For political reason SPLA/M exploited the situation as a way to weaken Riek and to arrest, torture and send many Southerners to exile because of the same request for democratic rights. This has resulted into mass defections and abandonment of the movement since for the first time people begun to know that the movement is only after their manpower but not concerned about their interest, rights, and protection as such policies are contrary to the principles of democracy, justice, human rights, and rule of law.
 
The second problem of democracy in South Sudan emerged during the negotiation of Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Kenya. At the beginning of the peace agreement many South Sudanese scholars, students, religious groups, politicians, and other international observers felt the peace process was not democratic; inclusive, transparent and argued that these problems need be fixed before Nairobi agreement reached its conclusion. But the request felt into deaf ear of SPLA/M who short-sightedly thought by being the only party falsely claiming to be representing Southerners and because of power grid, it expects to control South from its competitor.

Hence, it also forgot the split of 1992 factions which brought with it a new chapter and perceptions on SPLA/M direction and its visions. It is here for the first time that many Southerners knew that the movement is not fighting for self-determination of South Sudan but the entire Sudan. The Nubians on the other hand found that they participated in a war in which their demands were excluded in practice although in theory such claim seems real.

Because of the mass immigration of Southerners into exile, the Nubians went back to defend their region which was neglected by the SPLA/M from NIF atrocities. For this reason the Nubians which were gathered on the false and illusive ideology of “New Sudan” were able to drop out from the movement as a whole and begun to define their cause and methodology of their struggle. This negative consequence has made if difficult for the movement to bring new fighters together and this has resulted in the Sudan Peace Agreement in Kenya as the only reliable option for SPLA/M to recover from its political blunder. Hence, Kenya agreement did empower SPLA/M to led South Sudan undemocratically.
 
The third challenge of democracy in South Sudan comes from the formation of GOSS. In less than two years, the appointment of one ethnic group in GOSS is complete. Corruption took its toll, insecurity became rampant, removal of able and capable South Sudanese leaders who’re elected democratically by their subjects became the norm of Juba administration.

Land problem erupted. Militias issue became a political scapegoat of our administration in Juba to cover its failures. Militia were accused for hindering development of South Sudan. However, the militias were not fools but they met CPA principle which states either they join SPLA/M or Sudan’s government. In addition, many Southerners know that the other army group doesn’t have administrative power that would stop South Sudan development like SPLA/M does.

Since three years of militia blame did not score political gain to SPLA/M, the blame game has been shifted to the Sudan government. Sudan government is accused for not giving 50% share of oil; Darfur crisis is worsening each second; that the government is not honoring CPA; it is responsible for South/North border demarcation failure and Abyie disputes. This complaint reminds the words of those who said CPA was undemocratic, exclusive, transparent which is why SPLA/M and its partner NCF could not resolve most of these contentious issues because of either social cohesion or social exclusion.
 
The fourth challenge of democratic values is the existence of bad governance. The government in South Sudan lacks ability to provide social services such as health care, education, employment, affordable housing, food and clean water to the average citizens. Instead, prostitution became a source of employment as strippers club was the first thing our government was able to build, child sex abuse by foreigners became common as our weak judiciary system is unable to defend and protect our young ones. It can be reinstated that most of this social crisis is a result of poor coordination between executive, legislature, and judiciary system in South Sudan which was formed undemocratic.
 
The fifth democratic shortcoming in the South happened during census. Before the so-called Sudan census took off, GOSS Minister Gabriel Changson has vigorously outlined reasons why the census should be postponed. However, our Minister democratic right was undermined by the president who doesn’t listen to his cabinet Ministers. Mr. President ignored the predicated negative consequences expected to come in future.

Regardless of problems stated by Changson, Mr. President is impatient about census because of the assumption that such delay of census will hinder his elect-ability in the next Sudan general election. That is why the census has to go undemocratically irrespective of whatever its outcome would produce. From now onwards let each and every concerned South Sudanese people know that we have lost one of the important democratic right (census) which is vital to our self-determination.

As we wait for the result of census which is already showing trouble in some areas in South, let us be prepared for how we will face the 2011 referendum. For if one person can carry out census without his Cabinet Minister’s help or concerned volunteers, common sense tells us that the same will occur in the referendum. It took us decades for the South to get this precious event but destruction of progress can destroy such noble cause in one second.

Thus, the triple alliance of SPLM, NIF, and LRA of Uganda with the aim of causing instability in Eastern, Central, and Western Equatorial, together with Bahr el Ghazal and Upper Nile must be defeated during the referendum or else we will remain slaves of these coalition of land grabbers, violators of human rights, destructors of life and property who cannot provide our children with food, health care, education and security.
 
The last democratic challenge facing SPLA/M is its ambition and expectation of wanting to win Sudan’s general election. Although I respect such democratic right, I wonder how SPLA/M expects to win given its pitiful shortfalls in all areas of governance and management of public offices. If SPLA/M thinks its long imaginary slogan of “New Sudan” is the only ticket to enable it win Sudan’s president, this is a serious joke which a kid cannot dare do.

The following are the reasons why I think SPLA/M cannot win Sudan’s general election. a), most South Sudanese are not going to participate in Sudan’s election because such event is not in their interest and whoever wants to rule Sudan shall do so at his/her own cost but not at Southerners expense; b), SPLA/M is disorganized and disunited within its government since there is disrespect on cabinet ministers duties; c), the Nubian and Darfurian cannot be deceived by SPLA/M anymore, in fact they have already declared that they will not take part in Sudan’s election as their Liberation Movement is growing fast in their region; d) northern opposition parties are united regardless of their divergent party’s plate-form and their unity is bond by their common religion, culture, language, and are respectful about their life, properties e. g businesses and would not accept anyone to destroy such valuable things irregardless of who among the northern political parties is leading Sudan.

So, what did SPLA/M have in store? Corruption, lack of respect for people’s property, violators of human rights, lack of the rule of law and order, unable to build hospitals, roads, factories, and decent facilities for tourists.

However, if SPLA/M wins Sudan’s election by miracle as it always does, the first thing people in Khartoum will witness is confiscation of their houses, stores, lands and vehicles like what is happening in Juba. If someone in the north requested for an explanation as to why his or her land and properties is looted, SPLA/M leaders will respond they have liberated Khartoum.
 
I would like to close this article by saying the remedy for this democratic chaos mentioned above is not difficult. All what the lover of power needs to do is to be respectful of the democratic institutions, protect people’s life and property, willing to engage in team work, discourage tribalism, forget corruption, encourage accountability and transparent, be inclusive as opposed to exclusion or cohesion.

These factors could enable the lover of power to rule not only South Sudan or Sudan in general but also the whole world. Otherwise, the culture which is after terrorizing South Sudanese with all sorts of discrimination and mistreatment will not keep or bring someone into power. So let’s learn how to live together in the most democratic way if this is a problem for others in South Sudan.