Sudan’s partners failure over Abyei
By Alfred Taban, The Khartoum Monitor
May 31, 2006 — The meeting between the National Congress Party (NCP) and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) meeting has been a total failure. It resolved nothing. instead it brought to the fore the wide differences the two sides have over Abyei.
In an attempt to cover their failure at the meeting, the two “partners” proposed four options, all of them are either unworkable or have been proved to be impractical. The issue cannot be resolved within a political framework because the meeting just held was political in nature but did not solve much.
The second option was an insult to the Abyei Boundaries Commission (ABC). The option calls for the summoning of the ABC experts to come and explain their report. Now, how can you summon these experts as if they were criminals? These are 15 experts, five representing the government, five the SPLM and the other five foreigners who you, the parties to the conflict, appointed.
The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) says “upon presentation of the final report (by the ABC), the presidency shall take necessary action to put the special administrative status of Abyei area into immediate effect.” Has the presidency set up the administration in Abyei? The group to be summoned is not the ABC, but the presidency that has refused to implement the recommendations of the ABC. This is the second insult of the ABC. After being authorized to produce a report, the ABC came out with its report and presented it to the presidency last July accordingly.
Instead of accepting the report and implementing it speedily as required by the CPA, the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) rejected it and instead accused the ABC of overstepping its mandate. Just because the ABC came out with a report that it did not like, the NCP decided that the ABC had to be declared offside, a clear case of selective implementation of the CPA.
The third option of referring the case to the constitutional court is not workable because the court is dominated by the NCP and its verdict would likely support the ruling party’s views.
The fourth option of arbitration could work if the third party is know. The arbitrator has to be acceptable to all sides, including the ABC. If that third party was mentioned and all sides, including the ABC. If that third party was mentioned and all the sides accepted, it could work but it was not named. Hence that option too is unworkable.
The CPA is very clear on the issue of Abyei and has not left any room for ambiguity. The report of the ABC is final and has to be acted upon. The refusal of the NCP (the SPLM has no problem with the report) to accept the report is a flagrant violation of the CPA and the party has to be severely punished for this. This refusal is setting a very dangerous precedent.
Next time one of the parties finds a clause in the CPA it does not want, it will also ignore it and fail to implement what it calls for. What kind of agreement would we be left with? The CPA must be implemented in spirit and deeds. That is the only way we can prevent a return to war.