Back to the Drawing Board: What is our Main Problem in South Sudan?
South Sudan's coat of arms, in which the eagle symbolizes vision, strength, resilience and majesty, and the shield and spear the people’s resolve to protect the sovereignty of their republic and work hard to feed it.
By Francis M. Malwal, Houston, Texas, USA
Thursday, May 21, 2029 (PW) —- Most people believe that there is a problem that needs to be addressed in South Sudan. Some people think that the problem is the lack of institutions, enforcement of the laws, and governing system. So if the federal system is introduced today, everything would be fine. However, I do not agree with these people, and I firmly believe that the reasons they cited are just symptoms of a bigger problem. So in this article, I will refute these three hypotheses.
Firstly, the lack of a constitution and the rule of laws. The proponents of this theory believe that there is no constitution and laws in South Sudan. However, South Sudan has the 2011 constitution and amended in 2015, and many laws have been passed since independence. But what is lacking is the implementation and will to enforce them. Because most of the leaders in the country considered themselves above the law, and they wanted to impose the law selectively.
For example, according to the constitution, the president has the power to fire governors of states. Still, the same constitution requires the election commission to conduct the election within sixty days. So here the president has picked the article that is in his favor, ignored that is not in interest. Therefore, arguments that South Sudan has no laws or constitution is baseless.
Secondly, some people attribute the problem of South Sudan to weak institutions. Yes, there is no doubt about that. However, the genuine question that we need to ask ourselves is, who builds institutions? It’s a simple question, but most of us got it wrong, especially our leaders. For a new country like South Sudan to have institutions, it needs authentic leaders who have vision and capacity to translate that vision into smart objectives and tangible programs.
However, South Sudan has no such leaders who can utilize the potential resources the country has for the benefit of its people. So what we have are a bunch of selfish leaders whose ultimate goal is to enrich themselves at the expense of the country’s development. Therefore, as long as they are interested in looting the country’s resources, they would never have an appetite for building and strengthening institutions.
In summary, the fragile institutions could not qualify as the main problem of South Sudan because building institutions in a brand new country depends on the authentic leaders of the country. If there are no authentic leaders, there will be no strong institutions.
Thirdly, the system of governing theory is the problem. Supporters of this hypothesis believe the centralized government is the problem, and therefore, introducing a federal system where states take most of the resources and power, will solve the issues of corruption. However, the prevalence of corruption in Juba is because the funds are there. Once such resources move to the states as a result of federalism, the corrupt politicians and generals will follow the money to the states.
Therefore, the bottled ground shifts from Juba to the states. Although federalism may limit the movement of corrupts from one state to another, still the corrupts will not disappear as a result of changing the system of governing. So, in short, even though the introduction of the federal system may get rid of crook leaders from other states, still the corrupt leaders and generals of that particular state will follow the money.
If a state succeeds in managing resources and building the institutions, nevertheless it will not go anywhere as long as the central government is unable to provide the leadership needed to develop the country.
In conclusion, although the three proposed theories, such as lack of a constitution and rule of laws, weak institutions, and centralized system of governing are the problem of South Sudan, they all don’t qualify as the major problem of the country. Still, they are symptoms of a bigger disease called leadership.
So To build strong institutions and enforce the rule of laws and manage resources requires authentic leadership, and without it, our country will remain captive.
The author, Francis M. Malwal (Pharm. Pharm. FPGEC), is a South Sudanese pharmacist based in Houston, Texas, USA. He is the Former Head Department of Pharmacology, University of Juba, College of Medicine, and Chairman of Establishment Committee, African’s National Party. He can be reached via his email: E.mail.francismalwal@gmail.com
About Post Author
