In a letter dated April 16, 2020, Timothy
Tot Chol, the first deputy speaker of the now expired South Sudanese legislative assembly, summoned South Sudan's minister of defense, Angelina Nyajany Teny.
In that letter, Mr. Timothy argued that ‘The Transitional National Legislature Task Force in
its meeting 1/2020, dated 7 April 2020 discussed impact and challenges in
implementing the preventive measures to combat the spread of COVID-19 in the
country.’
In response, however, Madam
Angelina argued that she couldn’t appear before the legislature ‘until a
reconstituted Transitional National Legislative Assembly is formed.’ ‘However,’
she added ‘I recognize your concern regarding the impact of COVID-19 pandemic.’
Given the uncertain
realities engendered by the COVID-19 pandemic, a provision could have been
offered to allow parliament to continue operating if the selection of new MPs
under the revitalized agreement will be taking too long to materialize.
However, there is no such a provision so any words coming out of the South
Sudanese legislative assembly is overruled by the agreement.
Failing to strategize and
anticipate future problems of governance will continue to cripple Africa and
South Sudan especially. Without such a foresight, problems will continue to
mount as they always do.
Essentially, one of the
main problems with South Sudanese politicians is their inability to follow state
laws, agreements, and protocols. As people who are supposed to guide how issues
are operationalized within the country, their disregard for the law,
regulations and the agreed principle is astoundingly worrisome. What I don’t
really know is if their disregard for institutionalism and constitutionalism is
out of ignorance or sheer stubbornness.
While Minister Angelina
could have complied given the circumstances the world is in, she acted within
the mandate given by the agreement so she has a strong ground on which she can
reject parliamentary summons. Mr. Timothy, however, has no such a ground even
if he could have relied, with an understandable regulatory framework, on the
new realities created by COVID-19.
Since the 2018
agreement spells out in section 1.14 the manner in which the Transitional Legislative
Assembly is to be reconstituted, Mr. Timothy is acting outside the acceptable
agreement provision. Section 1.164.6 states that ‘The duration and terms of the
reconstituted TNL shall run concurrently with the RTGoNU, as per the terms of
this Agreement, until elections are held.’ Mr. Timothy is therefore acting with
a parliament that has not been reconstituted according to the provisions of the
agreement.
However, the problem is
not just this incident. South Sudanese state officials have a knack for acting
outside their institutional mandate. They feel more powerful than their
institutional and constitutional provisions allow them to. It is either Mr. Timothy
did not read the agreement provision, or he doesn’t care what the agreement says.
In South Sudan, sadly, as long as you are not
defying the president and his men, not much thought is given to how state
officials bully other officials.
What is even more ominous
is this attitude will continue throughout the interim period. Ministers and MPs
feel more powerful and act outside accepted regulatory and legal provisions
without any consequences.
Even when Minister
Angelina wrote a letter explaining why she couldn’t appear before an assembly whose
mandate has expired, the reconstituted cabinet and the president didn’t respond.
The government and the president should tell the TNL leader that their mandate has
expired and inform them about when the new legislative assembly would be reconstituted.
Sadly, there is a deafening
silence even when the presidency knows the parliament is acting outside the agreement
provisions.
______________________________________
Kuir ë Garang is the editor of The Philosophical Refugee. Follow him on twitter @kuirthiy
No comments:
Post a Comment