The role of federal government in services delivery in South Sudan 28 states.
By David Matiop Gai, Juba, South Sudan
February 7, 2016, (SSB) —- What are 28 states and the federal government? When the government of South Sudan declared a long awaited SPLM vision of “taking towns to people” on Oct 2, 2015, under leadership of Excellency President Salva Kiir Mayaardit, the SPLM party did not defined 28 states as what or like what?, just they talked of bringing services closer to people. But it is literally known as a figure of mathematical methodology (28 states).
And in my own understanding, the definition and concept of 28 states in the Republic of South Sudan and federal government have no differences as people were been complaining about federalism since 1947, and they had raised the issue two years back. The 28 states are self-governing states or political entities in one party called SPLM characterized by union of SPLM partially self-governing states or regions under central government in Juba, while federal government is the same coin of the same side as a Latin word, “foedus” mean “covenant” with more understanding federal states.
In federal government, the self-governing status of different states, as well as the division of powers between these 28 states and the central government in Juba are just the hierarchies in authorities of executive, legislature, and jurisdiciary, and they are constitutionally authorized to abide by law and not to be alter by unilateral decision of other parties, other states or federal bodies, which mean IGAD, Troika, UN Security Council, Democratic Change, SPLM-IO, or regional and international bodies have no a say on 28 states because it is rule abiding principle of federalism worldwide or internal extension of more states in the country.
There is nobody under Sun shine who can say no to development in South Sudan when states are not emerging to his/her territory!
Before I mention some roles of 28 states or federal government, I always argue with IGAD, TROIKA, and international community and their condemnation about 28 states in favors of SPLM-IO insistencies and pressurized the President to revoke the decision saying it is a violation of peace agreement but my argument is basing on the truth of the 28 states, peace implementation, and final conflict resolution in the Republic of South Sudan.
In my opinion, the creation of 28 states has brought down high tensions among communities from 95% to 35% especially in greater Upper Nile region! And the remaining 35% is to be handling by Juba government at the transitional government of national unity (TGNU).
But brothers from SPLM-IO, IGAD, Troika, and UN Security Council didn’t want to listen to people at the grass root levels. Which one is better now? 28 states to remain in place or reverse it to cause more fighting in the country? If somebody says 28 states should remain as it is, then why is it very complicated? Or when a person said revoke it, and then this person doesn’t know the popular demands and interest of people.
Citizens demand and adoption of 28 states is a significant factor for federalism which many regions in south Sudan were been called for. Federal can be multi-ethnic or ethnic covering the territorial areas with other states. Coming back to my topic, 28 states are associates of states under umbrella of SPLM to overseas roles of 28 states as federal system of governance both internal and external affairs of the nation.
It will be quiet difficult by the way apart from the two years conflict, my fellow south Sudanese politicians are debating on internal controversy and conflict in certain reforms of political and constitutional disputes resting on political gain, self reward, and international influences, part of resources looting particularly oil.
While on and off line time of social services delivery system in our country, I applauded to the welfare of 28 states and the roles of federal government to be regarded as the best option than disputes and arguments which are not contributing to the development of the country. These roles are as follows.
- The role of federal government in services delivery is mainly through social services block grant.
Yesterday evening 5th Feb 2016, I got chocked when I heard on SSTV that Council of ministers in their Friday ordinary meeting, direct minister of justice to draft services delivery Bill which mean all these years we don’t have social services delivery Bill! Although South Sudan has no services delivery Bill, the creation of 28 states will pressurized us to draft it as soon as possible.
The goals of social services block grant (SSBG), is to allow communities achieve to maintain their economic self-support, and self-sufficient, reduce abuse neglect of children, and adults, promote family preservations, reduce inappropriate institutional care, and secure institutional care when in appropriate.
I hope this year; tractors which were distributed to 28 states will make the different, and may bring amounts of products in Agriculture sector.
- Combines services or offer a single service. The experiences and knowledge of the government is either to combines services or delivers a single service. South Sudan can combine huge of social services to all states or single service to the states. This role is very important for one nation like South Sudan who has resources which are scattered to regions, but although regions govern themselves, central government is responsible for their both combine services and single services defending the choice government they can use.
- Involving referring social services responsibility from federal government to states, the best example of privatization under control of the government. The states government in 28 states, (example government societies, central government in Juba,) can encourage private sectors to meet social needs of the people of South Sudan through these 28 states. Another example are areas which never experienced town development since will be develop to towns through 28 states.
Finally, many roles of federal government in services delivery is leading security services, both food security and human security, health services, education services, strategies for quality research, establishment of administrations and provisions of other basic needs services such as water, electricity, police, local banks, fire and emergency, and many community projects.
These projects can be informs of services delivery of multi-structures, information/data, low levels of community participations, and updating urban and rural development projects, community infrastructure projects and strategic planning and economic development projects.
I hope the lawmakers will not sleep too much this time; they may push central government in sitting houses both in states and national provider of competitive, quality, and innovative south Sudan, while they may desire limited choices and opts for South Sudanese consumers.
The author is a Co-founder of National Health Care Organization; he holds Bachelor degree in social work and social administration from SSCUST, Bachelor degree in Theology from CLT Montana, USA, and a fellow researcher. He can be reach at tonggaid551@yahoo.com/davidmatiopgai@gmail.com.
About Post Author
