Democratic Forum denounces supporters of corruption in S. Sudan

March, 20, 2007 — The recent developments pertaining to cracking down on corruption should be applauded by those Southerners who are concerned with good governance, accountability and transparency since they are prelude to get rid of the challenges which hinder development in the post-war South Sudan. Ever since the formation of the Government of the South Sudan (GoSS), there has been an outcry from all quarters of South Sudan regarding the rate of corruption and the way it has been practiced in Juba. There is no doubt that corruption has paralyzed the newly established GoSS and demoralized all those Southerners who had high hopes that with the achievement of peace more positive things would follow i.e., rapid social economic development, institutional buildings, repatriation of refugees, rehabilitation and resettlement of internally displaced persons (IDPs).

The courageous step the leadership of the GoSS has taken could be regarded as the beginning of weeding out corruption and taking up the responsibility to discipline all those individuals who once assumed they were above the law and could not be touched, lest the GoSS would collapse because they claimed that they had suffered enough during the struggle and as such abrogated to themselves the right to abuse public trust and misappropriate public funds with impunity and defiance. These individuals also went as far as mobilizing their own constituencies to back up their malpractices by instigating their chiefs and elders to threaten the leadership of the GoSS that if their sons who are now in high positions were removed on corruption allegations, they would withdraw their support from the leadership of the ruling party.

With such a threat from the supporters of corruption lords, could we say that they want to justify the theory that stealing from coffers of the government is not a crime if it benefits a particular community? According to this theory, stealing from the GoSS is not seen as a crime or immoral act by individuals or ethnic groups who find themselves in power. From their point of view, it is a manly thing to do: Steal from the alien government with impunity. Under normal circumstances, a leader of an organized state could not loot a government or a ministry with impunity and get away with it. If this theory is what the supporters of corruption lords in Juba have ascribed to, then the GoSS is in real trouble and it is time for president Salva Kiir to challenge and denounce it in the strongest language possible; otherwise, if those corruption lords continue to practice such a theory, then the only law that could deal with them is Sharia law which exacts the penalty accordingly.

To do justice to all those accused of corruption, perhaps it would now be left to the investigation committee to carry on with their work and minimize more publicity in order to avoid manipulating the outcome of the investigation. Although some people had already started making their presentations by writing enticing and crafty letters in order to blackmail the GoSS’s leadership to be more compassionate in dealing with matters pertaining to allegations of corruption, we would regard such presentations as suspicious, premature and lack sense of statesmanship. The tone of such correspondences could make people from other regions to doubt the competence and ability of the leadership of the GoSS if in fact the presidency at some point would succumb to such intrigues and subtleties promoted by individuals who have tainted records which might compel people to revisit in case they may try to fool the public that their move is genuine and it is an expression of regional solidarity.

The relieve from duty of former Minister of Finance, Arthur Akuen Chol and the issuance of arrest warrants for Mr. Isaac Makur Ater, former under-secretary of the Ministry of Finance, and Major Gen. Martin Malwal Arop, former member of June 30, 1989, Military Revolutionary Council that overthrew a democratically elected government, are just the beginning of tackling the reign of corruption in the South. We expect more to follow and the fact that the accused individuals happened to come from one region (Greater Bhar el Ghazal) should be deemed as coincidence although it has already prompted a move from political elites of Greater Bhar el Ghazal to think that the initiative taken by the GoSS was targeting one particular region. The signatories of a letter written to President Salva Kiir by a group of politicians from Greater Bhar el Ghazal argued that the people of Bhar el Ghazal suffered greatly during the struggle more than any other region in the South—a claim which could make many South Sudanese from other regions to feel insulted as we know very well that the two civil wars started in the regions in which the signatories of the letter did not hail from, i.e., the August 1955 civil war which broke out in Torit took its toll in Greater Equatoria before reaching Greater Bhar el Ghazal and Greater Upper Nile. Moreover, history attests that the May 16 1983 uprisings that took place in Bor and Ayod inflicted a lot of destructions in terms of human capital in Eastern Upper Nile, particularly eastern Nuer, where civil war took its toll before spreading to other regions of the South.

Coming back to analysis of whether the claim made by the Bhar el Ghazal’s elites in their letter that individuals who have been accused of corruption are among those who had suffered during the war, the people of the South, particularly learned individuals from Greater Bhar el Ghazal, would regard the arguments presented in the letter as a mockery of justice as we all know that the majority who have been indicted, and who happened to come from Bhar el Ghazal, never suffered during the struggle. For instance, Mr. Arthur Akuen Chol is one of the individuals who were not subjected to harsh realities of the frontline during the armed struggle. As for Major Gen. Martin Malwal Arop and Mr. Isaac Makur, these are individuals who had never been to the bush. While the rest of South Sudanese were busy fighting the war of liberation, these two men had been prospering and flourishing financially under successive Khartoum regimes. It is undeniable fact that President Omar Bashir dismissed Major Gen. Malwal Arop in the 1990s because of embezzlement and abuse of public funds. For the signatories of the letter to claim that their people are being victimized—unless there are people from Bhar el Ghazal whom they suspect might follow suit because of corruption charges—the arguments they presented in the letter should be regarded as an obstruction of justice and an attempt to prejudice the investigation. With the exception of a few, the majority of the signatories had never joined the liberation struggle. For the sake of fairness, they were either regarded as supporters or sympathizers who had never cocked AK-47 to liberate their people.

Coming back to the question of the interest of Bhar el Ghazal as indicated in the letter, many Southerners would wonder whether the interest of Greater Bhar el Ghazal does override the national interest of the South. Although suspension of Arthur Akuen Chol by the president of the GoSS was not meant to target any particular region, the people of the South are caught off guard to learn from Bhar el Ghazal’s elites that the former Minister of Finance was appointed in Oct. 2005 to safeguard the financial interests of Bhar el Ghazal at the expense of the South. What is now at stake is the issue of $360 million dollars which, up to now, could not be accounted for. This amount of money allocated as oil revenue in 2005 is for the whole South, not money for one region. Such amount of money, if disbursed equally to the ten states, would lead Greater Bhar el Ghazal to end up with $144 million dollars, which is a fair share for four states of the region. If this is what the signatories of the letter claimed to be the interest of Bhar el Ghazal and should not be questioned because their people had suffered during the war as they alleged, then, where is the balance which was supposed to be allocated to Greater Equatoria and Greater Upper Nile whose people also suffered from the war? If that is what their crafty and beguiled letter is alluding to, then perhaps Greater Equatoria and Greater Upper Nile should demand out of court settlement to retrieve their share in order to avoid lengthy and protracted investigation of Arthur Akuen Chol which we could see has been prejudiced by the letter of Bhar el Ghazal’s elites.

What is also extremely worrying, but not surprising, with the letter of Bhar el Ghazal’s elites is the involvement of those who always regard themselves as statesmen and rose to prominence as the result of their claim as national figures, and yet the way they look at issues is far from statesmanship. Sometimes people may begin to wonder whether these political elites from Greater Bhar el Ghazal are not promoting re-division of the South, and if so, where did those politicians of Greater Equatoria go wrong when they talked of “Kokora” in 1983? President Salva Kiir Mayardit should be very vigilant and take greater caution as signs of the collapse of his empire are simmering and if that happened, he should not blamed other people a part from regional politics being played by his kin and kith. Unless he is in full agreement with such regional politics as he once ascribed to during the Rumbek Conference of 2004 where he challenged Dr. Garang and claimed that the people of Greater Bhar el Ghazal suffered more than any region, and positioned himself as a regional leader to defend their rights, we advise the president to respect his constitutional post lest he followed the footsteps of late Joseph James Tombura who dismantled his empire despite an overwhelming support he enjoyed from all Southerners by succumbing to regional politics. Otherwise, the people of the South would wonder if those of Bhar el Ghazal’s elites who joined the 1983 uprising because they rejected the re-division of the South are now using the CPA as a new model for further re-division of the South by giving special status to one region to colonize others, as was the pledge of some Bhar el Ghazal’s members of parliament in 1983 who warned supporters of Kokora that “we would go to bush and come back to Juba as your masters”. People may also wonder whether Bhar el Ghazal’s interest being preached by the political elites of that region would not give birth to the promotion of tribal, clan and sectional interests at state level leading to the decentralization of chieftainships.

For Contact:

Mr. Gordon Buay

Spokesperson of South Sudan Democratic Forum Party and Chairman of Democratic Forum in Canada

Tel. (613)260-9307

Email: [email protected]

Further Contact:

Head Office

South Sudan Democratic Forum

Juba, South Sudan