Decentralisation for Nation -Building and Managing Ethnic Diversity in South Sudan
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2023-06
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
AAU
Abstract
The definition of what holds a nation together varies not only from country to country but also over time within a nation. Bringing people from diverse cultures, languages, and traditions together is a founding principle in many multiethnic societies. Throughout history, leaders have introduced policies such as federalism, devolution or decentralization to foster common values that would help various ethnic communities in a polity identify with the state. Hence, one of the objectives of governance in a multiethnic society is to manage diversity and resolve conflicts through the building of inclusive state institutions that can equally serve different ethnic communities without exclusion. This thesis argues that with inclusive and participatory state institutions in place, citizens remain connected to the state as inclusive political institutions enhance the sense of belonging to the system. The objective of this study, therefore, is to investigate why the decentralised system of governance as adopted in the Transitional Constitution of South Sudan failed to address the question of nation-building and manage ethnic diversity. Building inclusive state institutions with which South Sudan's various ethnic communities can identify with, is seen as central to the argument in the study. The study considered the design, structures, and institutions of the Constitution in the context of state-building, peace-building, and nation-building in post-conflict South Sudan. The central question in this study is: Why decentralised system of governance has failed to address the challenges of nation-building in South Sudan? The study is informed by righ literature in comparative federalism particularly in divided societies that argues for inclusive political institutions and public policy to build sense of belonging in society as a means to manage divisions and ensure relative peace. This is the main tenet of federalism in the post Cold-War era although its validy remains contested. To search for an answer to this question, we employed secondary and primary data sources. The secondary and primary sources include the transitional constitution and its institutions, as well as a few selected state constitutions. The study employed in constructivism research approach and used interepretivism methodology in analysis of data. The author has reviewed and analysed different peace agreements signed between different political parties in the political history of Sudan and later in South Sudan after independence. These peace accords include Addis Ababa Peace Agreement of 1972; the Comprehensive Peace Agreement of 2005; the Agreement for the Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan in 2015; and the Revitalized Peace Agreement of 2001. The author has also reviewed and analyzed other national documents relevant to the study such as the Local Government Act of 2009 and South Sudanese parties Act 2012. For the collection of primary data, I conducted unstructured in-depth interviews and focus group discussions with the selected key research informants.
Major findings of the study reveal that although the decentralised system of governance was adopted in 2005 and promises to transfer power to the states and local government, it has failed to bring about inclusive political system and autonomy (self-rule and shared rule) to states in South Sudan. Despite promises for devolution and several power sharing schemes, South Sudan remains in the hands of a Dinka dominated political elite and a President who prefers to rule by decree. The making and ummaking of state boundaries, appointment and dismisal of state governors and legislatibe bodies are clear indicators. The series of power sharing schemes meant to bring different political actors at national and sub state level have never been taken seriously. All added, the regime resorts to personal rule and lacks political will to implement devolution and inclusive political system in South Sudan. The fragmentation within the ruling elite is also affecting state and nation building efforts. The regime has has failed to create inclusive state institutions that could deliver critical services to the people of South Sudan. The political leadership of the
ruling SPLM party has failed in building capable and effective state institutions. It has also failed to bring lasting peace to the new nation. It also failed to manage ethnic diversity in the new nation. The findings have also attributed the problem to constitutional and institutional design, structure, implementation, and the institutions created by the system. A decentralised system of governance in its design from the very onset was a top-down approach where the political process was controlled by the SPLM without the involvement of other stakeholders. Decentralised system of governance has also failed to resolve deep-rooted and protracted conflicts. That is to say, after more than a half-century of the struggle for justice, equality, and prosperity from successive Khartoum-based regimes, South Sudan’s political elite, mostly from one ethnic community that governs the country, failed to build democratic and inclusive state institutions that could create a common identity and a shared national interest amongst different ethnic communities. The indication is that barely two years after independence was celebrated in 2011, simmering hostilities and a leadership struggle for political power erupted between the political elite of the governing SPLM-political party, who also hailed from two major ethnic groups. The elites from the two communities (Nuer and the Dinka) once again turned the country into a battlefield. With the conflict persisting, the powerful political elite at the center thus captures the state, its institutions, and resources. As a result, it is recommended that South Sudan's plurality as a multiethnic society places a serious demand on its current leaders to find amicable paths to effective and successful nation-building. The establishment of representative, inclusive, and democratic state institutions at all levels of government is a hallmark for establishing a political community with shared values. Multinational federalism, with significant devolution of powers and resources to subnational levels of government allows citizens to develop a common identity and shared values while living peacefully together as they share a common destiny. Despite the constitutional promise for devolution of power and resources to states, the national government has centralized power and resources manifsted amongt others by presidential decress that by pass state institutions, central appointment of state governors, the making and unmaking of states boundaries defeating the purpose of devolution. Thus, the thesis concludes that South Sudan is a deconcentrated unitary state that has made power and resources concentrated in the hand of a few elites in the centre. Citizens need to be are connected to the government through relationships of authority, support, participation, and inclusion, an inclusive poltical community can emerge and nation-building could be a successful endeavour. Inclusivity and participation of citizens in the governance process, including decision-making, could only be achieved through the adoption of an effective mutlinationl federal system in which political leaders are willing to devolve power and resources to subtional levels of government.
Description
Keywords
South Sudan, Peace building, Transitional Constitution, Decentralisation, Multi-ethnic Societies, Federalism, Nation-Building, and State-Building