By Luk Jiath Riek,
Opinion.
June 07, 2014(Nyamilepedia) — FEDERALISM does not get good press in South Sudan. We are constantly told that federalism is a wasteful, costly system of government should be and would be in South Sudan, which produces nothing more than duplication and buck-passing. Figures are often tossed around about how much money we could save without it billions, of billions, from Oil revenue or more in South Sudan. I have not been brought up to regard federalism as an archaic in Sudan before, inefficient and uncompetitive encumbrance that is holding us back economically and socially. Yet in other parts of the world, federalism is seen as a modern flexible system of government, which is efficient, highly competitive and best suited to deal with the pressures of globalization. This must give us as Southerners’ pause to think. Is there something to federalism that we are missing? Perhaps it is not the system itself that is at fault, but rather the way that we operate it. It is time that we put our prejudices to one side and took a more balanced look at federalism – the benefits it gives us, the costs, and the future possibilities South Sudan will change better living area on earth.
First, some myths must be dispelled. Federalism is not an old-fashioned and impractical system of government that we would not choose today. At least 50 per cent of the world’s population is governed by federations, generating 70 per cent of global gross domestic product and federalism is increasing in its popularity. One of the reasons for this is that its flexible nature allows local needs to be satisfied while simultaneously responding to the international pressures of globalization. It is also the system of government almost invariably chosen in geographically large countries, as any other system of government cannot sufficiently satisfy the different needs of citizens who live in infinitely different circumstances be they differences in climate, demography, geography, resources, industry or culture. The only nation larger than Australia that is not a federation is China, and even it is regarded as a quasi-federation, having devolved significant powers to its regions in recent years. Given Australia’s size, it would be extraordinary if we were not a federation.
Secondly, different to the popular perception in Australia, federal systems are not costly, inefficient and mutually respectful. Indeed, comparisons between federal and unitary systems show that federations tend to have smaller and less costly public sectors than unitary countries. This is because the internal competition within federal systems ensures that bloated complacent bureaucracies do not develop to the same extent as in unitary states. Many of the most competitive economies belong to federations. Half the countries in the G8 are federations and the others have all proposed or taken steps in recent years to decentralize functions to their regions in order to obtain some of the competitive advantages of federalism.
From a social point of view, there are many other advantages to a federal system.
First, it offers voters choice. They can choose to vote for different parties at the state and national level, depending on their policies, or choose to move to another state if its policies are chosen. The fact that people and businesses do vote with their feet is one of the reasons that states are forced to reform and improve.
Secondly, policies and services are better tailored to meet the needs of the communities they directly affect. They are put in place by people who live in those communities and understand their different needs.
Thirdly, federalism functions as a check on power. It ensures that there is no all-powerful central government. Without federal limitations on South Sudan power, a federal of South Sudan government with control of both houses of parliament could enact laws on almost any subject, no matter how extreme, with scarcely any inspection.
It is in the interests of all of us in South Sudan to make federalism work better. Much could be achieved without the need for a constitutional amendment. All that is required is will and commitment. Recognizing the problems is one thing, but now we need to do something to fix them, and the war will never happen again, and there are no good people than others in South Sudan.
Federalism: Its Advantages and Disadvantages
First what is federalism? Federalism is defining as the allocation of power between the national government and regional government. A system of government in which the power is divided between a central authority and constituent political units, Is it desirable for a country like us or South Sudan has been control by one Tribe they called themselves leaders without borders and grave all country economic to their own resources to adapt this kind of government?
We should take federal type of government. South Sudan would take a period of no less than 20 years to make a successful transition to federalism with Dr Riek Machar leadership, involving a period of consolidation of several regions and intensive socioeconomic development in each of consolidated regions. Advantages of federal government are the following:
(1) It ensures that government remains close to the people because the state government argue that they are more in tune with the daily needs and aspirations of people especially relevant to small and isolated places.
(2) It encourages development of the nation in a decentralized and regional manner and allows for unique and innovative methods for attacking social, economic and political problems.
(3) It provides a barrier to the dominance of the majority so called Dinkasm, while the disadvantages are the following:
(1) It can lead to duplication of government and inefficient, over-lapping or contradictory policies in different parts of the South Sudan.
(2) It can lead to inequality between the states and lead to unhealthy competition and rivalry between them.
(3) It can lead to over-government that will result to corruption. I have cited both faces of federal government in order to inform all of you that federal government is a good system of government and a good example of successful federal kind of government is the Australia, United States of America etc. But the question here is do we really need it? Is it advisable for our country South Sudan to change the government into federal?
On my point of view, we do not need here a change of government all we need is to strengthen the centralized government. And also it’s very expensive to have a federal kind of government. We have no enough funds because we are still paying our debts. We needs of people that have a power equal to the national government. We are making our situation better if we change our present government into federal system rather than one man governs. Lastly, the South Sudan is a third world country we really have federal political system needed now or later we do, and. It only indicates that the younger country of South Sudan do really ready and cannot afford the federal government?
Poverty and Corruption Ties that combine
Poverty is very obvious here in the South Sudan. It is conceptualized broadly, taking into account not only income but its impact in terms of human deprivation, development and quality of life. The existential reality that underdevelopment and poverty are more that concepts in a book- they are directly related to starvation, illness and human degradation.
Fight embeds and corruption, because for me, this reason alone can explain all the other factors why poverty is rampant here in our country. I’m open to the idea that there is no politician or a government official that didn’t commit corruption. Even the lowest position in country or from Bumas to Payams, the before they can have their budget for their projects a sort of corruption must be committed. How can the government fight this problem? Government of Salva Kiir Mayardit never change their attitude towards governmental and his leadership in new younger country in the world.
THE DEMOCRACY IS REALLY
We all know that there are a lot of people who shout there and use their bodies are the main shield as a guard just to shout their grievances towards the current political system in South Sudan and towards those people who hold power and authority to govern lives. They sacrifice so much and they even choose to fight for the benefit of many people over the opportunity cost of acquiring a peaceful life like Dr Riek Machar Teny. Every blood that they lost, every wound that they take, every pain that they endure is for the sake of what they are fighting for freedom and justices for all in South Sudan. These people behind these battles are truly a shining example of a noble warrior who seeks for justice and for freedom. So called SPLM/A in opposition.
WHY DO SOME HATE THEM?
Dinka people some say that these people are worthless because their voices do nothing. Some say that they contribute for the confusion of the masses and they contribute to political immaturity of the country. And they use illegal actions to killed Nuer people and others like Equatorians in cold murdering of their politicians file their appeal against the current administration and they deserve the pain that they receive, killing, raping. Democratic Freedom Fighters are amongst the Southerners whom deserved the only right of people of South Sudan. We cannot milk cow without to get milk.
ETHICAL STANDATRDS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
In my own honest and personal opinion, ethical standards deal with moral. So as long as public officials follow the legal standards, which are embodied in the Constitution of South Sudan, any person or court cannot prosecute any public official if he did not committed any wrong or haven’t done any violation of the law. However, it may be good to realize that ethical standards impose a measure that goes beyond the standards imposed by law. The ethical standards of honesty, fairness, propriety, decency, accountability and compassion are moral values that public officials must follow
Now a days, it is true that there is a wide spread mistrust and suspicion of those government service due to their acts which is not in line moral standards and because they haven’t violated any law, they will still continue holding office in spite of many people that degrade them. They don’t accept their short comings as they claimed they haven’t violated any law but they are morally accountable. What kind of public officials do we have now a days? There are legal officials but not moral
QUALITIES OF A GOOD LEADER
this current government of South Sudan are not well qualified to lead our nations, because are visionless government, are criminal and tribalism on used, at point of view the authority does not have long-term vision just only making noise base on discrimination against their own people, those are the quality of leadership who own by Dr Riek Machar.
Hardworking, Intelligent, Brave, Honest, Decisive, Responsible
A good listener, A good speaker, Principled, Flexible
Loves change, Just, Ambitious, Practical.
South Sudan. Is For Militarization of African Interests?
Whenever I heard Militarization it sounds dangerous in South Sudan. There are cops everywhere. Looking for bad people every night but seeing them in their uniform I feel very safe. Whenever I go home late at night from work I see tough men and women in uniform in Juba. I feel they were taking care of the people. But sometimes when I am reminiscing, what is the feeling when our country is under militarization? I mean during this Kiir Mayardit regime when military are scattered in Juba city to kill Nuer people. There were no snatchers and rapists that are walking on the streets of Juba on 15 December till now. People were afraid to do such moves that are against their own people. It’s so nice to hear if our country will not be same again without abusing the power of the person leading our country Salva Kiir Mayardit. I am not pro militarization but what I am saying about is, nowadays our country is on chaos, even though we are exercising democracy people are not safe to move or to go outside. Many people at UNIMISS We do not know who our real enemies are. Is it the government? Or Dinkas or the so called antagonist, the SPLM/A? Let us think about it if militarization is dangerous to our country, or are we safe nowadays?
Luk Jiath Riek
Thoknath Development Agency
www.nueronline.com
You can reached me on
The statements, comments, or opinions published by Nyamilepedia are solely those of their respective authors, which do not necessarily represent the views held by the moderators of Nyamilepedia. The veracity of any claims made are the responsibility of the writer(s), and not the staff and the management of Nyamilepedia.
Nyamilepdeia reserves the right to moderate, publish or delete a post without warning or consultation with the author(s). To publish your article, contact our editorial team at nyamilepedia@gmail.com
