Parliament, a toothless watchdog: a response to Thomas Wani Kundu of Information Committee in National Assembly, NA in Juba
7 min readBy Malith Alier, Juba
This article is in response to his article on 8 August which was written in response to my original article on the 6 of the same month.
I first of all thank goodness that Members of Parliament (MPs) are listening to the general public about issues affecting this dear country at the moment. It is further appreciated that they even spare time to respond to some issues put forward by individuals like myself. This is commendable.
Coming to the article as it were, it is not the exact numbers of members of Parliament that matter but rather, how they got there and what they do as their Constitutional mandate. It really doesn’t matter whether the number is just one or four hundred fifty. What I put forward were just approximations which were not the core issue.
Now you said that according to Transitional Constitution MPs are categorised into three; 170 elected members of Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly, 96 members of from defunct National Assembly in Khartoum and finally the President’s appointees numbering 66.
We all know that the Constitution you referred to is a document subject to manipulations and this happened on many occasions I will cite later. The document itself was also controversially passed in July 2011 as a matter of urgency. The reason was that it gave away to much power to one man to wield to the disadvantage of everybody.
The formation of a huge government after 2010 elections was countered by a public demand for a lean government. This lean government was not only meant for the executive. It should have encompassed all arms of the government; the executive, Parliament and the judiciary. Instead, it was only the executive which was downsized in 2013 from over fifty ministers and their deputies.
I do not see the reason why it stopped there. The current Parliaments should have been slashed by the same percentage. The bulk of Khartoum 96 and the appointed 66 are too many and a supernumerary. They really represent nobody in that House. The appointment of 66 MPs which amounted to 39 percent of the elected MPs is a testimony to the excesses granted to the President by the said Constitution.
The appointing authority should have the power to appoint just 12 MPs to balance the power equation. However, this number should not exceed 20 appointees. The appointment of about 40% of the elected House is not in place because the same House is predominantly SPLM. So the President does not need extra MPs to be able to pass bills and govern effectively.
The existence of the Council of State is another controversy planted in the State of South Sudan. This is a cut and paste from the Sudan we left and for good reasons. The extra chamber of 50 members serves no meaningful purpose for the people of this Country. The States do not need another parliament because they already have their own parliaments on the ground. If anyone wants to make it meaningful, he/she should transform it to be a Senate so as to scrutinise and approve laws made by the National Assembly.
In doing that, South Sudan will be different from Khartoum and its bad policies that made us separate. Nevertheless, to make the matters worse unfortunately, the Council of States makes collaboration agreements with that in Khartoum before our very eyes. Wonders will never cease!
Everyone knows that there are consequences for not limiting the House to only elected MPs. One of these is the strain on the country’s budget. The huge size of the government included the accommodated ones is the reason why over eighty per cent of the budget goes to salaries of Constitutional post holders and civil servants. Another issue is that of Constituency Development Fund (CDF).
The information we have is that the MPs voted to share CDF funds among themselves equally. Where do the 96 from Khartoum and the 66 appointed MPs take their CDF monies? The CDF money that goes to this extra number of MPs amounts to (96+ 66)* 700,000 which is equals to SSP 113,400,000 (SSP one hundred thirteen million four hundred thousand). If you have any information about this please let us know.
We know that honourable members from Khartoum were legitimately elected in 2010. There is no question about that. The question is why are they included in the current Parliament without fresh elections? You are well aware that their former Constituencies are no longer on the map of this country. They served in Khartoum for five years from 2005 to 2011. This time is long enough for them to have accomplished the task and impart their expertise to the young generation.
Nobody denies that while in Khartoum, the MPs served this country to the best of their ability but is it a justification to continue in a representative House where they represent on one except themselves?
All of us contributed for the liberation and betterment of this country in one way or another. There are those who fought in the bush, those who contributed while inside Sudan, those who contributed in materials during the struggle and even those who contributed through the word of mouth. I wonder whether you have compensated them all.
There are those who died before those MPs in Khartoum in the service of this nation, those who perished in the thick of it. Be reminded that the ones who died in Khartoum died of natural causes and do not need special status in the country.
Therefore, moving from Khartoum to Juba as Parliamentarians is akin to clinging on to power. They should have been given their retirement dues and send to their villages for good.
The reasons why this Parliament is a toothless watchdog are many. However, this is not today’s observation only. Many independent observers documented this since 2005. The defunct Parliament of Southern Sudan under Igga and the current Parliament under Rundial are the same peas of the same mother. Their only function is to pass anything in a conveyer belt manner. Tell me anything else they did not pass through a “conveyer belt” except Telar Deng, the 2013 nominated minister of Justice.
Mr. Kundu your Parliament has been branded a rubber stamp Parliament. You watched the President removing elected governors unconstitutionally. The 60 day time limit to conduct by-elections elapsed but you kept mum.
The President wrote letters to 75 corrupt government officials to return the stolen money to the government coffers. You tried to move to suspend them but the executive silenced you.
Your House was intimidated during the elections of House Speaker by the very President who is supposed to uphold the doctrine of separation of powers as in the Constitution. The current Speaker was imposed on the House against the conduct of business regulations. You as the legislative arm of the government were attacked on your backyard but you went underground. One would imagine that this was the rare opportunity for you to bite if you had any teeth.
The various militias continued to be reintegrated against the SPLA Act but the Parliament is always there to just approve.
New States are being created outside the Constitutional framework like the Greater Pibor Administrative Area. You just ratify!
The foreign currency crisis in November 2013 saw all MPs rising against the Central Bank of South Sudan (BSS).
This was a clear attack on the independence of an institution like BSS for no good reasons. The mere rise of the exchange rate from 3.16 to 4.50 per Dollar was a sole responsibility of the said Bank. Now the Dollar is trading at 5.00 Pounds per Dollar but you’re no were to intervene.
The local government Act of 2012 is dormant to date. The County Commissioners and assemblies continue to be appointed instead of being directly elected as stipulated by the Act. What is your take on this? The claim that there is no money to run elections is bogus and absurd. Why is it that there is no money for elections while millions are siphoned to foreign bank accounts by corrupt officials in the same government?
Every South Sudanese wonders why you people continue to partially cite this document called South Sudan Transitional Constitution?
Asking me to apologise for stating the fact is not a good start. I have not misinformed or intended to mislead the public in this regard. If anything, it is you people in Parliament who should apologise to the people who sent you to represent them but you chose to sit on the job. A question still lingers what have you done to improve the livelihoods of the people of this country?
Under your watch corruption thrives, rule of gun rather than rule of law is the order of the day. The current civil war should have been averted but you failed to just act. The country is failing diplomatically and many more. There are many questions than answers in this country.
About Post Author
