Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
By Manyang Mayom
December 28, 2009 (RUMBEK) — Over fifteen thousand people turned out today in Rumbek, the capital of Lakes state, demonstrating against the laws which were passed in Khartoum by the national parliament without concern for the objections of the Southern Sudan ruling party, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM). Parliamentarians of the majority National Congress Party (NCP) were responsible for passing the bills earlier this month.
The protesters demanded amendment of the law that dealt with the National Intelligence and Security Services (NISS). They also called on the national parliament to revise the Southern Sudan Referendum Law, Abyei Popular Consultation Law and Blue Nile Law which were passed by the NCP without SPLM participation in parliament.
Demonstrators were joined by all Lakes state ministers, advisors, lawmakers, trade unionists and students. Protesters cried out, “We don’t need change in the CPA [Comprehensive Peace Agreement] document or re-negotiation of the CPA – only we need full implementation of the CPA”.
The peaceful demonstration was addressed by SPLM Lakes State Secretary Samuel Mathiang Keer, Rumbek Centre County Commissioner Abraham Makoi Bol Kodi and Acting Governor David Nok Marial Buot in conjunction with others from among the Southern Sudanese political parties in Rumbek Freedom Square on Monday.
In a joint press conference held on Sunday at SPLM Lakes state secretariat office attended by all eight Southern Sudanese political parties, the Southerners had voiced together their willingness to fight injustice and to aim toward the common goal of democratic formation and full implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
“Khartoum government is cheating us badly; we are not receiving our 50% of oil revenue of wealth-sharing as mentioned in the CPA. NCP is our partner but it has turned horn against us and they are struggling to destroy this peace by all means like the agreement of 1972,” said a SPLM official.
The SPLM official downplayed the differences among Southern Sudanese political parties operating in Lakes state and said that together they are eyeing Khartoum as their senior enemy of peace. “We are Southerners and we were marginalized by the Khartoum government, let us demonstrate peacefully.”
David Nok Marial Buot, the deputy governor and minister of Local government and Law Reinforcement Agency in Lakes state affirmed that “If NCP took away our Southern Sudanese community properties by force, then we must return it back – if NPC would like to force us to war, then we will decide immediately – there is no more return to war but NCP is alarming to take back the country to war”.
Kuc Abyei, the leader of African National Congress – Sudan (ANC) asked the crowd of demonstrators “whether God were wrong to create us in Southern Sudan land? Why does always Northern Sudan, the Khartoum government, put Southerners’ life under threat and cheat us daily?”
This is the first demonstration carried out peacefully in Lakes state since the signing of the Sudan Comprehensive Peace Agreement.
(ST)
Sala Gai
Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
Dear Mr. president Kiir Mayardit
Thank you for inviting me to your Annual Dinner Mr President Kiir Mayadit. These are interesting times in South. I have therefore decided to speak to you about some of the challenges that we face and the opportunities that we have and what we can do about them.
I. The dominant political philosophy over the last 20 years And by way of background on how we can meet the challenges, and seize the opportunities, I will first say a few words about governance and our political system. The Lagu fell in 1972 in Adis Aba Aba. Since then, discussions on politics have largely assumed as axiomatic, that the ideal political system is the Liberal Democracy as practised in the Sudan, particularly the South. Every country and political system is usually compared against that as the ideal and is graded accordingly. Most discussions in the media, and the academia, proceed on this basis.
II. Difference between Governance and the nature of the political system
In this intellectual environment, there has not been a lot of focus on the relationship between two different but connected ideas: (1) Governance; and (2) A political system that is capable of delivering governance.
Good governance would mean the delivery of benefits to the people: (1) Rule of Law (2) Maximum opportunities (3) Housing (4) Economic well being (5) Healthcare (6) Safety and security (7) A civilised environment which allows the individual to be free. And so on.
A political system is the means to deliver good governance. Often, in the past, there was not enough public understanding even now of the fact that the two concepts are different. One was merged into the other, and there was an unstated presumption that if you had the formwork of democracy, then you will get good governance.
Much discussion which passes for political comment usually started and ended with a critique of the political system, without an adequate analysis of the need for governance. But the two concepts are different. We see increasing acknowledgement internationally, that the difference between two concepts should be understood. I have made the point elsewhere. This week, the Dr John Garang Times carried an interesting interview, with a political analyst in the time entry to Sudan Government by the agreement, who made the same point.
iii. Political System If we agree that good governance is the goal of the Southern not you by wish of Dr John Garang, then we need to ask: can we automatically assume that the political system as developed say in the South, will also deliver good governance to all other societies?
To answer the question, I would quote Abel Alier. He said: “The political system has to be tailored as closely to the country as a coat to a man”. Before I go on, let me make one point clear: I am not entering into the “Eastern versus Northern values” debate; nor am I making the point that Eastern societies do not value human rights.
My point is more basic: Political systems are essentially systems for delivery of governance. And while some values are universal, nevertheless a political system will work best in a society if it is designed to fit that specific society.
If we accept that political systems have to be tailored to suit the needs of each country, then the debate must really be on how the political system should be structured for a specific country, rather than whether the system approximates the US or UK or any other model.
V. Southern Now let me turn to Southern. I am not going to repeat points I have made elsewhere on Southern’s exceptionalism. In essence, in my view, there is a clear difference between how interventionist and activist our Government has to be, and how the Government and the people have to act together, compared with larger and more secure countries, which can take a more laissez faire approach.
Our size, geography and strategic situation have imposed limits on us. There are more natural resources nor any strategic space or large pool of manpower. We survive on our wits.
To succeed we need to:
(1) get investments into South (2) encourage local entrepreneurship (3) become a sophisticated service centre; and (4) ensure safety, security and stability.
To achieve this: (1) We need a Government that formulates policies for the long term with the main party SPLM; (2) A talented population which can deliver world class performance; and (3) Collective effort between the Government and the people to implement the policies that have been formulated. This formulation, with its emphasis on activist Government is somewhat different from the classic laissez faire approach. I don’t think that the laissez faire approach will deliver the most optimal results for us. What does this model mean in philosophical terms? One strand of liberal theory would suggest the State can intervene to protect society from an individual. But, it should not intervene to require the individual to act in his own good or for the benefit of society. That could work if there is no real need for Government to act to ensure the survival or the economic success of the State. But would that theory hold, in a small city state which has to react quickly to externalities and which may need to mobilise the population for such action? Many other countries are not as finely balanced as us – few are as small and dependent on maximizing the opportunities in the external environment as we are. Kenya,Uganda is not a real comparison on our interest – it has a dependable hinterland. China will look after Norther Sudan due to our oil flied. With this background, on the essential need for good governance for us, I will outline a couple of external challenges.
VI. Challenges We have several challenges. I will only mention a couple of challenges, both external. Security The first challenge I will mention is security. If you look at the map of Southern Sudan, you will see several countries which have had political instability in recent years now. Such political instability allows militancy to take root and flourish. There are also insurgencies in a number of countries. These insurgencies are long running and are based on ethnic or religious differences. These insurgencies may attract more militants to their cause. There is a risk that the militant cause could spread wider, causing even greater regional instability. They may also serve as breeding grounds for terrorists. There have also been reports of extremist groups using religious schools as a means of recruiting potential militants in some of these countries. That provides them with captive recruits.
These threats cannot be taken lightly. So if you look at the map of Northern Sudan, the situation is not pretty. In fact it is a troubling picture. The potential for the situation to get worse and for that to spread exists, if the underlying issues that have led to the insurgencies and militancy are not tackled effectively. We do not have to be alarmist. But we must work on the basis that we could be a high profile target. And in any event we will be affected in one way or another by what happens in the region.
Our responses cannot only be kinetic. We have to also build real bonds of trust within our society, across racial and religious lines, so that our community responds cohesively in the face of such threats. A laissez faire approach will not work, as some Western countries are finding out.
Ministry Home Affairs Luka BIONG, Mr. Gier Chueng and the other Ministries put in a lot of effort into this and work with our people: an example of what I had earlier referred to as the need for the Government and the people to work cohesively together. We have, for example, a variety of continuous Community Engagement Programmes, to inter alia, build inter ethnic confidence.
We have other projects as well as Legal project which are not fitting the communities need, these are the Ministry of Home Affairs. Many countries come and look at how we are doing this – and realize that what we do is worth learning from. There are also countries in the region where questions of ethnicity and religion have been raised with increasing intensity in political discourse. Our own ethnic and religious mix somewhat mirrors that of other countries in this region. Thus we have to therefore prepare our population actively, to try and ensure that there is no automatic reaction here, along ethnic or religious lines in response to events in the region. We have been doing that. Thus we have to be constantly alert because while the region is making progress, it still has serious governance issues.
And we need to ensure that our own Governance is of the highest quality – to deal with the challenges. As a financial and services centre, servicing, inter alia, this region, we will feel the impact of events in the region. I will now deal with a second external challenge. Big Power Relationships and Interests in this region This region is of interest to major powers, including the US and China, Egypt, Arab countries. They are likely to chart a path of peaceful co-existence Unity. But at the same time, we can’t have to recognize that both countries, as well as other powers, we have interests in which may always be coincidental. The , Egypt Pacific Fleet navigates through the waters in South. The Northern has substantial economic interests in , Egypt. China’s economic and diplomatic interests are also growing rapidly. History shows that big powers will seek to influence smaller countries. And where big powers compete, their desire to influence smaller countries could sometimes be quite strong. All of this is natural. China also has claims in the Paracels and the Spratleys. Other regional countries make competing claims. Countries in this region and the regional entities (like South) have to deal with all these issues. South has to be aware of the way these issues evolve and are dealt with. And South has to be very clear about the direction it wants to take, in its own sovereign interests, in a dynamic, fast changing environment. That will require nimbleness and long range thinking. On that note, I will now turn to the opportunities.
VII. Opportunities I have spoken about a couple of external challenges. But on balance, the opportunities in our external environment far outweigh the challenges that we face. If you combine the populations of China and South Sudan, you get nearly 2 billion people. A substantial number of this 2 billion people are hardworking, smart and want to make a better life for themselves. Thus this vast area will progress. And China will progress rapidly. That can have very positive economic consequences. Thus I am optimist about South – strongly so. We are in an unique position to be part of the progress of East and South East as well as the dynamic progress of India. We have a real opportunity to be a leading, dynamic city, servicing a region of tremendous wealth, albeit that wealth might be unevenly spread. We will not be the only city doing that, but we can be among the leading group. And we have some unique advantages that many others do not have. But to get there, we must be able to tap into these opportunities. That goes back to good Governance and cohesive society: with a clear idea of our interests, our abilities, what the opportunities are, and how we can be part of the regional growth. I will also emphasize another point, which I see as being important to our continued success – our openness to talent inflow. We have succeeded so far because we have been liberal on talent inflow. To continue to succeed, we need to continue with that policy. Businesses invest in Singapore because they know that they will be able to bring in the talent they need. The financial services sector employs several thousands of Singaporeans. It also employs many foreigners. If we told the banks that they cannot bring in foreign employees than we put the jobs of Singaporeans at risk as well. Let me illustrate with a concrete example. This week I met a BOSS of a major blue chip foreign bank. That bank employs nearly 600 people in South. Many are in high paying jobs. 100 of them are foreigners on Employment Pass.
The other 5,000 or so are Southern or PRs. He told me that the great advantage Southern had, (for them), compared with almost any other place they operated in, was the ease with which they could bring in employees from all over the world. He told me, with some pride and satisfaction, that there are 40 different nationalities amongst his 100 foreign employees in the South Government. He considered it quite remarkable – they can bring in talent from all over the world, and these people contribute to our economy. As a result, they were confident about expanding in Singapore even during the crisis. He also expressed some concern, as to whether our policies on talent inflow will change. The debate in the newspapers about non Southern in South has obviously been noticed. What should our policy be? Should we be restrictive? 5,000 Southern and PRs get employed by the bank.
If we had been difficult about the 100 foreigners, would not be there 5,000 Southern jobs? The number will be much smaller. In the end protectionism does not help. And the value add to the economy, from the extra business the bank does, in South, is significant as well. It grows our financial sector, thus benefiting many other Singapore businesses. If we are clear minded, we can help our financial sector grow quite well. The same in these few industries. Foreigners occupies us increase the pie – and that gives jobs to Southern.
This is a war for talent. We have been successful in attracting talent. We must continue on that path and compete for talent. If we are not open to talent, we will quickly lose out internationally. This has become even more important in the aftermath of the financial crisis. Some countries have been forced, either by reason of their financial position, or for political reasons, to come out with policies that do not favour the attraction and retention of talent. This has been particularly so in respect of finance industry professionals. In this environment, we have stayed calm, rational and have kept to our talent and investor friendly policies. Our tax rates are sensible. We are a good, stable place with a stable financial system. If we keep to our policies, we will, in the growing Asian environment, continue to grow strongly as a financial centre , this is what I can I sure you to follow these step. We have to always remind ourselves: We do have resources. and also We want to depend on investments. Many countries compete for investments. Investors will assess where best to invest. If we make it difficult for them to hire foreign workforce, then the investors will go elsewhere. Investors are also rational. Where they can do so, they will employ Southern. We must create the right conditions for investment and must also create the right conditions for employment of South. And we have done so – as shown by the fact that through this recession, many more foreign workers lost their jobs. Singaporean jobs were saved by Government policies (like Job Credit) and the Government working together with the Unions and the Employers. Let me also share a couple of examples from the legal sector
Within the legal services sector, the top tier of cross-border, transactional work has long been dominated by global firms, primarily of South and Southern origin. The Government had to consider whether to open up our legal sector to foreign law firms. There were serious good arguments as to why foreign firms should not be allowed to practice South law. But on balance the Government assessed that it was beneficial for South to open up, and a decision was made last year to open up. We gave out 6 Qualifying Foreign Law Practice (QFLP) licences last year 1983, to allow foreign firms to practise SPLA/SPLM law. The practice of South law may be have been necessary for the kind of work they are doing. But giving them the licences gave them buy-in within the South legal scene. They have expanded their practices here, creating more opportunities for local talent. Other non-QFLP foreign law firms, seeing our cosmopolitan outlook, have also invested in their South practices. Now there are nearly 1,000 foreign lawyers in South. Many were here before the sector was opened up. We want to be a top international legal hub.
Opening up increases the opportunities for South lawyers, increases the technical quality of Singapore lawyers. And of course there is a whole series of downstream benefits in having 1,000 highly paid foreign professionals here. Our arbitration sector has also benefited tremendously from a new blue-ribboned Board at the South International Arbitration Centre, comprising ten members from seven different TEN State. That Board was appointed to be in this year. All of them are well-known Nationwide. If Southern wants to be an international arbitration centre, we cannot take a parochial approach.
VIII. Conclusion Let me conclude by making four points:
(1) One: we do face significant challenges – we should be alert to them and deal with them effectively. (2) Two: there are even more significant opportunities – we must be smart enough to seize them. (3) Three: we need good governance and a cohesive society to do both.
My fourth point is this: In pursuit of good governance we have gone about building a system that is in some ways unique to South. That has attracted a fair degree of criticism. When criticisms are made, we should consider them carefully. We should neither assume them to be correct nor be dismissive. And there is no need to adopt a stance where we accept that all judgments passed on us must be correct. We can and should be more confident about what we have achieved. We have achieved success by not blindly following prescriptions. Let me illustrate by reference to one example. Earlier this year Parliament enacted the Public Order Act (POA). There was criticism in some of the international media – how this is a further restriction on political rights and so on.. If we had decided to be Country put detainees in cages like this, what do you think the reaction of the international media would have been? We usually get a lot of stick. Sometimes different standards are applied to our actions. We have to know that, and not expect that criticisms will be free of bias. So let’s take criticisms as par for the course, and do what we believe is right.
Thank you.
By Salah Gai De Mbior
Dinka Boy
Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
Thanks Lake and Jonglei states. Your protest represent the rights of the entire Southerners.
The trick like the one of 1972 mean the starting of war.
Brothers and Sisters, i have no doubt that we have war with this khartoum criminal party. They are going to test their capabilities because of oil and borders. The problem of Abeyi, Nuba,and blue Nile is less for them.
Caution!. My advise is that,our leaders must be careful with this idiot NCP other they can creat problem with assassination. I am sorry to say that,but that is how i can see this selfishes NCP due to their frequent manipulations of the bills. In very bill they have propblem! why.
This means they are usless Arab traders with Bin laden heart.
Thanks
Thonweng
Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
The right of people should be respected in the country that why the thousand of people attended the demonstration peacefully without violence in Rumbek.
thank you the SPLM secretary Samuel Mathiang Keer .please keep that spirit and be the eye of SPLM in Lakes State.
Called me Thonweng in the middle of Lakes State
SALAS TIGBAGBA
Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
Am sure that the demostration wasn’t only in Rumbek but all over 10 states of southern sudan. NCP sould know that SPLM is a born again political party that reports the voice of the people who are voiceless.Time has comed for things to be done openly no time to waste.
SALAS T.
Thonweng
Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
Please my brothers from Equatoria State and upper nile especially Nuer communities why don,t you ask yourself alone before somebody asked you to what was happene during war time.please friends i advices you to eat your money silenly without talking to anyone in Brazgell region and Dinka Bor who were real been chase away by Nuer people.
Called me Thonweny in the middle of Lakes State
Thonweng
Thousands demonstrate against NCP in Rumbek
Mr dog iam not abus the Equatoria State and UPPER NILE BUT iam just advice these two STATES apart from Dinka BOR who are within Upper Nile but you Nuer Community you like position in the government while administration is not there whereas Equatoria are minded fear. what are you trying to say at this movement of election.
Called me Thonweny in the middle of Lakes State