The New Nation
By Jacob K. Lupai
May 1, 2011 — Precisely 70 days are left for a new nation to emerge in the world scene and the new nation will be called the Republic of South Sudan. The birth of the new nation is as the result of a bitter struggle against two word, injustice and unfairness, to be telegraphic. The result came out of a vision that only with a nation of their own would there be justice and fairness in abundance for all. It was with this vision of justice and fairness for all that the people of South Sudan in their determination paid the ultimate price with their lives and destruction of their property to reach where they are now. As can be seen it is now a matter of days not years for the people of South Sudan to enjoy the freedom for which many precious lives have been lost. Now for people who have been fighting an unjust and unfair system for decades it will be strange indeed for the same people either insensitively or through arrogance to institute a repressive system.
Since the establishment of self-governing South Sudan as a result of a comprehensive peace agreement (CPA) in 2005, there has been a lot of murmuring against the government for poor delivery of basic services. For example, in Sudanic Magazine of March/April 2008, a survey showed that the government was perceived as 90 per cent corrupt and inefficient, and those were the main reasons cited for the lack of development in South Sudan since the CPA. According to the Sudanic Magazine corruption existed at certain levels of government, especially in the form of what was described as the award of contracts to phony companies. However, despite the Southern Sudan Anti-Corruption Commission declaration that there was no fear to name and shame any public figure who engaged in corruption, hardly any public figure had been named and shamed. When the Nile Commercial Bank collapsed there has never been any great defaulter named and shamed.
All the aspirations of people are for a Republic of South Sudan that will be based on a system of justice and fairness for all. However, tribalism and nepotism may sow a seed of discord. For example, the composition of government should fairly reflect regional diversities. One fair way is to use distribution of population for regional balance in power sharing notwithstanding competence and qualification. For example, the population of Greater Upper Nile is 2,908,756, of Greater Bahr el Ghazal 2,722,987 and of Equatoria is 2,628,747 according to the 5th Sudan Population and Housing Census of 2008. This shows that Greater Upper Nile is approximately 35 per cent, Greater Bahr el Ghazal 33 and Equatoria 32 per cent of the total population of South Sudan.
Taking the population percentage distribution in the three southern regions, it is not only a fair way of power sharing but a requirement in promoting unity in South Sudan. Using the percentage distribution of 32 ministerial positions in the Government of South Sudan (GOSS) Greater Upper Nile should have 11 positions, Greater Bahr el Ghazal should have approximately 11 and Equatoria 10 ministerial positions. Indeed in all fairness Greater Upper Nile has 11 ministerial positions in the GOSS. In contrast Greater Bahr el Ghazal has 12 ministerial positions and Equatoria has 9 per cent. In all the distribution of ministerial positions according to the population in each region was fair. One only hopes that this should also be reflected in all institutions of the GOSS for fairness for all.
One worrying scenario and hopefully it will not be the trend is the domination of one ethnic group in government. Twelve or 37.5 per cent of the 32 ministerial positions are occupied by members of only one ethnic group. Although the one ethnic group straddles two greater southern regions is no justification for such hegemony. Out of 15 advisors 7 are from the one ethnic group and this is about 47 per cent of advisory positions. However, in regional distribution of advisors Greater Upper Nile has about 33 per cent, Greater Bahr el Ghazal 40 and Equatoria has 27 per cent of advisory positions in the GOSS. This may not be unfair.
Another area of concern where the new nation is to be extra careful is foreign affairs. This is specifically about foreign missions of the Republic of South Sudan. People assigned to foreign missions must have in-depth understanding of diplomacy. This is because that is where one is able to represent South Sudan, to market recognition of the new nation globally and to articulate the priorities of government in building relationships with foreign nations. It should be observed that appointment of diplomats should not be on the basis of cronyism and nepotism. It should not be based either on who has the family links with people who matter. Those who are supposed to represent the new nation should be people who are already tested in the field of diplomacy and understanding it like the back of their hands. It is counterproductive to recruit novices as diplomats simply because they are people with well connections. In diplomacy there is no room in starting with the wrong foot.
One definition of diplomacy is interpretation of domestic policies to the outside world as stated in official documents. Priority in domestic issues is what should be reflected by diplomats. A diplomat as an ambassador for that matter should be a high ranking official to have the confidence in representing their country. Sending a novice as a diplomat or as an ambassador because of ethnic connection to meet and mingle with heads of powerful nations will be playing with the image of the country. In other countries an ambassador is an equivalent of a cabinet minister. For example, the Ethiopian Foreign Minister is assigned as an ambassador to China, a powerful country. Also the Ugandan Internal Minister is assigned to the UN as a representative. In all a cadre for foreign missions should be well groomed for effective representation. Those assigned to foreign missions should be knowledgeable of the countries to which they are heading. People must also have communication skills for public diplomacy. Family connection should not be the qualification to serve in foreign missions otherwise this in itself is corruption.
The Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan, 2011 is already out and is available in the Internet. Different people interpret a constitution differently as there are already voices claiming that the Transitional Constitution is partisan and ignores views of the other sections of the country. In the Equatoria Conference 2011, on governance, the conference calls for a federal system of government for the Republic of South Sudan. However, the Transitional Constitution even does not seem to mention the word federal. Nonetheless, to be fair Article 161(1) says, “The territory of South Sudan is composed of ten states governed on the basis of decentralization”. It is only Articles 155, 156, 157 and 158 that seem to throw the concept of decentralization into confusion. For example, in Article 155 the confusion arises in sub-articles 1, 5 and 7. The question one may like to ask is, will there be parallel national police service institutions to those of the states? Clearly the Transitional Constitution inclines towards a centralized system of government for the Republic of South Sudan where the role of the state becomes very minimal indeed for example in the police, prisons, wildlife and fire brigade service. The emphasis on decentralization seems to have been thrown out of the window from the Transitional Constitution. Power sharing between the centre and the state is hardly spelt out clearly as truly in a federal system. Anyway we may have the benefit of the doubt as this is not a permanent constitution
In conclusion, the new nation in waiting is going to face unprecedented challenges some of which will be manmade. For example, it is clear that the review of the constitution has not been based on consensus. Using a constitution as an instrument of domination will only invite a negative reaction which will not only threaten the unity of a country but in the case of the Republic of South Sudan with make others to take advantage to destroy the hard won independence. The Transitional Constitution seems to show a strong tendency in others wanting to dominate. What people may not understand is that this is 21st century that none in their right senses will ever put up with marginalization after decades of dehumanization. A federal system with equitable sharing of power and wealth is the only appropriate system one can think of right now as the guarantor of unity of the Republic of South Sudan. The latent threat of the use of law enforcing agencies to protect the constitution in promoting domination will not work.
The author can be reached at [email protected]
Bol Deng
The New Nation
” We are not there yet.” we should be focusing on Abyei,boarders, and oil before talking about distribution of positions. Let clear the space and we will be fine after we all shake out out main enemy on the way. During the war, there was nothing like distribution of work( fight).So, i am sorry to let the authur know none of us will listen to your prose. Thanks
Ambago
The New Nation
Dear readers
South Sudan is now an independent territory and two months from today it will be officially declared as the sovereign Republic of South Sudan. Issues of our borders with the north can only best be tackled by an international arbitration in a court of law.
It is understandable that Abyei referendum is no longer possible under the current circumstance and going back to war before 9th July independence declaration is not a popular idea. Again the post independence government of the Republic of South Sudan will have to seek the ruling of a court before we finally have Abyei back.
However the rhetoric of “dealing first with the common enemy” at the expense of huge corruption, tribalism and cronyism currently devouring south Sudan is quite irrelevant now. You can’t ask people not to rock an already rocking boat. Our boat is a ‘Rocky Boat’ by design of the builders. We better seek for ways of how to survive in this otherwise ‘Rocky Boat’ and keep on moving.
The popular demand for a federal system has nothing to do with how to secure our borders. Federalism is a new call first tabled in 1947 almost four decades later, long time after Abyei became part of Kordofan which took place in 1905. We better not mix issues. If we win Abyei back it can still become a state in the federation. So what is the worry?
Agutthon
The New Nation
Federation is good. Can Lupai and Ambago tell us what is lacking in the current federalism?
It is also good that Mr. Lupai has gone a head with some statistics and percentages.
My other percentages are that;
NGOs;
1. Equatoria 100%,
2. Upper Nile 0%,
3. Bhar El Ghazel 0%
in any area where Equatoria does not cry foul, they absolutely dominate! On the contrary we keep quiet.
Since everything is now Parliament, let’s go for it boys.
Bin Laden II
The New Nation
Lupai,
Why should the issue of federalism very much becomes Equatoria issue, if there is no any other agenda behind it like reviving kokoro? Look, When you propose, you don’t expect anything to come in your favour afterall, other Soutern Sudanese may not be in support of it. Base on your article, it is now clear that Equatorians want to implement what they proposed with the former President of Uganda, Idi Amin Dada about forming a new Nation, possibly Kakwa nation without knowing that kakwa would be the minority if that Country was to be created. it is to be comprise of part of Nothern Uganda, East DRC and Equatoria of Southern Sudan. In my opinion, Amin is dead, the idea is dead. there will be no where President Museveni or any other future ugandan President would let such to happen. in South Sudan, it may not happen and if it do, only people (Equatorians) will be asked to go and form their new nation and leave South Sudan land behind. so please know this, your proposal on federalism won’t work unles it is in the interest of all South Sudanese. You also mentioned that this is 21st Century and anybody may not allow him/herself to be dominated. Where were you in 20th Century when other Southern Sudanese allowed themselves to be massacred by Arabs in the course of their struggle for this nation to be? Shut off and mind your business of behaving like women when war arise!
Adam
The New Nation
Thank you Mr. Jacob K. Lupai. Good view.
I hope Mr. President would read this article alongwith what the opposition is saying, especially the article published by Mr. Lam Akol.
Down with Cronyism and Nepotism.
Longlive UNITED South Sudan State
Adam Milawaki – Mayendit
Southern Sudan
jur_likang_a_ likan'g
The New Nation
Why on earth should anyone be out of mind and start to scare people when some citizens of the same country propose a good system of governance that can speed up the development of the country by extending services to the people by allowing them fully participate in the process? How does Uganda, Kakwa, Idi Amin come in this equation here? The federation proposal is a South Sudanese notion. It was brought up by them, and it for them. It is for the good of the South Sudan! Are the people who reject the proposal panicking or what? By bringing in Museveni, Idi Amin in our case is another way of saying that now they are in the shoes of Jallaba and they have support elsewhere? Look no one likes oppression of any kind. The recent referendum vote by South Sudanese is a testimony that says it all. It was a protest vote against oppression of any kind of colour. It was a vote for Freedom, Justice and Independence. So if you stood for those qualities during the war and now please have another look at the proposal in a civilized manner. Or otherwise you should come out clear and tell the whole world that you are now there for formation of class society in South Sudan based on sectarianism. We need clear answers for your refusal of peoples’ demand. Fear not all is about distribution of political power to the people for enhancement of social economic development of the nation by the locals. Do not think you are going to sit on peoples heads for life. Give back to the people what belongs to them.
Towongo Lakuya
Federalism is a good system for the nation, Republic of south Sudan
Yes, it is true that the Equatorian conference held at Nyakuron cultural centre in central Equatoria state in its capital juba last month as I was following this from sudantribune.com has caused big concern and sparked many criticism as those bounded or cronyism with spirit of racism in case of racist, tribalism in case of tribalists and those who rule in “divide and rule politics”,anyway, I don’t have enough information on themes of the conference as an agenda discussed but when I was reading the comments put forwards by somewhat so called scholars who are circumscribed by ideology of separatism and tribalism,nepotism and corruption, i would like first and foremost appreciate Jacob. K. lupai for his entire analysis on topic, the new nation and federal system is the most appropriate for the republic of south Sudan and you fellow southerners never ignore ideas that have the solutions for ourselves like others are commending kids who know nothing.
Let me try to put this federal system upright by asking questions like what is federalism or federation? Why do we need federalism or federation? Why federalism or federation is important to a newly born republic of south Sudan in proceeds July 9th 2011 and why even federalism fails to achieve its attained goals in most case?
To begin with the definition of federalism as was defined from its early aged of years during the historical evolution of a federation, there was a gradual movement of power from the component states to the centre, as the federal government acquires additional powers, the acquisition of new powers by a federal government may occur through formal constitutional amendment or simply through a broadening of the interpretation of a government’s existing constitutional powers given by the courts and by this spotlight Sudan by its virtue of nature enhance the diverse cultural and historically regime Arabs tyrannical rule in Sudan, therefore, by the above highlight, if Sudan from it inceptions practiced federalism, south wouldn’t have separated through referendum.
A federal government is the common government of federation which varies from one institution to another institution, especially for the case of those schism disbursed scholars with tribalism and corruptism in their minds, central government or union government is the government at the level of sovereign state, usual responsibilities of this level of government are maintain as national security and exercise international diplomacy, a right to sigh binding treaties and as a central government has a power to make laws for the whole country and thus, central government within this structure are the government ministers, departments and agencies and as ministers are assigned work alongside agencies to help with tax collection.
Not for the sake of what majority of south Sudanese regardless of who went to schools and who did not go to schools believed to have what they called kokora or division, tribalism or regionalism which sparked a big predicament, let me analyze countries that practices the concepts of federalism and the success they have hold to mitigate tribalism, favoritisms, discrimination and corruptions as way of putting efficient security, as to achieve economic development entail national objective, employment and distribution of income as to promote regional balance. Therefore, countries like United States of America, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Malaysia, India, Switzerland, Venezuela Pakistan, Russia, and Brazil and in Africa only Nigeria which I know of its inclining diversified surrounding.
Nevertheless, let me in circumscribed United States of America federalism briefly as was considered to be the first modern federation after declaring independence from Britain, the US adopted its first constitution as article of federation in 1787. to drawback as I can also compared it with our, transitional constitution for the republic of the south Sudan to be inaugurated in few months of July 9th 2011 which has less or untruly spelled or stipulted it as a federal state. therefore guys, for america,this was the first step towards federalism by establishing the federal Congress. However, Congress was limited as to its ability to pursue economic, military and judiciary reform in 1787.
Another similar situation to be explained here is the issue of Australia federal during its inception went through referendum like our referendum on 9th of January as stipulated in comprehensive peace agreement CPA, on 1 January 1901 the Australian nation emerged as a federation. The Australian continent was colonized by the United Kingdom in 1788, who subsequently established six self-governing colonies there.
In the 1890s the governments of these colonies all held referendums on becoming a unified, independent nation. When all the colonies voted in favour of federation, the Federation of Australia commenced, resulting in the establishment of the Commonwealth of Australia in 1901. The model of Australian federalism adheres closely to the original model of the United States of America, though through a Westminster system.
Another scenario to talk about here is Brazil, south America The Brazilian Constitution of 1988 introduced a new component to the ideas of federalism, including municipalities as federal entities and Brazilian municipalities were now invested with some of the traditional powers usually granted to states in federalism, and although they are not allowed to have a Constitution, they are structured by an organic law.
Nevertheless, Canada is another pivot point to talk about here as the system of federalism was described by the division of powers between the federal parliament and the country’s provincial governments. Under the Constitution Act of 1867, specific powers of legislation are allotted. The constitution gives rise to federal authority for legislation, whereas its constitution gives rise to provincial powers the federal government retains residual powers, however, Areas of contest include legislation with respect to regulation of the economy, taxation, and natural resources.
Furthermore, one of the historical event was the post-Imperial nature of Russian subdivision of government changed towards a generally autonomous model which began with the establishment of the USSR as It was liberalized in the aftermath of the Soviet Union with the reforms while as all of Russia’s sub divisional entities are known as subjects with some smaller entities, such as the republics enjoying more autonomy than other subjects on account of having an extant presence of a culturally non-Russian ethnic minority.
Even in the Christian federal structural system, Federalism also was found expressed in ecclesiology. For example, Presbyterian Church governance resembles parliamentary republicanism or a form of political federalism to a large extent and in Presbyterian denominations, the local church is ruled by elected elders, some of which are ministerial, each church then sends representatives or commissioners to presbyteries and further to a general assembly therefore, each greater level of assembly has ruling authority over its constituent members.
In Africa, this is the area I want to explain it into details to fellow southerners to portray the true as to why oversees countries, those adopting federalism worked successfully than here in Nigeria as well as in Africa as a continent, Nigeria is a Federal Republic modeled after the United States, with executive power exercised by the president and with influences from the Westminster System model in the composition and management of the upper and lower houses of the bicameral legislature.
The law of Nigeria is based on the rule of law and the independence of the Judiciary, and also system—because of the long history of British colonial influence, the legal system is therefore similar to the common law systems used in England and Wales and in other Commonwealth countries as a constitutional framework for the legal system is provided by the Constitution of Nigeria.
on the other hand, why Nigeria federalism failed to responded positively during its inception of independence update notwithstanding her multi-cultural diversity and the multi-partism as they practice the concept of democracy in this huge populated nation and therefore as this can be explained in four distinct systems of law in Nigeria: English Law which was derived from its colonial past with Britain and is still applicable to the autonomous administration, Common law some time called a case law development since colonial independence as update is use, Customary law which was derived from indigenous traditional norms and practices and Sharia law which was used only in the predominantly Hausa and Muslim north of the country and all these laws are applicable right from their inception day update the present Nigeria
Basing on the above analysis, the newly born baby, republic of south Sudan as to be officially inaugurated few months to go July 9th 2011 presumes federalism, my dear southerners, Decades after the Civil War, our country, The Republic Of South Sudan, will ease many predicament and hindrances by regulating tribalism, corruption, discrimination, administration, businesses and industries that span economic and development objectives to secure civil rights and the provision of social services that benefit all citizens even you with your heart of tribalism and corruption.