South Sudan wary of unilateral independence move

JUBA, Sunday

At the height of a row over whether or not Southern Sudan should participate in the plebiscite many here felt it was better to give in to a bad census in order to preserve the referendum.

On the day of the count, in his guest lounge, James Wani Igga sighed with relief that the Southern Sudan President rescinded the rejection by the regional Cabinet to take part in the Census.

“You would be compelled to postpone the elections,” Mr Igga said at the time.

Then, bending over forwards in the leather black sofa-chair in his home, Mr Igga added: “Soon you would be saying: ‘This referendum, we don’t need it. There are people trying to see to it that it [referendum] doesn’t happen. We are not going to give them an excuse.”

A year and four months to the referendum, noise is again rising, this time over whether southern Sudan should declare independence unilaterally.

And the logic of more than a year ago to the resolution to the stand-off over the census is beginning to trump the push for a unilateral declaration of independence.

The latest threat for a unilateral declaration of independence came from Pagan Amum, the Secretary General of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement.

Accusing the National Congress Party, SPLM’s co-principal signatory to the peace agreement, of obstructing the referendum law, Pagan said the crisis could force the South to declare independence unilaterally.

Centre of contention

At the centre of contention, unlike in the case with the census where the issue was timing, are the ground rules for the referendum.

The referendum law the NCP and SPLM teams are discussing, Michael Makuei, Southern Sudan’s Legal Affairs Minister told a forum for the region’s governors last week, “Seems not to acknowledge the provisions set forth in the peace agreement.”

The two parties disagree over who should vote; the NCP favours all southerners, including those in the north, to vote, and the SPLM sees this as recipe for rigging. According to the peace agreement, eligible voters are southern Sudanese by tribe or origin or by birth. But the NCP wants Sudanese living in the South.

According to the peace agreement, the Commission’s head office is Juba. But the NCP now wants it in town. According to the CPA, the Commission would have nine members – three from the Government of National Unity, and six from the Government of Southern Sudan. But the NCP now wants 15 members -- ten from the GONU.

And the two can’t agree over who should vote. The NCP wants the list of voters to be based on the census results. The SPLM has already disputed those results.

They can’t agree over which security forces should monitor the vote. The NCP wants forces should be brought to the south to monitor the exercise. The SPLM says the CPA lays clear who is in charge of security in the south: in this case, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army and the Joint/Integrated Units.

They can’t agree on the ballot papers. The NCP wants ballot papers to have names and with two issues — Unity and secession — with voters merely ticking their choice. The SPLM wants a single-issue ballot, with the option for ‘yes or no, saying putting both Unity and Secession on the ballot could confuse a population that can hardly read and write.

They can’t agree on the threshold. The NCP wants a simple majority threshold for unity but a three-quarters threshold for secession. But the SPLM wants simple majority for secession.

And the parties can’t agree on who should monitor the process.

Even if the parties finally agree and the law is passed by an NCP-dominated Parliament, a lot of what the south can do still depends on the goodwill of the President.

Under the constitution, the President can veto a law. It’s in the background of such challenges that some in the south are voicing frustration.

Pagan Amum is only the latest official to threaten unilateral declaration of independence.

But in Internet forums and chat rooms, the latest threat by one of the Party’s top officials to declare independence has resurrected debate and awakened passions over the future of Southern Sudan.

“I am just waiting for that day and it seems it’s gonna happen sooner than heartbeat,” one person writes, supporting unilateral independence, in one chat room.

But for many, it’s time to be cautious lest they rock the boat already three quarters of the journey to shore.

“NIF (National Islamic Front) has the Arab and Islamic world on its side,” says chatter.

“Who [have] you got on your side? UDI without preparation is catastrophic to the people of South Sudan and marginalised areas.”
That, writes, another chat-room participant, is a very accurate observation.

“Unilateralism is only an option for those who enjoy overwhelming political, military, and economic superiority,” writes the chatter. “I doubt if the SPLM leadership believes that this is the case! Probably the brinkmanship is the only way these two can negotiate anything.”

But it’s not only in the internet forums that people take a declaration of independence with a pinch of salt.

Until June, the push for a unilateral declaration of independence by Southern Sudan was just a whisper interspersed far and between in this vast marshy region more than half the size of East Africa.

But that was before the Southern Sudan Parliament took up the issue at the start of July.

MPs said the actions of the National Congress Party were making separation of Southern Sudan attractive.