By: Bol Khan Rom, South Sudan
July 30, 2013 (SSNA) — Once upon a time in my early years I was told, learned a traditional (an African) story of a byre and a wild beast or cannibal, which I can recall. That byre was said to had been built in an understanding way, with especial skill, that where it entrance (exit) door was positioned could not be seen by anybody else, but only it owners (builders)
Then, one day it happened that, a wild beast decided to cross from certain village to the same area where the byre was build. When this cannibal found the stated byre, a hungry cannibal tried to look for an entrance door of the byre, so that it could enter and get for itself just one.
Unluckily, the beast could not find any door; this was after it had routinely moved around the byre five times. Eventually, the cannibal stood just arms akimbo looked straight at the byre and said "I had always been travelling and touring various villages, districts and regions but I have never seen a byre without an entrance or exit door" What kind of byre is this? The cannibal asked
If we can apply this story to our current state of South Sudan, some of the Presidential Decrees we have already observed made the leadership to be above the law.
· The removal of former Lakes and Unity states’ governors who were elected directly by the people in 2010 general elections. Nevertheless, the Transitional Constitutional Article 101(r) says that a President shall remove the state Governor in the event of a crisis in the state that threatens national security and territory integrity. Like what is happening in Jonglei state, the Kismaayo of South Sudan, I call it.
· The most recent sacking of the Vice President Dr. Riek Machar is also contrary to National Transitional Constitution, Article(2) that says the President may remove the Vice President or by decision of two-third majority approval by National Legislative Assembly. With such condition in place, Dr. Riek’s removal should now pending National Assembly approval.
· Reshuffling of the cabinet was the precise constitutional move, which has been expecting since last year from the President by citizens.
· Notwithstanding, in any system of government worldwide cabinet is always dissolves and re-appoints at the same time as.
All along, Civil Society Organizations; Right Groups and citizenry of this country (plus the well-wishers) who do not want to see mayhem in the new nation have been either expressing positive views in a pursuit to respect the Transitional Constitution, but all in vain.
Dr. Riek Machar who was relieved becomes the only former Presidency’s deputy who calls for calm, saying" South Sudanese must just remain quiet for we have chosen to iron out the current national crisis politically, not violently" despite the fact that Dr. Machar himself was the target of all those decisions.
However, the President never address, said a word of peace as head of state or calling for tranquility, ever since. Hence, what the President should know now is that if there was any virtuous milestone, objective and reputation though; achieved by somebody else in the past years of the CPA; is historically a credit to his leadership.
Consequently, the President supposes to be number one here as he sworn; that he would do everything possible by protecting and promoting welfare, unity, integrity and dignity of the people of South Sudan. Another issue which has to be very important is that; preserving the democratic system in this country as well, was the great expectations that he should not had ill-advised to. All these, have been putting up just to bring about his legacy. However, as I can see it now this legacy is successfully disappearing day by day.
Now, coming back to the point, the whole thing (except number three above) confirmed as breaching of the National Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan. That is, the Decrees were (shall continue to be) in contradiction of the constitution. Thus, what do you make of this mess here? Our country is in a constitutional crisis. Isn’t it?
For me, the author, I can just refer to the aforementioned story (Quote). By saying, I had come across the constitutions of many countries with their Presidents’ histories, but I have never seen and learned a President who could works contrary to his/her country’s constitution.
Moreover, all the time any country whose government is working against its constitution might ultimately result with a negative status. Promptly, without doubt too that country is always considers as working not for its people prosperity and must await something terrible not excluding turmoil.
Otherwise, I may be right in believing the reason why the price will be paying one day one time! Therefore, the question which remains pending right now and to be answer is, individually: who will at the end of the day pay the price of having acted against the supreme law of the country, the President(current administration) or the people of South Sudan at large?
The writer is a South Sudanese and can be reached at [email protected]