It Is Not Possible To Federalize Non-existent Federalism In South Sudan

"There is no federalism in South Sudan to be federalized.
Decentralisation has not even gone far enough as greater local
autonomy to the states."


 27 May 2013


By Jacob K. Lupai

The recent debate on federalism has been fascinating. It has been a
battle of ideas and views which is healthy in a society that needs to
learn more in increasing understanding. It is not a battle to finish
off those with counter ideas and views. Rather it is to bring out the
best of what people need to know to make an informed choice. In such
debates nothing is personal. Learning is a continuous process and we
all need to learn as much as possible in our endeavour for a better
way forward in our quest for prosperity and national unity.

The debate is interesting as it focuses on whether South Sudan should
adopt a federal system or it is already federal. Strong views have
been expressed for a federal system. This in turn has drawn a strong
reaction against a federal system seen as divisive. Other views are
that south Sudan is already federal and there is no need to federalize
existing federalism. Arguably, South Sudan is not federal.

South Sudan is divided into ten states. Does that mean South Sudan is
automatically a federation? If that was the case South Sudan would
have been known as the Federal Republic of South Sudan. After
arm-twisting and probably blackmailing, on the 8th July 2011 members
of the then Southern Sudan Legislative Assembly voted for independent
South Sudan to continue adopting a decentralized system as in Article
167(1) of the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan, 2005 against the
demand for a strong federal system. This is evidence that there is no
federalism in South Sudan. It is therefore not possible and indeed
unrealistic to federalise non-existent federalism.

It is possible that the confusion is a misconception of the current
decentralized system. This is misleading. One way to clear the
confusion is to define what federalism is in contrast to a
decentralized system. According to the Concise Oxford Dictionary Ninth
Edition, federalism refers to a federal system of government in which
several states form a unity but remain independent in internal
affairs. In contrast, a decentralized system of government is the
transfer of powers from a central to a local authority in reorganizing
on the basis of greater local autonomy. If each state was given
greater local autonomy then each of the ten states could have been
like the southern region under the Addis Ababa Agreement of 1972.

>From the definition of federalism and a decentralized system, there
seems to be a gray dividing line. However, in brief federalism offers
a state independence in internal affairs while a decentralized system
offers greater local autonomy. This clearly shows there seems to be
little difference. If this is the case why is there a hot debate on
federalism versus decentralization. This could have been partly due to
the various interpretations.

 Federalism represents an attempt to decentralize responsibilities to
state-local levels of government with a view to overcoming regional
and local discontent with central policies. From this perspective
federalism is not irrelevant to South Sudan. Through federalism
national unity is consolidated. The state needs greater local autonomy
with independence in internal affairs such as in deployment of police
in combating rampant insecurity. The state must also have powers to
raise taxes otherwise the system is nothing but centralized. It must
generate sufficient revenues for development instead of reliance on
the centre for everything.

There is no federalism in South Sudan to be federalized.
Decentralisation has not even gone far enough as greater local
autonomy to the states. Contrary to decentralization proper, all
organized forces are centralized. Taxation for revenues to the states
is centralized. The judiciary is centralized. Now, where is the offer
of greater local autonomy to the states as the definition of a
decentralized system seems to suggest? It may be important to note
that there is worldwide interest in federalism linked directly to the
promotion of greater democracy and decentralization.

In conclusion, we in the Republic of South Sudan can reach a consensus
on federalism through fruitful debates and sharing others’ experiences
and our knowledge. However, we may need to liberate ourselves from
living in the past in order to look forward with confidence in
building a nation each and everyone will call home. The low literacy
rate may also be a problem.


 Posted in: Opinions

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"South Sudan Info - The Kob" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/SouthSudanKob/CAJb14oo5_L0nZiGACfdLMPpsx7Xs6UkFrgjw9okf7BKYNcA3kQ%40mail.gmail.com?hl=en-US.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to