SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
December 17, 2009 (KHARTOUM) — The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) reaffirmed its rejection to the bill of National Security saying it would vote against it next Sunday.
Yaser Arman, the leader of SPLM block at the Sudanese parliament and SPLM deputy Secretary General for northern Sudan, told Sudan Tribune Thursday they reiterated their opposition to the national security bill during the meeting because they “are opposed the powers to arrest, detention, search and seizure, and immunities for national security personnel,” he said.
“This is our initial and last position and we will not endorse this bill on Sunday,” he added.
Arman also said the NCP is determined to pass this bill with the mechanical majority stressing this position violates the spirit and the text of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the interim constitution.
In October, the SPLM and Sudanese opposition parties walked out of parliament because they objected to a draft national security bill endorsed by the ruling party that retained broad powers of arrest, detention, and immunities for national security personnel.
The two peace partners following a protest on December 7, reached an agreement on the referendum bills for southern Sudan and Abyei and the popular consultations for Blue Nile and South Darfur states, but failed to agree on the democratic reforms bills particularly the National Security and the syndicates’ bills.
The current law, the 1999 National Security Forces Act, allows the National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS) to arrest and detain people without charge for up to nine months, and without judicial review for six months. It also grants them broad powers of search and seizure, and contains immunity provisions.
Sulaiman Hamid Al-Haj, spokesperson of the opposition National Democratic Alliance block at the National Assembly announced they would boycott the assembly session on Sunday, he stressed they took this decision after a meeting of the parliamentary blocs of the NDA, SPLM and the bloc of Darfur Peace MPs.
The former rebel Sudan Liberation Movement of the Senior Presidential Assistant Minni Minnawi joined the opposition parties and the SPLM during the two protests organized for the democratic reforms on 7 and 14 December.
On Tuesday 15, federal minister of parliamentary affairs, Joseph Okello, presented draft bills on South Sudan and Abyei Referendum to the National Assembly for deliberations.
He also tabled the popular consultation bill for the contested areas of South Kordofan and Blue Nile to the assembly. Subsequently the bills got their way to the special parliamentary committee headed by Badria Suleiman from the NCP.
Arman also said the two blocks agreed on their meeting on Thursday to replace five of the former SPLM lawmakers with other five MPs. The move includes Lam Akol, Ghazi Suleiman and three other splinter members.
(ST)
Dinka Dominated SPLA
SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
That is the voic of the magnificent the DINKA who always say no to the enamy of his people well go a haed DINKA savrce your people in south sudan there is no freedom if no one invoke the DINKA. Thanks to the DINKA
Oduko
The laws must be pass by all mean !!
what do this criminals perty so called “SPLM/A” need lord !?
their laws of referendum has aldready been passed and again trying to destroy national security bill !! this is clear of end of CPA SPLM must burn death due of them fail in everything, therefore I call on SAF to clean the country out of SPLM they really thirsty of war honestly..
Mr Famous Big_Logic_Boy
SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
I believe that those two leaders who lead the monster protest are trying to creature a confusion before April 2010. It seem like they have their personal goal in fact they protest beyond the standard. I never see any protest that least for weeks and months.
junub
SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
Thanks Yasir I strongly saluted you with our party’s faith. It energizing we the SPLM members that we have great leaders like you Yasir, Pagan and the others. To bring peace in our country is not easy as traitor thought which is why the Sudanese people need un-easy-going leaders like you Yasir and Pagan. Going to jell is nothing if you go because of your people’s right, otherwise the black leaders in our African or African-American would have not jelled for the seck of their country. Love you leaders of the day.
Amir Ageeb
SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
The SPLM should continue the STRUGGLE even though the NCP will pass this damn BILL.
It is clear the NCP has been in power so far because of such bills. The mentality of the NCP is aggressive and intimidating. If this Bill is passed [Almost this will happen], then other parties should prepare for a long period of intimidating and arrests. Then following step will be winning the elections and al-Bashir will saddle those opposition leaders and remain over their backs!
Thus, Sudanese people have only one way: to keep struggle until this current NCP’s Gov. is gone.
Gatwech
SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
Dear readers,
After all, SPLM has pushed NCP very far in implementing most of the CPA. So why avoid dialogue with peace partner and implementer of the very peace and decide to go and join an opposition that is full of bad history towards the South and against the CPA’s self-determination.
However, I differ with you on your conclusion that the recent demonstrations in Khartoum by the northern opposition groups, joined by SPLM SG Pagan Amum and Yasser Arman, resulted to NCP’s agreement on referendum bills and popular consultations. This is a wrong conclusion. Unless you don’t keenly follow the news before the so-called demonstrations, the SPLM and NCP already agreed on these bills.It was the SPLM that did not want to sign the deal.
Take for example the South Sudan referendum bill prior to demonstrations. The only remaining outstanding issue was the turnout quorum. I hope you remember that the 51% yes vote to declare the South independent was agreed two months ago. But the NCP’s position two months ago on the other issue of turnout was two-third (66%). The SPLM political bureau rejected it and told the SPLM team led by the deputy chairman, Dr. Riek Machar to renegotiate the turnout.
Then two weeks ago before the demonstrations in Khartoum, news on sudantribune reported that the NCP came down to 60% turnout. Dr. Riek reported it to the Political bureau as reported on sudantribune.com. The SPLM again rejected the 60% turnout and told Dr. Riek to renegotiate it to 55%.
If you clearly followed all those processes, you would understand that the recent agreement on South Sudan referendum was not, in any way, a result of that opposition demonstration with Pagan.
Actually, it was the SPLM that agreed to accept the NCP’s 60% turnout, which it (SPLM) rejected two weeks ago, not the other way round. The SPLM political bureau was not happy with the demonstrations and called for continuation of dialogue with NCP, not pursuing demonstrations. Therefore the SPLM team rushed to Khartoum to defuse the situation by accepting the NCP’s 60%. Unless you don’t follow up with the process, the SPLM just agreed on what it rejected two weeks ago. And that was not because of the demonstrations. They used it to defuse the tension that the northern opposition wanted to create between the two partners.
Again, if you analyze it carefully, the aim of the demonstration in the mind of Sadiq Al-Mahdi, Dr. Turabi, etc. was to repeal national security laws as a priority and not referendum laws.
Again if you carefully look at the tactic employed by the NCP, they have separated the national security laws from the referendum laws, and agreed ONLY (and again ONLY) on referendum laws, but NOT on national security laws, which was the sole aim of the demonstrations.
This clearly tells you that NCP has never succumbed to demonstrations that would affect its hold on power. Touch the security laws and you will see how ugly the NCP is no matter how many times you demonstrate. It would only lead to bloodbath and the official death of the CPA. So the NCP is clearly saying it is better to separate the South and become independent through referendum or whatever, then to succumb to opposition pressure through demonstrations that would make it lose power. They will not give you the national security laws you want no matter how many times you demonstrate, but they may give you referendum that leads to independence. Take that seriously, my friend!!!
coles Blair
SPLM says will not endorse national security bill
Thanks the Team SPLM/A. keep bargaininin this crack heads, its not this time atleast now we understands their dodgy tactics.
Please give them more pressure to practice the rule of law, let there be no marshall law in sudan,
Like always SPLM active.