SPLM-IO lawmaker Juol Nhomngek. [Photo courtesy]OPINION – The debate over whether to hold elections before critical tasks for free, fair and credible elections are implemented or not has recently gathered speed as we are approaching the end of the Roadmap and the prospect of holding General elections in 2024. Some people are pushing that the elections should be held in 2024 even though the prerequisites for free, fair and credible elections are not yet in place.
The unfortunate part is that those who support the unconditional holding of general elections always use the CPA of 2005 as the precedent for their arguments. I am sorry to say that it is very simplistic to compare the Revitalized Agreement with the CPA. Using the CPA as the precedent for rejecting the full implementation of the Revitalized Agreement is just simply a destitute of common sense.
In substance, the Revitalized Agreement is different from the CPA as it is intended to address the matters connected to the strengthening of the national unity among South Sudanese. This makes the Revitalized Agreement different from the CPA. Moreover, whereas on one hand, the main issue that the CPA was intended to address was whether South Sudan should remain as a part of the united Sudan or it should go for outright separation from the north and become independent Country, the Revitalized Agreement on the other hand is intended to address the values of justice, equality, respect for human dignity and advancement of human rights and fundamental freedoms that cement the national unity.
The above values are what define the rule of law and then are protected by the supremacy of the Constitution. They are neutral and because of that they are applicable equally to all persons in South Sudan whether in the oppositions or in the government, whether in the opposition Party or in the Ruling Party. For this reason, no person should sabotage the implementation of the Revitalized Agreement because it is the opposition that is pressing for its implementation.
It is very unfortunate that the national media is being used to evoke emotion in general public against the reforms that will lead to the establishment of the above values. I have been hearing Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth and other politicians using the CPA as their point of reference, which means that they are detached from reality and do not want the stability of this country.
In other words, they have failed to understand the purpose and intention of the Revitalized Agreement. This shows that their arguments are somehow robotic in nature as they are guided by mechanical reasoning that does not address the real issues of South Sudan. The real issues of South Sudan have nothing to do with the period of the Revitalized Agreement or elections but they are concerned with the empowerment of the communities through establishing strong institutions, which are accountable and transparent that can lead to the abolition of the system that is based on personal cult that has destroyed the supremacy of the Constitution.
It is sad to see Hon. Minister Michael Makuei Lueth passionately arguing without the second thought on what will be the repercussion of holding elections without having the safeguards for free, fair and credible elections. It is quite troubling when we see some politicians not thinking of South Sudan as the country that will be left for the next generation but only concern with the protection their current positions, their accumulated wealth and power.
As the facts show, the main reason for them demanding for the holding of elections in 2024 irrespective of putting in place the safeguards for free, fair and credible elections is to make sure that they use fragmented and tribalized security sector to go back to power or to hold elections so that when electoral crises result then the Country will end up forming another government of National Unity. Hence, they want to use sham elections that will be conducted in 2024 as a means of remaining in control over resources and power or returning to the government at the backdoor to the disadvantage of our larger communities.
The elections without reforms are not helpful to the people of South Sudan because they are not implementing the purpose of the Revitalized Agreement. The purpose of Revitalized Agreement is to establish the values already referred to above that can improve the welfare of citizens of South Sudan. Whether we like it or not, South Sudan will never see peace unless the values and the system the Revitalized Agreement is trying to reintroduce in South Sudanese politics are implemented.
We would rather suffer once and for all as we implement the Revitalized Agreement so that we do not go back to square one where we shall have another Government of National Unity. To avoid future conflict over the electoral crisis, there is a need to make sure that the Revitalized Agreement is implemented that can establish strong system built on justice, equality, respect for human dignity and advancement of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
We need the system that is accountable to the people, the system where citizens can go to court to sue government officials that have violated their rights or on the public interest litigation to protect their aggregate interest. It is the system that makes good leaders and it is the system protects the people not the leaders. On this note, we must caution Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth that comparing the CPA with the Revitalised Agreement is not helpful in our situation because the aims and goals of the two documents are different.
Whereas the ultimate goal of the CPA was to achieve the complete separation of the South from the North of Sudan, the ultimate goal of the Revitalized Agreement is to re-establish the social contract or social covenant in South Sudan. The Revitalized Agreement is the document that revitalized Article 9 (1) of the Transitional Constitution, which establishes the covenant among the people of South Sudan and between them and their government at every level and a commitment to respect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms that we agreed during the independence of South Sudan as it is made clear in the Preamble of the same Transitional Constitution.
Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth and other politicians who oppose the whole implementation of the Revitalized Agreement should clearly understand the purpose of the Revitalized Agreement before they make erroneous arguments that misinform the public. South Sudanese are suffering not because they have not elected leaders but because the system that has strong values that force leaders to effectively deliver services and enable them to protect themselves without relying on their strong relatives in the government is not in place. The Revitalized Agreement is the document that establishes such a system.
The importance of the Revitalized Agreement is that it aims at empowering citizens standing alone under the supremacy of the Constitution and the strong court system. Therefore, establishing strong system that protects itself against the advances of personalities should be the interest of all South Sudanese. Hon. Michael Makuei as a lawyer should have been in forefront fighting for the establishment of strong judiciary or court system instead of struggling to bury the law and Court system even deeper.
Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth and other politicians of the same thoughts should know that instead of hurrying with the elections, we must fight for the reform to establish the system where citizens are able to elect the representatives that represent their will and fight for their rights by all legal means without resorting to force. This can only be possible if the conditions for conducting free, fair and credible elections are in place.
It is therefore unfortunate that our arguments against premature elections are being received negatively because of frustration caused by the inability of the government to deliver services to the public. What the public should know is that the failure to deliver services is a technique devised by some few leaders of the SPLM-IG, of which Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth is part of the plot to purposely induce frustration as well as to frustrate the implementation of the Revitalized Agreement. This is the reason Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth does not himself believe in the Revitalized Agreement.
It is understandable that the induced frustration has created conditions where citizens demand for unconditional change. The questions that we must think critically as we listen to Hon. Michael Makuei Lueth whenever he appears on SSBC or on social media to talk against the Revitalized Agreement as he demands for the holding of general elections are: how do we ensure that South Sudan will have permanent peace and stable security after the elections without having the prerequisites for free, fair, credible and peaceful elections in place? Or is it in the best interest of South Sudan and her people to conduct elections without implementing the revitalized Agreement in letter and spirit?
As referred to in the above question, the best interest of South Sudan and her people is that after the transitional period, the country must have established the system where justice, equality, respect for human dignity and advancement of human rights and fundamental freedoms are enjoyed equally. It is therefore not in the best interest of South Sudan and her people to hold elections without first putting in place the prerequisites of free, fair and credible elections that enable citizens to choose their leaders freely after the informed decision.
Implementing the Revitalized Agreement in letter and spirit means that: the Permanent Constitution must be in place; Necessary Unified and Professional Forces must have been deployed across South Sudan; the Political Parties Council and the National Elections Commission must have been operationalized and fully funded so that they do their work efficiently and independently; repatriation of refugees and resettlement of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) must have taken place; national census that ensures that counties and constituencies are created based on the population data and the formation of lean government after elections where the citizens must have enjoyed equal voting right would have been implemented; the provisions of the Revitalized Agreement on the accountability for sexual and gender-based violence and human rights violations and abuses that prevent the occurrence of the same violations in future must have been implemented and finally, comprehensive disarmament carried across South Sudan must have been carried out by the Necessary Unified forces to ensure that the whole country is free from insecurity caused by illegal arms in the hands of civilians.
The above demands are in the interest of everyone including the top leaders and their families. This explains the tricky part of the Revitalized Agreement. Implementing the Revitalized it in letter and spirit can benefit all South Sudanese but failure to do that can result into all South Sudanese losing the country. This is because the population that the oppositions represent in the government under the Revitalized Agreement is the same population that the Government officials on the side of the SPLM-IG represent.
It further implies that where the oppositions lose the battle against reforms of the system while it is the known fact that South Sudan system needs reforms, all citizens and the government officials on the side of the Ruling Party of South Sudan that oppose reforms will also lose at the equal rate. This is the reason we argue that we must not compare the Revitalized Agreement with the CPA. The fundamental difference between the CPA and Revitalized Agreement is that whereas the population that the SPLA/M represented were Southerners, the National Congress Party (NCP) represented Northerners.
As it can be understood from the above explanation, the current situations of South Sudan the Revitalized Agreement is trying to address unlike the situations of Sudan under which the CPA was being implemented, is the situation of the same people, the same village and the same interest though driven by leaders with different interests. The same people are always the victims on both sides whether directly or indirectly.
It is in relation to the above paragraph that I must caution those who have differing views on the implementation of the Revitalized Agreement in letter and spirit that they should always think carefully before taking their position against the Revitalized Agreement. It is for the foregoing reasons we must always search for the truth as we try to find the solutions to the problems of South Sudan rather than opposing the ideas based on personal interest.
In conclusion, without implementing the whole Revitalized Agreement, free, fair, credible and peaceful elections cannot be realized. Instead of going into elections with uncertain future, we must actively engage the unity Government to ensure that the implementation of the Revitalized Agreement is done within reasonable time in order to save South Sudan from succeeding wars caused by negligence of failing to implement the values of South Sudan provided for in the provisions of the Revitalized Agreement.
The author is a member of the National Parliament (TNLA) representing Cueibet County in Lakes State on the ticket of the SPLM-IO. He is lawyer specializing in the Constitutional and administrative law and human rights. He can be reached via: nhomngekjuol@gmail.com.
The views expressed in the ‘OPINIONS & ANALYSIS’ section of Sudans Post are solely the opinions of the writers. The veracity of any claims made are the responsibility of the author not this website. If you want to submit an opinion piece or an analysis please email us here.
