Jieng Council of Elders reject IGAD proposal on S. Sudan
July 10, 2015 (JUBA) – A powerful group of senior intellectuals and politicians from the ruling Dinka ethnic group, known as the Jieng [Dinka] Council of Elders (JCE), has issued a strong worded statement rejecting the proposal by the East African regional bloc, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), which aimed to end the 19-month long civil war in the country and advising president Salva Kiir’s government to refuse it.
“There are a number of factors for this situation which include the existence of a wide gap between the two parties to the conflict; IGAD’s own internal contradictions and lack of better understanding when it comes to the nature of the conflict; poorly designed mediation agenda and competing interests on the part of those supporting IGAD,” partly reads the Jieng statement, dated 6 July, signed by its chair, former South Sudan’s Supreme Court Chief Justice, Ambrose Riing Thiik, and a number of other members of the Council.
“The areas that have some serious concern include power sharing ratios; expansion of the National Legislature; arrangements for states most affected by the conflict; demilitarization of the national capital; establishment of the Hybrid Court for South Sudan (HCSS); and powers of Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC),” said the statement extended to Sudan Tribune.
The Jieng Council of Elders said they rejected the proposal giving Machar’s group 33% of power sharing at the national’s executive and 53% in the three states of Unity, Jonglei and Upper Nile of the oil-rich greater Upper Nile region.
The Dinka intellectuals and senior politicians argued that the percentage was allegedly meant for the Nuer community in opposition alone, despite having members from other ethnic groups in the rebel movement from the region.
They also said the Nuer ethnic group did not constitute the majority in Upper Nile region, adding that the Nuer were also divided and some are with president Kiir’s government.
“What is the justification for giving the opposition 53% in the war affected states? Does this suggest that the mediation had assumed that Nuer community in opposition, which almost constitutes all of the rebellion, is the majority in the three states?,” the Jieng elders inquired.
“If this is the case, has IGAD mediation accepted the narrative that the war is between the Jieng and the Nuer?”
They predicted that the Nuer on the side of the government will reject the proposal and threaten war to continue in Upper Nile region.
It attacked the IGAD proposal, saying it “clearly lacks any sound basis, devoid of any coherent logic and does nothing more than to fragment the society and threatens to further aggravate an already fractured social fabric.”
They also said they rejected any power sharing ratios being extended to the states, demanding that it should be only confined to the national level.
The Dinka elders however did not question as to why IGAD proposal gave 100% share to the government in the other seven states of greater Equatoria and Bahr el Ghazal, despite having rebel soldiers and officials in the opposition from these two other regions.
They also criticized the IGAD proposal which said 50 new members be appointed to the national parliament from the opposition faction, plus 17 new members for other political parties, making the parliament 400 of total membership.
“The expansion of the legislature would not only be unfair, but it could create over representation of one community in the government, a situation that is likely to provoke others to embrace use of violence to get represented,” the statement said.
The Jieng elders, who claimed to be speaking on behalf of the public, also refused the proposal to demilitarize the national capital, Juba, saying “The public fails to see any reasoning for the demilitarization of the national capital. Juba, the capital city is the sovereign seat of the government and it must remain fully under the control of the national government including its army, police and other organized forces.”
“This is essentially non-starter and it deserves an outright rejection from all the people of South Sudan,” they declared.
Concerning justice and accountability, the proposal makes emphasis on the need to establish a hybrid court, whose mandate would be to try suspected cases of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity under International Law.
But the Jieng elders said the South Sudan has capable justice and accountability system, saying there was no need for an international court to try the perpetrators of the war.
They also rejected the term genocide in relation to the mass killing of the Nuer civilians in Juba in December 2013, challenging IGAD.
“Furthermore, the proposal talks about the court having jurisdiction in respect to matters of genocide and other crimes committed since December 2013. Since when has IGAD determined genocide as having been committed in South Sudan?” the Dinka elders challenged.
The statement also rejected the proposed powers for monitoring body, the Joint Monitoring and Evaluation Commission (JMEC) on implementation of the would-be agreement.
According to IGAD, JMEC will be tasked with overseeing the implementation of the agreement, a mandate that essentially guarantees this body “the power to take corrective action in the event of non-compliance with the terms of the agreement”.
“The proposed powers of JMEC simply infringe on the sovereignty of the Republic of South Sudan and therefore, the JCE [Jieng Council of Elders] cannot support the creation of such a body with sweeping powers,” they advised.
“This proposal supports speedy fragmentation and dismemberment of this country and people of South Sudan strongly oppose anything that culminates in the disintegration of the people and the country,” they said.
They however said the peace process should be anchored on the urgent desire to reconcile and reunite the country, so critical decisions about the future of the country should not be dependent on the fierce compulsion for political expediency.
The country, they argued, needed a deliberative process that preserves its unity, promotes sustainable peace and provides equitable political dispensation.
“The latest IGAD power-sharing proposal fails to live up to these aspirations, prompting outright rejection,” they concluded.
(ST)