Will South Sudan be ready for its first democratic elections comes 2023?
Posted: 14 January, 2022 Filed under: Garang Yach James | Tags: 2023, civil wars, communal conflicts, democratic elections, national elections, Permanent Ceasefire, Permanent Constitution, R-ARCSS, refugees, Repatriation of refugees, Republic of South Sudan, Security Sector Reform, social disorder, Transitional Period, Transitional security arrangements 6 Comments
Author: Garang Yach James
South Sudanese Political and security analyst and PhD Student, University of Juba, South Sudan
Summary
This article discusses key requisite benchmarks for the success of first democratic elections towards the end of the Transitional Period in 2023. The author argues that the conduct of credible democratic elections is conditional on certain processes being successfully completed. The article posits that in lieu of faithful implementation of these processes, the conduct of first national elections in South Sudan is likely to birth mock democracy and would be a recipe for recycling of conflict. The article finally gives three recommendations as a path out of the series of transitional governments.
Requisite benchmarks for democratic elections in South Sudan
Since independence, South Sudan has never conducted general elections in its capacity as a sovereign State. Instead, the country has experienced multiple communal conflicts and civil wars which threatened prospects for democratic elections. In attempts to establish peace and security, the two agreements namely; ARCSS and R-ARCSS expected to transition the post-conflict state to democracy have been signed but none of the said agreements has transitioned the state to secure and peaceful South Sudan. To do this, the Revitalised Transitional Government of Nation Unity( RTGoNU) stands a chance of leading a successful transition provided that the following necessary benchmarks are achieved.
Did the recently concluded South Sudan’s fifth Governors’ forum address the elephants in the room?
Posted: 6 December, 2021 Filed under: Garang Yach James, Joseph Geng Akech | Tags: Administrative Areas, ‘Permanent’ constitution building, Chief Administrators, democratic governance, economic reforms, governance, Governors’ Forum, Humanitarian relief, internally displaced people, law reforms, peace, R-ARCSS, refugees, Republic of South Sudan, Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, Revitalised Transitional Government of National Unity, RTGoNU, social services, sustainable peace, Transitional justice mechanisms, Transitional security arrangements, UNDP, United Nations Development Programme 1 Comment
Author: Joseph Geng Akech
South Sudanese human rights lawyer and PhD candidate, University of Pretoria, South Africa
Author: Garang Yach James
South Sudanese Political and security analyst and PhD Student, University of Juba, South Sudan
Summary
The government of the Republic of South Sudan recently organised a week-long conference of its 10 State Governors and Chief Administrators representing the three Administrative Areas. The aim was to discuss the role of States and local governments in the implementation of the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS). After a week of intense deliberations, the Forum released resolutions and recommendations on various aspects of peace, governance, social services and economic reforms. This paper critiques the Forum’s outcome arguing that the Forum failed to address the ‘elephants in the room’. For instance, the resolutions and recommendations did not articulate and in some instances, failed to mention, as priorities, aspects of the transitional security arrangements, transitional justice, permanent constitution building, humanitarian assistance and the return of internally displaced people and refugees as well as institutional and law reforms.
The transitional national legislature is to be transformed into a constituent assembly to adopt the ‘permanent’ constitution of South Sudan, but what does this mean?
Posted: 25 October, 2021 Filed under: Joseph Geng Akech | Tags: Constituent Assembly, constitution building, constitution making processes, Constitutional Drafting Committee (CDC), Draft Constitutional Text, legislation, National Constitutional Conference (NCC), National Constitutional Review Commission (NCRC), Preparatory Sub-Committee, R-ARCSS, Republic of South Sudan, Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan, Unelected national legislature Leave a commentAuthor: Joseph Geng Akech
South Sudanese human rights lawyer and LLD candidate, University of Pretoria, South Africa
Introduction
The Republic of South Sudan embarked on its ‘permanent’ constitution building process which is a critical part of the peace process. The Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS) puts forward mechanisms and institutions for achieving such ambition. These institutions include the Constitutional Drafting Committee (CDC),[1] National Constitutional Review Commission (NCRC), Preparatory Sub-Committee, National Constitutional Conference (NCC) and the reconstituted transitional national legislature (Council of States and Transitional National Legislative Assembly) acting as a constituent assembly. The R-ARCSS establishes the above institutions with varying powers and degree of influence on the constitution building process.
This article focuses on the role of the reconstituted national legislature – bicameral chambers composed of Council of States and Transitional National Legislative Assembly. According to the R-ARCSS, these two houses of parliament are to be transformed into a Constituent Assembly to adopt, in a joint session, the Draft Constitutional Text passed by the National Constitutional Conference.[2]
AfricLaw 