Differences emerge as People’s Democratic Movement (PDM) rejects latest proposal

People’s Democratic Movement (PDM),
July 18, 2018, press@pdm-rss.org, UNITED KINGDOM,

Agreement on Outstanding Issues of Governance;
Mindful that Sudan Government’s mediation in Khartoum has repeatedly and persistently insisted on presenting its proposal for a bloated government as a purported agreement by all parties on “Outstanding Issues of Governance”, and with Salva Kiir as the President of a proposed revitalized TGONU based on ARCSS 2015, PDM would like to take this opportunity to inform the mediators and the public that:

1. Khartoum mediators proposal for “Agreement on Outstanding Issues of Governance” is not consistent with SSOA’s position as communicated to the mediators, and the statement issued by SSOA this week, rejects this latest proposal.

2. The proposal does not reflect the position of PDM which calls for adoption of Federal Governance during the transitional period, based on three (3) autonomous regions with their borders of the three provinces of Upper Nile, Equatoria and Bahr al Ghazal as they stood on 1st January 1956.

3. The proposal does not reflect PDM people-centric position for power sharing between three federal regions on 33.33% for each region, and not allocation of power to political elites and their movements by a stroke of a pen.

There now seems to be a communication emanating from the mediation in Kharoum, quoting the Sudan Foreign Minister, Mohammed Eldirdiri, purporting that all the parties to the talks in Khartoum have agreed to their proposal on “Outstanding Issues of Governance.”

This could not be further from the truth and PDM wish to categorically refute this claim. As member of SSOA, neither PDM nor SSOA have reversed their expressed positions on the proposal, and have not endorsed it individually nor collectively as an alliance.

PDM as a member of SSOA has not given consent or authority to SSOA to sign the Khartoum Agreement on Outstanding Issues of Governance.

The communication from mediators in Khartoum that an agreement has been reached by all the parties is therefore misleading, inaccurate and not being factual.

Any member of SSOA who is so interested to sign the Khartoum Agreement on Outstanding issues should sign it on their own behalf individually and in the name of their own party or organization.

The interim Chair of SSOA, Mr. Gabriel Changson Chang, has no authority of SSOA to sign the Khartoum Agreement on Outstanding Issues of Governance on behalf of SSOA.

Dr. Hakim Dario
PDM Chair


  1. Eastern says:

    I love this position of PDM based on the 33.33% triunion, as I argued earlier. This thing of forcing leadership down the throats of South Sudanese is untenable. If Khartoum believes it can coerce Kiir and Machar to sign an agreement that will see it gain from the oil industry, as is now obvious, then be my guest!

  2. Mor-amook says:

    hahahaha, all those who pretend to be parties and representing the people of south Sudan will never agree when it comes to who can lead. Shame on you Dr. Hakim.

    When we had southern Sudan as a region, we were united and very strong. But when former president Jafar Nimeri realized that, he divided south into three regions, a policy of divide and rule and subsequently abrogate the 1972 peace agreement. That divide and rule was the beginning of identifying ourselves as tribes by the regions.

  3. Bismark says:


    Now what would you call the 32 states that Kiir created alone for? Look at yourselves before claiming things!! South Sudan will come to rest at peace when no one of us feels more superior than any of us. This nation can only be successful in all aspects and politically stable if we come to believe that the country was built on foundation of Equatoria, Bahr el Ghazal and Upper Nile Regions. Like the three stones that hold the pot on fire, two stones can not hold the pot without the input of a missing stone as such any of missing region in agreement on issues of concern only advocates instability and insecurity. Mr your 32 states were for divide and rule if you do not know my dear. Learn from now.

Leave a Reply to Bismark Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.