It seems like the
Lincolnian government of the people by the people and for the people is in
obsolescence. And nowhere is this obsolescence true than in South Sudan. This
sociopolitical tragedy owes its emergence to what American novelist, Dalton
Trumbo, once said: “The chief internal enemies of any state are those public
officials who betray the trust imposed upon them by the people.”
It’d be naïve to expect
South Sudan to institute all the required governance structures within a
decade. However, it’s very dangerous for South Sudanese officials to use the
‘age’ of the country as an explanatory excuse for their failures. Admittedly,
there are issues that are understandably excusable, however, there are issues
whose preparatory parameters need neither money nor time. These issues are specificity and clarity of purpose.
Citizens need guidance
and inspiration; and these should come from both national and local leadership.
However, with no specificity and clarity of what national and local initiatives
are, people become despondent; not necessarily out of the reality of things but
out of political disconnect between
the people and the government.
The government isn’t
the government of people through speeches and professed, imaginary deeds.
People need to be valued through demonstrable deeds. An uninformed electorate
is a dangerous, moldable crowd. And people don’t have to be ‘educated’ to be
politically informed. They just need to know what their government is doing for
them and how it’s doing it.
For instance: What’s
the government plan for the next 5-10 years? How’s the government planning to
achieve such a plan? What are the expected outcomes: both bad and good? How
much money is to be spent and how?
Where’s the money coming from? What are the shortfalls and how is the
government expecting to meet them? How does the government expect to remain
transparent and how is accountability supposed to be assured? How can the
president and his officials regularly keep in touch with the people? Town hall
meetings? Weekly radio/TV address?
It’s understandable
that every government has its plans; however, a government that doesn’t bring
its plan to the people can’t pretend to be working for the people. People
aren’t accountable to the president and his officials. The president and his
officials are the servants of the people and they owe every single citizen
explanations anytime major decisions are made; unless these decisions are
classified information related to national security.
During his independence
speech on July 9, 2011, the president outlined a 100-day plan. The promise was
a great start to South Sudan’s independence. Unfortunately, neither the
president nor the parliament thought it expedient to come back to the people
for accountability! Was anything achieved with that 100-day play? If not, then
why and what does the government expect to do about it?
When the government,
supposedly of the people, fails to explain its national mandate and strategic
plans to the people who elected it into office, then that government shouldn’t
claim to be representing the people; and the government deserves accusatory
fingers. Taking people for granted is treasonous.
In 2012, the government
sent out a letter to government officials about 4 billion dollars of stolen
public funds. It was a welcome initiative and many South Sudanese were appreciative.
When the presidency flexes its muscle on behalf of the people about what rightfully
belongs to the people of South Sudan, the people become hopeful. However, no
one knows what became of the process, the stolen money, and the officials
concerned. South Sudanese are now scratching their heads regarding the stolen
money. As the case with any responsible government and leadership, the people
are expecting an explanation they aren’t even getting.
A government that
doesn’t take its citizens seriously, or lords its workings over the people is a
government on its way to dangerous territories. While I don’t expect transparency
to be at the same level of Canada or France, it’s crucial for South Sudanese
officials to make sure that South Sudan moves forward with consistent
transparency and promise.
No country is too young
to put down a clear, people-friendly national strategic plan? No country is too
young to distribute power equally to the three branches of government without
the presidency usurping power. No country is too young to put its people front
and center of its sociopolitical and socioeconomic plans.
Empowering South
Sudanese citizens is as simple as letting them know ‘what’s happening and why!’
Take them for granted and the accusatory fingers point to the presidency and
the parliament.
Kuir
ë Garang