hitler, Cambodia under Pol Pot, Uganda under Idi Amin Dada or Museveni, just to mention only a few.

This is the reason why we are eager to remove him from the leadership of South Sudan. Had it not been for his increasing dictatorship tendency, the country would not have been driven to war.

One strongly believe that the unity of South Sudanese will be restored when Salva Kiir is out of way. That is when our society will enjoy a democracy which will freely allow them to speak, to publish and most importantly, the freedom to criticize the government.

Although freedom of expression is enshrined in our current constitution, yet, it’s just symbolic, we need a remarkable/workable federal system that will honor the freedom of the press. The freedom of expression can be found almost in every nation constitutions, but only few countries such as the United States that guarantees the freedom of expression as the people and the government are dedicated in making the ideal come true.

In conclusion, as we are debating trying to find ways of how our country should be governed, we ought to avoid unnecessary collaborations. There might be people among us who had and will choose sides before analyzing and correctly identify the cause of the problem.

If that would be the case, one would like to illustrate and educate such people that, accordance with the SPLM party constitution, every five years period leadership of the party has to expire and the party must convene a national convention to either reinstall its serving leaders or elect new leaders, that made Dr. Riek, Pagan and Rebecca Nyandeng a room to challenge the incumbent party chairperson.

Is that a crime which can cause the war? If it is a crime, only in South Sudan it might be seen. Had the leader called the convention and allowed democratic voting manner, Dr. Riek would not drag the country to war.

Promptly, leadership failure and lack of vision from the country’s top seat dragged us into this mess. Had the leader of our nation chose democratic principle, the blood of our citizens that is spilling daily, would have been prevented.

Ruling the country on iron fist rarely succeed in today’s world. National unity that is imposed on people through dictatorial tendency or spurious nationalism will never work. It will only promote disunity and ultimate disintegration of the country.

No one in their right mind or senses will force the medieval behaviors like centralization of power on people. National unity is a voluntary coming together of diverse people and regions based on fair equitable sharing of power and wealth, imposing it will stir the people to dissatisfaction and anger.

IGAD and its partners must bear in mind majority of South Sudanese are longing for a federal republic State that excludes Salva Kiir since he already had shown oddness to it. Once he steps aside, the country will be at peace and national healing will soon follow.

Very respectfully,
Lul Gatkuoth Gatluak
The author is a political commentator who have written several articles on both Sudan and South Sudan, he is also a member of the SPLM-In Opposition in the State of Minnesota, he could be reach via simonlul2000@yahoo.com or (651) 500-7397


A Failed State: Is it a true description of Lakes State?

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, KAMPALA, JUL/23/2014, SSN;

In this article, I will explain why I consider Lakes State to be a failed States in South Sudan. In Lakes for instance, people have completely lost trust in the government as Lakes State authorities have turned the state into a scavenges’ ground for wealth, which further turns the condition of employment akin to that of slavery and forced labour.

When greed, illiteracy and bad governance converge at a certain point, the whole country can be thrown into hell on earth. Competing interests will overrule commonsense and good judgment from authorities who instead will abuse.

Authorities that lead the nation with the desire to fulfil their personal interest will always cause downfall of the nation. Nation is created by the people and it is in the interest of the people to be served by leaders that they put in charge of that nation.

Where such leaders become liabilities to the people then they are supposed to be discarded from power and then thrown into the dustbin of history. The former president of Libya is a good example of such leaders who are thrown into dustbin of history.

Former President of Libya has now been forgotten and if people ever remember him, he is always remembered on the side of bad governance which in many cases bring with it bitter memories created by his style of leadership.

Leadership which uses ignorance of the people to its advantage is a type of leadership that must be forgotten in history. The foregoing description exactly fits Lakes State. The leadership in Lakes State is using people of Lakes State as its own slaves.

The leadership in Lakes has turned the whole State into personal assets and hold citizens in captivity, servitude, forced labour, slavery and slave trade. It should however be understood that when we talk of slave trade and slavery in this context, we are not talking about it in a conventionally way as it is understood.

Slave trade and slavery in this context should be understood in the sense that when citizens are coerced into accepting unlawful and unbearable conditions which impair the enjoyment of their human rights just for one person to reap the benefits out of the suffering, then such a situation can constitute a modern slavery and slave trade.

Looking at the definition of slavery as I have given in the above paragraph, it can easily be concluded that the government of Lakes State has subjected its citizens to slavery, servitude and slave trade because people of Lakes State no longer enjoy their economic freedom, human rights and personal liberties.

The Lakes State government has robbed its own citizens of all their rights, specifically, the right to property, life and health. It is very disappointing to see people being treated like commodities because the government’s interest in Lakes State is to ensure that people pay as much money as they can.

Hence, losing a traditional role of the government; the traditional role of the government is to protect citizens from violation of their rights while making all attempts to improve their welfare.

In Lakes State, the reverse is true. People are the ones being forced to improve the welfare of the leaders and the government. Therefore, the question becomes: who is supposed to serve who? Leaders to serve citizens or citizens to be served by the leaders?

In fact, citizens or people are supposed to be served by leaders, however, in Lakes State leadership is so much materialistic to the extent that it does not see anything good in the citizens but only seeing citizens as source of income to leadership hence making all efforts to deplete little energy that people have for their own benefits.

As a result, citizens of Lakes State are forced to work in dismal terms and conditions, which are akin to slavery. In actual sense, what the world needs to clearly understand is that Lakes State government does not have any preference for its citizens. Instead, it is making all desperate attempts to make money out of the people from nowhere, hence turning citizens into slaves within their country.

Lakes State citizens are citizens of South Sudan and must not be treated like slaves in their own country just to satisfy interest of the few cliques in the SPLM Government in Lakes State. Those few cliques in the SPLM government in Lakes State appear to use the SPLM government to achieve a certain mission and ambition.

The way leadership is ruthlessly seeking for wealth in Lakes State explains the mission I have mentioned above. The mission is to become stingy rich and in order to become rich as such; they must exploit citizens as much as they can.

Such a method of acquiring wealth through ends justifies the means is very dangerous because people suffer eternally from poverty as leaders struggle to build personal wealth and empire through practicing forced labour on citizens, hence, exploiting them to the maximum.

The government of Lakes State exploits citizens because it has lost morals. Some of its officials do not have any feeling for the poor children, orphans and war disabled. The lack of feelings for the poor and disabled is counter liberation principles and counterproductive to the SPLM vision of taking towns to people.

The way women, children, war victims, disabled and cattle keepers are suffering today in Lakes State indicates that Lakes State government has lost vision of nation building, and instead, it has become a state run on principles of self-help. This begs another question which is relevant to this discussion:

Are the people of Lakes State sacrificial lambs sacrificed for the president to please power hungry generals who do not feel ashamed even when they have failed to manage the state?

The above question reminds me the debate of whether South Sudan is a failed nation or not. the issue in this article is whether the description given on a failed state suit in the scenario of Lakes State. The ways things are in Lakes State may explain that Lakes State is a failed state.

A failed state according to Wikipedia is a state perceived as having failed at some of the basic conditions and responsibilities of a sovereign government. Furthermore, according to the Fund for Peace, which is often used to characterize a failed state with the following characteristics: loss of control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein; erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions; inability to provide public services; inability to interact with other states as a full member of the international community.

Many of the characteristics of a failed State as listed in the above paragraph such as loss of control of its territory, or of the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force therein; erosion of legitimate authority to make collective decisions; inability to provide public services all fit in description of Lakes State.

In Lakes State, there is no rule of law, killings are order of the day, authority has lost legitimacy and respect of the people, no respect for human values, and cattle raid is rampant. Despite, the existence of all these ugly situations the major concerns of leadership is how to accumulate wealth yet the president does not take an action to save the people of Lakes State.

The reason why the President does not want to take an action in order to save people of Lakes State is that he has already formed a prejudice that people of Lakes State are not good and therefore he has sold them for the benefits of his generals.

The people of Lakes State are sold alive as slaves for the president to maintain his loyal friends in power in order to control any other rebellion in Lakes caused by the current leaders if they are removed.

Such an attitude should be of a great concern to all South Sudanese. It is a bad sign for South Sudan if all people removed from their posts in the government always rebel against the government then there is great problem in South Sudan.

The root of the suffering of the people of Lakes State is in the fear of the president to lose his generals who may rebel against the president if he removes them. Hence, leaving citizens of Lakes State in bad governance, abject poverty, lawless, unceasing killings and permanent and legalized thief carried out in daylight by some of the Lakes State authorities.

As I have already mentioned above, some of the Lakes State authorities are morally corrupted, insensitive, inconsiderate and unpatriotic. They only know how to grab resources of citizens in order to build personal mansions and wealth.

It is unthinkable! In fact, the way Lakes State authorities are seeking for wealth. It is amoral in itself. It is unthinkable and unbecoming of Lakes State authorities to legalize theft and corruption. It is sad and heart breaking to see government chosen by the people instead becoming anti-people.

How can a normal Government rob its citizens of their national wealth just to build a skyscraper and personal tombs in a place like Lakes State? In fact, in Lakes State, the governor has built a personal skyscraper and tombs in his home village, which has cost the state millions of dollars while citizens, especially the poor, widows, orphans and disabled soldiers are wallowing in miasmas of the sea of abject poverty. Is it logical? It is absolute wrong.

The whole blame goes back to the President who adamantly refuses all appeal to remove the governor and come up with the correct solution of Lakes State. Correct solution of Lakes State is neither force nor democracy but there is a need to restore rule of law and justice that has been eroded in Lakes.

The president has completely failed the people of Lakes State. Can he claim any credit from good deeds he has done to Lakes State? Of course not. Building hospitals or roads is not what people of Lakes State want. Who will use such facilities if the people in Lakes State exterminate each?

What people of Lakes need are law and order, protection of personal property, life and human dignity. These things are absent in Lakes State as things have gone from bad to worse. The blame for the occurrence of all these problems cannot be placed on citizens of Lakes State but on the President of South Sudan and the Governor of Lakes State.

What is destroying Lakes State is not that leadership in South Sudan and in particular, Lakes State is weak, but because they do not have political will to restore rule of law in Lakes State. The point is that no matter how weak the leader is, a leader cannot be weak to the extent of allowing citizens to be killed even within the towns.

The whole explanation of what is happening in Lakes State is that leadership wants to benefit at the expenses of the poor citizens of Lakes State. The government in Lakes State is both corrupt administratively and morally.

It is the type of government that loathes the rule of law since it is only through confusion created by the government itself in disregarding the rule of law where it benefits from. The lack of the respect of the rule of law by Lakes State authority is the root cause of Lakes State problems.

In order to briefly explain the point I have made above, I beg readers to digress from this topic a little. Lakes State problems are not hard to solve as many view them; they are simple and the only needs indigenous solutions because they are indigenous problems.

What makes them appear hard is the lack of political will from authorities both in Juba and Lakes State to solve them because leaders themselves have the same mind with those who create them. They have narrowed mind and the leadership without open mind is very dangerous to the nation.

As I have stated in the above paragraphs that problems of Lakes State need the solution from indigenous approach, it is important to out that the major solution to Lakes State problem is to overhaul the whole system of government, then appoint the interim government with appropriate leaders whose work is to restore the rule of law in order to get some resemblance of peace.

After that, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) should be established. The TRC is a form of transition justice which deals with restorative aspect of justice. The TRC will deal with all crimes committed in Lakes State before and after the independence of South Sudan.

The TRC will help to restore trust of Lakes State citizens in the government and brings peace among them and the respect of the rule of law and order, which are absent in Lakes State today.

As soon as the peace is restored among the people of Lakes State, the State government should institute the commission of inquiry to investigate all root causes of the problems of Lakes State before and after independence and then the State government has to act on the findings of the commission of inquiry accordingly.

After that, the cattle keepers should not be disarmed but should instead be called upon to write their own law on gun control, elopement of girls, relationship and marriages.

As soon as they have come up with the law under the guidance of advocates, the role of State Government is to adopt such a law and strictly enforce it with integrity, impartiality and honesty.

For instance, in case where such law carries a provision that sanctions a death penalty, then the role of Lakes State authorities is not to change or question it but to enforce it in accordance with its procedures as provided in it.

In addition, the payment of cows as a compensation for those killed (sometimes called apuk) should be abolished because it is one of the things that is exacerbating and aggravating crisis in Lakes. These are simple but effective solutions to Lakes State problems.

Coming back to the main topic under discussion, many people with shallow thinking have been viewing the cause of the problems in Lakes State to be guns, people, cows and tribes but none of these to my understanding is the cause of Lakes State problems.

The major cause of Lakes State problems is the failure by the government to stick to the rule of law. For instance, some of the government officials in Lakes State are in themselves worse than cattle keepers. They are cattle raiders behind law enforcement.

If one were to carry out the research in relation to what is happening Lakes State, I am sure, one of such a person’s findings would be that some of the officials in Lakes State government are complacent in Lakes State crisis.

As it has been reported several times, many of government authorities instigate tribal clashes among the people of Lakes State in order to give them a chance to negatively portray the governor and also to rob citizens of their cows in the pretext of restoring law and order.

For instance, there are many instances where some of the commissioners in Lakes State are accused of being implicit in cattle raids. Some of the Commissioners are accused as such because they do not intervene when they hear that youth have gone to raid cattle in other states or counties but as soon as the youth have come back with cows, they demand their share from youth indirectly.

They demand their share indirectly in a way that when cows are raided by youth such commissioners go on tracking down cows that were raided not because they want to return them to the true owners but with the aim of getting their shares.

Such action of conducting a raid within a raid indicates that greed has invaded Lakes State Government, which turned the government into robotic, insensitive and corrupt machinery that does not even have a heart for the citizens of Lakes State.

In other words, the government of Lakes State is being run on robbery and stealing. Insensitivity in Lakes State government has thrown the whole States into slave trade centre where human rights no longer exist.

For instance, the violation of the right to employment is order of the day in Lakes State. In the year 2013, right to employment of the employees and citizens of Lakes State was violated when the governor gave illegal orders that resulted into the suspension of more than four hundred employees with no clear reason.

However, as I discovered later, the reason for suspension of such a big number of the employees was a calculated move intended to give governor a room to get money to build his own tombs and a house in his village.

The money of the employees that were suspended by Governor was used by governor in building personal skyscraper and tombs of himself and his mother in Rumbek East. An action is a deplorable given the current conditions in Lakes State.

Apart from suspension of the employees as stated above, many individuals have been dismissed from works by the governor without any valid reasons. For instance, Military Governor Matur has disregarded the rule of law completely. He is above the law since he can dismiss any person from work at his whim as he has been doing; he dismisses a person from work without any written document detailing the reasons for such a person’s dismissal.

It is a peculiar form of dismissal. I have never come across oral dismissal of government employees in a country which claims to be governed by law. It beats the understanding of a reasonable person to see such things happening yet the President is just there watching helplessly.
The oral dismissal does not exist anywhere in all civilized nations except Lakes State which is being run on primordial principles. People without care, are they people at all? This is the true description of people of Lakes State.
The government of Lakes State is the type of the government that civilized nations with civilized people cannot accept to rule them. In fact, the President is lucky enough to have people of Lakes State who are Dinka, if they were any other tribes in South Sudan, they would have claimed and fought for their independence or for a greater autonomy.

There is no any different between problems faced by South Sudanese in Lakes State today and those that were faced by South Sudanese under Khartoum regimes from 1956-2005.

Drawing such similarity only brings tears and regrettable thoughts to one’s mind not because of having got our independence but because of having the type of the self-centred government in Lakes State today.

It is regrettable to see the government who hypocritically claimed to have fought for the liberation of the people turning around to oppress and exploit its citizens. What is happening in Lakes State today is worse than what colonial masters were doing to Africans.

At least, colonial masters had an agendum of transforming Africans whom they considered barbaric and backward. However, what is happening is Lakes State is unprecedented. It is senseless and a greed driven event. It is in actual sense like what was happening in New World or Americas during the Transatlantic Trade.

During Transatlantic Trade people were used as machines in the production of raw materials for the Whiteman. In the same way, the Lakes State government is using people of Lakes State as producing machines for benefit of the government officials starting from the governor and this is why State government is quick to suspend anybody who it deems to be contrary to its interest.

The interest of Lakes State government is not to please and serve people of Lakes State but to please the president by trying by all means to silence any dissenting voice or character in order to show to the president that he is being loved by the people of Lakes State.
For instance, the recent incidence that occurred after President Kiir visited Lakes State, and which prompted me to write this Article is of interest and needs to be known by the world.

When the President visited Lakes State in this Month (July, 2014), the Governor issued orders that all the employees of the government should go out to welcome the President who was going to land in Rumbek Airport from Juba.

However, when some of the employees in public service who were about forty out of ninety eight employees for one reason or another did not make it to the Airport to welcome the president, their salaries were cut.

The reason given for cutting their salaries was not convincing. The reason for cutting their pay as given was that they did not go out to welcome the President and by implication were considered to be against the president and the government of South Sudan. Is that a logical reason?

Nonsensical! Any country that respects the rule of law would never temper with the rights of its citizens. The human to employment is human rights and is only realized when the terms and conditions of employment are respected.

The right of employment can only be violated through lawful means described by law. There is no any rule governing the welcoming of the President. In civilized country, people have freedom to choose either to welcome the president or not.

The coming of the president should be a burden to the people as it is the case in Lakes State. In Lakes State, for instance, whenever, the president comes for a visit to Lakes State all businesses are closed and all people are forced to go out and welcome the president. I have never, in this world seen or heard of any nation going out to welcome the president.

The way governor of Lakes State treats people whenever the president comes tell exactly the understanding of the leadership by the governor of Lakes State. To the governor of Lakes, presidency is something outside people’s reach and must be worshiped like God.

It further shows that the government of Lakes State is no longer government people but the government of the president and a governor. Nonsensical! Forcing people to go out to welcome the president was done in bad faith and show the failure of the Lakes State government.

It was done in bad faith because the underlying intention was to show to the President that the people of Lakes State love him, which is repugnant. It is hypocritical, deceptive, immoral and wrong. It is contrary to the rights of South Sudanese citizens guaranteed under the 2011 Transitional Constitution.

It amounts to forced labour, slavery and slave trade, which are also prohibited by the Transitional Constitution. Article 13 (1) and (2) of the 2011 Transitional Constitution provides that slavery and slave trade in all form are prohibited and that no person shall be held in slavery or servitude.

In addition, the Transitional Constitution provides that no person shall be required to perform forced or compulsory labour except as a penalty upon conviction by a competent court of law.
Forcing citizens to welcome the president tantamount to forced labour because it is not stipulated anywhere in the law of South Sudan that it is the duty of all citizens to welcome the president.

The action was only intended to please the president and tell him that people of Lakes State love him. In addition, it was only intended for the benefit of the Governor in a way that the president would be dubbed into believing that the role of the governor in Lakes State is great and it has helped to improve the image of the SPLM; hence, as a result the president keeps the governor in Lakes State indefinitely.

What the President of South Sudan and the governor of Lakes State should understand is that people of Lakes State no longer love the SPLM government although they do not have any intention to rebel against it.

Therefore, it is the waste of time by the governor of Lakes State to forge love of the people of Lakes State for the President of South Sudan. Loving the president by citizens is the act of patriotism, which is only undertaken by the people willingly and they are not forced into doing it because forcing them to love the President or the country can change the meaning of patriotism and instead becomes slavery. Such action is an attempt by a failed leadership.

Therefore, the action of the state authorities to order pay cut for forty eight public service employees is illegal and the authorities have violated the South Sudanese law. There is no law anywhere in this world, and in particular in South Sudan, that makes the failure to welcome the President illegal.

I think the logic behind the pay cut was not that they employees in public service had refused to welcome the President but it was just a pretext used by the State Authorities to get enough money to build their personal projects which have been left unfinished due to shortage of money.

The authorities’ desire to exploit citizens in Lakes State has been persistently coming to the fore. For example, in 2013, the authorities in Lakes State increased taxes in which even taxi drivers were forced to pay twenty five pounds on every taxi, which by implication increased transport costs on poor citizens of Lakes State.

In addition, the greed by Lakes State authorities has made them disregard the rule of law that governs Lakes State tax system. For instance, Lakes State governor and his deputy used to go to the Market to collect taxes themselves due to suspicion that tax collectors were cheating them.

Such greed is bad and immoral of any authority. In summary, the description of failed state as explained in this article fits the conditions of Lakes State and therefore Lakes State can be described as a failed state run by a failed government.

The Author is a Lawyer and a concern Lakes State citizen and he can be reached through the following contacts: +256783579256; juoldaniel@yahoo.com


Seeking solution for Acceptable Administration to the people of South Sudan- A Jieng proposal

By: Concerned Jieng Community Elders, Juba, South Sudan. JUL/18/2014, SSN,
(Forwarded by D.M. Agok, JUBA);

Introduction:
People of South Sudan have not agreed on the system of governance they should adopt to rule themselves peacefully. The recent Agreement between the government and the Murle Community led by YauYau has revealed the tendencies of people of South Sudan to govern themselves through ethnic administrative set up like the choice of Murle for autonomous administrative unit away from greater Jonglei state.

This move is indicative of the rejection of the ten states inherited from the government of Khartoum as stipulated in the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA).

It further suggests also that majority of people of South Sudan prefer ethnic administrative arrangements better than former greater regions of the provinces of Equatoria, Upper Nile and Bahr al Ghazal as a solution to tribal rivalry over the resources with the strongest dominating the ethnic minorities or minority making false claim of marginalization in the larger administration, thereby creating enmity between ethnic communities that eventually result into violence of the rivaling communities.

Given the above argument, the choice to opt for an ethnic administration, can easily be adopted from the past colonial administrative set-up of twenty-three districts, as they stood on 1st January 1956.

These districts were wholly or partially set up on ethnic arrangements, except in few cases where some minority communities were put together with larger communities for possible governing conveniences at that time which might have now negatively or positively changed with the change of communities’ attitude towards each other.

Therefore, a solution acceptable to such minority could be addressed in whatever suitable manner. In general therefore minorities must be accorded or facilitated chances of choices to remain in their current authority, form their own administrative unit when viable or choose to join another community or administrative authority they share borders with.

Federal Arrangement:
Many people of South Sudan are demanding for application of federal system as one of the solutions to govern the country peacefully. There is no problem with the federal governance except the fact that the country was marginalized by Khartoum and left without development.

Therefore, there was need for the country to consolidate itself for some reasonable period of time to use available resources for equitable development until suitable time to apply federal system where-after each administrative unit or state would have a chance to run its own affairs with available resources of that state without much difficulty.

But as things stand now, this step has to be skipped and the federal system be introduced because the demand for it is a wish of the majority.

There are many countries which are federal based. Some examples of nations with good federal systems are Germany, Canada, etc. These federal systems can be examined and improved for application that suit South Sudan.

For example in these federal systems, each Federal state depends on its resources except where government have the right of resources like customs, taxes and other specified rights spelt out in the federal constitution.

The rich states make contributions to the federal government pool fund for its budget and contribution to the poor states.

The federal government source of revenue comes from customs, VAT, etc., and other specified taxes in the constitution. These taxes are either collected directly by the federal government or by the state or Municipality on behalf of the federal government.

Other detailed power structures of federal arrangements are embodied in the federal system of governance depending on the model of choice from any federal arrangement and to be agreed upon and adopted by the people of South Sudan.

Constitutional Review for Permanent constitution preparation:
For the people of South Sudan to develop and adopt a system of federal governance, they have to go through established institutions of the Transitional constitution for governance if they believe in good governance that respects established systems.

Therefore, the current constitutional review process must be followed without resorting to short-cut initiatives to avoid future shortcomings that may result into poor definitions and wrong application of federal system in the constitution that would eventually fail good governance.

Hence, the application of a federal system must pass through a constitutional review process leading to permanent constitution.

The Three Provinces of Southern Sudan and Districts as of 1st` Jan. 1956:

Equatoria Provincial Districts:
1. Kapoeta; 2. Torit; 3. Yei River; 4. Juba; 5. Maridi; 6. Yambio; 7. Tumbura
Bahr Al Ghazal Provincial:
1. Yirol; 2. Lakes; 3. Jur River; 4. Raga; 5. Aweil; 6. Tonj; 7. Gogrial;
Upper Nile Provincial Districts:
1. Renk; 2. Malakal; 3. Nasir; 4. Pibor; 5. Akobo; 6. Bor; 7. Bentiu; 8. Pangak; 9. Kodok.

The above former twenty-three provincial districts can be developed into states to replace the current ones inherited from Khartoum.

Specific cases:
Distinct cases that may require ethnic solutions could be resolved in direct consultation with the affected community wishing to either have its own administration, be joined to another community of their choice or remain within the same community. There shall be developed standards and criteria that can qualify an ethnic community to have a state in the consideration of population, resources and security.

Proposal for federal states:
The sub-committee charged with the purpose for structure of federal states agreed that the colonial districts are the best that can be used to structure federal states as this was based on the nationalities or ethic structure which was wholly in some cases and partial on others given realities on the ground.

This arrangement would allow nationalities to develop their languages with no serious problems, easy understanding of themselves due to illiteracy, backwardness and suspicion.

In this manner much would be achieved in the long run when education changes the attitude of suspicion and backwardness thereby coming together and embracing larger communities for better understanding, achievement in development and love for greater improvement of life.

The committee then went down to discuss the terms of references: population, economy, cultural affiliation, geographical alignment, security consideration or any other dictating realities on the ground like ethnics integration settlement for instance.

The committee was able to arrive at the following results after heated debate and reasoning as thus:
List of States, Counties and Headquarters (H/Q):

E1 Imatong State:Torit +Ikotos+ Lafon+ Magwi; H/Q Torit
E2 Lomurnyang State: Kapoeta S. + Kapoeta North + Kapoeta East + Budi; H/Q Kapoeta
E3 Maridi State: Maridi + Mundri West+ Mundri East + Mvollo + Ibba; H/Q Maridi
E4 Gbudwe State: Anzara + Yambio + Ezo + Tumbura + Nagero; H/Q Yambio
E5 Jubek State: Juba +Terekeka; H/Q Juba
E6 Yei River State: Yei + Kajo-keji + Morobo + Lainya; H/Q Yei

B1 Wau State: Bagari + Jur River; H/Q Wau
B2 Aweil State: Aweil South + Aweil Center; H/Q Aweil
B3 Lol State: Aweil West + Aweil North + Raga; H/Q Raga
B4 Aweil East State: Aweil East; H/Q Wanyjok
B5 Kiir State: Twic + Abyei; H/Q MayenAbun
B6 Gogrial State: Gogrial East + Gogrial West; H/Q Kuacjok
B7 Tonj State: Tonj North + Tonj East+ Tonj South; H/Q Tonj
B8 Lakes State: Yirol East+ Yirol West+ Awerial; H/Q Yirol
B9 Rumbek State: Cueibet + Rumbek East + Rumbek North + Rumbek Center + Wulu; H/Q Rumbek

U1 Liech State: Rubokona + Guit + Leer + Mayendit + Panyijar + Koch + Mayom; H/Q Bentiu
U2 Ruweng State: Panrieng + Abiemnom; H/Q Abiemnom
U3 Eastern Nile State: Renk + Maban + Melut + Baliet + Akoka + Pigi; H/Q Malakal
U4 Western Nile State: Panyikang + Kodok + Manyo; H/Q Kodok
U5 Jonglei State: Bor+ Twic East +Duk; H/Q Bor
U6 Bieh State: Fanjak+Ayod+Akobo+ Nyirol+Uror ; H/Q Ayod
U7 Latjoor State: Nasir+ Ulang + Maiwut+ Longuchok; H/Q Nasir
U8 Boma State: Pibor+Pachalla+Buma; H/Q Pibor

All the borders of these new states shall be based on 1956 borders of the three provinces of Southern Sudan by then.

Capital City
1. Ramciel shall be the capital city of the Federal State.

2. Juba shall be the temporary seat of the Federal Government until relocation to Ramciel is determined.

3. The residents of Ramciel and Juba shall have full measure of self-government. Particulars shall be determined by law.

4. The Administrations of Ramciel and Juba shall be responsible to the Federal Government until relocation to new Capital of Ramciel is finalized.

5. Residents of Ramciel and Juba shall in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution, be represented in the National Legislative Assembly.

6. The special interests of Lakes State in Ramciel and Central Equatoria in Juba, regarding the provision of social services or the utilization of natural resources and other similar matters as well as joint Administrative matters arising from the location of Ramciel within Lakes State and Juba within Central Equatoria State, shall be respected. Particulars shall be determined by law.

*This is based on a thorough consultative study with various communities of South Sudan from September 2013 – June 2014.


People should be cautious in the ongoing rebellion in South Sudan

By Jacob K. Lupai, JUBA, JUL/07/2014, SSN;

The advice for people to be cautious in the ongoing rebellion in South Sudan is not a matter of taking sides. It is rather advisable for people to be objective and realistic in approaching issues that have been unfortunately seen contributing to the rebellion. The advice is especially to those who are enthusiastic about federalism.

Those people should not be carried away by the euphoria of federalism. Without a rebellion federalism was coming. Even the hardliners against federalism were softening up. Federalism was therefore gaining ground where it was at first shunned.

Equatorians will always stand up without fear for equality, justice and prosperity for all in South Sudan regardless of ethnic and regional diversities. This is in contrast to the highly pronounced nouns above as lip service since the signing of a comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) on 9 January 2005 that ended the North-South war that lasted 22 years. The lip service had its contributory share in the eruption of the violent conflict on 15 December 2013.

Equatorians and indeed peace loving South Sudanese are advised to take their normal position of high moral ground by not joining blindly the rebellion on the pretext of fighting for federalism. This advice will not make peace loving Equatorians cowards but their perspective of life follows their culture of respect and the love for peaceful co-existence.

People may not like to acknowledge it openly that Equatoria is the anchor. Without Equatoria there may hardly be a viable South Sudan. Equatoria should therefore help to resolve the conflict without taking sides in what seems to be an ethnically charged war for leadership of South Sudan. On ethnic dimensions of the conflict the South Sudan Human Rights Commission Interim Report on South Sudan Internal Conflict December 15, 2013 – March 15, 2014 seems to confirm this. One wouldn’t like to replace hegemony with another abhorrent one.

Federalism cannot be imposed by the use of force. A peaceful environment is needed to assess the viability and relevance of federalism to diversities in South Sudan. Besides war in Equatoria to impose federalism means the people of Equatoria will be killing themselves and dying for no good reason in a senseless war only for the benefit of others. This will be contrary to the perception of Equatoria as the most peaceful.

In addition, in the communiqué that followed the Equatoria Conference 2011, Equatoria asserts in clear terms that: “Mindful of the suffering of the people of Equatoria in the past decades, we will no longer accept Equatoria land to be used as a battle ground for any senseless bloodshed”.

Causes of ongoing conflict in South Sudan

The ongoing conflict did not just come out of the blue. There must have been something that triggered it. We may therefore need to be searching for clues that led to the start of the conflict.

For our search we may not need to go that far but to refer to the South Sudan Human Rights Commission Interim Report on South Sudan Internal Conflict December 15, 2013 – March 15, 2014. We may also need to refer to The Truth about the Aborted Coup of Dr. Riek Machar and his group of the 15th December 2013; documented by the Government of the Republic of South Sudan (7th January 2014). The two mentioned documents highlight the genesis of the ongoing conflict.

The problem seems to have started when Dr Riek Machar as the Vice President openly expressed his desire to challenge President Salva Kiir Mayardit for the leadership of the ruling party, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM). The response from President Salva Kiir Mayardit was to make a major cabinet reshuffle, aiming at dropping his Vice President, Dr Riek Machar.

The earlier campaign by Dr Riek Machar against President Salva Kiir Mayardit for the leadership of the SPLM and in addition to the cabinet reshuffle helped to precipitate the ongoing conflict. According to the Government own version, at around 5 pm on the 15th December 2013, a group of uniformed soldiers allied to the former Vice President Dr Riek Machar opened fire at Nyokuron Culture Centre where the SPLM National Liberation Council meeting was taking place.

On the surface the campaign against the leadership of President Salva Kiir Mayardit, the cabinet reshuffle that appeared to be aimed at the removal of the Vice President, Dr Riek Machar and the subsequent gun fire on the 15th December 2013 in Juba seem to have been the causes of the ongoing conflict. However, there seems to be a deep-seated dissatisfaction with service delivery and the style of leadership.

Unnecessary armed rebellion for federalism

The incident of December 15, 2013 in Juba has become a full blown armed rebellion led by Dr Riek Machar who is citing federalism as one of the reasons for the rebellion. Initially Dr Riek Machar claimed he escaped from Juba for his dear life. Soon thereafter he was the leader of a rebellion, mobilizing to march on Juba with the intention to usurp power by force of arms.

To halt the advance of Dr Riek Machar, Uganda intervened while the Intergovernmental Administration and Development (IGAD), the African Union and the UN sprang into action to stop the rebellion turning into something like a destructive wildfire.

The IGAD Communiqué of 25th Extra-Ordinary Summit of South Sudan in part: Urges the Parties to fully comply with and implement Cessation of Hostilities (COH) Agreement and its Implementation Modalities as well as show their political will and commitment to end the war, and take all necessary measures to encourage the Parties to abide by the Agreement; and Reminds the Parties to negotiate in good-faith guided by the spirit of give and take, tolerance and accommodation and respect the politics of zero-sum-game.

In part the IGAD Agreement to Resolve the Crisis in South Sudan Addis Ababa 9 May 2014, the Parties: Agree that a transitional government of national unity will offer the best chance for the people of South Sudan to take the country forward; and that such a government shall oversee government functions during a transitional period, implement critical reforms as negotiated through the peace process, oversee a permanent constitutional process, and guide the country to new elections; and thus direct our respective representatives to the IGAD-led peace process to negotiate the terms of a transitional government of national unity;

It can be seen that everything possible is being done to usher in an era of peace and stability in South Sudan. The ongoing armed rebellion is neither in the national interest, regional nor in international interest. The sooner the rebellion comes to an end the better for the country that is witnessing senseless loss of innocent lives and wanton destruction of rudimentary infrastructures and property.

In the context of South Sudan the armed rebellion is unnecessary because federalism is already gaining ground among those who were hostile. The armed rebellion is also unnecessary because there is always a peaceful means for regime change through the ballot box instead of senseless bloodshed and fueling of ethnic and regional polarisation.

Ending rebellion in the national interest

The IGAD and AU and the UN are all doing what they can to resolve the crisis in South Sudan. However, the SPLM-in-Opposition may be an obstacle because anything that does not guarantee a regime change may not be of interest to the SPLM-in-Opposition.

In the best national interest and to avoid South Sudan sliding down dangerously as a failed state, what is so special about being elected while elected governors are removed probably without second thought? The people of South Sudan must act in a peaceful manner on how to end the destructive rebellion.

The youth have a crucial role to play. The women, civil societies and the communities in South Sudan must prevail on the youth because they may be vulnerable. The rebellion is basically to effect regime change with no guarantee that there won’t be despotic leadership.

The youth of Equatoria may be especially vulnerable because of the crafting of federalism onto the rebellion agenda. The advice is that originally the rebellion had nothing to do with federalism. It is nothing but a clever way to attract support from Equatoria.

The youth are advised and reminded that the opponents of federalism are now becoming positive and are endorsing federalism as a system of government for South Sudan. Nevertheless, there is still a lot to be done by way of articulating clearly the type of federalism suitable for South Sudan. We need a consensus to move forward. A rebellion for federalism is therefore unnecessary.

In a public lecture on federalism in the history of South Sudan in the University of Juba, the discussants highlighted the relevance of federalism to South Sudan. One discussant used statistics to show the extent to which South Sudanese would prefer federalism to a unitary system. This suggests that South Sudan does not need a rebellion to impose federalism.

A peaceful adoption of federalism is ever possible. The youth are therefore advised that they should better get engaged in a debate on the merits of federalism instead of joining a rebellion with the mistaken belief that they are fighting a just war for federalism.

Without a rebellion federalism will find its way into the permanent constitution of South Sudan. There is no time limit to rebellion when the permanent constitution is silent about federalism.

Adoption of federalism solution to South Sudan problem

In a nutshell the problem of South Sudan can be identified as absolute poor service delivery to improve the quality of life of ordinary men and women in terms of equality, justice and prosperity. Some people argue that the priority now is peace and stability. However, before the rebellion was there no peace and stability, and how then wasn’t the problem addressed?

Arguably federalism is the solution to the problem because it will bring peace and stability. This is because those who claimed to have joined the rebellion for federalism would turn their back against the rebellion after realizing federalism was being adopted. The continuation of the rebellion may probably be for something else, for the leadership of South Sudan. However, the IGAD, AU and the UN are involved in the realization of an appropriate solution.

Conclusion

The public lecture on federalism in the history of South Sudan was presented by Professor Douglas H. Johnson, the author of the book, The Root Causes of Sudan’s Civil Wars. What specifically captured my attention was when Professor Douglas H. Johnson said, “Kokora is not Federalism”.

In my articles on federalism I have been arguing that federalism is not kokora but I have never been taken seriously. I have even been viciously attacked. Asked why people equate federalism with kokora one discussant answered that it was the fear of the unknown. I am now vindicated and those who were and are fearful of federalism as kokora should now relax and do not need to be full of anxiety.

The next step should be a debate on the type of federalism South Sudan should adopt. I reiterate that we have to build a consensus on the type of federalism suitable to the peculiarities of South Sudan with its ethnic, cultural and regional diversities in fostering national unity. Federalism is not now a taboo but an openly accepted system of governance for a diverse South Sudan.

In conclusion, the question now is not why to adopt a federal system but when should it be adopted and the sooner the better as a solution to volcanic tensions in South Sudan.

A call for federalism by Western Bahr-el Ghazel intellectuals in diaspora

BY: Peter Utermando, South Sudan, JUL/04/2014, SSN;

South Sudan as the world’s newest country had a great opportunity to embark on nation-building, institutional reforms and right decisions on the most suitable system of governance.

However, since 2005 the government has been taking the country on the wrong direction. Most importantly, lack of good government in the country led to questioning the effectiveness of Salva Kiir’s rule.

An overwhelming majority of South Sudanese voted in January 2011 referendum to secede and become Africa’s first new country since Eritrea split from Ethiopia in 1993.

Not long after the independence of the country on July 9th 2011, the young state plunged into several crises and the people of South Sudan have been disappointed.

The country’s post-independence period quickly witnessed the same coarse realities most African countries underwent before. Unfortunately, the country’s government grew a bad habit of ignoring to tackle critical problems during their infancy stages.

Federalism is an example to such ignorance issues currently occurring in the country. As a result, there are been increasingly a debate about the issues of implementation of the federal system in the Republic of South Sudan.

As a result of a serious economy set back, violation of human rights, tribalism, occupation of citizen’s land by the government elements, lack of rule of law and strong constitution in the country, now the majority of the population has been voicing for federalism system in the country.

First of all, federalism or Decentralization of the government is described as a system of government in which sovereignty of an independent country is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and states or provinces of the main territory.

Decentralization of the government is both implemented in developed and developing countries. The World is turning to devolution to improve the performance of their public sectors.

In the United States, for instance, the central government has turned back significant portion of federal authority to the states for a wide range of major programs, including welfare, Medical, legal services, housing, and job training.

The objectives of the federalized country are that state and local governments, being closer to their people, will be more responsive to particular preferences of their constituencies and are able more effectively to find better ways to provide services necessary to their communities.

Recently the three governors of Greater Equatoria, who stand with their people on federalism, a call being championed by the SPLA/M in opposition, are reportedly managing intense relations with the Juba’s regime.

This led to President Salva Kiir directly to criticize the people of Greater Equatoria on Monday June 30th 2014 and warned them to stop calling for federalism, a system of governance that is seen as a threat by Salva Kiir’s home region.

Why dictator Salva Kiir and his followers see the federalism as a threat? South Sudanese have been calling for the federal system since 1947 until now and never their voices for the federalism will be silent by any power on earth.

It is weird that the system of governance, which the whole world regards as a perfect system of ruling diverse country, such as South Sudan, the regime of Salva Kiir has different view, in which it opposes the system.

As a result of the debate about the federalism in the country, a meeting reportedly held on Thursday 26th June 2014 by president Salva Kiir and his recently appointed Chief of Staff, Gen. Malong Awan, has produced an extensive list, which contained the names of Equatorian generals and intellectuals, who would be closely monitored by the government agents in an attempt to silence federalism demands in the country, which led to ethnic cleansing against Equatorians as happened against Nuers in last December 2013 and in Wau city in December 2012 in which the government army shot in cold blood innocent protestors.

How on earth the government that supposes to protect its own citizen kill its people? Who will protect the people of South Sudan from Salva Kiir’s killing machines?

Even the media is not safe from Salva Kiir’s suppression. On Monday 30th June 2014 South Sudanese media protested a directive issued by security officials to desist from publishing information about recent proposals to establish a federal system of government. The intimidation to silence the call for the federalism will never work.

As a people of Western Bahr el Ghazal WBGS intellectuals in Diaspora, we elevate our voices against the attempt by Salva Kiir’s government to silence the call of federalism.

Further, we condemn with strongest words the killing of Equatorian brothers in Juba during last week. We stand united with our fellow citizens all across the country who embrace the federalism, to call for the implementation of the system in the country.

We call on Salva Kiir regime to respect the will of Southern Sudanese people and retreat from the aggressiveness that they are committing against our nation.

Federalism is a perfect model for the country with diverse population such as South Sudan. In Switzerland for instance, there are only four nationalities that lived in harmony when they established federalism system in their country.

In the South Sudan there are more than 62 different tribes with different culture, the federal system will perfectly fit the country, solve its ethnic problems, and help the country to be developed as other nations. END


How the rampant embezzlement can be wrestled: Open letter to Pres. Kiir

BY: Agok Takping, AUSTRALIA, JUN/29/2014, SSN;

Mr President, as you and the rebel leader Dr. Riek Machar recommitted yourselves to unfasten the current unfortunate carnage in our young nation by agreeing to form a transitional government in due course, South Sudanese are tightly holding their fingers crossed. Majority of South Sudanese are living under unimaginable conditions in their own country.

Hunger or famine, as has been widely speculated is looming large. Thousands of lives have been unnecessarily lost and three major towns in ruin. In short, the pain which South Sudanese are undergoing is arguably more severe than what we have experienced in our previous wars.

Notwithstanding the relief that would come with the final peace deal (if you our leaders keep your commitment), I have a feeling that South Sudanese’s dignity will not be restored anytime soon. Our image has been tainted in the global arena, Mr president, we are a laughing species of Africa.

In fact The Fragile States Index 2014 released this June by FFP placed South Sudan on top of the list before Somalia. Who would have thought that we would be worse than Somalia after just two years of independence?

Mr. President, as much as I believe the history of the attempted coup by Riek Machar in December 2013 which brought the current mayhem, we are not the only country at war with ourselves. Syria has been at war for the last three years, Libya too had been at war with itself, and nevertheless, they are not even on the top ten of the Fragile States Index 2014.

In the eyes of outsiders, Mr President, no single institution in your government is or has been functioning accordingly. The world see your government as a joke, Mr President, all the ministries have wasted and embezzled staggering sum of money in the last nine years of your tenure.

Corruption is a weapon that undermines the credibility of public institutions. It attacks the morality of justice and damages society. This is where the unwanted ranking come from Mr President. We need to get our act together to clean our dirty image.

Some of the readers of this letter may argue that poor management of national resources is synonymous to Africa (i.e. not just South Sudanese problem). It is true that corruption throughout Africa and indeed in other parts of the world is widespread, however, the grand scale of corruption in our country is in my opinion second to none.

In fact it is a slow pace robbery of national resources by those entrusted to manage them. There are many forms of corruption, however, the focus here is on embezzlement.

In fairness nevertheless, our politicians are not the only one with meandering of uprightness. It is a known fact that corrupt politicians all over the world are opponent of the truth; their virtues and ethics are scarce.

However, Mr President, what is setting apart the degree of corruption in South Sudan from the rest of the world is the extreme lack of control and monitoring mechanisms. It is this dire deficiency of controlling measures that made every sub-tribe want to have one of their son/daughter to be a minister.

In other countries, a minister is someone who the president see fit to make departmental decisions and implement them on behalf of the president; in other word, a minister does too little to represent his/her constituency in the parliament where legislations are made, instead a minister become a national leader who must represent the whole country.

Mr President, the reason why every sub-tribe outrageously goes ballistic when one of their beloved son/daughter misses out in the appointment for the ministerial position during reshuffling, or when their son/daughter is removed from the ministerial position is because they see ministerial position as a house for money laundering and embezzlement that everyone should have a slice of.

Mr President, you would agree with me that the reason why we only have tarmac roads inside some parts of Juba and not a single modern freeway built in the country is not because South Sudan from 2005 to present doesn’t have enough money;

Mr president, the reason we don’t have clean running water in the whole of Juba let alone all other major towns across the country is not because South Sudan doesn’t have enough money;

Mr President, the reason why no single modern hospital is built in Juba or any other major town across the country is not because South Sudan cannot afford to build a modern hospital;

Mr President, the reason why the outdated Russian made bomber (Antonov) in the hands of SAF is still a threat and continue to fly at will in the skies of South Sudan is not because South Sudan cannot afford to buy basic and old defence system that can easily take Antonov down and assured the citizens that they are safe from the sky;

Mr President, the reason why the deafening portable generators are still polluting the air with noise in Juba is not because South Sudan cannot afford to build temporary power station or buy four or three large generators which can be stationed outside the town and can still provide the city with limited power (electricity in mornings and evenings till midnight);

Mr President, the reason why thousands of children are still learning under trees is not because South Sudan cannot afford to provide ninety percent children with classrooms.

The list is long Mr President but you get the idea, the idea is that your government need to put in place some measures to reduce the rampant embezzlement of public money which has been continuing undeterred for many years.

Mr President, your anti-corruption body is toothless and ineffective. It is true that without effective law enforcement which is essential to corroborate anti-corruption efforts, the anti-corruption body can be a mere veil.

What your government should have done Mr President is to give more powers and autonomy to law enforcement agencies which should be part of anti-corruption teams to detect and punish any public or government official, along with any public servant who violates corruption laws.

Mr President, everyone in South Sudan knows and appreciate your outstanding contribution to the liberation of the South Sudanese people from the rogue Islamic regimes in Khartoum. Many of us who grew up during the war have unquestionable loyalty to you because of your unwavering services to the people of South Sudan.

However, as is often the case with human beings Mr President, people tend to remember a person’s shortcomings more than his/her outstanding achievements. Mr President, the inability of your government to yet hold a single public servant accountable for the despicable and shameful continuous embezzlements of public monies is potentially destroying your revered legacy.

Mr President, any ordinary person on the street today would tell you that in the court of law, one party must be guilty and the other acquitted. However, the missing $30millions: scandal between Arthur Akuin Chol and Pagan Amum defies that logic of ordinary concept Mr President.

If the two gentlemen are innocent, I guess we can conclude that an alien has made a surprise appearance in South Sudan and taken the money with it, there is no any other way Mr President to explain where that huge sum of money has gone. Anyhow, let us not dwell on this extensively.

Mr President, to preclude similar scenarios like the infamous Dura saga where 6 billion South Sudanese Pounds (SSP) was embezzled, it is imperative that your government enact procurement law.

Mr President, your government need to establish an independent PROCUREMENT agency to deal with all purchases. Mr President, I know that building 21th century roads, providing citizens with adequate electricity, building modern hospitals and equip them with well-trained doctors, providing citizens with clean water, and building grain stores across the country to fight hunger, are some of your priorities.

Mr President, your ability to deliver services to help achieve these outcomes depends, to varying degrees, on the effective procurement of goods and services. Effective procurement not only means getting the best value out of the money that the public has entrusted to your government, but also behaving ethically at all times and being accountable for processes and outcomes.

Procurement simply means: establishing what the project needs, locate the suppliers, obtain the quotes and compare them, evaluate the suppliers, enter negotiations with few selected suppliers, award the contract to a supplier that meet the desired price and the desired time frame for the completion of the project or delivery of goods, and finally pay the supplier.

I previously made a comment in the editorial article on southsudannation.com that “South Sudan is the only country on earth where a minister can award the contract to the supplier without first verifying whether or not the supplier actually does have a business which the contract is based upon”.

The alleged mischievous transfer of $7,959,400 to Daffy Investment Group (ST) by Deng Alor Kuol in 2013 perfectly depicted that. As things stand, after probing by the investigative committee that your government set up, it turned out that Daffy Investment Group is fictional, it never existed Mr. President.

Additionally, as stated by Abraham Awolich from The Sudd Institute, in the Dura saga probe “The World Bank found that 290 companies were paid without signing any contracts with the government and 151 companies were overpaid”.

If we critically evaluate all these so called companies Mr President, we would surely find out that the majority of them don’t exist. They are ghost entities. Astonishingly still, no single individual has been held accountable

To impede such behaviours from surfacing in the future, your government need to act speedily to enact procurement law and establish the procurement board. Mr President, nothing come cheap in this age of ours, if you intend to get competent person who can do the job on your behalf, they need to be fully compensated.

Mr President, an independent procurement board need a CEO with expertise in the area of procurement, he/she doesn’t have to be South Sudanese. We need help Mr President, thus it is advisable to recruit the CEO for the procurement agency from anywhere in the world.

We need a knowledgeable individual who will be able to help create certain rules and responsibilities, and make sure that all ministers understand them.

In conclusion, it would be naïve to think that better procurement processes alone will reduce corruption. Mr President, It takes prosecution of corrupt officials for reforming to take root, I know finding judges who are willing to convict these criminals is ridiculously onerous. This is because lawyers are themselves corrupt or fear retributions.

However, without trying and convicting corruptors, the embezzlement of public money will continue.
End.

Disclaimer: views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author. Agok Takpiny is a concerned South Sudanese in Melbourne Australia. He can be reached on agoktakpiny@ymail.com


No community is the enemy to other community, a wrong choice of words by enemies of peace

BY: John Adoor Deng, Australia, JUN/27/2014, SSN;

The choices of words continue to add insults into the already worsen situation in South Sudan. All we hear daily are people saying that, Dinka is a bad community, Nuer community is bad, Murle community is worse and even generalise that Equatorian (combination of multiple groups) communities are obnoxious just to name a few. However, not only did these culprits stop from there, they mouthed that Dinka community is the enemy to Nuer community, Murle community is the enemy to Dinka, and so are Equatorian and Shilluk communities enemies to both Dinka, Nuer and Murle and vis-versa and the list is endless.

Thus, a foreigner who is fed with this vague information could realistically see no sense of cohesion and hope of a united country. Some of the badly fed foreigners go to their countries to project bad image of our country. Of course, this piece is here to demystify such fallacious.

Day and night I argue that no community is the enemy to other community, and there is no such thing as absolute community collective enmity towards other groups.

Indeed, I do not disbelieve that there are conflicts that in some cases partially involve the above communities, either in the forms of cattle raiding, child abduction or recently politically motivated conflicts.

However, the correct definitions of such conflicts are intrinsic motivation of individuals wanting to achieve certain ambitions or goals. Arguably, these communities to some extent are collided by few elements that waged assaults to achieve not community collective goals but their individual interests.

For example, the cattle raiding initiatives are concocted by young people outside their communities’ conventions, in other words, community opinion leaders do not play a part in such acts. The chief in Murle, for example, deal with cases of his chiefdom, priests in murle deal with his evangelistic ministries and both have nothing to do with cattle raiding if the case of cattle raiding was launched by elements of murle youths.

In politics, some actors used the communities as their shield and cover to achieve their goals. In recent conflicts, there was no need to massacre innocent civilians in Juba who’ve nothing to do with Riek Machar or the detainees.

Also, the massacre in Bortown was baseless as those civilians killed in Bor had nothing to do with Kiir Mayardit and his inner circles in specific terms. These elements who killed civilians on both sides of the conflicts have this fallacy in mind that, “they are Nuer, and we are dinka, we must kill them, they are dinka, and we are Nuer we must kill them.”

All these acts were done outside of communities’ conventions. Apparently, the Dinka community and Nuer community continue to work together socially; they intermarry each month despite these conflicts. In Juba and Australia and elsewhere marriages between Dinka, Nuer, Murle and Equatorian are taking place. No community is the enemy to any community, and the choice of words must change in order to delimit the context of the conflict.

We cannot afford to be referred to as enemies to one another. We are naturally placed on one piece of land religiously, conditioned to work together as brothers and sisters inhabiting this proudest land of Cush, South Sudan. The word choice of words and the demonic generalisation of conflict must be got rid of from those brothers and sisters who only, unfortunately, found comfort in talking, inciting conflicts between our blessed communities.

The Author is John Adoor Deng, BA, BTH, MPRL, MPPP(current) and director of South Sudan Support Foundation. He is reachable by emailing: johnadoordeng@yahoo.com.au


Foundation of South Sudan is premised on Social Contract not Master-servant relation

By: Daniel Juol Nhomngek, KAMPALA, UGANDA, JUN/24/2014, SSN;

This article intends to explain the foundation of South Sudanese nation and the relation of the people of South Sudan and their government. It will also explain why the government of South Sudan has misunderstood this relationship because instead of treating it as a social contract, it treats it as a master-servant relation, hence changing the Transitional Constitution provisions which clearly state that the relationship on covenant is not that of master-servant relationship but contractual in nature.

It will in addition explain the concept of African family and its advantages to her members and how this concept is the basis of the foundation South Sudanese Transitional Constitution and this can help solve the present poverty crisis in the country if adopted, which can further help to reduce social tension that has been the cause of the numerous wars fought in Sudan and current conflict in South Sudan.

Without wasting time, it is imperative to begin with the famous statement of Dr. John Garang when he was addressing Sudanese community in the United States on what constituted the fundamental problem of Sudan. In that speech, he pointed out that an attempt by various Khartoum based regimes to build a monolithic Arab state constitutes the fundamental problem of Sudan.

In the same way, an attempt by SPLM leadership since 2005 to change the foundation of South Sudan from contractual relation to master-servant relation constitutes the fundamental problem of South Sudan.

The foundation of South Sudan is provided for under the Transitional Constitution of 2011. In Article 9 (1) on the Bill of Rights of all South Sudanese, it is provided that the relationship that exists between the people of South Sudan and their government exists as a matter of covenant.

In plain English and according to the Bible, a covenant means a formal agreement or a contract between the parties. . In Genesis 12 in the Holy Bible for instance, Abraham, the father of the modern Jewish people or Israel, is said to have made a covenant with God.

In that covenant, God took undertook initiative to promise Abraham a lasting, peace, protection and numerous children. God indeed made a promise to Abraham of as many children as stars in the sky at night and as many as sand at the sea. As soon as God made that promise to Abraham, He went into pact with Abraham when Abraham made a sacrifice of five animals. From that time Abraham became a true friend of God and God remained loyal to that agreement indefinitely despite the fact that God had power to violate it at will.

If I can ask this general question: why did God decide to remain loyal to the contract he made with Abraham although He had power to violate it at will? It is important to note that because God is a God of truth, justice, law and order he has to do what He initiated to human being according to the principle of general contract.

God knew that as a matter of justice and protection of the rule of law, He had to be committed to following and performing His part of the agreement in good faith and Abraham had no option but to do the same.

It should be observed that the contract or covenant between God and Abraham was being performed in accordance with the general principle of the rule of law of contract, which provides that as soon as parties have entered the valid contract, such a contract is binding and must be carried out and performed in good faith.

This is because if God or Abraham violated the terms of that contract the rule of law governing business would have been destroyed. Therefore, God and Abraham have to be committed to performing the contract in order to save the rule of law implied in the covenant.

The rationale behind strict adherence to the contractual terms of any contract or covenant is that once a person has promised to do a certain work and the other party has incurred detriment due to that promise, that person who misled the one who has suffered detriment must be forced to perform his or her part. This is because the rule of law does not allow a person to back down from his or her promises since it will destroy the rule of law itself.

Preservation of the rule of rule makes covenant binding on the parties who made that particular power although they are unequal in strength. This is why even the most powerful nation like the USA goes into contract with a weaker country like South Sudan; the USA must follow what the international law dictates it to do.

In the same way, the contract is performed based on the same principle of the rule of law no matter how powerful one party is, which underscores why God has to perform His part of the contract in Biblical or Abrahamic time.

As put above, the foundation of South Sudan as a country and the relationship that exists between South Sudanese themselves and their God is premised on covenant. The rule of law that follows from that contractual relationship by the virtue of Article 9 of the Transitional Constitution imposes a binding duty on South Sudanese authorities and citizens of South Sudan to perform part of their social contract established therein in good faith.

The problems prevalent in South Sudan today are due to the violation of the terms of the covenant provided for under Article 9 of the Transitional Constitution. Article 9 of the Transitional Constitution establishes the agreement that gave birth to South Sudan as a nation. The agreement was in form of covenant. The terms of that covenant were that the covenant was made between people of South Sudan on one hand and their government on the other hand and at every level.

In addition, the agreement stipulated that the people of South Sudan were to co-exist together based on equality before and under the law. Existing in equality in this context means respecting each other‘s culture, religion, customs or values, resources, which further means sharing the national resources equally. Equal sharing of resources means that people should love each other or tolerate each other if love is too heavy to carry.

In order to ensure that the terms of that covenant are obeyed and strictly adhered to by every South Sudanese, the citizens went ahead to elect a certain group of people with contract who they consider to be neutral in order to be in charge of the country. This was to ensure that contract between them is followed by every member to it or forced by that group selected to force them to abide by the terms of contract.

The group selected as stated in the foregoing paragraph constitutes the government of South Sudan, which was supposed to act as a trustee and hold all the resources of the people of South Sudan in trust for them. Trustee in plain English language means someone who is entrusted with people’s property on certain terms and condition.

In the definition given in Chambers-EAEP English Student Learners ‘Dictionary new edition, a trustee is someone who looks after and controls someone else’s money or property in a legal agreement. As seen from the definition of trustee in that Dictionary, South Sudanese authorities were entrusted to hold all natural resources in trust for the people of South Sudan, which means that the leaders are prohibited from using national resources to build personal empire and wealth.

However, South Sudanese leaders dishonestly breached the terms of the agreement as provided for in the Constitution and instead ran a country like person assets which further threw the country into massive corruption and ordinary citizens became extremely poor coupled with disappointment that has become part of their lives.

The government in addition as provided for in the covenant was to hold in trust for the people and protect natural resources such as lakes, rivers, wetlands, forests, games, national parks, minerals and all land on behalf of the people. The term of that trust involve the authorization of the government to use of force where necessary.

In fact South Sudanese know very well the concept of the government. The authorization of South Sudanese authorities to use force is based on the concept of the government. The government is ordinarily understood to mean the legitimate use of force. Therefore, South Sudanese trusted the government to use force legitimately where some members to this social contract disobeyed it terms.

However, to ensure that their interest is not jeopardized by the extensive use of force in case the government forgot to follow the terms provided in the social contract, South Sudanese limited the government in other way. They forced the government to promise them that it would respect their rights and freedoms.

Rights and freedoms of people as a matter of general human rights law limit excessive use of force but only allow the reasonable use of force. As a result of that agreement, the government once again promised them to respect and promote their human rights and fundamental freedoms enshrined in the Transitional Constitution.

The Transitional Constitution in Article 9 provides that the government must protect, respect and fulfil human rights and freedoms, which is the cornerstone of social justice, equality and democracy. The Transitional Constitution is alive to the important of social justice because social justice deals with the economic well-being of South Sudanese. In addition, it deals with the distribution of benefits and burdens throughout society.

Moreover, on the individual level, social justice demands a proportionate share of the benefits of economic endeavor of social partners, that is, social justice demands proportionate distribution of the fruits of people’s labour so that no one is cheated in any manner. Furthermore, on the national level, every group demands a proportionate and equitable share of the nation’s wealth among various groups, which implies that the demands by minority groups should not be neglected.

In relation to the above, the concept of social justice in South Sudan provides that the rights and freedoms of individuals and groups enshrined in the Bill of rights has to be respected, upheld and promoted by all organs and agencies of Government and by all persons.

When it comes to the international level, social justice demands that the relationship between nations be guided by mutual respect of every nation. It imposes an obligation on developed nations of the world so that every nation will enjoy fruits of earth, and so, fully live as human beings.

As it can be understood from the discussion in the foregoing paragraphs, social justice in other words, means treating people equally and ensures that they are able to access resources on equal footing. It is upon such ground the concept of social justice can be well understood when explained in the concept of and the role of family in South Sudan as a country.

The concept of social contract as provided for in South Sudanese Transitional Constitution is founded in the concept of social justice and family. The Transitional Constitution in other words is founded on African concept of family. The African concept of family is in turn founded on “ubuntu” notion. “Ubuntu” notion provides that all people are equal and belongs to the same family. This means that African concept of the family is founded on the notion that all members of the family are equal in rights and in dignity.

As African Scholar and Philosopher, John Mbiti, correctly observed “I am because you are and since you are therefore I am.” This saying underscores what constitutes healthy family in Africa. A typical or healthy family in Africa is that unit of people which accommodates all people related by descent and common ancestor. Hence, a typical African family takes care of its members; besides, providing a room for foreigners who have sought refuge within its premises and under its shade.

In general, African family system is founded by its members due to the advantages that accrue to them, in terms of social assistance and social justice. These advantages are clearly summarized by Journal of Social Development in Africa Vol. 17 no 2 July 2002. African Community according to that Journal is where the group or family serves only their members; it is a kinship-based solidarity.

For instance as that Journal further provides, groups serve the extended family and village residents’ by extending mutual assistance to its members, which are compulsory for all adults in the villages as a matter of moral responsibility. Moral responsibility created solidarity and an obligation to care for family members and relatives in times of need.

In relation to the above concept of African family as explained by Journal and African Philosopher, John Mbiti, the country call South Sudan constitutes African family and South Sudanese government as a head of this big family has a duty both under the national and the international law to ensure that all human rights and freedoms enshrined in the Transitional Constitution are respected, promoted and fulfil.

Under the international law, the principal obligation of South Sudan is to take steps to achieve progressively the full realization of the rights of all South Sudanese in all areas. This imposes an obligation to move as expeditiously as possible towards that goal.

South Sudan as a State is obliged to ensure for everyone under its jurisdiction access to the minimum essential needs which are sufficient to ensure that all South Sudanese are free from poverty. As seen in the foregoing discussions, South Sudan is just a trustee who is supposed to hold all national resources in trust for the people and to ensure that their distribution is determined by principles of social justice.

Principles of social justice that determine the distribution of national resources are: equal access to opportunities and rights; fair system of law and due process; ability to take up opportunities and exercise rights; protection of vulnerable and disadvantaged people. These principles of social justice ensure that all people in the country are treated as equal members of family as an African concept of family previously explain entails.

It further implies that the possibility of throwing the country into the crisis of social classes is minimized through equal distribution of resources, which in turn results into improvement in the welfare of all citizens of South Sudan.

Unfortunately, as things now are, it is in apparent that social classes have already been developed under the disguise of tribalism. It is tricky. It is very tricky because tribalism covers underlying social structures of the South Sudanese communities. There is an existing social class system beneath and within South Sudanese communities but tribalism effectively covers its appearance.

South Sudan has developed social classes already and there is a caste system that exists in persons of women although many people who lack clear analysis keep on blaming tribalism whenever there is a problem triggered by marginalization at any level within the government and the society at large.

To explain the point made above, many citizens lack clear analysis of the social relationship which currently exists in South Sudan and often make premature conclusion by saying that problems of South Sudan affecting them in all areas are as a result of tribalism. To them, tribalism creates nepotism in the system of government, which excludes non-relatives of the one in the government from accessing employment and other opportunities.

Of course, such an argument is held by many and almost all believe to the source of the problems of South Sudan. Such an argument however in my view does not hold water in relation to the problems occurring presently in South Sudan. It does not hold water for some reasons.

One of such reasons is that the system also affects the members of the same people who are accused of tribalism, and for instance, if the problems of South Sudan were due to tribalism, all Dinka people would have been contented with the government simply because their man is the president of South Sudan which is not the case.

For instance, some Dinkas are not happy with the government of Kiir as seen in the recent defection of some prominent Dinka politicians who have recently rebelled against the SPLM government. The same is true with Nuers who are divided for and against rebellion, which they were supposed to have joined since it is a Nuer spearheaded rebellion.

From the above analysis, it is therefore logical to argue that if the problems of South Sudan were all about tribes, all Dinkas would have joined army to defend Kiir’s government or all Nuers would have joined Riek to fight for Nuers’ victory, but Equotarians would have not joined either side. This argument knocks out the notion of tribalism in South Sudanese problems.

As the explanation above illustrated, problems of South Sudan have nothing to do with tribes but they are as a result of an attempt by SPLM leaders to build personal wealth and empire and in the process end up creating social classes through patronage system. Therefore, what is being experienced in South Sudan today in form of conflict is the knock on effect of social classes struggle.

Nevertheless, this argument should not be taken out of context, no one disputes the contribution tribes and tribalism have in the problems of South Sudan but their contribution should rather be treated as one of the facilitating factors along poverty and illiteracy.

Back to the point, as leaders build personal empire and wealth, there is a creation of social classes since the building of wealth involves marginalizing of vulnerable. The same marginalization occurs within the SPLM leadership since leadership is understood as a major source of wealth by all South Sudanese.

The rationale is that the more one is at the top of leadership, the richer one becomes and this explains the fact that within nine years of the establishing of the government of South Sudan there are already billionaire. The question is where did those rebel leaders get such huge amount of dollars? Hence, making leadership a disputed area of interest to all and this brings in tribes and tribalism since they can facilitate one’s easy access top leadership and power.

This is why after quarreling in the struggle to go to the top of leadership but failed, some of the SPLM leaders appeal to the tribe-mates to help them fight their way to power. Hence, exploiting tribes and effect of tribes; tribalism to their advantages. At this point the tribalism becomes apparent to every person and they conclude that the problems of South Sudan are tribalism; such a statement is superfluous and erroneous.

The argument of this article as explained above is that problems of South Sudan are not due to tribes and tribalism. Instead they are due to cause and effect of social classes created in the process of building person wealth of leaders.

Social classes in South Sudan have their basis in the way war scattered people. It has to be noted that during the war many South Sudanese were scattered to different parts of the world while others remained in South Sudan throughout the liberation struggle. Those who remained in South Sudan are the SPLM/A and some people who had never gone to town.

One interesting thing that emerged about the liberation struggle of South Sudan is that although all South Sudanese were united against north in whatever capacity and wherever the war caught them or scattered them to, including those who were in Khartoum; in fact, those who were in Khartoum suffered the most because they braved Khartoum government through supporting its enemies.

Nevertheless, when the peace agreement was signed in 2005, the SPLM government started discriminating the other group of the people who were not in the liberated areas. SPLM members began categorizing some South Sudanese who were not in the war zone as not true liberators.

To effectively discriminate and marginalize the groups who were not within war zones, the SPLM/A employed a phrase which I do not know any equivalent phrase in English. The phrase in Dinka is “ee Piny ci Ok Kooth Guor thin.” In general, it means “a war of liberation in which we have suffered.”

The irony is that all South Sudanese including unborn whether within South Sudan or outside had suffered during the war and were also committed members of the SPLM/A. This is illustrated by the fact that South Sudanese owned liberation in their souls and minds.

In fact, this assertion is proved by the fact that sometimes during the war when things became difficult like in 1990s, the SPLM leaders could leave forests or bushes to either go to Australia, Canada, the USA, the UK or to many other countries where South Sudanese were.

They went there in disguise of educating people on the progress of liberation war but in actual sense, they were going to get assistance from those innocent South Sudanese who later became victims of social classes created by the greed of SPLM leaders.

In other words, there were times during the war SPLM leaders and their children could heavily rely on the people from Diaspora for their survival. But after peace agreement, the same SPLM leaders marginalized the people in Diaspora by developing a phrase like the one that has just been explained above.

Another observation which has to be made about the application of phrase explained above and which explains the fact that SPLM leaders are building social classes is that the phrase is applied selectively. It is not applied to the children of the leaders although they were also outside South Sudan as well, which means that it is only intended to exclude other members of South Sudanese not related to leadership either by tribe or in any other way, which beneficial to them.

As I discovered later, the phrase was employed by SPLM/A members to marginalize citizens from sharing in the fruits of their liberation struggle hence it was used as a tool of oppression and a form of social injustice that exists in South Sudan; the phrase is one of the tools for creating social classes.

The SPLM leadership has been consciously creating social classes as a way of entrenching itself in power which made it a group, which with time became a dominant group and also a group which controls resources of the country. Hence, the struggle for and against social classes began at this point and tribalism although it is not a cause for struggle becomes a facilitating factor in causing tension in the struggle for domination.

One funny thing to note about the role of tribalism is that the members of the SPLM hate tribalism when it is disfavoring them politically but use it for their advantage when they deem it necessary hence manipulating South Sudanese to their advantages.

For example, if I can remember very well what Dr. Riek told youth sometime back? In some years back he abused students from East Africa to the point of calling them political novice who should be taught how to play politics. To Riek, like any politicians in South Sudan, he expected students to be submissive, snobbish, miscreant and sheepish to him.

The youth of the above characters are the one South Sudanese politicians want. All politicians of South Sudan expected youth who wash their feet and praise them continuously even in the face of abuses of their rights, which has become a custom in South Sudan that youth should not attack politicians. This is a failure to distinguish the law from morality.

Human rights is a matter of law and every holder of that rights is supposed to protect his or her rights by coming out openly to protest and to attack the violator of his or her rights while morality is not binding but exists in villages where youth are expected to respect elders.

However, it should be observed that traditionally elders were respected because of the good work they do and also because they cared for the youth, which explains the rationale behind giving youth the fattest parts of animals in cattle camp.

The youth were given fatty parts of meat because they were considered to be assets for the society and in case when there was a danger, they would defend the community. However, most of the elders in South Sudanese government have marginalized youth and at the same time expect youth to respect them, which is wrong and unfounded respect.

It is another way of weakening youth. The respect for elders is being used in South Sudan as a means of silencing the youth yet there is fragrant violation of their human rights which is unacceptable. The youth must teach politicians how to govern the country.

Coming to the point, the reason why Dr. Riek behaved as explained above at that time was because he saw youth to be a threat to his political dominance. He therefore attacked them as a tool of destroying such unity and weakens them. This is proved by the fact that when he saw that his dominance and struggle to achieve it was threatened within the SPLM membership, he has now turned shamelessly to the same East African students he first attacked of not knowing politics.

Riek, who knows the weaknesses created by tribes and tribalism in unity of South Sudanese managed to manipulate tribe and tribalistic feelings to recruit students to go and fight on his behalf as it has been reported sometime back after the conflict had broken out. The war of Riek has nothing to do with the liberation of South Sudan from dictatorship but it is a trial to achieve what he has not achieve through peaceful means within the party; the SPLM leadership.

Therefore, tribalism becomes handy in fighting against marginalization within dominant group by its members against their marginalization within SPLM. The effect of tribalism becomes apparent since most of the people do not deeply to dig out what beneath things. Most of the people take effect for cause. This is why tribalism is the problem of South Sudan to them.

Nevertheless, tribalism is the effect of underlying factors that are not apparent to most of the ordinary people and to less critical mind. To them, what they see is tribalism without asking of motivational factors underlying tribalism itself. Such underlying factors are sometime termed as “Order of Thing” by some philosophers and any person interested in finding solution to the problems must always study the underlying factors or the root causes of the problems.

Michel Foucault in his Book entitled The Order of Things explains the underlying factors as: “Order is, at one and the same time, that which is given in things as their inner law, the hidden network that determines the way they confront one another, and also that which no existence except in the grid has created by a glance, an examination, a language; and it is only in the blank spaces of this grid that order manifests itself as depth as though already there, waiting in silence for the moment of its expression.”

As explained by Foucault in the above extract, the existence of things on earth including human beings is determined by underlying and inner law that cannot be easily noticed by anybody but only critical thinkers. Failure to understand underlying factors causing a given social problem will make that problem continues without ending and people will become helpless since they are not able to get a suitable solution to that particular social problem.

Therefore, the best way to solve any problem is to approach the issue in two ways. The first way is to stop the problem and the second way is to study the cause of the problems. The first way is to stop the problem from escalating and then the next step to find out the root causes of the problems in order to get correct solution to the problems. Failure to follow these two ways will make problems stay permanently or even expand.

Coming to the problems of South Sudan, its problems has nothing to do with tribes and tribalism although it cannot be disputed fact that tribes and tribalism play a role in fueling the crisis.

Tribes are only a facilitating factor as witnessed in South Sudanese war on 15 December 2013. That war did not start as a tribal war, but, started as a political struggle for power within the SPLM party.

However, due to the illiteracy and ignorance, some citizens supported such useless war that had no basis all to make it just but only intended for political domination among SPLM party members.

The political struggle though became a devastating conflict, started way back in 1990s, whose root-causes and human rights abuses committed as a result of that conflict remained unaddressed, which remains as a source of tension within South Sudan. The underlying problems of South Sudan were supposed to address after peace agreement.

However, after the establishment of South Sudan government in 2005, the SPLM leaders did nothing to address the underlying causes of the previous conflicts but instead opted to conspire against all South Sudanese citizens by marginalizing them from equitable sharing of the national resources.

The SPLM/A leaders started using national resources that were supposed to be in the improvement of people’s welfare by living extravagant and lavish lives. This is indicated by fact that although they are poor they live like billionaires buying most expensive cars in the world. South Sudan becomes a hotpot markets for Hammers and other celebrities’ cars which leaders are not supposed to buy. For instance, every house of SPLM leader has big cars even Obama cannot afford. This was mixing pride with poverty.

As a result, they misappropriated national resources through buying houses abroad, expansive cars, sending their children to expensive universities and building their own big houses in the states where they come from. While citizens are dying of hunger and some preventable diseases that can easily be dealt with the patriotic government.

Many leaders in SPLM government do not care for the welfare of the citizens of South Sudan. In summary, they are not patriotic. For instance while all other citizens of South Sudan are left in poverty and underdeveloped, they are developing themselves and their children with the false hope that their children will continue with their dynasty.

The above statement support the fact that the SPLM government disenfranchised citizens of South Sudan by not allowing them to have enough access to resources, the leaders begin to personalize education although education is a human right, and since it is a human right, the government has a duty to make sure that it is realized by all South Sudanese.

The purpose the authorities marginalize all citizens from national resources is aimed at leaving citizens ignorance with an attempt to constructing personal empire with unbridled wealth. Hence, social classes became apparent. The discrimination that exists in South Sudan in general indicates the existence of social classes.

Social classes are already constructed by the leaders as witnessed in the direct development of some concepts such as social capital, which means allocation of resources according to membership of their associates; social network, which means allocating resources according to interdependence and benefits, patrimonialism, which means centering government on family; this is where the government officials employed their relatives from the top to the bottom of the office hence leaving non-relatives out.

In addition, there is also an existent of patronage. The evidence of patronage in South Sudan is shown since resources are allocated according to the mutual benefits, which means that someone who cannot produce any benefit to the leaders cannot be supported.

All the above concepts exist in South Sudan and are seen in operation as they determine the allocation of resources to the public and the wrong allocation of resources created by above concepts stir up opposition against the government.

As explained above, the problem of South Sudan is not tribe but the failure of the authorities to run the government according to the principles of its foundation. The foundation of South Sudan as discussed in the opening paragraphs of this article is premised on social contract not on masters and servants relations as authorities are trying to establish in South Sudan.
This is because the authorities are struggling to build the society on master-servant relations hence neglecting the principles of social justice that are entrenched in the Transitional Constitution of 2011. The social contract in South Sudan is premised upon the foundation for a united, peaceful and prosperous society based on justice, equality, respect for human rights and the rule of law.

However, the authorities, as a matter of practice, have effectively neglected the rule of law. This is because they do not want the equality of citizens as their intention is to build their personal resources hence by implication building social classes in the country. They know that where the rule of law does not exist the citizens are vulnerable since they are not able to speak out against mismanagement of resources.

The authorities have created a lot of poverty even those who were not poor initially because they did have agent to educate citizens on how to earn a living. They have done this by creating a dependent nation, yet the reason why some of them got involved in the struggle was due to wide, yawning gap between rich and poor, and the refusal of government of Sudan to acknowledge and try to fix the existence inequalities between north and the South.

However, when they managed unthinkable, they now again reversed their original principles on whose war was fought and became worse than Arabs themselves. However, this statement should not be taken as if I am regretting for getting independence the point I am making her is that authorities must learn how to govern the country. They must understand that there is a need for the rule of law in South Sudan because failure to enforce the rule of law is dangerous and has many implications.

What the authorities have not understood is that as long as the rule of law does not exist or where it is neglected, the implication is that the problems of South Sudan will never end. Any country which seeks for prosperity must take the issue of social justice because the violation of social justice has the cause of revolution in history and the disintegration of many countries.

The only way to end the problems prevailing in South Sudan is for the authorities to get committed to promoting rule of law, which means that the authorities must respect human rights of every South Sudanese citizens, irrespective of their tribes.

Otherwise, if South Sudanese leaders continue to build personal wealth and empire at the expenses of the citizens and continue creating social classes, there is likelihood a risk for the country sliding into deeper crises and eventual collapse than what it is now.

The author is a lawyer from Makerere University and he can be reached through the following contacts: juoldaniel@yahoo.com; +256783579256

Bagari and Bazia Atrocities in Western Bahr-el-Ghazel

Breaking News, JUN/21/2014, SSN;

(From Eyewitnesses in Wau) Once again, the vampire Rezik Zacharia, governor of Western Bahr al Gazal has been bugged by Paul Malong, the military chief of staff who is thirsting for the blood of the Balanda people.

This time he has sent the military personnel to Balanda villages; Bagari, Faragalla, and Bazia, whereby they are beating people and asking for the whereabouts of the rebels. Not only that, but they are also looting people’s properties of whatever kind they can see.

They are looting the Balanda properties as if it is the Balanda people who refuse to pay them, the soldiers, their salaries.

Because of these atrocities people are leaving their villages and running to Wau city.

The main aim of Gov. Rezik is to provoke the Balanda in such a way that if they react against those SPLA troops then they will have an excuse to massacre them like what they did in Wau in December 2012.

Even though the country is supposedly on a ceasefire between the government troops and SPLM-in-Opposition rebels, there is no peace in Balanda villages.

Moreover, this is happening during the farming season and it is chasing people away from their farms, forgetting that the Balanda farmers basically feed Wau city and the consequence will be starvation in Wau next year.

Kalwendu Gbaga Gbaga