Kiir did not act within the law
By Gordon Buay
January 25, 2011 — In his response to my public statement entitled “President Salva Kiir’s Decree Violated South-South Dialogue Agreement”, Dr. Peter Adwok Nyaba argued that Lt. Gen. Salva Kiir Mayardit “acted within the law”. I am not sure whether Dr. Nyaba read the Final Communiqué of the South Sudan Political Partiers’ Conference of October 2010 or he was writing to defend his boss to please him, knowing quite well that most South Sudan ministers in the Government of National Unity (GONU) will lose their jobs after February, 15, 2011. I heard that South Sudan ministers in the North are concerned about their future because the coalition government that will be formed in the South after July will not accommodate all SPLM’s ministers from the north because half of GOSS portfolios will go to other political forces as agreed last October by all political parties.
To refresh the memory of Dr. Nyaba, in case he didn’t have time to read the Communiqué last year due to the well-known resentment between him and Lam Akol, I would advise my dear uncle to pay attention to article 3 of the said communiqué which stipulates that in the event that separation is the winning option in the referendum, a conference shall be reconvened as a National Constitutional Conference within one month from the announcement of the result of the referendum to carry out a constitutional review on the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan in order to draft a permanent constitution for the new independent and sovereign state of South Sudan. What this means is that President Salva Kiir cannot appoint members of the SPLM party as members of the so-called “Constitutional Review Committee” without involving other political parties. All the personalities appointed are members of the SPLM including Judge Muolana Gatwec Lul (ran during SPLM primary elections to be a candidate for Upper Nile State governor) and Muolana Kon Bior. None of the people appointed is a member of another party.
What is more intriguing is whether the need for the review of the interim constitution is a prime responsibility of SPLM party alone. Unless uncle Nyaba is advocating for one party state or he is relapsing to his communist tendencies of 1970s, President Kiir’s decree cannot be justified in a free and democratic society. One may hope that resentment between uncle Nyaba and Lam Akol should not override the will of the people of South Sudan to establish a democratic system. I hope uncle Nyaba is not advocating for what is called “choiceless democracy” where the affairs of the state are determined by one party only in a country that has more than one party. The people of South Sudan should keep praying every Sunday so that uncle Adwok Nyaba does not confuse President Salva Kiir Mayardit at the expense of building multiparty democracy in the South as it is now clear that majority of the people of Southern Sudan voted for secession.
One does not need to be a rocket scientist to understand that President Salva Kiir should have consulted with the leaders of other political forces as per the terms of last year agreement between political parties. Therefore, Dr. Nyaba needs to be educated about the terms that were agreed by all the political parties’ leaders last year unless he wants to introduce “Dukeson’s treatment” to issues of South-South Dialogue (Dukeson is a name of a guy called John Gatkuoth Dup, who, in the 1960s, threw Nyaba over the offence in Malakal because he was disturbing the party).
In conclusion, the people of South Sudan should call upon President Salva Kiir Mayardit to include other political parties in the committee that will work-out modalities for the future governance of South Sudan. One party’s monopoly of the constitutional affairs of the South is a clear introduction of guerrilla dictatorship.
The author is a former Secretary General of South Sudan Democratic Front (SSDF) and the signatory of Washington Declaration between the SPLM and the SSDF in 2008.Email: [email protected]
Nyieth-Aguthon
Kiir did not act within the law
Gordon Buay,
One constitutional’s right is the most important provison of all the provisions provided in the national legal document of any country, therefore you have just war to battle.
However, South Sudan opposition parties pushing for change at the movement should be able to put in position the kind of political leadership qualities which are acceptable.
You misplaced some of your points by attacking your uncle Adwok Nyaba for nothing. What he originally commends was his political views on the government side, but you on the opposition part.
It is appealing that most of opposition leaders calling for regime change to take over as leaders are suffering integrity crises. They have let South Sudanese down miserable, both in their personal and political lives.Some have thrived on the politics of deceit and falsehood.
The South Sudanese, must therefore, ensure that those whose legacies are stained with thier blood and cannot pass the the leadership and integrity test as would be stipulated in the upcoming new constitution can be rejected constitutionally.
Paul Ongee
Kiir did not act within the law
Ya Gordon Buay,
Who acted within the law by often going to Khartoum and coming back to the SPLM mainstream during the bush war and after the CPA of 2005? Please, tell us.
Paul Ongee
Khartoum, Sudan
Nhomlawda
Kiir did not act within the law
Gordon,
I think you were in a wrong position in that party if that was a party indeed but not a militia grouping.
You need to know how to argue your point without attacking somebody’s character. What you have just done is termed as character assassination.
Those political parties you are referring to are tribal groupings and we are not in South Sudan to allocate national duties based on tribe but on ability to perform them.
South Sudan is now free from Arabs and choiceless democracy is the only option till some of you become nationalistic enough.
Those political parties in South Sudan are tribal groupings and have to be banned for 20 years.
maroof
Kiir did not act within the law
Brother Gordon,
I do not understand what is the whining about. Right now, there are things that are bigger than paying attention to how opposition parties (So called politicians) would guarantee their positions in power post July 2011, once the south becomes independent. A rational person who is really looking after the interest of the nascent country would not worry about who is writing the constitution: The question is whether the constitution reflects the will of the people. For example, the SPLA/SPLM has been fighting for twenty one years with some of those very leaders you are talking about either residing in London or breast feeding from NCP government in Khartoum, yet the South is now independent. Please stop what you are advocating and trust the same system which brought you freedom to bring you a good constitution. Dignity of South Sudanese is above all, therefore the so called politician should stop whining for now.
Thanks
Gae Ajak
Kiir did not act within the law
Gordon…SPLM/A tookup arms for the fundermental change of this country,to bring about citizen’s democratic rights, of governing, of movement,of free of speech,infact more as you know..But is that the way of claiming them,look! “the longest journey was not trekked by everyone,it was trekked the stronghearted known ones and so whatever is found in the promised land belongs to all of us, but shouldnt be by force.SPLM don’t segregates,instead it fought for everyone’s inclusiveness.But when those who have been retarding the progress of the struggle begin to shout for “democracy,democracy,not thinking about what SPLM has done…Man! things wont be better,please leave SPLM alone,they have make you enjoy even fresh air which you didn’t struggle for.Watch what they gonna do.