NBG Speaker writes to council of state over parliamentary dispute
July 2, 2012 (ABYEI) – The speaker of South Sudan’s Northern Bahr el Ghazal State, Aguer Wol Aguer, on Monday said he has written a letter to the speaker of the South Sudan Council of States, objecting his removal.
Aguer’s letter seeks the intervention of South Sudan’s upper house, to address the parliamentary dispute, which he accused the state governor of engineering.
He grounds his claims on an administrative order instructing him to leave the office by Northern Bahr el Ghazal State governor, Paul Malong Awan.
A letter, dated 11 June 2012, bearing the signature of governor Awan, quotes the constitution of South Sudan’s governing Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) branch office in the state, as the basis for taking decision.
Aguer, however, rejected the governor’s attempt to remove him, arguing that he is not aware of any wrongdoings that would warrant his resignation. He demanded that parliamentary procedures be followed. The speaker’s letter described the call for his resignation as an alternative to addressing the issues in the SPLM in Northern Bahr el Ghazal State.
“Inspired by the guiding principles, objectives, vision and mission, the SPLM Secretariat in the collaboration with the office SPLM State chairperson have seen that the dispute in the State legislative Assembly as worrying, and endangering stability and unity of the SPLM membership in the state”, reads part of the governor’s letter seen by Sudan Tribune on Monday.
It further recommends that to rescue the situation, the SPLM leadership in the state decided to remove Aguer as speaker “since he has failed to observe and comply with the decision of the majority under the article 9 sub article 8 of the 2008 constitution.”
The letter also asked that the Northern Bahr el Ghazal State Legislative Assembly be reopened so that MPs are able to elect a new speaker.
The Chairperson of the country’s governing party branch office in the state gives president Salva Kiir Mayardit who is the chairperson of the ruling party in the country copy of the decision. Pagan Amum Okiech, Secretary General of the ruling party was equally copied.
However, Speaker Aguer ,in his letter dated 29 June, 2012, which was addressed to Joseph Bol Chan, Speaker of the South Sudan Council of States in Juba rejects the demand of the governor. He said that the governor’s attempt to unseat him violates article 99 of the State Transitional Constitution, which defines function and competence of the state governor.
“This is a clear violation of the Transitional Constitution which Governor himself signed into law on 15 March 2012. It is also encroachment into the competence of another institution. So I reject it because it is outside assembly premises”, Aguer told Sudan Tribune on Monday by phone from Aweil town, capital of the state.
He said he was calling for intervention of the central government because the decision to remove him from the chair was “illegal and unconstitutional”. Governor Awan was attempting a “constitutional coup” punishable by law under the state transitional constitution.
He denied in late June, while visiting Juba, of holding personal grudges with the state governor but attributed the opening of the house in his absence to the parliamentary wrangle between the house and executive over implementation of the 2011 budget.
“I do not have any personal problem with the governor but it is becoming clearer that the 2011 budget implementation which the house saw a lot of irregularities leading to the subsequent raising of vote of no confidence against the state minister of Finance, Ronald Ruay Deng, is creating these relations”, Aguer explained.
He said the motion was necessitated by the failure of the minister to appropriately answer questions he was asked to explain over government expenditure.
“This decision of the house was politicised and misinterpreted to the governor by some elements and mobilised his intervention and subsequent refusal to endorse decision of the house to remove the minister, resulting into an unwarranted row between the two institutions of the same government”, he explained.
(ST)