South Sudan should be divided into 6 Regions or Territories, instead of 10, 21, 32 or 39 States
8 min readInstead of the controversial 10, 21, 23, 32 or 39 states, South Sudan should be divided into six regions, each headed by Governor General elected by the people with full decentralized or federal powers. The 32 States shall be increased and turned into Counties according to the local available population and size as per local government act
By Kanybil Noon, Juba, South Sudan
Historical Perspective of South Sudan
Wednesday, September 18, 2019 (PW) — Before the Turko-Egyptian invasion of 1821, the Sudan consisted of Kingdoms and tribal communities without modern forms of government as we have today. In other words, Sudan in its present boundaries did not exist. The Turko-Egyptian occupation of 1821 was promoted by the expansionist ambitions of the Ottoman Empire and its craving for wealth and markets. The main commodities of interest were slaves, gold, ivory and timber. South Sudan and her people became the main source of these commodities.
The Turko – Egyptian and the North Sudanese collaborated in their raids against the South Sudan for slaves resulting in millions of South Sudanese people being taken into slavery in the Arab and new World. Although the Turko – Egyptian rule lasted for a period of sixty years, it did not control all the Sudan. South Sudan in particular was not fully brought under the administration of the invading alien power. Similarly, the Mahdist administration of 1883 – 1898 did not succeed to impose its full authority on the whole of South Sudan.
The Belgians in 1892, advancing from the former Belgian Congo (now Zaire), captured Western Equatoria up to Mongalla and established the Lado Enclave as part of the Belgian Congo. During the same period (1892) the French led by Major Marchand occupied large parts of South Sudan (Bahr el Ghazal, Western Upper Nile up to Fashoda) and by 1896 they had established a firm administration in these areas.
Another French expedition which started off in 1897 from Djibouti moving through Ethiopia and along the Baro and Sobat Rivers failed to link up with Fashoda expedition. The French had wanted to annex South Sudan to the French territories in West Africa. However, an international conflict developed between the British and the French over South Sudan commonly known as the Fashoda Incident or crisis. Again, in 1898 the Sudan was re-conquered by a joint British and Egyptian forces resulting in the signing of the Condominium Agreement between the British and the Egyptian to administer the Sudan in its present boundaries.
In 1899 the British and the French concluded an agreement in Europe which made the French pull out of South Sudan handing over its portion of South Sudan to the same authorities who were already in control of North Sudan. A similar incident took place in 1910 when the Belgians withdrew from the Lado Enclave after an agreement was concluded in 1896 stipulating that the Enclave was to be handed over to the British after the death of King Leopold.
The British Separate Administration Policy (1898-1947)
Owing to the geographical, political, historical and cultural differences between North and South Sudan, the British devised a system of a separate administration for the two countries. To guarantee the effectiveness of the separate administration policy the British passed the Closed Districts Ordinances of 1920s. In consolidation of this policy, the Passports and Permits Ordinance was promulgated in 1922.
This ordinance required the use of passports and permits for travellers shuttling between the two countries of North and South Sudan. The permits were to specify the conditions and purposes of the visits. The Immigration Policy was further strengthened by the permits and trade order enacted in 1925. This law required North Sudanese to obtain permits to conduct trade in South Sudan. Finally, a Language Policy was developed and enforced in South Sudan in 1928.
This policy adopted English as the official language for South Sudan and approved the use of the following local languages: Dinka, Bari, Nuer, Latuko, Shilluk and Zande. Arabic was categorically rejected as a language in South Sudan. The cumulative effect of the immigration and trade laws coupled with the language policy was to maintain South Sudan as a separate country from North Sudan.
After the establishment of the Condominium rule, the British continued to consolidate its position in North Sudan by creating the necessary administrative and political structures for the state of North Sudan. In an effort to prepare the North Sudan for self-rule, the North Sudan Advisory Council Ordinance was enacted in 1943.
The ordinance covered all the six North Sudan provinces: comprising of Khartoum, Kordofan, and Darfur, Eastern, Northern and Blue Nile provinces. This council was empowered to advise the condominium authority on how to administer North Sudan in certain specific areas. Members of the Advisory Council were all North Sudanese. The ordinance had no application or relevance to the territory of South Sudan. Thus far, North and South Sudan were regarded as two separate countries colonised by the British and Egyptians.
Colonial Britain Hands over South Sudan to the North
Instead of establishing an advisory council for South Sudan similar to that of North Sudan, the resolutions of the Administrative Conference held in Khartoum in 1946 surprisingly advocated the colonisation of South by North Sudan.
It must, however, be pointed out that the conference took the decision at the back of the people of South Sudan as they were not represented and because the conference was meant for administrators in North Sudan only, the British administrators in South Sudan did not attend. Consequently, this unexpected outcome revealed the conspiracy between the British and the North Sudanese supported by Egypt to hand over South Sudan to North Sudan as a colonial territory. Certainly, this plan provoked bitter reaction from the South Sudanese and their sympathisers.
The betrayal of South Sudan by the British was finally concluded in the infamous Juba conference of 1947. Precisely the conference was convened to inform the chiefs of South Sudan of the irreversible decision to hand over South Sudan to the new colonial masters from North Sudan. This unpalatable decision was crowned by the promulgation and establishment of the Sudan Legislative Assembly in 1948. Thirteen (13) delegates from South Sudan were handpicked and forced to represent South Sudan in the Assembly.
The Cairo Agreement of 1953 was no exception to the rule. Once again, the colonial masters from Britain and North Sudan masquerading as representatives of national political parties with tacit support of the Egyptian government conspired to grant self-determination to the Sudan without the participation of South Sudan. The people of South Sudan were deliberately excluded on the pretext that they had no political parties or organizations. This was yet another ploy made by political parties of North Sudan to claim representation of South Sudan with the erroneous and unjustifiable assumption that the Sudan is one country.
If the British had felt that South Sudan was not yet ready to become an independent state by it then, they should have either handed over its administration to an international body like the UN instead of North Sudan or should have left North Sudan get independence separately as they did with North Rhodesia. Source (Dr. Riek Machar Teny-Dhurgon);
With this brief introduction of how South Sudan transition to where it is, I would like to humbly present an alternative proposal to10 vs. 32 or 21 States in the Republic of South Sudan; After Addis Ababa agreement, Southern Sudan was guaranteed its semi autonomy which was later on abrogated with consequent creation of three regions.
As internal Boundaries Commission (IBC) struggles to bring to an end the outstanding issues on the number of states, I would like to present an alternative solution to the commission, as an independent thinker. Initially, the Southern region was founded on the three regions of Upper Nile, Bar El Gazelle and Equatoria and this regional political geography were transformed into states.
Thus, it is critical that South Sudan goes back for regions or territories, reviews issues of tribal and counties colonial boundaries and later use the local government act to create more states if people think states are to their political division best interests than regions or territories.
In order to quell this political antagonist among political parties concerning the number of states, there is need for an alternative and neural proposal in relations to political demarcation or creation of political administrative units. Nevertheless, to have political regional balance of power, the current three regions should be divided into 2 regions each (6 regions in total) or Territories and they shall be as follows;
- Upper Nile Region – made up of the former Unity and Upper Nile States
- Eastern Region – Made up of the former Jonglei State and Pibor administrative Area;
- Southern Region – Made up of the former Central and Eastern Equatoria States;
- Western region – Made up of the former Western Equatoria State;
- Central region – made up of the former Lakes, Warrap States and Abyei administrative Area;
- Northern region – made up of the former Western and northern Bar El Gazelle States;
Each of the regions shall be headed by Governor General elected by the people with full decentralized or federal powers. The 32 States (thirty two) shall be increased and turned into Counties according to the local available population and size as per local government act. The Counties shall be headed by county commissioners with relevant powers to implement local government projects and law enforcement as per local government act;
Advantages of these 6 regions
- It shall kill the regional identifications of Bar El Gazelle, Upper Nile and Equatoria;
- It shall addresses political conflict of 10,21 and 32 states outstanding issue since it doesn’t represent either of the proposals from oppositions or government;
- It shall addresses the political regional balance of power since each of the three regions has 2 regions;
- It shall addresses the ethnic based states formation;
- It shall address the huge political accommodations and encourages developmental programs as number of government administrative divisions reduce to 6 regions.
- Three regions mean few governors unlike 10, 21, 23 , 32 or 39 states
- It shall implements the meaningful decentralization or Federalism;
- It shall addresses territorial claims by different communities;
The author, Kanybil Noon, is a student of Strategic and Security Studies at the Institute of Peace, Development and Security Studies, University of Juba, in South Sudan. He can be reached via his email: kan1noon@gmail.com
The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made is the responsibility of the author, not PaanLuel Wël Media (PW) website. If you want to submit an opinion article, commentary or news analysis, please email it to paanluel2011@gmail.com. PaanLuel Wël Media (PW) website do reserve the right to edit or reject material before publication. Please include your full name, a short biography, email address, city and the country you are writing from.
About Post Author
