By Bol Thon Nyabeb
"To prove that the SPLM is an institutional body that adheres to rules and regulations or to become democratic party it must embraces , advocate democracy internally before calling on other to do that" Telar Riing Deng on April 2008.
August 29, 2013 (SSNA) — Mr. James Ladu Modi, you wrote an article which was published in Juba Monitor Newspaper page three (3) Vol.3 Issue 153, on Thursday, August 22, 2013 titled " Who is Salva Kiir and who is Riek Machar?" Reading just that title one could felt that Mr, James Ladu wanted to talk about the current SPLM stigma status. Actually, the question is indeed democratic and neutral, for the situation we are in now needs, all of us as South Sudanese at least to drive for democratic transformation in the ruling party, whatever the personal or black economic corner you are squeezing.
At first, I thought that Mr. James Ladu was going to encourage the two men (Salva& Riek) to face the neutrality of the democratic principles such that the current stalemate in the party is break off. Because now I’m not wrong to say that the people of South Sudan are not aware up to this minute whether the party (SPLM) is on a verge of transforming itself (South Sudan) democratically or tyrannically.
Nonetheless, let me only pick some points that meant to assassinate democratic spirit in the SPLM, probably South Sudan in general. Once, democracy has killed in the ruling body in any country, as it was/is the case in our former united country’s ruling NIF party then that country is always deem as undemocratic or totalitarian one.
Therefore, Dr. Riek declaration for the SPLM top job that would endorse him to take a party ticket for 2015 presidential general elections based on democratic process and constitutional steps.
Therefore, you should not ask an ignorance question as to why Dr. Riek Machar declares himself to stand for 2015 general elections. Given the SPLM rules and regulations, the primary ambition of Dr. Riek is to become the Party Chairperson in 2013 national convention and wait until 2015 where he would automatically be a presidential candidate in 2015, as his secondary one.
Mr. James Ladu and his likes should take it from here that the SPLM constitution regulates that the party’s Chairperson is an official flag bearer in any presidential elections held. This is a system being used by most Africans parties not only SPLM alone, thus to become a party flag bearer you need to be a party’s Chairperson in the first place.
However, to be a Party’s Chairperson, unless primary elections are hold within the party whereby several comrades (candidates) have to compete for that post. Once, one of them wins in a primary elections then that winner must be a party’s Chairperson and a flag bearer at the same time. In contrast, suppose an SPLM convention was precisely took place on time, in May this year and Dr. Machar kept quiet; while Mr.Thon Nyabeb and Mr. Ladu Modi contested in primary elections with one of them win, let’s say Mr. Ladu Modi won and become the SPLM elected Chairperson 2013-2018.
Constitutionally, Mr. Ladu Modi would be the one to qualify for 2015 presidential elections on the SPLM ticket not any other else. Now, you want Dr. Machar not to express his ambition for the SPLM’s Chair but only in 2015, on what ground then would he claim to be the party flag bearer for 2015 presidential elections.
James Ladu said, "It is a wrong decision for Dr. Machar to stand for the SPLM’s Chairperson, asking an absurd question, how the same party’s members could hold elections and decide to run against each other competing for the same seat. It is impossible and unbelievable for Dr. Riek and Salva Kiir to compete for the SPLM’s Chairmanship, because the two are comrades together and they fought for the same objectives". James Ladu Modi, what does democracy mean to you? Don’t you know that in democratic principles of elections, even your own father, Modi could compete for one post with you if you are in one party? Do you know exactly the objectives H:E President Kiir and Dr. Riek fought for? One of their objectives, if I can tell you was pure democracy that you are asking our nation today to assassinate.
Mr. James Ladu, do you think we took up arms against Khartoum to established absolute monarchy (Kingdom) in South Sudan? You said, because there are good schools for pupils, standard hospitals, running tap water, better security, equality, developments, transparency and accountability there should not be elections(changes) in South Sudan. Elections or needs for changes sometimes do not mean that there are no all those somewhat modern facilitates. Rather, it is constitutional routine one, which has been practicing worldwide, even in rich countries like the United States of America. I know you was expecting something out of (writing) that article and let me hope that you earned a car (or equivalent for children) as always done to several writers so you was indirectly requesting. But, isn’t national fate better than that nonsenses? Equatoria, is a most educated region in South Sudan, so its people, therefore I’m one hundred percent sure that Juba will never be use a dictatorial ground for betraying our main objectives including democracy. Lastly, it is advisable and imperative that, instead of killing our characters and discouraging democracy that took the lives of 2.5 million South Sudanese, we should promote collectively an objective nation-building base on what we fought for.
The author can be reached at email:[email protected]