Dr. Lam Akol on Federalism
4 min readBy Lam Akol, Addis Ababa
The pastor is either misled or, I quiver to say, is distorting the facts about what is going on in the peace talks here in Addis Ababa. The two delegations never discussed federation or any substantive matter, other than the cessation of hostilities. They were battling with how to produce an agenda all this time.
In fact since an agreement on the Ceasation of Hostilities (CoH) was signed on the 23rd of January, no agenda for the talks has been agreed by the two delegations up to the time of writing. One and a Declaration of Principles were agreed on the 31st of March and were to be signed on the 1st of April when in the last minute Dr Riek instructed his delegation not to (This piece of information, Riek’s instructions, was provided officially by the mediators).
Thereafter, the two delegations went on recess for consultation. It was during that time that the Nasir meeting by the SPLM/A-IO took place and came out with the current hullabaloo about ‘federation’ and the like. I will come back to this point.
The government delegation comprised of a number of political parties with a clear agenda that the talks shall be in two stages: the first would aim at attaining a permanent ceasefire which, logically, should be between the two warring parties.
The second, would be an all-inclusive national dialogue conference in which all stakeholders shall take part each on its own right. It will be in this conference that each and every political party shall table its position on not only the system of governance (federalism, etc.) but all the challenges facing the country.
It was on the basis of this understanding that SPLM-DC and USAP represented the political parties in the delegation of the Republic of South Sudan (call it the government’s delegation if you like). The participation had nothing to do with supporting or otherwise the idea of federation, because that simply did not arise.
With the 9th of May agreement that combined the two stages together, SPLM-DC and the other registered political parties (a total of 18) were represented on their own and came to Addis Ababa for the symposium. Now, they have selected seven as demanded by IGAD to go to the next round of talks. SPLM-DC is leading the seven. This separate representation is totally in line with our agenda as above.
To come back to the Nasir meeting of SPLM/A-IO, one must highlight a point rarely talked about. The Nasir documents including their suggested amendments to the draft Agenda and DoP (the two documents that were to be signed in April) all were for a bilateral deal between them and the government to share power in Juba.
They did not envisage a role for the political parties and the civil society. In other words, the were for a CPA-2 or Naivasha-2! This talks volumes about the democratic claims of the group.
Nobody will be fooled by the loud noise; the documents are available to all. One must add that Riek recently came out with a ridiculous demand that he must send his own political parties to the talks equal in number to those coming from Juba!! I am not making this up: it was revealed to us by the Special Envoy Lazaro Sumbeiywo who was chairing the symposium.
The stand of SPLM/A-IO on federalism is not original but an attempt to rise on the tide of a popular demand. Yet, the way it is being presented is so clumsy that it may boomerang against such a noble idea if left to these new converts alone. Empty jargons have never helped a genuine cause!
A good advice was given by James L. Simon that ‘the taste of the pudding is in the eating’. If you do not trust SPLM-DC, just ask the IRI to share with you a copy of the draft federal constitution we gave them in 2013, as came in the public statement.
My sincere advice to the pastor and those who support SPLM/A-IO is that if they are genuine in working to bring about federalism in South Sudan, they should better concentrate their energies on developing what kind of federation they are offering and try to build a consensus on it rather than busying themselves questioning the commitment of those who say they support the idea.
—–
Draft Alternative Constitution of the RoSS from SPLM-DC
—–
Explanatory Note to the draft alternative constitution of RSS
—–
The Case for the Parliamentary System-HP
About Post Author
