Why Governance And Human Rights

The civil society in South Sudan is one of the most important sectors that is meaningfully contributing to nation building before and during the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and in the events that culminated into the independence of South Sudan in 2011. The civil society plays a major role in promoting and advocating for effective disaster management, peace building, conflict prevention, reconciliation and post conflict reconstruction. However, the capacity of civil society organizations (CSOs) to chart a clear focus and engaging in joint initiative to making influential advocacy on issues of national importance and interest, development and concern remains low. This has affected the performance of CSOs to engage government and enlighten the citizens on their rights, roles and responsibilities. The limited civic engagement space has also constrained them from engaging in issues such as democracy, good governance and human rights to efficiently address problems of corruption, accountability, transparency, access to justice and fair distribution of public resources and services and fully contribute to the development process.

Another aspect of good governance is also the capacity of both civil society and state actors to set priorities, follow up and monitor implementation of plans especially during this critical period of implementation the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS). However, this capacity is limited especially at state and county level. It is also noted that for South Sudan to achieve long term peace and stability, there is need to have a strong, independent, and vibrant local civil Society. The weakness in the capacity and gaps of civil society in South Sudan is partly from a consequence of decades of conflict that has affected citizen and institutions hence, they “citizens” are not empowered to articulate their concerns, demand and advocate for meaningful accountability from their leaders and service providers. Providing expertise in addressing these challenges is crucial for South Sudan and its society. The civic engagement space available to journalists, human rights activists and civil society to inform, debate and dissent has continued to shrink. Citizens face legal, administrative and security deterrents to political participation, resulting in growing censorship and self-censorship at a time when more, not less, engagement is needed.

Several years after independence this effort has only reached the county level, with appointed commissioners, mayors, town clerks and councilors. Strengthening participatory and democratic local governance which promote and mainstream human rights in planning and decision making will be necessary. South Sudan’s Local Government Act (LGA) 2009, provides for community participation in local governance for purposes of prioritized basic service delivery. The LGA is the law that establishes government at County level in South Sudan. It provides a platform for people’s participation in local government through establishment of a Civil Service for the Counties, including; an Executive Council, a Legislative Council, Customary law Councils and Courts and a Land and Resources Council, each with the affirmative action provision that at least 35% of all positions should go to women in spite of the laws provided. There is however a lack of efficient community consultation leave alone implementation of the act.

In 2018, the Revitalized Agreement reaffirmed the commitment to the transitional justice framework adopted in the 2015 Agreement. The framework reflects a holistic approach, emphasizing transformative goals to which accountability, truth-telling, reparations and processes of reconciliation and healing contribute. However, the Hybrid Court for South Sudan, the commission for truth, reconciliation and healing and the compensation and reparation authority, which are to be complemented by customary and other community-centered mechanisms, are yet to be established. Although the Peace and Security Council of the African Union endorsed the hybrid court in September 2015, in line with the recommendations of the African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan, little progress in setting up transitional justice institutions has been made since then.

South Sudan remains a deeply patriarchal society in which customs and traditions entrench the subservience of women and girls to men. The prevailing inequalities, discrimination and unequal power relations between men and women, lack of access to resources and inability to access quality education result in women and girls being susceptible to sexual and gender-based violence (SGBV). This situation is exacerbated by the protracted conflict, which has an impact on gender norms and the roles of women and men. Impunity for SGBV in South Sudan is a result of a lack of political will to hold perpetrators accountable and the absence of appropriate, and effective institutions to handle such emerging cases.

South Sudan’s economy is now struggling, as oil exports previously provided 98 percent of the national revenue. The resulting harsh austerity measures ushered in by Government of South Sudan have led to a decrease in public services including in health, education and people’s livelihoods that could undermine political stability. The current situation in South Sudan has also worsened the condition of the rural people. For poor families, meeting their most basic needs for food, water, and shelter can be a daily struggle; this becomes acute when there is unemployment and underemployment, or lack of productive land or other income-earning assets.

People living in poverty certainly need opportunities, such as access to decent education, health care, water and sanitation, and assistance to help them cope with the shocks of everyday life. Poor people need power over their own destinies and over the factors that influence them such as party politics, the justice system, and the markets for land, labour and goods and services. Active citizenship has inherent merits: people living in poverty must have a voice in deciding their own destiny, rather than be treated as passive recipients of welfare or government action. A combination of pressure from grass-root organization and an enlightened leadership from above is required to produce some remarkable wealth redistribution and functioning state.

Corruption continues to constrain human progress and governance in South Sudan both at national and local government levels: Corruption is a cancer that cuts most institutions of governance, cultural or ideological divides to rob people of the freedom and prosperity that they would otherwise have. Corruption siphons scarce resources away from vital and necessary public investments. Only through a long struggle for democratization wherein governmental institutions and civil society of public accountability are developed can lasting progress against corruption be made.

It can be said without hesitation that, corruption constrains economic growth and opportunity for individuals and is often the tool of elites to establish, maintain and strengthen monopolies and oligopolies that are used to further entrench their political powers as the case is seen in South Sudan.

Citizen voices and participation are essential to build and sustain democratic South Sudan through a well set good governance system. In South Sudan, large groups of people are excluded from involvement in the political processes that define their opportunities and quality of life. Both the local, state and national governments operate in a closed and nontransparent manner without the meaningful participation of citizens. Promoting participatory, representative, and inclusive political processes will be a key issue.

The full participation of women is a prerequisite for long term socio-economic development and creation of good local governance. In South Sudan, women continue to be under-represented in formal decision-making structures. Although women are increasingly active in community support systems, gender disparities persist in public positions at all levels in South Sudan.

The lack of accountability for decades of violence during the struggle for independence has helped to fuel the current conflict in South Sudan. Since December 2013, tens of thousands of civilians have been killed in brutal attacks, often targeted on the basis of their ethnicity or perceived allegiances. Attempts by the Government to hold perpetrators accountable for gross violations of human rights and serious violations of international humanitarian law is fruitless due to weak judicial institutions as a result. Pervasive impunity still remains the norm. The promotion of some senior officials despite allegations of human rights violations and crimes has raised concerns and skepticism as to the Government’s commitment to deal with past crimes. Where the Government has initiated mechanisms to ensure criminal accountability, little or no information has been made public on the identity of the accused, the nature of investigations or subsequent convictions, raising questions as to the credibility of the process.