FAREED MUSA FATAKI
Africa-Press – South-Sudan. The current discourse in South Sudan revolves around the topic of elections. One faction advocates for elections as the optimal method for establishing a government mandated by the people, while another contends that South Sudan isn’t prepared for elections. This latter group outlines prerequisites that must be met before holding elections. Meanwhile, there’s a third faction that remains indifferent to the prospect of elections; their primary concern lies in accessing essential services necessary for their survival.
This majority, comprised of innocent citizens residing in rural areas, simply seek peace, security, infrastructure such as good roads, schools, hospitals, and access to food. For them, peace ensures security, enabling them to engage in productive activities for sustenance. Their focus isn’t on the intricacies of governance but on basic necessities, and they constitute the bulk of the population in rural regions.
This article aims to present my perspective and offer suggestions to bridge the gap between the various emerging voices, proposing a common path forward. Within this article, we will delineate the advantages and disadvantages of holding elections now versus abstaining from them, and ultimately recommend the most viable course of action.
It’s crucial to acknowledge that South Sudan has never conducted democratic elections since gaining independence; thus, the forthcoming elections mark a historic first. The conduct of these elections will not only shape our democracy but also lay its foundational principles, positioning us within the global community of civilized nations. This monumental task necessitates careful consideration of the nature of these elections. They shouldn’t serve as a mere expedient for legitimizing power but rather as a solution to our leadership challenges, providing guidance on the accession to power.
Before delving deeper, it’s essential to clarify the concept of an election. I align with those who define an election as a formal group decision-making process whereby a population selects individuals or groups to hold public office. It embodies the act of electing or being elected, wherein individuals carefully choose preferred candidates for specific public positions. This definition will serve as a framework for analysing potential outcomes should South Sudan proceed with elections in December 2024.
Scenario one aligns with those advocating for immediate elections, asserting with conviction that there should be no further extensions. They express collective exhaustion from prolonged delays and emphasize the urgent need for elections. Their concern stems from a fear that without timely elections, South Sudan risks descending into a state resembling Somalia, characterized by the dominance of warlords and the proliferation of militant groups. Such a scenario, they argue, would not only destabilize South Sudan but also threaten the stability of the entire African region.
It’s undeniable that there’s widespread dissatisfaction with the current leadership, perceived as deceitful and corrupt. This faction believes that elections offer an opportunity to replace these leaders. However, they acknowledge the necessity of ensuring the credibility of the electoral process. They raise critical questions: How can the presidency be legitimized without the enactment of a permanent constitution? How can a legitimate president restore national security without a nationally unified military force? How can elections be credible when a significant portion of the population is displaced, either as refugees, in internally displaced camps, or incarcerated on politically motivated charges? Moreover, how can there be a legitimate president without accurate demographic data, clearly defined national boundaries, and constituencies?
While acknowledging the urgency felt by this faction, it’s evident that rushing into elections without addressing these fundamental issues could exacerbate the country’s challenges. Establishing credible laws and courts to oversee the electoral process is paramount. The concept of mobile courts, demonstrated in previous instances, should be expanded to swiftly resolve any electoral disputes. The absence of credible judicial institutions undermines confidence in the electoral process.
Furthermore, public displays of bias by judicial and electoral officials erode trust in the system. Instances where the Chief Justice publicly aligns with a political party or the electoral chief demonstrates partiality towards a specific faction highlight the lack of impartiality and preparedness. This lack of readiness is perilous, as it leaves the country vulnerable to internal strife and external interference. Various stakeholders within and beyond South Sudan may exploit a poorly organized election to instigate conflict.
In conclusion, proponents of immediate elections must consider the broader implications and prioritize the nation’s stability over individual interests. Rushing into elections without addressing underlying issues risks plunging South Sudan into further turmoil. It’s imperative to ensure comprehensive preparedness, including the establishment of credible institutions and the resolution of key challenges, before proceeding with elections.
In scenario two, proponents advocate for thorough preparedness before conducting credible elections. They assert that all necessary elements for fair elections, such as security and a solid constitution, must be firmly established before proceeding. However, I argue that granting further extensions under the current leadership is futile. The call for extensions serves only to prolong inevitable challenges, and patience is wearing thin as we urgently require effective solutions.
Given the entrenched corruption and conflicting interests, particularly regarding the establishment of a national army, it’s doubtful that the current leadership possesses the capability or willingness to address these issues adequately. Previous attempts, including the 2015 Agreement revitalization in 2018 and the subsequent failure to hold elections in 2021, followed by a two-year extension, have not yielded satisfactory results. Another extension would only lead to further deterioration, risking the stability of the country.
The lack of political will was evident in the flawed 2018 agreement, which failed to address the root causes of our problems. External actors, including IGAD, TROIKA, AU, and the UN, advocating against extensions may be signalling a need to move beyond the current agreement and initiate a new approach. We must heed these warnings and carefully consider the implications of prolonging the status quo.
Various voices, including SPLM-IO, UN representatives, and government officials, offer conflicting perspectives on extensions versus elections. However, the resounding call against extensions suggests that further delays will damage South Sudan’s international standing, exacerbating poverty and potentially igniting further conflict.
We must recognize that war is not a viable option, given the generations who have suffered displacement and the dire consequences of continued conflict. Thus, scenario two requires careful navigation, considering the current realities.
It is imperative for all South Sudanese, regardless of their stance on scenarios one or two, to reconcile their interests and find common ground. By integrating divergent views, we can work towards a solution that averts further turmoil and paves the way for a more stable future.
Many have expressed differing opinions on the notion of perfect elections. Some argue that perfection is unattainable, while others view elections as a learning process, suggesting that multiple iterations are necessary before achieving excellence. While I acknowledge the validity of these arguments, I believe that as a nascent nation, South Sudan can leverage the experiences of other nations to minimize errors and establish credible, transparent, and fair electoral processes.
We have the opportunity to learn from the mistakes of our predecessors and adopt best practices to enhance the integrity of our electoral system. This requires a collective commitment to prioritize the interests of our nation above political differences. With concerted effort, I am confident that we can achieve this goal.
1-To this end, I propose a pragmatic approach to ensure peaceful, credible, and transparent elections in South Sudan: Firstly, I advocate for gubernatorial and county commissioner elections to proceed as scheduled in December 2024, without further extensions. County commissioners play a crucial role in bridging the gap between urban centers and rural communities. Electing commissioners will enhance accountability and responsiveness to the needs of the people.
Additionally, I propose delaying presidential and parliamentary elections until a permanent constitution is promulgated. This strategic delay allows for the establishment of foundational governance structures, ensuring that future elections are conducted within a framework that upholds democratic principles.
Furthermore, I emphasize the importance of empowering local governance by enabling elections for governors, county commissioners, state legislative assembly members, and councillors at the Payam level. These localized elections can be managed more effectively, considering the existing state-level constitutions that govern political, social, and economic affairs.
By focusing on subnational elections initially, we can build confidence in the electoral process and address key governance challenges at the grassroots level. This incremental approach lays the groundwork for successful national elections in the future, guided by established democratic norms and institutions.
In conclusion, prioritizing local elections and delaying national elections until constitutional prerequisites are met offers a pragmatic pathway towards credible and transparent electoral processes in South Sudan. It is imperative that we seize this opportunity to build a foundation for democratic governance and national cohesion.
The established state governments, comprising elected governors, commissioners, state legislative assembly members, and councillors at the Payam level, will undertake additional responsibilities to facilitate the forthcoming elections. These include:
I. Training and Deployment of Unified National Forces: Each state will be responsible for training and deploying unified national forces to restore security. This entails establishing fully-equipped army divisions in well-established military barracks, ensuring representation from all ethnicities of South Sudan’s 64 tribes. Similarly, police headquarters and a functioning judiciary, including high courts at state capitals and courts at county and Payam levels, must be established.
II. Assistance in Border and Constituents Demarcations: State governments will assist in border and constituency demarcations, essential prerequisites for presidential and national parliamentary elections.
III. Facilitation of Refugee and IDP Return: Improved security measures will enable the safe return of refugees, internally displaced persons (IDPs), and those in Protection of Civilians sites (PoCs) to participate fully in the pending presidential and parliamentary elections.
IV. Conduct of National Population Census: State governments will facilitate the conduct of a national population census, crucial for determining electoral boundaries and demographics, prerequisites for presidential and national parliamentary elections.
V. Facilitation of Referendum: If the National Constitution Making Process calls for a referendum to ratify the new constitution before its promulgation, state governments will facilitate its conduct.
In essence, state governments will play a pivotal role in preparing for the pending presidential and national parliamentary elections. This includes providing enhanced security for all candidates, collaborating with the national electoral commission to establish state-level electoral commissions, and mobilizing voter registration and civic education initiatives statewide.
2-Institute a National Roundtable Dialogue: A comprehensive dialogue is essential to address the root causes of conflicts in South Sudan and chart a way forward. Building on the recommendations of the concluded National Dialogue, this inclusive dialogue should involve not only political parties but also holdout groups and other concerned stakeholders. Beyond focusing solely on elections, discussions should delve into the underlying issues fuelling conflict. The outcome of this dialogue should include the agreement on a caretaker government to assume responsibility from December 2024 onwards.
3-Dissolve the R-TGoNU: As of December 2024, the Revitalized Transitional Government of National Unity (R-TGoNU) should be dissolved to pave the way for state-level elections. President Kiir should step down, creating a neutral atmosphere conducive to fair elections. It’s crucial for all parties to agree on the transitional leadership structure, ensuring transparency in the nomination process. Kiir’s resignation is imperative to level the playing field for all presidential candidates and demonstrate the SPLM’s commitment to democratic principles. Additionally, serving military officers and civil servants must refrain from engaging in politics until they resign from their respective positions to prevent the politicization of the military and civil service.
4-Military and Civil Service Restrictions: Serving military officers and civil servants should not engage in politics until they resign from their current positions. This measure aims to prevent the militarization of politics and politicization of the military. Additionally, veterans involved in the liberation struggle should be appreciated and transitioned to the reserve force, with provisions for consultation on a consultancy basis. Foreign troops, except for UNMISS forces, should be withdrawn from South Sudan to enable the resolution of internal issues without external interference. UNMISS forces should operate under full Chapter 7 authority to protect civilians and oversee the withdrawal of foreign forces.
In conclusion, I propose holding elections in two phases, beginning with state-level elections followed by national elections for the presidency and the National Legislative Assembly. This phased approach ensures readiness, including the ratification of the constitution, the unification of forces, and the safe repatriation of refugees, IDPs, and PoCs. By addressing the concerns of all stakeholders, we can build a prosperous South Sudan for all its citizens.
Source: Radio Tamazuj
For More News And Analysis About South-Sudan Follow Africa-Press
