Contributor's James Nguen

People of South Sudan and International Community Rejects President Salva Kiir’s Presidential Order Establishing 28 States

By James Nguen,

Flags of EU Countries

Oct 8, 2015(Nyamilepedia) — On Friday 2nd of Oct., 2015, President Salva Kiir Mayardit announced the “Establishment Order Number 36/2015 for the Creation of 28 States in the Decentralized Governance System in the Republic of South Sudan.”

People of South Sudan in the country and Diaspora and the international community were dumbfounded and taken aback after learning President Salva Kiir has once again made another erroneous, tribalized and ill-conceived republican order establishing 28 States in the war torn country.

The President’s republican order did not only violate the recently signed Compromised Peace Agreement by Kiir himself and rival Dr. Riek for the resolution of South Sudan conflict, it feared the order would jump start the somalization of South Sudan.

In the light of this Presidential Order, people of South Sudan in the country and around the globe have reacted against it negatively after realizing that their hopes for peace returning to the war torn South Sudan is implausible, trashed and thrown overboard by Kiir’s ill-advised order. Subsequently, in unison and with the international community, they categorically rejected Kiir’s Presidential Order Establishing 28 States.

They (South Sudanese) called the order many names including “ill-advised, “mean spirited” “clear violation of the Compromised Peace Agreement,” “unconstitutional,” ill-informed,” “rejuvenation of Kokora,” “unwise” “unstudied,” misappropriation of lands by Dinka and dinkanisation of South Sudan.”

Meanwhile IGAD-Plus, European Union, African Union and Troika have also condemned and strongly reject Kiir’s Presidential Order Establishing 28 States. The parties have called on Kiir to “revoke” and “defer” the order because its “violates and goes against the sprite” of recently Compromised Peace Agreement.

More in deepest, lecturer of Juba University, Dr. Okuk and Dr. Lam Akol, the leader of Official Opposition in South Sudan have identified constitutional blunders referred to in the order. For example, ‘Article 166(6) (a), (b) and Article 101 (b), (f), (k) and (u)” were wrongly quoted showcasing how poorly the document was hastily derived.

Mr. Okuk further point out the nonexistence of Kodok or Malakal Counties which also referred in the order and the two counties in Warrap and Lake States that become two independence States of their own in the new order.

Both Dr. Okuk and Dr. Lam stated that the order is a “violation of the IGAD-PLUS’ mediated Agreement on Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan, which was signed by President Kiir himself in Juba on 26th August 2015 and ratified later by the National Legislature so that it becomes supreme over the Transitional Constitution (2011 and amendments” and that the establishment of 28 States “may be suspected as rejuvenation of ‘Kokora’ but on tribal enclaves.”

With these serious flaws and unforgiven mistakes in the order, Dr. Okuk concluded by calling for the nullification and reverse of the order by Kiir because it undermines President Kiir’s constitutional stands. More so, it is feared that the republican order would unquestionably jump start the balkanization of South Sudan.

On the other hand Peter Gai Manyuon in Nairobi Kenya, called the Presidential Order Establishing 28 States as a “dinkanisation … idea” and tribalistic Leadership characterized by primitiveness, nepotism and political materialism.” Mr. Manyuon on his part also rejected the order and call on President Kiir to reverse the order because it violates the recently signed Compromised Peace Agreement to the Resolution of South Sudan’ conflict.

David Blair reported that “President of South Sudan was accused of “violating” a peace agreement by unilaterally creating 28 new states.” Also, the Raja County’s tribal leaders of Western Bar El Ghazal States have strongly rejected the order and condemned the annexation of Raja County to Northern Bar El ghazel State.

Tor Madira Machier in Egypt, Cairo, called Kiir’s creation of 28 states as a means to “promotes of ethnically based political hatred {campaign} among tribes, returning to war and it undermines IGAD-plus peace deal.” And therefore, it must be nullified.

Moreover, leaders of Greater Equatoria have rejected Kiir’s Presidential Order Establishing 28 States. The leaders stated “the President has broken his oath by not consulting the members of the National and State Assemblies that represent the people of South Sudan; and therefore, the President’s action to create 28 states is unconstitutional.”

The Equatorians’ leaders trashed the decree called it a clear violation of the recently signed peace agreement and called on IGAD to intervene because the agreement states that “no party should be allowed to undermine the peace agreement by unilateral actions that are not stipulated in the agreement.”

Meanwhile, the SPLM/A –IO, the SPLM –Political Detainees, the South Sudan Civil Society, the South Sudan Faith Group and other partners in the Compromised Peace Agreement also condemns and strongly rejects Kiir’s Presidential Order Establishing 28 States.

In the released statements, they clearly stated that the Presidential decree is a “violation” of the Compromised Peace Agreement. Further, the SPLM/A – IO stressed that “it is a clear message to the world that President Salva Kiir is not committed to peace and the Movement call on IGAD –Plus to take a strong position.”

The Troika (USA, Norway and UK) stated that “this announcement directly contradicts the Government of South Sudan’s commitment to implement the peace agreement it signed on August 26” and call on President Salva Kiir to “defer” the order.

Considering these strong opposition outcries, condemnations against the order and the flaws it contained, it is therefore self-evident that President Salva Kiir Mayardit has made a mistake for scrambling and partitioning of South Sudan’s 10 States to 28 new States. The move is unpopular and must be annul in order to avoid subsequent bloodshed in the country.

In closing, I personally echoed the strong rejections of Salva Kiir’s Presidential Order Establishing 28 States. And I therefore call on IGAG-PLUS, Troika, African Union and Friends of South Sudan to remind Salva Kiir of dire consequences should this unconstitutional decree remained unreversed in the next two weeks.

The decree does not only violate the recently signed Compromised Peace Agreement, it inadvertently call for balkanization of South Sudan into tribal enclaves, and I am afraid the resultant of this unpopular decision would be an uncontrollable bloodbath across the country.

Nguen is a concerned South Sudanese living in Canada. He can be reached at jamesnguen@gmail.com.

Related posts

Opinion: R-JMEC, IGAD envoy should publish resolutions of security mechanisms




Lasting Battle For Difference Political Ideologies Within SPLM/A Leaders



AGUMUT October 8, 2015 at 9:50 pm

Dream on,our people accept it. Please stay in exile if you don’t it. Long Live 28 States. Our people are fed up of abusive language toward them.

Goweng Torbaar October 8, 2015 at 10:34 pm

I hope JCE will read this!

AGUMUT October 9, 2015 at 11:18 am

It is up to you if you don’t like 28 States. You have abused us a lot and now you do not want us to take care of ourselves.

AGUMUT October 9, 2015 at 12:01 pm

Jonglei Canal will reduced flooding,our people were against it because it was going to Egypt for nothing,but it will happen through agreement.Keep Dreaming on to destroy 28.

AMEN October 9, 2015 at 7:08 am

Nuer from Rebels side are not the people of south sudan alone, if Nuer from rebel side rejected the Presidential ORDER of creation 28 states doesnot mean that all south sudanese refused the creation of 28 states. if you donot want 28 states you rebels than don,t included the innocent citizen of south sudan. LAM AKOL and OKUK all are rebels side eventhough they are still yet in Juba they remain as internal coward rebels who don,t want to get suffering in the bush and the government of the republic of south sudan is already aware about Lam and Okuk. the so call Shulluk land which they alway claim in Dinka Apadang Land will lead to continue fighting between Shulluk and Dinka Apadang.
Shuluk always claim that they have a land in the eastern bank of the River Nile which is the Land of Apadang, but A padang donot claim that they have a land in the western bank of the river Nile which is the shulluk land, for this case fighting between shulluk and Dinka apadang will not stop even thought peace come

Tolio October 9, 2015 at 4:50 pm

Majority of South Sudanese citizens living in South Sudan have welcomed their newly proposed 28 federal states,while only a few number of South Sudanese opposition members and people from Raja living in South Sudan have rejected the creation of the 28 states.

Another group which has rejected establishment of the 28 states are a few number of South Sudanese communities living overseas.

If you add up those members of opposition parties with a few number of South communities residing abroad and people of Raja,you will end up with a total minority South citizens who doesn’t constitute the majority of population,but rejected the creation of 28 states based on their false believes it will destroy the peace,signed recently and that the action taken by President Kiir is an unconstitutional.

Their rejection of 28 states is some how echoed by international and regional communities. Both the international and regional communities don’t actually reject the 28 states. They want the creation of 28 states be deferred for future considerations and consulations,since they say it contradicts the peace agreement which the government has signed with different opposition factions. They agree with few South Sudanese communities and key different opposition members who have rejected the 28 states on the grounds that the president has acted unilaterally against what the constitution recommends prior to installation of those 28 states.

Both the international and regional communities which have voiced their negative thoughts against construction of those 28 federal states can be simply discriminated and isolated based on the fact they are not related to South Sudanese by their nationalities or citizenships. They are simply foreigners or aliens to South Sudan,which means, the decision taken to establish our own 28 states cannot impact them.

Opposition members,people of Raja and members of South Sudanese communities living overseas don’t outnumber majority of South Sudanese citizens in South Sudan who have welcomed the newly proposed establishment of their 28 states.

Establishment of 28 states is fair for every South Sudanese citizen who has ever wanted federalism as the best system of governance.

The 28 states will make delivery of services much easier than the usual way of doing it and will eliminate the dominant rule of one large tribe over other minority tribes in South Sudan.

If a decision taken by one person is fair for every South Sudanese citizens like the newly proposed establishment of the 28 states which is no doubt has been welcomed by millions of South Sudanese citizens,it shouldn’t be refused by few citizens in opposition parties and thousands living abroad on the grounds that the action taken by one person like President Kiir needs bilateral or constitutional agreements.

Bilateral agreements,compatible with constitutions are not always the only best strategies of doing good things for all the citizens and there is no prove it is the most effective judicious method of keeping every one happy.

If some South Sudanese citizens,along with the international and regional communities value and care much about actind according to constitutional and bilateral agreements on issues that affect all South Sudanese citizens, why was the an unfair power sharing mechanism,which was the reason why some South Sudanese citizens somehow demonstrated against the need for peace was allowed to be imposed on them
to hap, considering the decision taken by the mediators backed by the international community was done unilaterally without a constitutional agreements,prior to deciding and ruling what they think was good for all South Sudanese citizens and their warring parties? Hypocrisy and contradiction are the answers to this question.


Tell us what you think

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: