Editorial Analysis MAY/12/2013, SSN;

Whilst the combined stature of Equatorias’ trio of Governors Bakasoro, Wani and Lobong can’t certainly match that of world-famous South African Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu, these governors and their Equatoria SPLM members who recently held the Extraordinary Equatoria Conference in Juba should learn some lesson from the Nobel laureate. Tutu has unequivocally announced that he’d no longer cast his vote for the Mandela-founded ANC because of “corruption, violence and inequality.”

Archbishop Tutu further explained that “the ANC was good at leading us in the struggle to be free from oppression, but it doesn’t seem to me now that a freedom fighting unit can easily make a transition to becoming a political party or leading a nation.”

Just as equally relevant to our own predicament, Dr. Lual Deng, a man so close to late Dr. John Garang himself, in his newest book, “The Power of Creative Reasoning: the ideas and vision of John Garang,” explicitly wrote that, “Salva Kiir’s responsibility was to take the people to the promised land, but the development of the promised land is a different mission that requires a different leader, and we expect a divine intervention in this regard.”

Dr. Lual Deng blatantly concluded, “it’s therefore imperative for Joshua (Salva Kiir) to give way to a developmental leader of the promised land, that’s the Republic of South Sudan.”

Verily, the South Sudan, but particularly Equatoria, is at a critical juncture especially with the impending so-called leadership crisis now evolving among those SPLM top members who, if the truth be told, all of them don’t really deserve the top position they are keenly aspiring for, especially with their horrendous leadership over the past eight years.

Historically, since Equatoria Region back then in 1983 precipitated the Kokora (Redivision) of South Sudan that saw the expulsion of the Nilotic Dinka and Nuer and Shilluks to their particular ‘home states’ and the evolution of the SPLM/A war which Equatorians rightly construed as reaction to Kokora, there has never been any genuine trust or closeness between the Equatorians and the others.

Governor Clement Wani Konga of Central Equatoria steadfastly fought on the side of enemy Arabs, preventing the SPLA from ever capturing Juba till the end of the war when he along with other militia leaders like Paulino Matip finally reconciled with the SPLA in 2005.

On the other hand, Western Equatoria Governor Bakosoro was forcefully ejected from the SPLM party during the last gubernatorial election but was later pardoned and readmitted back in the SPLM, inarguably losing his so-called independent stature which had hitherto garnered him the massive popularity to win the governorship against the party-supported candidate.

First, judging from each of the governors speeches, one visibly discerns signs of fear among these governors as they all started their speeches by addressing the president (Kiir) whose ghost wasn’t even anywhere in the hall, as if their speeches were scripted for them to placate Kiir and the party, but more embarrassingly, their singular message was a strong warning to anyone trying to usurp the powers from President Kiir.

Secondly, the predicated contest expected between president Kiir, Machar and others, for the Chairmanship of the SPLM party and the eventuality of multiple candidates contesting in the national presidential election, is a democratic right of any member of the party and it shouldn’t be sanctioned by any body for that matter.

Lastly, Equatoria today is not a homogeneous society in spite of being at peace with itself, and moreover, each of its three states has its own particularity and parochial interest, especially their closeness to and acceptability by the ruling SPLM under President Kiir.

Significantly, these Equatoria governors and their SPLM ministers and officials are equally complicit in the systemic corruption, bad governance and insecurity so prevalent in each state which only amply mirrors and amplifies what is going on in the government of president Kiir itself.

Corruption in each of the Equatoria states obviously emanates from the top to the bottom, so, which governor really can boldly stand up and sincerely and publicly declare his financial assets or vow that he is absolutely clean? Which Equatoria state governor or official can publicly vow that he hasn’t abused his office for personal gain or that of his family members?

For instance, while Wani Konga publicly laments about land grabbing mostly of the Bari land around Juba, how clean and free is he and his family, or his local ministers and officials on this land grabbing? Just recently he publicly provided Vice president Machar a big chunk of Mundari land, ominously openly up inevitable a land grabbing appetite for more Mundari land.

Eastern Equatoria under governor Louis Lobong today is shamefully experiencing famine and government-sanctioned murder of its own citizens ostensibly condemned as cattle thieves. Where is the so-called smartness of these Equatorians if they thought they were homo sapiens one stage higher than the Dinka or the Nuer?

Practically, each one of the Equatoria governors worriedly expressed their apprehension on the impending war that would take place in Equatoria between the Dinka of Kiir and the Nuer of Machar and the impact of such eventuality would only definitely exacerbate the already fragile situation in the region.

How naive, hypocritical and irresponsible of these Equatoria SPLM leaders gathered in that cosy conference hall to needlessly worry about being the “grass that suffers when two elephants fight,” as if they are constrained by some invisible power not to avert or ameliorate the severity of their predicament?

Wake up, men and ladies of Equatoria, you’re now in dirty game of politics and politicking, and as they say, there is no permanent friend or enemy in politics, and the presumption of neutrality is not an option.

You are either with one or the other, especially since your collective decision has been already made easier — since ‘Greater’ Equatoria has shamefully capitulated and accepted to be hostages and second-class citizens — so, it’s either standing with Machar or Kiir, period.

Unsurprisingly, Governor Clement Wani Konga narrated multiple failures committed and commissioned obviously by the current Kiir misrule and failed government, which of course incriminates also Machar, so, like the humble Archbishop Tutu, who has supported the ANC all his life without ever betraying the cause of liberation waged by Mandela, Equatorians have the other alternative of not supporting either person.

If really those Equatorian SPLM supporters seated on those posh chairs are genuinely concerned about the future of South Sudan Nation and if they are collectively pained by the relentless suffering and depravity endured by the common people as a result of the immoral rule by Kiir-Machar, they, like Tutu again, should reject to vote for the same criminalized party, the SPLM.

Furthermore, to quote Dr. Lual Deng again, who has been a staunch SPLM/A adherent, “there is absence of a visionary leadership which has led to sclerotic management of the SPLM bureaucracy.”

Just within one year after independence, the country has been declared a failed state, the people of South Sudan, who should have been fortuitously blessed with abundance of natural resources, the situation has continuously deteriorated, thanks to the myopic and dysfunctional leadership of the SPLM under Kiir and Machar.

Indefensibly, the behaviour of the leadership these Equatorian leaders purportedly support has engendered international shame like the $4 billion dollar theft which has remained unresolvable because the third top SPLM person, the Equatorian Speaker, Wani Iga, conspired in disabling the national legislative assembly from doing anything.

It’s time these Equatorian leadership in the SPLM seriously acknowledged that there is palpable and irrefutable evidence that there is a leadership vacuum at the top level of the government and the party itself. Those close to Dr. John Garang might still recall his repeated quotation that ‘the fish rots from head down,’ a fact that the brave Professor Wako reiterated so adamantly to President Kiir recently.

Finally, if all Equatorians, together, are seriously concerned and perturbed by the unpredictable crisis looming ahead, they all either quit the SPLM and form their own party to contest in the leadership, or otherwise, the lesser evil would be to collectively align with the next alternative to Kiir and hopefully anticipate to reap some dividends for their support of the next leader of the country.

Better still, like Archbishop Tutu, they don’t vote for the SPLM again. Why not, you are free at last, you are no longer stooges, the choice is in your own hands. Why be the grass being trodden upon, why not be the hunter and shoot down both elephants…… politically speaking, that is…….

BY: J. Nguen, CANADA, MAY/9/2013, SSN;

“Truth alone will obtain a lasting victory”
–Antoine Nicolas.

Human’s perfectibility before the law and above all else is what defines truthfulness and moral absolute. Herein, I feel obliged to write to what I think prescribes to this humanistic perfectionism for awakening proposes to further a positive collective progress and allow informed participatory decision making process in South Sudan. Since independence, there have been heroic burst of energy from the youth who wanted to change the status quo with well-grounded intent of good governance in order for the new country to restart anew.

Despite these positive attempts, more than once, people of South Sudanese have been kept in the dark and denied access to information and participation in political discourses aimed to shape the future of the new country. Often, the intents for exclusion are for short ends but long term dictatorship and coercion government outlook in South Sudan and in the SPLM. Because of this, I purposefully decided to write, to share with my fellow South Sudanese issues of special interest that bond us together and which are solely confined to the SPLM party and its long awaited upcoming SPLM 3rd National Convention this month, May 2013.

To begin with, I must declare before my readers that I am a proud member of the SPLM party and I will always be, like I have been for the last 24 years, so long the principles and the values for which this party was founded upon remains standing, strictly kept and perfected to the highest regard by those whom the party entrusted to carries the baton. Based on these principles, this is where I sincerely believe SPLM party is too big to be a one man dynasty and a wrong platform to stage a brutal dictatorship leadership.

Therefore, the key aim of this commentary is to enlighten members of the SPLM party and the general public to ensure that no one is denied or deprived freedom to information and inputs about importance matters that are being discuss in the Political Bureau meetings, prior to the forthcoming SPLM 3rd National Convention.

Currently, there are four agenda items before the PB, which are as follow:

1. The SPLM constitution;
2. The SPLM manifesto:
3. The SPLM code of conduct;
4. The SPLM Basic rules and regulations;

In February and March 2013, the highest organ of the SPLM party, Political Bureau met and discussed most of the above mentioned agenda items. There were reports of unanimous consensus on major items but bitter disagreements on the constitution voting processes and internal democracy. Hence, this is where I would like to focus to ensure that public is aware and inputs of the SPLM party members are welcomed to help in the deliberations process.

In a nutshell, the disagreements arise because President Salva Kiir Mayardit proposed and demanded a show of hands voting method as oppose to the secret ballot in the SPLM 3rd National Convention elections. The president asserted that “the voting process in the SPLM 3rd National Convention shall be a show of hands, no more, no less.”

However, Mr. President’s position was bitterly opposed by many members in the Political Bureau in both meetings because the method is open to intimidation; bribery and it compromises voter’s security, but the president seemed not to get it. Therefore the issue remains unsettled because Mr. President has refused to consent despite the fact that his position is weak, unsustainable and only used in medieval times on temporary platforms, where there was only one nominee for the post.

Those who rejected President Kiir’s position argued that a secret ballot is an ideal method, because it “allows voters to make confidential choices and thus helps prevent intimidation and bribery” while the show of hands voting method is open to intimidation and bribery. Not only that the secret ballot is flawless method, it is use universally around the globe. For instance, the secret ballot voting method was passed to law in British in 1872, Canada in 1874, USA in 1892 and Australia in the 1850 and the list is almost endless. In these instances, the key reason was that “it is the only appropriate method that ensures voter’s security, sincere choice and forestalling attempts to influence the voter by intimidation or bribery” (1838).

With method as flawless as this, why is President Salva Kiir strenuously pushing for a “show of hands,” an outdated method subjected to flaws and abject bribery and deadliest intimidation? Of course, this is for anyone’s good guess. But the simple answer is that Mr. President admires coercive method and one man show governance. It has worked in the past perfectly in his favor and still being utilizes intensively in RSS. For example, this method of bribery and intimidation were used during 2010 elections and when the South Sudan Interim Constitution was being passed into the law of the land. Mr. President demanded unnecessary powers and got away with it.

Here, it will be unforgivable political blunder if President Kiir gets away with this ill informed motive in the SPLM 3rd National Convention because the demand is at best gravely contrary to the SPLM founding principles. Outrageous as it sounds, it adds to the fact that people South Sudan have had enough sell outs already from an inconsistency, indifference and unfocused war veteran and head of state. However, I am convinced that the SPLM aspirants and the PB will not and must not allow the president to triumph with such disastrous, illogical and irrational method of voting.

I am also sure that our people know better. They know the reasons why we took arms, because the reasons were clearly articulated in the SPLM’s founding document and well communicated to them. The truth is President Kiir should have known this better than anyone else, because he was in the heart of the movement, but it lately appeared the SPLM’s programmes are still too complicated and too overwhelming for a man who never had administrative experiences or a formal education to say the least. Without doubt, President Kiir is not the founding father of the nation but a step father who delivered the nation to its birth and he deserves minimal credits.

The other issue that generated major disagreement in the PB meetings is the internal democracy. President Kiir Mayardit demanded that “the SPLM Constitution shall only elect the Chairperson of the party and the National Liberation Council whereas the vice chairperson (s) of the party, the Political Bureau members and the Secretary General of the party shall be nominated by the chairperson of the party. Many think this is hypocritical and pathetic at best. Where in the world is this possible? Nowhere! Even in the “Animal Farm” where lion was named king of the jungle because his bravery and might, but the opposite is true for the poor president.

Another point made along the same argument was that all the above mentioned positions must be subjected to vigorous contest and each candidate must be democratically elected. In an essence, the canard rationale behind Mr. President’s position is to control the party as one man show as he falsely assumed that he will win the party’s chairmanship. The other poorly planned tactic was to bar young SPLM party’s aspirants from contesting for any position in the high organs of the party; and thus will keeps the party unsuccessful, underdeveloped, unreformed, not rejuvenated, not re-energized but instead remains under misguided old guards who ceased to think of anything positive.

Finally, President Kiir demanded to handpick 5% allocation of the SPLM’s 1,000 delegates (100 from each 10 states) to the national convention and be allocated to him. This position was bitterly opposed by majority in the Political Bureau meetings. Those who opposed see no justifiable reason why Mr. President should be given 5% percent allocation. Out of 1000 delegates that would attend the SPLM 3rd National Convention the president needed fifty people. This is not fair and logical to any SPLM member because it under-minds democratic ideals of the party. It also places the president at advantage above everyone else, in a party where everyone is considered equal.

To place this under honest scrutiny, President Kiir needs no special treatment in the party. However, if Mr. President refuses to relent as evident suggested in the PB meetings, it would be nothing short of miscarriage of justice and the move will certainly temper with proper SPLM party’s elections results in favor of the president. There is also a weak argument from the president that the mentioned 5% are for youth, women and disables. If this is true, the 5% is meant for youth, women and disable, then, this should be given to each state to bring their women, youth and disable and not by the president of the Republic. More so, the women, the youth and the disable must also democratically compete and should not be handpicked by the President.

In closing, it is true that confusion reigns under President Kiir’s leadership since independent or even before the South Sudan’s Interim Constitution became law of the land under one man’s dynasty. Lazy old guards and some uninformed general public are now taking notice of the fault made 20 months on since South Sudan independent on the 9th July 2011. Because the flaw in the institution distresses and continue to affects every thread of our society politically, economically and socially. Presently in replica, President Kiir is demanding for the repeat of the same unwelcomed grave mistake.

I believe SPLM members are not really that fool to make the same political blunder made during the passing of South Sudan Interim Constitution in 2011. But surprisingly if may, few in the political Bureau remained silent when Mr. President strenuously demanded for unnecessary powers and unlawful voting processes in the SPLM Constitution, thus, I cannot escape the question why few reasonable beings in the PB do behaved so unreasonably?

For this commentary, the facts now are before the public for public scrutiny and inputs in order to propel matters that are of national interest and beyond our ethnic lines. It is undeniable that South Sudanese in general have been unlawfully denied participatory rights and their inputs have not been considered by the system and the same government they previously blindly trust. So, the question is how long can we be victims of a system of exploitations before saying enough is enough?

“The people cannot be fooled for long into accepting … those they judge to be self- aggrandizing and seeking to enrich or benefit themselves at their expense” Robert Mugabe

True in our case! Around the world, people of South Sudan have lost confident on the SPLM party led government under Kiir and this is no secret. Our people have no hopes and aspirations anymore simple because President Kiir’s government is too corrupt, too tribalized, too irrational, too misguided, too inconsistent, too confused and too lazy to deliver big programmes and vision and mission of the SPLM party. In addition, the government is also too big for the president himself to “handle,” as previously alluded to by Deng Alor Kuol, the current Minister of cabinets Affairs in RSS.

In South Sudan for example, people are being killed in thousands daily and President Kiir does not care to even address a nation and mourn with South Sudanese who lost their loved ones. Strangely, President Kiir instead condemned the deceased. Good example of this occurred in Western Bar El Ghazal State when Mr. President condemned the deceased killed by RSS’ police force. Similarly, President Kiir never visited SPLA troops in borders, Fangak Nuer, Murle people, Dinka Bor and Lou Nuer in their villages who are losing their loved ones daily due to Mr. President’s miscalculated moves. What a President! In other nations, especially in the west, if one person is killed the President will address his or her nation to calm the people down, mourn with them and assure them that justice will be done.

The evidences mentioned are unquestionable an abject failures, but Mr. President is weirdly in a gruesome denial. He instead resorted to higher end immorality of blame game tactics, tribalized politic, rampant corruption, arbitrary arrest and killing of innocence South Sudanese who seems to questions how he misguidedly and blindly runs the government. He is in a hopeless pursues of cover up and masking up his inability to lead and deliver services effectively.

Mr. President need to be corrected that South Sudan is not being runs like other nations. There is no nation in this planet where the head of the sate can sack or remove elected government officials and governors without any due process. There is no nation in this planet where sensitive organs of the government institutions are assigned to and runs one tribe men/women and by extension one clan for that matter.

There is no nation in this planet where $ 4 billions US dollars was stolen by 75 government officials and no one has been persecuted and held accountable. There is nowhere in this planet where $ 6 millions dollars/pounds were kept in the President’s office in cash and at the end got stolen. With these disappointing facts, President Kiir was mistaken by stating that “we are a new country. This is why the whole world has turned to us and [is] watching closely to see what we are doing. It is not because what is happening in this country is not happening in other countries.”

Beside, President Kiir is currently in a dangerous pursues of reminiscing Uganda President’s dictatorship style, but the truth is, SPLM as a party is a wrong platform to stage such brutal tyranny ideals. Similarly, the South Sudanese people are not Ugandans to be dictated.

Above features are what defines the current government in South Sudan, and therefore I wonder, should the SPLM party members just standby and allow an inconsistent leader with distorted conscience to turn people’s SPLM into one man dynasty with irrational ideals and batters us with outdated voting processes while we watch? I don’t think so. SPLM party is too big, too strong and it has high moral principles and values which are unfit for one man dynasty.

J. Nguen is a concerned South Sudanese citizen living in Canada. He can be reached at nyolgaar@yahoo.com

BY: Jacob K. Lupai, JUBA, MAY/01/2013, SSN;

In the old Sudan, South Sudan had demanded a federal system of government to sustain national unity. However, the narrow minds of the old Sudan rejected the South demand. With no alternative South Sudan then embarked on one of the longest and bloody protracted armed struggle on the continent for freedom, justice and equality. This was spearheaded by the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM).

After twenty-one years of armed struggle South Sudan achieved what it had aspired for, total independence. This was expected for people who had suffered so much injustice and gross marginalization in the hands of brutal neocolonial North Sudan. It was easy realizing independence through the ballot box but it is going to be a different matter to attain sustainable unity of South Sudan being diversified as it is.

There are instruments, nevertheless, when carefully considered and applied with a nationalist and revolutionary vision may promote sustainable unity. The problem may be that people hardly differentiate between a nationalist and a tribalist vision. People are confused as the level of tribalism may be high.

SPLM Constitution 2008
The SPLM is the lead party in government in South Sudan. It has a constitution that will make South Sudan a paradise on earth, only if it could be rigorously followed with a nationalistic zeal. In the constitution the SPLM is guided by principles such as democracy and political pluralism, prosperity, harmony and social cohesion. In addition the SPLM is guided by the principles of decentralization and devolution of power and voluntary unity of people, respect of diversity and economic interest.

Among other things the SPLM is guided by the principles of justice and equality for all irrespective of ethnicity, religion, region, social status or gender, accountability, transparency and good governance, and above all emancipation of the individual from constraints to freedom, prosperity, self-realisation and happiness.

From the highlights above the SPLM constitution 2008 is a masterpiece. The constitution has clearly set out basic principles to follow in making South Sudan truly a country all can call home. The aims and objectives of the constitution suggest that the SPLM has a clear revolutionary vision and an instrument to attain sustainable unity and prosperity for all in South Sudan. However, in practice it is not clear to which extent the SPLM has rigorously followed its own constitution to realize the aims and objectives set.

Transitional Constitution 2011
In the Transitional Constitution, 2011 of the Republic of South Sudan, Articles 24(1) and 25(1) stipulate respectively that, “Every citizen shall have the right to the freedom of expression, reception and dissemination of information, publication, and access to the press without prejudice to public order, safety or morals as prescribed by law” and that, “The right to peaceful assembly is recognized and guaranteed; every person shall have the right to freedom of association with others, including the right to form or join political parties, associations and trade or professional unions for the protection of his or her interests”.

In Article 36(1) of the same transitional constitution it is stipulated that, “All levels of government shall provide democratic principles and political pluralism, and shall be guided by the principles of decentralization and devolution of power to the people through the appropriate levels of government where they can best manage and direct their affairs”.

It can be seen that what the Articles in the transitional constitution stipulate is indeed magnificent. However, what matters are not the niceties of the Articles in the transitional constitution. What is of great importance is for the constitution to be seen making the difference in the lives of ordinary people. For example, the freedom of expression guaranteed in the constitution should be translated into practice when people are not silenced for expressing critical views.

Decentralisation and devolution of power to the people to manage their own affairs is something that is universally accepted and is put into practice to make the unity of a country attractive. In South Sudan, however, decentralization and devolution of power to the people at best remains theoretical on paper. There are ten state but remain like departments in a centralized system.

Centralisation of power is evident and examples abound. Tax collection has been centralized and so are the police, prisons and the wildlife forces where the states hardly have power over deployment. This does not sound at all like decentralization and devolution of power to the people in the states to manage their own affairs.

SPLM Manifesto 2012
According to the SPLM Manifesto 2012, “Good governance is achieved through transparency and even more through inclusion, in decision-making through opportunities to give voice to concerns at all levels of governance, and through exercise of the right to ask questions and to demand appropriate answers”. The manifesto states that the ultimate goal is the full empowerment of the people of South Sudan as agents of their own destiny in the economic no less than in the political life of the nation.

What the SPLM Manifesto affirms can only mean decentralization and devolution of power to the people as agents of their own destiny. The manifesto also affirms that the SPLM will ensure democracy under the rule of law and good governance, to safeguard fundamental human. economic, social, cultural and religious rights, and freedoms.

On equality the SPLM Manifesto asserts that it is rooted in the understanding that all men and women have an essential right to be respected fully as human beings, that all human life has equal worth and that all human beings must be afforded equal dignity.

With reference to unity the manifesto affirms that it should not be confused with unanimity. The manifesto asserts that people of South Sudan are diverse and value their diversity, and respect for equal dignity of all human beings necessitates respect for their right to assert and preserve collective identity and values.

The SPLM Manifesto 2012 is very clear on governance, equality and unity. However, good governance, equality and national unity cannot be achieved by word of mouth without the empowerment of people to manage their own affairs. Empowerment of the people is best achieved through proper decentralization which in other words could mean a federal system. The SPLM Manifesto couldn’t have been clearer about empowerment of the peop0le when it asserts that, “True national liberation comes not with the achievement of formal independence, but with the achievement of full and effective empowerment and sovereignty of all citizens and of the nation as a whole”.

The manifesto further affirms that the SPLM shall uphold and respect the rights of minorities and guarantee their representation and participation in the life of the country. Arguably the rights of minorities and their participation in government cannot be guaranteed through a centralized system. Minorities may need to be empowered to manage their affairs and that can be through a federal system for sustainable national unity.

Models of federal system
There are various models of a federal system of government in the world. Models of a federal system are found in countries such as the United States of America (USA), Australia, Germany, Switzerland and Nigeria to mention but a few. To avoid boredom only two models of a federal system are highlighted. They are the Swiss and the Nigerian model.

Swiss model of federal system
Switzerland is a small country located in the heart of Western Europe. It is only 41,277 square kilometers, smaller even that Central Equatoria State whose size is 43,033 square kilometers. However, the population of Switzerland is 8.02 million almost the same as that of South Sudan.

Switzerland has quite a unique democratic tradition. Although a small country Switzerland is a federation of 26 member states known as cantons. Switzerland’s basic political philosophy can be described as far reaching with a form of federal system granting member states a maximum of political self-determination and restricting the competencies of the federal government to absolute minimum.

The Swiss model of a federal system consists of governments, administrations, parliaments and courts organized on three political levels, federal, state (canton) and communal which may be an equivalent to county in the case of South Sudan.

The importance of the Swiss model of a federal system is that Switzerland is made up of different ethnic groups. Over the centuries whenever conflicts have arisen between the different ethnic groups, the Swiss have resolved the conflict by allowing each of the warring groups to govern themselves.

Single states have divided into half-states, new states have been formed and border communes have opted to leave one state to join another. In this way the Swiss have developed a federal system which permits people of different languages, cultures, religions and traditions to live together in peace and harmony. This makes the Swiss model of a federal system particularly well suited to ethnically diverse countries.

Nigerian model of federal system
In Nigeria, under the British colonial rule, conflicting demands for autonomy by the various political grouping compelled the British to establish a measure of compromise to accommodate conflicting demands. The Nigerian model of a federal system can be traced to when the Northern and Southern protectorates were amalgamated. With the existence and recognition of the two autonomous parts of Northern and Southern protectorates, the administrative system of Nigeria was an outlook of a federation.

Under a new Nigerian constitution introduced by the British, a federal system of government was established. This system was based on three regions Eastern, Western and Northern Nigeria. The idea was to reconcile the regional and religious tensions as well as accommodating the interest of diverse ethnic groups. Coups and counter-coups created a volatile situation in Nigeria when the Eastern Region announced secession and proclaimed its independence as the Republic of Biafra. However, the Republic of Biafra could not win an all out war for independence and after a cease fire the Eastern Region was reintegrated into Nigeria.

The three regions of Nigeria were restructured into twelve states with the intention to produce larger representation for other ethnic groups. Each region was divided up into states as were the three regions of South Sudan each also divided up into states. The Nigerian population is diverse with well over 250 ethnic groups. Given the historical legacy of divisions among ethnic groups and regions in Nigeria, the federal imperative was so fundamental that even military governments, characteristically unitarian and centralist, attached great importance to the continuation of a federal system of government.

The model of a federal system in Nigeria is flexible. This means with time more states in the federation can be created. For example, in 1967 the three regions of Nigeria were restructured to create twelve states. The number of states increased to nineteen in 1976, and eventually to twenty-one in 1987. In the span of twenty years Nigeria, from three regions, has developed into twenty-one states in addition to the Federal Capital Territory. The increasing number of states was a direct response to the demands of groups that were not satisfied with their positions in the federation.

National unity through federal system
Both models of a federal system of government in Switzerland and in Nigeria have one thing in common, the achievement of sustainable national unity. The two models adequately address ethnic and regional diversities and challenges that a centralized system may hardly cope with. South Sudan has similar ethnic and regional diversities and challenges as in Nigeria which seems to be coping through a federal system. South Sudan may also cope adequately with its ethnic and regional diversities and challenges through the adoption of a federal system of government.

The main worry about adopting a federal system in South Sudan is that some circles are very scared that they will be out of Equatoria through administrative mechanism of deployment to work in one’s state when a federal system is adopted. This is because Equatoria seems to have become a safe haven for people escaping insecurity in their own states. This may explain the bizarre proposal to annex the states in Equatoria to the insecure neighbouring states.

Nigeria abolished the federal regions and instead created federal states. The existing ten states in South Sudan could become federal states with the larger ones to be divided up into more states to address imbalances in service delivery.

It is not the solution to insecurity and development stagnation to annex the states in Equatoria to the insecure neighbouring states in the other regions. Arguably the solution is the adoption of a federal system to empower the people to manage their affairs with adequate support from the national government.

The recent announcements by the President of the Republic of South Sudan for amnesty to rebellious groups were a giant step forward and in the right direction to realize security and peaceful co-existence.

However, so that not to be seen as discrimination, the amnesty should also include Peter Abdelrahaman Sule though he is a politician. This may go a long way as reconciliation and confidence building for a peaceful South Sudan.

Conclusion
In conclusion, it can be seen that sustainable national unity can be attained through the adoption of a federal system of government as the Swiss and the Nigerian models seem to suggest. A federal system addresses the challenges of ethnic and regional diversities in the national interest.

The main challenge to the adoption of a federal system may be how it is interpreted in the context of South Sudan. However, from a positive perspective a federal system appears to promote sustainable national unity in diversity as the Swiss and Nigerian models seem to confirm.

The Moral Discrepancy between Traditional Ethical Values and Practice at the Higher Echelon of Political Power in South Sudan

BY: Tongun Lo Loyuong, FINLAND, AP/23/2013, SSN;

While we are at it, kindly allow me to clarify my views on the previous article that I subjectively and perhaps erroneously so, entitled “The Dinka Problem in South Sudan: Part I.” Three main points can be recapped and set straight from that discussion going forward in this piece, which from now on should be treated as an examination of the moral discrepancy between traditional ethical values and practice at the higher echelon of political power in South Sudan in relation to the issue of corruption.

As some have correctly pointed out in the previous discussion, discussing corruption in the Republic is a thorny issue, and may cause you your life. It is even more sensitive to try to come at it from below without offending anybody by reflecting on what I previously called “impunity from below.”

Thus, it was clear from some of the public uproar, verbal abuse and threats following the previous piece that engaging in such an exercise may be counterproductive at the time being. It may also promote disunity rather than foster the desperately needed unity among our people and collective South Sudanese stance against the corruption venality in South Sudan—the very purpose for which we labor in putting our views together in writing.

Since there was plenty of misunderstandings, it is important to be on the same page regarding the main points articulated, and the morale of the previous exercise. The central argument I attempted to present as objectively as possible on that occasion, is that the carnal corruption is eroding the social fabric of our people, and impeding development and progress in our costly and hard-won Republic.

This is in part because of greed of our political leadership exacerbated by what I called “impunity from above,” and in part due to the need of our people who have been condemned to perpetual deprivation as a result of intractable civil wars.

Because of being subjected to deep and sustained impoverishment during the wartime, and even in the era of the CPA peace agreement, including after the independence of South Sudan, our people have albeit unwittingly, found it difficult to resist being lured into participating in corruption and hence indirectly providing impunity from below.

This impunity from below in turn further contributes to social disharmony and the polarization of our people across ethnicities.

But in light of the negative public reaction of some of our brothers, perhaps it is now best to dismiss impunity from below as a morally justified practice or a byproduct of an existential struggle to survive due to persistent marginalization and destitution of our people by the governments of the day, including both northern governments and their counterpart in the South.

Secondly, on the previous occasion I argued that the oil shut down and the subsequent “Kostirity measures, ”though biting hard on the poor, was nonetheless, a lesser evil and came to rescue and mitigate the greater evil of our continued social decay and ethnic multi-polarity, which is proving to be destructive to our nation building aspirations and efforts.

Moreover, due to the austerity measures I contended, the eyes of our people were opened as voices of acknowledgment of mis-governance and corruption that rose above tribal commitments and that would have otherwise been vulnerable to being quieted through petrodollar hush money as a result of the perpetual state of need of our people, became louder and clearer.

And thirdly, I maintained that the prophetic voices of dissent against wanton corruption and political malpractices, however increasing and deafening in recent months, will remain scant and ineffectual, as long as they are not bolstered by a collective effort and official public statement that assesses the performance of the government, and outlines a collective vision on the way forward to build a peaceful, just, equal and prosperous united nation called South Sudan.

While I may have regrettably failed to clarify why I examined this thorny corruption issue from a Dinka perspective, the underlying assumption was that, as an elder son of several younger siblings myself, in the absence of my father, I have had to assume the responsibility to lead my younger brothers and sisters by example, in order for them to develop into becoming healthy and contributing members of the society. If I fail, they will also fail or so my South Sudanese traditional culture tells me.

Thus, using this cultural metaphor where the older son assumes responsibility of the family in tandem with the fact that the Jieng community constitutes the largest tribe, and therefore, representing the elder sibling that also dominates the current government, I saw it fit to encourage our Jieng brothers to lead by example in addressing how corruption has been handled, to ensure the country does not fall apart.

South Sudanese have bitterly complained about power abuse and excessive constitutional powers wielded by the President. But monjang, and all South Sudanese are the true constitutional power holders in the Republic. Without the Jieng’s support, and our collective social contract to be law abiding citizens those constitutional powers held by the President, are null and void.

After all, the law is made for the people, not people for the law. In this context, South Sudanese collectively have the constitutional power and moral responsibility to inform the President on our vision for a peaceful united South Sudan that is not wracked by corruption. We also have the moral duty to kindly urge the President to grab this corruption disease by the horns and wrestle it to the ground.

Alas, I must stop “rumbling too much,” as our elder brother, Chief Abiko would wisely advice. Bottom line is that due to the three points outlined above, the rest of this exercise employs Dinka cultural lens to try and understand the seeming discrepancy between Dinka cultural moral ideals and practice in the Jieng’s majority led government of South Sudan.

In this regard, I am aware and take on board the constructive reservations that have been expressed about the “sensational” usage of the title “the Dinka Problem in South Sudan” in this sequence of reflections, and hence the change of the title here.

In fact in anticipation of such reservations, I attempted to use the subjective proposition “in” as in “the Dinka Problem (in) South Sudan,” to imply the problem exists as subjectively seen by me from a Jieng’s cultural perspective, rather than using the objective proposition “of” as in “Dinka Problem (of) South Sudan,” which may mean the Dinka are objectively being condemned as the Problem of South Sudan, which is far from it.

In the end these are my views and my views alone, which may perhaps make more sense to me than to others. If this is the case, kindly disregard this exercise, without the need for verbal abuse or posing threats. I stand responsible for my opinion pieces—that I know.

Now, picking up from where we left off we will attempt to answer the question of how does the government’s ineptitude to remove the impunity from above from the corrupt officials not only risks eroding the well-being of South Sudan, but also defies and contradicts the cultural moral existence and practice of our people?

This is examined here by looking at some of the core cultural moral values, or Jieng’s cultural moral discourse on issues such as greed, justice and wholeness of the society.

Without further ado, unpacking Jieng’s cultural stance vis-à-vis greed yields intriguing results. As a result, the Jieng culture like most South Sudanese cultures is one that can be summed up as a morally driven culture that is abhorrent to greed, and therefore, corruption and the impunity from above that condones the practice of such vice within the higher echelon of political power in South Sudan.

Looking at Dinka worldview and cosmology that defines the Jieng culture, for example, it is readily apparent that there is not only zero-tolerance of greed and corruption, but also that it was precisely because of human greed that the Jieng society conceptualizes and articulates our current human condition, and the reasons for our demotion to endless suffering by God the Creator (Nhialic Aciek), from our previous primordial state of bliss.

According to one of the most popular Dinka mythologies, which is reminiscent of the Genesis account of the fall of man in the Hebrew Bible, the current human condition was precipitated by greed of our ancestors — whose names were Garang and Abuk.

Before the world was “spoilt,” the account enumerates that the earth and the sky were not far removed from each other as is currently evident. Rather, Garang and Abuk, the first man and woman residing on earth, could with limited effort climb their way up to the sky—also known as nhialic by means of a rope that connected both spheres.

God provided Garang and Abuk with one grain of millet for their daily subsistence, and prohibited them from carrying out any effort to provide for themselves. However, because of Abuk’s greed (and Garang’s complicity too), she disobeyed God by cultivating more grain for consumption.

As she raised her hoe to cultivate the ground, Abuk ended up striking God, which prompted God to retire far beyond human reach, expanding the gap between the earth and the sky in the process. God sent a bird to sever the rope that linked the earth and the sky, thus alienating Garang and Abuk and their subsequent offspring from God.

Along with this separation, God told Garang and Abuk that they are on their own now. Consequently, hunger, disease and death became the fate of humanity, as the world became spoilt.

This rich Dinka mythology, which recounts the origin of humanity’s separation from God, highlights how divine-Dinka relationship was originally harmonious and peaceful, characterized by the Dinka’s relative accessibility to the divine abode in the sky. God provided for the daily needs of Garang and Abuk, albeit with the condition that they should rely entirely on divine providence.

However, greed meant that divine-Dinka relations deteriorated as God and the sky withdrew at a distance, while hunger, violence, disease, and death became a commonplace. Can you see the similarity in the current practices of our government owners?

Understood this way, greed in Dinka culture is a repellent vice that raptures harmonious divine-human relations as well as social relations, and is therefore strongly discouraged. Why are some of our people now indulge in greed and corruption—practices that are alien to our traditional cultural beliefs and moral practice with impunity from above?

Why have these values been rendered a thing of the past, and when we try to remind ourselves about staying faithful to our cultural values, we are accused of perpetuating tribalism and inciting disharmony in the community?

To restore sound divine-human relations and social harmony, Dinka religion was introduced to function as the bridge between the spiritual and corporeal. Spiritual leaders perform ceremonies and rituals of reconciliation between God and human beings as well as between human beings themselves centered on cattle transactions.

Perhaps, this also explains the unique affiliation with cattle-herding in Dinka culture. In Dinka religion, cattle are offered as sacrifices to appease Nhialic, as well as the spirits of the ancestors believed to be involved in our daily activities, and can invoke curse or bestow abundant blessings depending on our moral display, including in relation to greed and corruption.

These spirits are collectively referred to as yeeth. As the prominent Dinka expert, Godfrey Lienhardt, in his book “Divinity and Experience: The Religion of the Dinka,” aptly noted: “relationships between human beings and the divine are regulated by the transfer of cattle in dedication and sacrifice, as conflicts between different human groups are resolved by the simple transfer of cattle from the offending to the offended group.”

In short, greed and corruption is abhorrent in Dinka world view and religion, and therefore, those who practice this vice with impunity are not worthy to be seen as members of our traditional societies. This is particularly true of our current political leadership, who in their greed and corruption practices, have become a tribe unto themselves.

I will examine the remaining part of this discussion by reflecting on how the Dinka culture treats the concept of social justice, and the wholeness of the society in the last part of this sequence of opinion pieces due in the foreseeable future.

The discrepancy between our traditional ethical values and practice at the higher echelon of political power in South Sudan in relation to the issue of corruption will be examined in our next piece, more specifically as reflected in Dinka social organization, folktales, and songs, and also in terms of what is expected of a leader, political as well as spiritual. Stay tuned.

I am just a concerned South Sudanese, and happy to entertain questions and concerns at: tloloyuong@gmail.co

BY: Koul Bol Deng, JUBA, APR/19/2013, SSN;

In this article, I would like to emphasize the title “Tribal war in South Sudan is unavoidable” and justify why war is unavoidable in South Sudan. I’m not being partial in this article favouring the government or those who oppose the regime, but will just explain the facts as an intellectual South Sudanese. I won’t go beyond the context of the intellectual debate initiated in this paper.

First, since the autonomy started back in 2005 with the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) up to this point in time, there hasn’t been any tangible change in government’s policies towards development. The rate of corruption is very high and is being practiced by government’s officials who seem to have impunity and are not accountable for any civil or criminal misconduct.

In order to mitigate the situation, the president announced the issuing (secretly) of official letters to nearly 76 South Sudanese most of them were reported to have been government’s officials. However, up to now there has never been any action taken by the president or the Anti-Corruption Commission.

This was in relation to the 4 billion that got wasted and no accountability has been pursued.

Millions of South Sudanese are dying of hunger, lack of services such as health, education, roads, sanitation, electricity and clean drinking water. Comparing the current regime with Addis Ababa Agreement 1972, the institutions that the government are operating under now, were established during the regional government led by Moulana Abel Alier and later by General Joseph Lago. We are very fortunate that both of them are still alive.

The ministerial compound that currently represents most of the ministries in South Sudan was built during that agreement as well as the University of Juba, some schools and the current hospital.

So the question is, what has the government done with all these millions and no reflection of these monies in development? What is the future of South Sudanese innocent people who have fought the war of liberation?

The second case was the Dura saga where millions of dollars were lost without any accountability.

Third, was the amount of money being given to South Sudan for repatriation of South Sudanese who have been dispersed by the civil war, again these monies have gone to individual pockets.

Fourth, the large sum of money being donated by the Western countries to reform the party (SPLA/M). These monies also got lost and nobody can explain what has been done with the money.

The President, on his being sworn in day one, had declared a zero tolerance but this has never been substantiated. Instead the rate of corruption is growing rampantly and to the highest level.

Fifth, the transitional Constitution of South Sudan 2005 that mandated the president absolute powers, which has been also ratified by the parliament is also among the causes of the problems in South Sudan because the parliament has no say in whatever the president will say, even to the extent that the president is omnipotent and could ignore the parliamentary legislations and work according to his personal convictions.

Here the rule of law has no significant presence since the president is above the law. To be constructive in my argument, the president have gone to the level of dismissing elected governors which had never happened in the history of democracy if we claim to be embracing democratic principles based on what we fought for, justice, equality and freedom for all.

These kinds of situations happen only when the governor breaches certain laws that could jeopardize his position by law and subject to parliamentary agreement.

The point number seven, is the political wrangling within the SPLA/M represented in the political bureau, senior members, the President and his Vice.

Current developments have revealed the president’s withdrawal of certain powers that have been delegated to the Vice and the reason behind that has been alluded to in both the media and public the Vice President’s intention to contest in the next election 2015.

There could have been better way for the President to withdraw these powers since these are administrative powers related to the executive. These included the National Reconciliation Project which has been cancelled being described as a political project which the president has never been cognisant about.

In the real world, such significant national projects cannot be done without the knowledge of the president. Reconciliation is a sensitive project because it involves most of the issues that people need to talk about after war, reconciliation between tribes, individuals and South-North reconciliation.

The election in 2015 might instigate tribal war in South Sudan if not handled with care. The reason behind this is the tribal wrangling between the main tribes, the Dinka and Nuer and the other tribes that have also been marginalized.

The fight between the Vice and the president has been silent but now becomes clear after the president has declared withdrawal of powers from his Vice.

The SPLA/M Political Bureau is dominated by the president’s supporters, and therefore if the SPLA/M nominee or the candidate for 2015 election is selected by the party, definitely President Kiir will get the majority. However, among the ordinary party’s members both (the president and the vice) will get numbers and will sometimes depend on loyalty and tribe.

The president has got absolute powers to dismiss the Vice from position, the government and the party as well.

What happened last week from the president was a test to see how important is the Vice both in the public and the SPLA/M. If the reaction of the people was against the decree, then there would be an alternative plan in the near future as long as the president and his supporters in the SPLA/M and some ordinary citizens are determined not to allow the Vice to hold the top position based on some tribal and personal grounds.

The president is now in power and has got the support of thousands of South Sudanese people, some based on material gain or tribe. The same with the Vice, there are also tribal groups supporting Machar from Nuer sections based on his tribe and those who support him based on personal interest.

Scenario One: the president might issue a decree dismissing his Vice from both positions. That way the Vice will form a political party that competes with SPLA/M and will get majority from the Geater Upper Nile, Equatoria and the minority marginalized tribes in Western Bhar El Gazal. SPLA/M will still have many supporters from different tribes including some Nuer.

That way if the election law and the constitution are passed in 2014, there is a possibility that if the president wins the election, Machar supporters specially from Nuer and other groups will instigate violence and this will divide the army based on tribes.

The same scenario is applicable to Salva in both cases either by genuinely winning the election or rigging it since he is in the power position.

Scenario Two: Riek might get the majority among the citizens of South Sudan especially in Upper Nile and Equatoria plus some areas in Bhar El Gazal. That way if he wins the election SPLA/M will deny him the presidency. His supporters will invoke violence that will turn into tribal war.

Scenario Three: the president might cancel the party’s convention which is supposed to be in May 2013 and the election in 2015 by a presidential decree as usual. In this situation tribal war or a military coup based on tribes will take place.

Scenario Four: if SPLA/M convinced Salva that he is not popular in South Sudan in 2015 election and that the party needs to seek a candidate, what are the outcomes?

First, to be a candidate for such an election you need to be getting support overwhelmingly across all South Sudanese States. It is not a matter of endorsement of a candidate by the party that gives that candidate the right to win the majority. These are two different things and might confuse people.

The candidate might fail or win but still will cause violence.

However, among the party’s senior members that are known overwhelmingly in South Sudan are Pagan Amum, Deng Alor, Luka Biong, Kuol Manyang, John Luk, Taban Deng, Wani Igga, Nhial Deng and James Hoth. Who could be the right candidate to represent the party in 2015 election if the president agreed not to contest?

Among these people, for example, if we select Mr Pagan Amum to contest with Riek Machar whether Riek is an independent candidate or representing a party, there are still difficulties in terms of numbers. Pagan is popular in the party but not among the citizens of South Sudan and he’s being alleged to be part of the corruption and therefore the possibility of winning the election is weak.

If we select Wani Igga, he is not very popular in the other states but only in Equatoria, a support that might not win the majority of the constituencies. Therefore, it is a risky choice for the party. But if he contests with Machar with a Dinka deputy from Bahr El Gazal there is a possibility to win but still Riek has a ground both in the Upper Nile, Bentiu and Equatoria.

Again, if Wani wins the election, Machar’s supporters won’t accept the outcome and might claim that the election is being rigged. Violence will take place and war might happen.

Nhial Deng could have been a better candidate in 2015 but the problem of generalization among the South Sudanese plus tribalism may affect his numbers. Moreover, he is from Bahr El Gazal and might be generalized by the ordinary citizens from other states as the same with Salva.

He is an open-minded person, civilized and not tribalist given his background. Grown up in Khartoum, studied in Khartoum from primary education to the university. Could have been accepted among the Southerners to some degree if not because of tribalism and current corruption practices by Kiir’s regime.

Deng Alor, very well known in the SPLA/M and in Bahr El Gazal and Equatoria. But will that guarantee the presidency if contested in 2015’s election? If he is contesting with Machar, it will be difficult for him to win the majority of votes in the Greater Upper Nile and Equatoria.

Equatoria will be the determinant factor. But will the majority in Equatoria vote for him though the issue of generalization will affect his numbers, being from the Dinka Bahr El Gazal and deeply alleged to be involved in the financial corruption. But again if he wins the election, war is unavoidable based on tribalism.

The fact is that in any political system there are factors of degeneration. In the case of SPLA/M these factors are tribalism, clique and elitism that serve interests of few groups enriching themselves with the public funds.

The party has got no vision at the moment and the only way to get out of that situation is to start the reforms right now by changing some of the policies in the party that would allow transformation into a modern political party, fighting corruption and winning the majority of South Sudanese.

Unlike modern political parties, SPLM/A is not yet reformed, most of the policies still dated back to the movement.

Now it becomes clear that the power struggle in the party is between individuals seeking their own interests, whether tribal or material not the national interest of the innocent South Sudanese.

It will be difficult for the ordinary citizens of South Sudan to differentiate between SPLA/M, their tribes and who will serve their interest given the lack of liberal education and political orientation among the majority.

After the tribal war, the real peace will come and all citizens of South Sudan will treat themselves equally based on the rule of law. Like what happened in Rwanda, genocide is not a good option but it gave an opportunity for democracy to prevail because each tribe will recognize the other and will remember that bad past and the need for a better future for the next generation.

The military, likely SPLA/M figure will take over and the United Nations will monitor the situation after 2015. A transitional period will be initiated to prepare for democracy and a new constitution will be drafted. New parties will emerged or the old ones will be revived and work with SPLA/M.

The SPLA/M will still have large numbers but not a guarantee to win the election in a fair competition after 2015. After 2015 the SPLA/M needs to be very careful because its domination of the political arena after the war might invoke political unrest in the country, not another tribal war.

The oil revenues do not reflect on the lives of the ordinary citizens and therefore poverty and ignorance will continue. In addition, most of the oil funds will go to individuals.

What is the fate of Salva Kiir and Riek Machar?

Both of them might not survive during the war. They might get killed or politically assassinated. If they are alive, both will be answerable to the International Court – ICC – based on crimes committed against humanity.

Email address: kouldeng13@yahoo.com

BY: Juma Mabor Marial, lawyer, JUBA-SS, APR/17/2013, SSN;

It is two now days since President Kiir issued his presidential decree No. 3/2013 withdrawing the delegated powers from the vice president, Riek Machar. This decision brought about mixed reactions and quite a substantial number of opinions have so far suggested that this is not about delegated powers per se but it is largely about the on-going political bickering and leadership shadow boxing within the political bureau and the SPLM party. These calculations are tempting to be ruled out as these are indeed the hidden secrets that compounded the power struggle within the ruling party.

These factors later on but now….. let us just go to the rationale (if any) of the presidential decree withdrawing the delegated powers of the vice president and the subsequent decree that dissolved the national peace and reconciliation committee, the question that I initially had to asked and all of you could be anxious to ask is, “did the president have to go public in his decision of withdrawing the delegated powers from his vice president?”

Mine is a resounding NO. why, because the prudence behind the term ‘delegation or delegated’ is relative and quite prerogative to the extent that, the president like any other boss in his own right can withdraw by implications the trust that he has bestowed upon his vice and possibly tell him one-on-one that, he will no longer send him here and there, the president can as well remain silent and choose to delegate other people to do the work that is supposed to be done by his vice at his pleasure.

This will indirectly tell the vice president that he is no longer relevant because the president no longer trusts him with major government projects.

There is a recent example that I must relate to you about these kinds of things. Closer home, when Kenya was preparing to go to the general elections, president Kibaki was caught up with the choice of picking a successor and because there were so many candidates who were eyeing his endorsement, he decided that, in order to play his cards safely.

He had rather started right away and from then on, he forgot about his vice president Kalonzo Musyoka who was not his favorite choice and whom he doubted would be a spoiler in his plans to bring Uhuru Kenyatta to state house. He rapidly delegated Musilia Mudavadi who was then the Deputy prime minister and all he intended was to tell Kalonzo indirectly that, ‘man, if you don’t relent on your desire to block Uhuru, then know that I can always have a choice against you even before the general elections.’

This change of events drew Kenyans into serious arguments and endless debates but in simple terms, it was a withdrawal of powers by Kibaki from Kalonzo Musyoka by implications. Mr. Kibaki didn’t care whether Mr. Mudavadi was called his project or otherwise. He was determine to deter Kalonzo and that, he ultimately achieved.

Now, let’s come back to Kiir and his ‘brother’ Riek. In my opinion, the president could have silently made use of his closest confidants to stripe the so called delegated powers of the vice president instead of wasting time on writing a decree. The president could have sent the people that he had earlier sent to investigate Riek on the desire to contest in SPLM to also act for him in things that he used to delegate Dr. Riek to do for him.

What would have been Different?

The people of south Sudan would have been glued to their Television sets and their ears fixed to the local radios if the president had decreed the suspension of the vice president powers under article 105 of the transitional constitution of south Sudan 2011 for the best reasons known to him. This would have made great news although it could have been disastrous and volatile news at the same time.

However, with my non-acceptance of what transpired, I still strongly feel that, Kiir wanted to pass one strong message to Dr. Riek that, “you think you have people on the ground, am still the president of this republic, your political oxygen is squarely in my bare hands and you should be careful how you try to compete against me’.

Kiir also wanted to taste the popularity of his decrees to the public in the political aspects and if the reaction is not overwhelming, then he may as well thumb his chest and say, ‘am still in control’, so all in all, Kiir is threatening Dr. Riek that ‘don’t think about SPLM, else you will find yourself in your house before the convention.’

What I would call ‘damage control’ by the Information Minister, Barnaba Marial Benjamin, to me does not hold any water in the current political developments, following are what he had to say when he addressed the Journalists yesterday in Juba regarding the decree withdrawing the Vice President delegated powers that: “Riek Machar is still a vice president with all constitutional powers. General Salva Kiir Mayardit is still a president with all his constitutional powers. They are all in office. What the president had done is that he had withdrawn powers he had previously delegated to the vice president. It is like you asking me to do some work for you when you are preoccupied. This is exactly what happened and it should be understood in this context,” Marial said Tuesday.

He added that, “There is no difference that I know between the vice president and the president. The two leaders have been closely working together on all issues of national value.”

That is also what I would call ‘rat-and-Mouse Game’ in Marial’s sentiments. What Benjamin does not understand about this job of his is that, he can always be loyal to his boss and report in his favor but also, he has an equally significant obligation to tell the public of south Sudan the truth. He cannot lie to the people that there is no problem between the two artificial brothers (Riek & Kiir) and this is already in the public domain.

What is needed now is, ‘what are the necessary conflict resolution mechanisms people like Benjamin exploring to avoid the situation from escalating into a different dimension that will negatively affect the lives and progress of the people of south Sudan.’

To say that there is no conflict between Riek and Kiir is like dangling the Christmas bell in the ears of the people of south Sudan and I think Marial should be told that we know better than what he thinks he wanted to tell us, we need new solutions to those political bureau and the SPLM power wrangles.

The decree suspending the holding of the national reconciliation conference and dissolution of the committee thereof:

My first reaction to this fact was that the president had overreacted because the commission on peace and reconciliation should not have been seen to be a brief case project for the vice president such that the withdrawal of his delegated powers could be done concurrently with the dissolution of the commission.

But later on as the details of the conflicted unfolded, I was convinced that this commission was a sole project of the vice president and some of his closest cronies and the office of the president was never happy with it and its leadership from day one.

The reasons for the decision emerged that, with the removal of the vice president from the committee, the office of the president can now work on installing its own cronies to eat into the funding that had been appropriated to the project.

So in simple terms, ‘it is, you have eaten enough, Mr. vice president, it is now my turn to eat the remaining share with my cronies’ kind of scenario.

Otherwise, if there were no individual interests in the national peace and reconciliation commission, I don’t see any legitimate reason why it should have been incorporated as an ingredient to this political conflict. The people of south Sudan need to move forward and the commission was a milestone in this journey.

So it was, to say the least, useless to drag the commission into this problem.

In conclusion, I wish to offer my free legal advice to the president and his advisors that, next time when you want to embarrass someone, do it in your offices without giving the public uneasy time, because, believe me you, I couldn’t sleep that night when this news was read out and I think most of you did not.

The president and his advisers had created an unnecessary political tension and this is something they should have handled quietly and neatly.

From now on, you must know that ‘delegated powers’ are freely and willingly given by any particular boss and they are or can be withdrawn at will, so there was no need to inform us about it, however, the point of giving the strong message to Dr. Riek being the underlying factor is recognized but again, use other mechanisms next time.

As for the people of south Sudan, politicians are funny animals and can only be likened to foxes family, they can trick you to do what they would not do and recently in Kenya, Raila Odinga, after losing to Uhuru Kenyatta in the presidential elections, behaved as if he was never going to reconcile with Uhuru.

And some four (stupid) people committed suicide because of him after the supreme court ruled in favor of Uhuru, upholding his presidential elections result as legitimate.

Two days after Uhuru was sworn in and Raila came back from south Africa, the later was invited to state house, Nairobi, and the four, (president Uhuru Kenyatta, deputy President William Ruto and the losers Raila and Kalonzo musyoka) had lunch together, got into the jovial mood anyone would ever see and spent a splendid time together.

One blocker after seeing the pictures of their cordial meeting wrote on Facebook and I must quote: “what if we had killed ourselves?!!”

These are the politicians for you and my honest advice now in this case is that, we should take the decision made by the president as purely a leadership wrangle between him and his deputy and should not be taken out of context to cause disunity among the ordinary citizens because in the end, these two gentlemen will be seen sharing several other issues as they are now doing.

Let’s take the Kenyan blogger’s spirit and for that I say, “why should we kill ourselves for this duo?”

Juma Mabor Marial is a Lawyer and Lives in Juba.

Reachable at: hussenjuma@hotmail.com.

BY: Tongun Lo Loyuong, HELSINKI, MAR/31/2013, SSN;

In view of some of the counter-discourses that have surfaced since we last expressed our opinion on why South Sudan’s liberation is gone awry, it seems fitting to reload the debate. It is clear that our freely expressed opinions do not bode well with some of our brothers, old and young alike. In the past when we shared our view on why we will not be celebrating the first anniversary of the independence of South Sudan due to endemic corruption and systemic nepotism driven by ethnic particularism and identity politics that dominates the social, economic and political space in the country, we were labeled unpatriotic, and senseless.

We were also condemned as disrespectful to the blood of the martyrs, even though it was precisely because of our respect to the selfless sacrifices of the martyrs, which we saw as being betrayed by current political malpractices that celebrating the first anniversary of the independence seemed redundant.

This time around when we pointed out the ills with why South Sudan liberation is being blown up in smoke before our very eyes, and why we decline to be passive bystanders, we are called bickerers and whiners. Worse yet, a distorted and reductionist explanation of the ills of land grab in the Republic that was devoid of any substance was publicly circulated as a response to allay the “nonsense” concerns of the overwhelming majority of South Sudanese, and boy what a delusional response indeed.

While engaging these issues through peaceful and civil debate is much welcomed, what will not be appreciated are barbaric attacks on the individual, without any objective well researched response to the substance of the issues raised. Reason with me like an educated man. Or is it the case that we lose our sense of civility when we are confronted with the truth? The view is already made public and substantiated with evidence; counter it in a similar manner.

Our brothers who were apparently irked by the previous usage of the term ignorance to describe the shambolic social and political reality in the country, have gone on not only to mistakenly equate ignorance with illiteracy but also skillfully divert the argument against the innocent masses of our people — the very powerless people we are defending, as the target of the alleged condescension.

They took the strong but unsurprisingly biased jibe in our direction that quote “as members of the elite, we tend to take major decisions without consulting people at the grassroot level, who are often considered illiterate and ignorant. Using education to judge our people underlines not only our level of ignorance but also lack of respect. Our uneducated people in the rural areas have managed to sustain us with a wealth of indigenous knowledge, experiences and wisdom of centuries” Unquote.

It is commendable that at least somebody somewhere is following our concerns, which is a good step in the right direction, as most of our political leadership are busy and can’t be bothered, while the country is falling apart beneath their feet.

Yet, our reply is that in their emotive reaction to our opinion, our point about tribal myopia as consuming South Sudan has now been substantiated beyond any reasonable doubt. What is more, and as we have amply showcased on numerous occasions in the past, our current crop of political leadership continue to leave much to be desired in terms of arresting the moral bankruptcy that is afflicting our society and which is at the center of the crises.

As is well known, the moral bankruptcy is not only contributing to the social decay of our people across ethnicities, but has also sacrificed the cohesive ideals and vision of the liberation struggles, where we now see the greed of our elite undermining the popular grievance of South Sudanese and their resolute will and desire to live a life in dignity and not as second class citizens in their own country anymore. It is these marginalization and domination policies that we are addressing as based on ignorance and arrogance, or rather the attitude and myth of “we liberated you.”

But if this is not clear enough, let me categorically reiterate that I was not in whole or in part referring to our “illiterate” and “uneducated” people as ignorant, nor was I trying to undermine the rich experience and traditions of the fathers and mothers in delivering ideal and healthy human relations between the various peoples of South Sudan.

If anything, I am a stern advocate of the notion that just and sustainable inter-communal peace in South Sudan can only be achieved by reviving the traditions and peace ideals and values of our ancestors and traditional elders, the very ideals that are now being undermined by our elite. I will address this in detail, when I look at the “Dinka Problem in South Sudan” in our next reflections.

For now, however, it really baffles me, when I hear such a strong sympathy expressed towards the plight of “our people” without seeing any concrete steps being taken to ameliorate their plight? Do they only become our people when we want to score some cheap political points?

What about the other people who are continually being called cowards? Where is the sympathy towards them and towards all South Sudanese for that matter? Where is the public condemnation of our ill-mannered brothers who are not ashamed to call their fellow compatriots cowards and slaves? Are these cowards and slaves not our people too?

How credible for some of our countrymen to condemn the usage of the terms arrogance and ignorance directed at their misbehavior, and yet turn the other way when our people are being called cowards and what not? Please don’t get me started.

In any case expressing such emotions of solidarity will remain but empty gestures, so long as South Sudanese remain deeply rooted in abject poverty and endless suffering while the delivery of social and economic services remain unheard of, even as some of us are wallowing in riches and privileges.

On a different note, who said that ignorance is all doom and gloom? We are all ignorant in one way or another. Ignorance only becomes negative when it resists embracing new knowledge, which does not necessarily have to be acquired solely in a classroom setting.

Ignorance is when we fail to revive the paths that our ancestors treaded to maintain social harmony, and that have sustained us for generations. After all, one of the purposes of knowledge generation and acquisition is to unlearn negative traits and perceptions, in order to learn positive ones that promote the betterment of the human condition on the personal level—through attitudinal change, and on the societal level—through the pursuit of mutually enhancing political change.

It is for this reason societies comb the past to find out how their ancestors have dealt with similar issues. It is the same reason why people travel the world for inter-cultural exchange and interaction for mutually enriching experiences in order to enhance their own cultures, by for instance speaking truth to power and unwanted practices upon their return home or remotely through electronic exchange.

In the end, the only reasonable avenue to find amicable and lasting solution to our problems in South Sudan is by peaceful and non-violent means where dialogue is at the center, and where we mobilize our rich experiences to create a nation and forge a peaceful, united, and prosperous society.

But for that to happen, South Sudanese must begin to come to their senses and listen to each other’s grievances, if we are to prevent inter-communal antagonism that may culminate to violent mayhem. Only this way can we steady the baby state to begin to learn to walk toward the front, and not backward.

Don’t’ get me wrong, I am not opposed to backward progress as long as it is backward progress and not backward regress. As the prolific African philosopher, John Mbiti convincingly articulated in his classic “African Traditional Religions and Philosophy,” in Africa our future lies behind us and our past before or in front us.

What this essentially means is that if South Sudan must be made to learn to walk backwards, it must walk backwards towards the front — a backward progress.

Put simply, South Sudan must learn to face and take advantage of its past, including its recent tragic past, which is well documented, and its old, oral and traditional past of our forefathers and mothers.

The implication is that we must turn to our rich traditions of the fathers and mothers, and how despite their differences with each other, they still managed to utilize traditional values and conflict resolution mechanism, which involves vomiting out or speaking about the problematic issue with each other with all transparency and mutual trust, in order to reconcile and peacefully co-exist.

How can I then denounce these people as ignorant? I am here today because of their tireless efforts, wisdom and diligent leadership. Let’s stop diverting the issue, and continue to be zealously clinging to a destructive mindset of entitlement. I was not attacking anybody’s tribe; the only tribe I am opposed to is the current spoiled regime and its spoiled policies.

Nay, with our current rigid mentality neither going to London, nor Cambridge, nor even landing on the moon can positively transform us from our muddled ignorance to informed bemusement, which is a positive form of ignorance.

Of all the views that have been expressed as part of the current debate, I am much more enriched by the objective article written by Suzanne Jumbo and entitled “National Healing and Building of the Nation: we are all equal,” and which appeared on Sudan Tribune, than by all the other void sentimentalities.

Notice after reading that article, I find it hard to slander the SPLM or empty it of its real content and purpose. That is constructive debate.

Christ is Risen, and so will South Sudan. Happy Easter!

For questions and concerns, you know where to find me: tloloyuong@gmail.com

QUOTE: “In the absence of inspired leadership, the more powerful side wears down the weaker.” Bevin Alexander

EDITORIAL ANALYSIS: MAR/28/2013, SSN;

If ever the word ‘kiir-iminality’ could be incorporated into our national lexicon, it would most appropriately provide a definition, status and activity of the most publicly blatant crimes being commissioned and committed with bravado and impunity by the ruling clique of government and cabinet replete with criminals and under the very watch of the current leadership in South Sudan.

Unarguably, since President Kiir and his SPLM/SPLA generals assumed power in South Sudan in 2005, the newly-created South Sudan nation has witnessed such bewildering acts of thievery and misrule by these newly-minted military-cum-civilian rulers, or ‘Kiir’s criminals’ since the president could personally but discreetly identify all of them.

In the latest scandal that has much bedazzled the nation and in which the perpetrating ‘kiir-iminals’ will never be arrested to the chagrin of the citizens, again, is the theft of millions (or a few thousands if the government spin doctors are to be relied upon) right from the president’s highly fortified office, an Oscar-winning Hollywood scripted action that defies all imagination.

In recollection, we’ve seen previous Megamillion dollars scandals that the rule of generals in South Sudan have unrepentantly commissioned and for which no single person has ever been arrested: the 4 Billion US dollar scandal by 75 alleged but known ‘kiir-iminals’ in the government, and the infamous 2 Billion US dollar Dura scandal perpetuated also with the criminal connivance of the so-called Multi-Donor Trust Fund expatriates.

However, in all these cases and many others that have made these ‘kiir-iminals’ and the generals ostentatiously rich despite the conspicuous poverty among the general populace, no single individual has ever been arrested, prosecuted and incarcerated in prison or made to refund the loot.

Instead, the prosecutorial modus operandi hopelessly preferred by the president was to write secret letters begging the 75 ‘kiir-iminals’ implicated to ‘please’ kindly repatriate the stolen dollars into a secret bank account in Nairobi that’s only known to the president himself. So far, years have passed and the nation hasn’t been updated on how much of that money returned and by whom…. how pathetic!

Legally, what President Kiir should have done, whether all monies were repatriated or not, was to hand over the names of these suspects to the police for further investigations and trial; otherwise, the probable definition of the word ‘kiir-iminals’ become appropriate since only the President is cynically privileged to their confidence, they’re, therefore, his self-owned and self-protected ‘kiir-iminals.’

Unfortunately, as predicted by many keen observers of our nation, the inevitable regression of the newly-independent South Sudan from a prefailed state to a complete failed state is almost accomplished, a fate brought about by the misrule of the generals and party die-hards utterly unfit and unprepared to shoulder the responsibilities of the nation.

History has glaringly proven that governments under military generals, who abruptly usurped a country’s political leadership either after a guerrilla war of liberation or more commonly after a military coup, all have either retrogressed, stalled or ended up in total failure and collapse, with deleterious effects on the nation.

As typical of military rulers, as is happening in South Sudan now, most of the nation’s money instead has been diverted into the insatiable Black Hole of an immensely bloated military budget which is inexplicably and arbitrarily exempted completely from any audit or transparency.

Irrefutably, in Africa, military juntas of such infamies as those of ‘Field Marshalls’ Bokassa and Idi Amin, or Generals Mobutu, Abache, Abboud, Mengisto and Siad Barre or the primitive Sergeant Samuel Doe of Liberia, all have clearly attested to the fact that generals or sergeants are totally unsuited to rule any country where democracy and constitutionality are supposed to prevail.

In our particularity of South Sudan, where bush-promoted guerrilla generals, most of whom haven’t had even the slimmest opportunity to attend some military college instruction or preparedness, leave alone completing basic primary school, have been suddenly pole-vaulted to top government positions from the presidency downwards, we are forever doomed as a failed state unless…….

More poignantly, just prior to assuming total governance in the country, the soon-to-be national army, was seriously divided and their top leaders figuratively and literally at each others throats, whence tribalism and sectarianism became overriding elements especially after the famous Rumbek confrontation between late Garang and the current commander and president.

It’s no wonder therefore that after more than eight years of state-sanctioned ‘kiir-iminality’ and misrule by these generals, the entire government has severely diverted from the much-cherished goals of liberation into goals of self-perpetuation and self-enrichment by a few, for which every tribe, regardless of numbers, had dearly paid for.

Historically and infamously, governments of, for and by generals, however much clothed in some cosmetic democracy with dubiously predetermined ‘national elections,’ have performed abysmally poorly in the fight against corruption, on the rule of law and on promotion of economic development of the country.

South Sudan, sadly, has become a pathetic epitome of the paradigm of failed military rule; the whole countryside is badly riddled with mortal rebellions, sectarian strife, economic depravity, starvation, famine, non-existent medical, educational or social services delivery.

Acceptably, despite being a resources (primarily oil, land, water and minerals) rich country, and despite starting our nationhood with billions of dollars in the government coffers, the political blunders recklessly commissioned by the government have irreversibly set the new country on the reverse course to perpetual doom.

What’s our future likely to be? For one, we’ll never be like Botswana, the jewel of Africa; more likely, we’ll be another Central African Republic, a ‘Democratic’ Republic of Congo, a Chad, or a more precipitous Somalia, unless some providential intervention saved the nation.

More aggravatingly, however, the government and its ‘kiir-iminals’ have unashamedly sold the future prosperity of the country for short-term survival gains and battered its sovereignty for exploitation by NGOs and the unscrupulous foreign investors/interests.

Lastly, what credibility does the President still have when, as they say, “he’s running with the hares and hunting with the hounds (dogs)?” It’s time President Kiir stopped glorifying and romancing with corruption with such impunity and without any recourse to morality or the law.