Politics in South Sudan: Where is now the rights of political liberty?

Posted: January 16, 2017 by PaanLuel Wël in Columnists, David Matiop Gai, Opinion Articles, Opinion Writers

By David Matiop Gai, Juba, South Sudan

democracy

Demo-cracy or Demo-crazy?

January 16, 2017 (SSB) — Opening the world of democracy and politics in South Sudan has distinct compare to politics and democracy of other part of the world where democracy is promoting citizens participation in politics, exercise free and fair election, engages, and enjoying rule of law, freedom of speech or expression in a responsible manner that will not provoke public peace, transparency, responsibility, and accountability in services delivery.

According to dictionary.com, political liberty is “the right to express one freely and effectually regards the conduct, makeup, and principles of the government under which one lives”. Source: http://www.dictionary.com, 2017 Dictionary.com, LLC: 19:20 pm. In other word, without law, political liberty itself may not be regarded the way its requires in democratic society, and  there will be no liberty if citizens are politically blocked not to participate in election like case of south Sudan when the Western nations vigorously supported rebellion in 2013 apart from democracy.

And question is, is South Sudan a nation of foreign nationals or diplomatic core or a nation of its own citizens? If South Sudan is of its own citizens, then why foreign diplomats are deepen their effort heading political affairs of South Sudan than citizens? The answer is simple, they divide, and came in as solutions.

The South Sudanese political democracy and governance is always a process of forming, creating, and sustaining coalitions of ethnic groups dominating national politics of South Sudan, and political structures are made up of groups of militias, former rebels groups, and the objectives are pave up ways ahead for power sharing, and group satisfaction either politically, or materially, what next cause of continuous rebellion in the country?

Honestly, everybody arise in South Sudan politics as the only person who knows politics, good governance, rule of law, freedom of expression, and principles attained in democracy. John Garang said, “Even devil can claim to be democratic”.  The South Sudanese psychological disturbances of South Sudanese politics and political leadership vested in ethnic groups whereby people do not sincerely believe in their leaders who sacrificed their lives since they were young people, example Salva Kiir in 1964-2005. Is it democracy or interest? Or it is just because people want to disturb in the name of democracy about what they never saw.

Where is now the right of political liberty? South Sudanese fought for four decades because to achieve political liberty, but one year later after independence in July 2011, war erupted in 2013, and those who believed they are fighting for democracy interrupted rules and principles of that democracy before two good years ahead of 2015 election, and avoided South Sudanese citizens to exercise their fate whether to re-elected President Salva Kiir or choose another leader in an election in 2015 but the case of democracy was lost in the process as war occurred. Is it democracy or interest?

As I put right above, democratic system do allow citizens in every nation to exercise their powers through ballots, and choosing their leaders through the frameworks of democracy, or changing matters through principles of democratic transformation, and rights fate of citizens’ obligations in social contacts in the nation. So elections in South Sudan were scheduled in 2013 democratic exercise through bullets, and gun force as means of getting to power and top leadership in South Sudan. Is that democracy or interest?

In South Sudan politics, issues of democracy, politics, conflicts, and arm movements are changing direction in regional and international media and those media highlighting the deeper political and ethnic issues fuelling violence where these issues are in another way affecting the ruling party SPLM for not contributing to nation-building process, and nationalism adaptations. So the courses of democratic society in South Sudan are totally being affected by lobbying groups outside country there.

Each and every South Sudanese who is a graduate thinks what he/she knows of becoming a president and the facts about my claim was the grumbling of five SPLM leaders who were willing for top leadership before December 2015 conflict, and they did not even handled it well in a peaceful manner to prove their truly desires for top throne until their desires escalated into violence where the nation is now totally devastated. Is that democracy or interest?

It is not about democracy, transformation, or reform in governance, it is about interest, and not solicitude, even the Western countries who are believed to be founders and preachers of democracy in this modern world and modern political thoughts and practices are supporting rebels and rebellions to spread all over South Sudan because their aim, objectives and goal are not about democracy, it is about getting or looting wealth of South Sudan through serious fighting, and  killings, because they know it very well that South Sudan is a nation of different ethnic groups, and if the fighting escalate high, they may loot natural resources without any legitimate government to look after resources.

It had happened in Libya, Iraq, and other oil producing countries, it is not a new strategy, they have the same plan like in Libya, where rebels cried loud of genocide and international forces intervened to help rebels groups indirect in 2011, and now is Libya in peace?

Of course Western countries are superpower, and issues of neo-colonialism and imperialism are as the continuous imposed on South Sudan government by Western nations, but not solicitude as they said always. To be solicitude is to be care or concern as for the well-being of others, but in case of South Sudan, the West concern is not about our well-being, it is destruction, and more destruction.

In conclusion, the way Western diplomats are driving us in South Sudan is a political matching, although some of our politicians are PhD holders, they are indeed being drives as illiterate PhD holders who only passed through academic but academic never passed through them. Therefore, the goal of South Sudan is not because why can’t I rule or governing people this time when I am a PhD holder, the goal of South Sudan is to build a strong nation together in Africa, and in the world at large with whatever we have and an in assistant of foreign friends if there is need and not west presidential special envoy to become our masters, but also to make south Sudan a right place where citizens have equal rights, opportunities, respect, and dignity of all South Sudanese people.

The author is a co-founder of South Sudan Mental Health care Organization, (SSMHCO). He holds Bachelor degree in Social Work and Social Administration from SSCUST, Bachelor of Theology from CLT, Bungoma, Kenya/Kalispell, USA, and a fellow researcher. He can be reach at david.matiopgai@gmail.com

The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made are the responsibility of the author, not PaanLuel Wël: South Sudanese Bloggers (SSB) website. If you want to submit an opinion article or news analysis, please email it to paanluel2011@gmail.com. SSB do reserve the right to edit material before publication. Please include your full name, email address, city and the country you are writing from.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s