What is expected from the Constitutional Review Commission of South Sudan: Part II?
By Luka Biong Deng
March 26, 2013 – When making a constitution, the process may be more important than the final text. One weakness of the Transitional Constitution is that it was not subjected to wider consultations. It decided on some fundamental issues, such as the name of the country, the currency and national anthem. These are the real symbols of any nation that would have required the participation of its citizens. As members of the elite, we tend to take major decisions without consulting people at the grass root level, who are often considered illiterate and ignorant. Using education to judge our people underlines not only our level of ignorance but also lack of respect. Our uneducated people in the rural areas have managed to sustain us with a wealth of indigenous knowledge, experiences and wisdom for centuries.
Although the views of citizens were not sought when the Transitional Constitution was passed, there is now an opportunity to make the constitutional review process more participatory. The challenge is how to capture the views of the citizens given the diversity and demographic differences in the South. Political parties through their engagement with citizens would be one way of seeking the aspirations of the people. However, we know that we do not have mature political parties which are close to the people, except for the SPLM which is struggling to put its house in order. Even the civil society organisations are detached from people at the grass-root level.
A referendum might be a more effective way of seeking the views of the population than a constitutional conference. If that is not possible because of budget constraints, the commission could explore other ways. It could carry out extensive focus group discussions with various communities and age groups, both women and men. With the help of the National Democratic Institute, the International Republic Institute and the National Bureau of Statistics, the commission could collect credible information from the people on critical aspects of the Constitution.
As mentioned before, one of the important aspects of the Constitution is the name of our country. Although we may have limited options, it would be appropriate to subject this issue to public opinion through a process that would ensure that the citizens have indeed named their country. Naming a country is like naming a child. Parents are careful not to give names that would embarrass their children when they grow up. In the constitutional review process, we have a chance of naming our country. Although there are many possible names, I would like to suggest four options: South Sudan, New Sudan, Nile and Kush.
The Republic of South Sudan
The Republic of South Sudan is the name we inherited from the old Sudan. However, it may not have political, social or even religious justifications. When the first civil war erupted, the name used for the liberation movement did not bear the term ‘South Sudan’. The movement was called Sudan Africa National Union. It was only in 1969 that the South Sudan Liberation Movement was established. In the second civil war, the use of South Sudan was avoided by the SPLM for strategic and ideological reasons.
The name Southern Sudan became prominent after the Addis Ababa Agreement in 1972 when the area was first recognised as a political entity. Some people do not understand the difference between ‘Southern Sudan’ and ‘South Sudan’. While Southern Sudan refers to a southern portion of Sudan, South Sudan refers to an independent entity. This is clear in the Arabic translation of South Sudan as ‘Jonob el Sodan’; a portion of Sudan, instead of ‘Sodan el Jonobi’. Whatever the case, South Sudan has become the brand name of the new country and changing it would certainly create a lot of problems.
The New Sudan Republic
The term ‘New Sudan’ is not only a name, it is also the political vision with which the SPLM waged its liberation struggle. It initiated a political process for transforming Sudan and allowed for the people of the South to gain their independence. It is a name that captures our liberation struggle values. The SPLM is finding it difficult now to change its name to South Sudan as that would tantamount to loss of history of struggle. Whenever one thinks of New Sudan one remembers the wisdom of Dr. John Garang and his farsightedness. New Sudan would have been the ideal name for our new country. The SPLM should be morally and politically bound to support the adoption of that name.
The Nile Republic
The territory of South Sudan occupies almost 45 percent of the Nile basin. In addition, almost 95 percent of South Sudan is within the Nile basin. The Nile basin forms the livelihood of every citizen in South Sudan. Without any doubt the people of South Sudan have more attachment to the Nile River than any other people living in the Nile basin. It is a historical fact that the Nilotic people emanated from South Sudan. During the first civil war, a liberation movement bearing the name Nile was established under the leadership of Gordon Muortat. During the second civil war, the name was given to one of the SPLA battalions, the ‘Nile Battalion’. Adopting ‘Nile’ as a name for our country would be appealing as the Nile River is not only a source of livelihood for most people but it also binds them together.
The Kush Republic
The name ‘Kush’ has both historical and religious meaning to the people of South Sudan. Historically, the Kingdom of Kush is known as an ancient African kingdom, situated between rivers, which constituted what is now known as the old Sudan. This kingdom under king Kashta invaded Egypt in the 8th century BC. The Kushite kings ruled as Pharaohs for a century until they were expelled in 656 BC. The Kush Kingdom was associated with the Nilotic people, as revealed by archaeological discoveries.
In the Holy Bible, Kush (Cush) is mentioned many times. It is referred to as ‘people’ or ‘land’. It means ‘black’ and it is the name given to eldest son of Ham. The land of Cush seems to have derived its name from him. The Isaiah 18 verse describes Cush as a land divided by rivers where the people are tall and smooth-skinned. Many people of South Sudan believe this verse refers to them. It makes them believe that the new country of South Sudan may have been prophesied in the Bible thousands of years ago. The name Kush is now seen everywhere in South Sudan. It is the name of an airline, a think tank, a church, an NGO and even a restaurant. In addition, it was the name of one of the SPLA battalions during the liberation struggle.
To strengthen the legitimacy of our new country and lay down a solid foundation, the Constitutional Review Commission should subject these and other possible names to public opinion. Even though it may seem a useless exercise, since it is unlikely the current name will change, the process itself will have a huge impact. People will feel that they have indeed given their country a name, rather than having a name imposed by the elite.
Luka Biong Deng is a senior member of South Sudan’s ruling party the SPLM. He recently stepped down as the South Sudanese Chair of the Abyei Joint Oversight Committee (AJOC). He is currently a fellow at Harvard Kennedy School and can be reached at [email protected]