South Sudan: Independence de Jure or
de Facto?
By Dr. James Okuk
DEC 21/2009, SSN;
As you decide to read and digest this article, please allow me to wish
you a happy Christmas if you are a Non-Oriental Christian or a
Non-Christian who celebrate this worldwide religious event in solidarity
with Westernized Christians. Furthermore, allow me to wish you a
blissful new year of 2010 if you are a Pro-Gregorian Solar Calendar that
ends the old year on every 31st of December in order to start the new
one on the 1st of January. May this Gregorian year 2010 be a peaceful
one in the Sudan especially in the worrying circumstances surrounding
the conduct of general 2010 elections in the country, the challenge of
sincerer preparation for South Sudan referendum in January 2011 in
accordance with article 226 (4) of the Sudan National Interim
Constitution, and the search for a comprehensive peace agreement in
Darfur.
In this article, I would like to present my answers to the following
political question: Which is the Priority
to the Native CPA Partners (NCP and SPLM); Referendum for the People
of Southern Sudan or the Sudan National Security Act? I know that it is
difficult to give a conclusive answer on behalf of somebody else,
especially when you are not mandated to do so. Nevertheless, it is
possible to attempt an answer based on behavior observation as some of
us keenly follow chronologically the unfolding political events in the
Sudan.
Thus, it could be said that the referendum for the people of Southern
Sudan is not a priority to the NCP neither is it for the SPLM unionists.
It is the National Security Act which is their priority as it suits
their power interest calculus in the united Sudan; be it
Old Sudan of
Islamism or
New Sudan of
Secularism. The NCP cadres are much
concerned about this Act because it is the backbone of their political
survival in the fragile Sudan where they got into power through
insecurity. They designed the existing National Security Law in a way
that would prevent any similar treatment to them. That is, the Security
Law that has been operating in the Country is aimed to protect NCP
leaders as individuals with government powers rather than safeguarding
the people of the Sudan as a whole, regardless of their parties’
affiliations. That is why whoever attempts to create an environment that
could lead to the NCP regime change, encounters “brutal lessons” from
the Sudan Security agents immediately.
For their power survival in the CPA era, the NCP negotiators ensured
that there is a provision in the CPA that says the status quo of the
existing laws shall remain until replaced by new ones that comes into
effect after being endorsed by the Interim legal authorities (the
Council of Ministers headed by the President and the Legislative
Assembly headed by the Speaker) (See CPA Part II, article 2.12.8). And
who are the heads these legislative and executive branches of
Government? The NCP cadres of, course. Hence they have the opportunity
to play legal and political tricks on the drafted bills.
The existing Security Act and other related Police and Armed Forces Acts
in the Sudan that were promulgated before the CPA came into force, are
very good for the NCP and they would prefer that new ones do not come
into existence. Therefore, when SPLM dull politicians enthusiastically
delay the enactment of new laws in this regard, the NCP foxy cadres
become very happy. They even help the SPLM to boycott their
constitutional obligations so that things stand in the country without
any new progress. The CPA has made the NCP leaders to gain more favors
than they use to get during the time of war. So the more delays come on
the way of CPA implementation, the better for them!!! They will pretend
to avoid delays but they will push the SPLM to do this dirty politics
for them, since some trouble-happy senior SPLM leaders feels heroes by
going opposite to the false direction that the NCP senior leaders point
to.
In other words, the delays that are caused by incompetency of the SPLM
cadres are a blessing in disguise for the NCP cadres because it
elongates their stay in power with a lion share in government control
where they continue to give the GoSS and other states of the Southern
Sudan what has been agreed to be belonging to the South in terms of
wealth and power. It is said that whoever gives you something even if
it is yours, becomes your master directly or indirectly. The CPA gave
the NCP powers to give SPLM and GOSS the share of oil money and
government powers, and therefore, the NCP is the master of the SPLM,
albeit. This is called inference of simple Aristotelian logic.
The NCP have proven many times to be smarter than the SPLM. They have
often put the SPLM weak leaders on reactive side of Sudanese politics.
What a pity to the so-called voluntary liberators of Southern Sudanese
who thinks the end of bush struggle is spree of corruption and tribalism
with impunity in the GoSS and other ten states of Southern Sudan!!!
Coming to the issue of referendum, the Non-Southerners who comprise the
majority of the NCP members are not eligible to this exercise and so
they consider it as none of their democratic or undemocratic business.
The same applies to the Non-Southerners who comprise the minority of the
SPLM membership; the referendum is never a priority to them. This could
be detected as the simple raison detre
why they are much concerned about the Security Act and other Acts that
are supposed to make democratic environment conducive for mass
demonstrations aimed at generating popular uprisings in Khartoum and
Medani even if this doesn’t apply in Juba or the South.
It is philosophically said that the right question is the start of the
correct answer, which is translated in medical analogy as: the right
diagnosis leads to the right prescription for a cure of an ailment. I
could have framed the above question to include the “democratic
transformation”, but since I believe that referendum could be
de facto without necessarily passing
through democratic channels, I intentionally left it out though I
understand that the de jure referendum
is a fundamental part of democracy as practiced worldwide.
What I mean here in a common language is that history is rich of
examples of countries that became independent without referenda that
were regulated by civil laws, as well as countries that became
independence through civil democratic referenda laws. Notwithstanding,
the countries that chose to get independent
de jure got it peacefully without
bloodshed or other undesirable consequences. The case of Southern Sudan
could take the direction of any of those options: independence
de jure or independence
de facto. But I will appreciate the
de jure direction until otherwise
imposes itself as unavoidable option. This is the tricky part of it all
that makes the NCP cadres unable to play legal games and political
delay-tactics for this right to dignity of Southerners after decades of
colonialism and oppressions.
That is why since the signing of the CPA they started to build big
developmental projects in the North from the oil dollars and euros that
comes from South Sudan natural resources. The NCP left the South to the
mercy of creator God as they dispatched huge amount of development fund
into the pockets and private accounts of corrupt and shameless SPLM
leaders. The NCP knew it in the beginning
that with more money and luxury at their disposal, the SPLM leaders will
relax with alcohol and women, forget the bitterness of bush struggle,
and become confused than the confusion itself; they will live without
identified priorities and clear directions!
And this has indeed happened until the rush hour we are in now where the
SPLM runs ups and downs at the corridors of the National Parliament and
Council of Ministers to make sure that the Proposed 2009 Southern Sudan
Referendum Act is not left in the cold when the MPs finally lose their
constitutional immunities and privileges and go back to their homes on
23rd December 2009. If this happens, the leader of the SPLM
Caucus in National Assembly should be blamed for negligence and having
busied himself with useless conspiracies of who should be dismissed from
the SPLM members in the Parliament and Cabinet, rather having focused on
what should have been done right in the convenient time by the MPs and
Ministers that have been holding national portfolios on the SPLM
tickets. Not only this, but Kiir should be blamed for having appointed a
Jellaba to represent interest of the South in an important legal forum
like National Parliament in Khartoum. Any way, let’s hope that things
end well with the tabled Referendum Bill at the Parliament.
The haggling that has been going on between the ever-quarreling CPA
partners (SPLM and the NCP), hitherto, is about the
de jure referendum, which has to be
presented to National Council of Ministers and the National Legislative
Assembly for deliberation and passage (unanimously or by majority
votes). This legal path is commendable and I pray that its
implementation follows suits without feed-dragging or foxy tricks,
otherwise.
What has been going on indoors between the referendum negotiators is not
really known apart from what they told the public and what they wrote
down in the proposed Southern Sudan Referendum Act for the year 2009. If
there were some gentlemen agreements of give-and-take of power interests
between them inside there, this shall get revealed later, although.
Now the most important thing that needs keen attention is what has been
declared publicly on the referendum exercise in accordance with the CPA
and Interim National Constitution obligations though it is lagging
behind the schedule by one year, because article 220(1) of the Interim
Constitution says that the National Assembly should deliver Southern
Sudan Referendum Act by the third year of the interim period (i.e., by
2008). Will the Sudan Interim National
Assembly pass the proposed Referendum Act that has generated quarrels
between the native CPA partners or will it play delay-or-avoid tactics
in the rush hour in which this bill has been tabled? This is the
critical question that keeps the minds of many people focused to
Khartoum these days.
Anyway, it is better late than never as it is said there is no hurry in
Africa. Also it is understandable that many African countries are
struggling to get out of perception or/and experience that Africa is a
very good graveyard for best constitutions and agreements whose
articles remains as ink on papers without honouring their implementation
in time. The Sudan is best known for dishonoring some important deals
but we hope this time, with the obligatory referendum exercise, this bad
attitude could be avoided.
There was no way for the unfaithful partners (SPLM and NCP) to deny
publicly what they have agreed to in the CPA and the Sudan Interim
Constitution. Otherwise the people, especially Southerners who are most
concerned about their referendum and the international community who
have pushed for the realization of the CPA and witnessed its signing,
would have considered these partners as liars and untrustworthy to lead
the country any more (whether in the North or the South).
Now the Southern Sudan Referendum Act has been inked on the paper, would
it be honoured for it to see the bright light of its dawns;
be it independence of South Sudan or
continuity of unity with the unjust North!!! Would the referendum be
a priority to the current contradictory SPLM leadership or they will
continue to look after other confusions in the pretext of democratic
transformation in the fragile country that they are dreaming to re-named
“New Sudan” in accordance with the vision of late Dr. John Garang de
Mabior, and as surrogated by his trained errand boys who are zigzagging
the SPLM and SPLA and claiming it as their personal properties under the
incompetent leadership of Salva Kiir Mayardit who thinks that he could
oppress any political party or community in the South in the name of
liberation credit?
I doubt whether it is yet uhuru (liberation) under the current situation
in the South!!! And I doubt whether the South would be born as a
non-failed state under Kiir’s leadership that is incapable of
improvement with all the suitable opportunities availed since 2005. I
prefer that new leadership comes in so that it could take the South
safely to the promised destiny!!! May God hear my sincere prayers for
better change in the South after 2010 elections?
Dr. James Okuk is a concerned citizen of South Sudan. He
can be reached at okukjimy@hotmail.com
COMMENTS, PLEASE CLICK HERE
Disclaimer:
Disclaimer: The views expressed
above are solely those of the author and do not represent those of the
website.