Girr''s position:
thank
you very much for your input. One thing I would like to make clear: I’m not a
defender of the government. Besides, it is not fair for the People of the
Equatoria to think that, just because Salva Kiir is the President, then it
follows that the government is Jieng government. Any S Sudanese has the right
to praise or blame the government. It is their right to do so. What I don’t
like is when the language of generalization is being used. I have never grabbed
anyone’s land; I have never raped anyone; I have never killed anyone and so are
the majority of Jieng. Why am I and the rest of Jieng people are being
bombarded with insults all the time?
RESPONSE:
In
your opening lines you stated that, you’re not pro-Juba regime, but implicitly
you are and this is very clear from the paragraph before conclusion and by avoiding
to provide your position on bad governance, injustice, structural inequalities,
discrimination ,marginalization, rampant corruption, cattle dumping, land
grabs, rape, force marriages, reform of organized forces, public services and
foreign services
and
other problems. The problem of Juba regime is not only land grabs, but bad
governance.
The
language of generalization was use and it will be use as long as people like
you and pro-democracy, federalism, equality and justice from Jieng are afraid
to come out of their closet and join the mess, oppressed and victims of injustice,
structural inequalities and marginalization and human rights and agreed to effect
change in country and to support transfer of power peacefully from one political
part to other. There is not blame game here, it is about addressing grievances
substantiated with legal evidences. I’d like to draw your attentions to Civil
Rights movement which changed the U.S.
The
1960s Civil Rights movement became a success, and victory for brighter future
for America when non-African-American majority of the European Americans from all
walks of life decided to their ego of self-centered behaviors and joined hands
with the victims of injustice, inequalities, discrimination and dehumanization.
They spoke truth to power with fire and supported the premise of CHANGE and REFORM
( See: To Make the Wounded Whole: The Cultural Legacy of Martin Luther King, Jr(
Dr. MLK, Jr), 1992; Dr. MLK, Jr, from A-to-Z).
The
POINT AND MESSAGE for Jieng who are not pro-government’s policy of structural discrimination,
inequalities, and marginalization should voice their disagreement with government
and join hands FOR CHANGE AND BETTER FUTURE and failure to do so, it’s going to
dig the country into deeper division.
Similarly,
until people such as yourself and many from two ethnicities decided to move from
position of naturality (NATURALITY HELPS OPPRESSORS, BUT NEVER THE VICTIMS) and
closet and join hands with the victims of injustice, structural inequalities
and marginalization- this is where South Sudanese will see themselves equal before
the law and spirit of co-existence could have a chance.
The
current formation of the IO and IG government, which reflects two ethnicities in
control of the country, business continues as usual may lead us disintegration.
I am afraid to say that, South Sudan will disintegrate in TEN STATES
(Countries). I said this with full confident based on my experience in the
Balkans and Ukraine. It will be too late to blame disintegration of S. Sudan into
TEN NATION STATES on pro-change-just like many Arabs blamed Bashir and successive
governments in Khartoum for S. Sudan separation. South Sudan separation could
have been avoided if northerners accepted proposed FEDERAL STATE.
It’s
great that, you did not participate in the land grabs, rape, and unknown gunmen,
Kiir’s tribal army crimes. Please, note that, the message was not directed to
you personally, but through you to effect change within Jiengs’ minds of unethically
gains and by educating your community members about injustice, stealing others’
properties, structural inequalities, marginalization
victimization policies of Juba regime for change of hearts (U-TURN).
Leviticus
19: Various Laws: Ten Commandments
11. Do
not steal.
12.Do not defraud or rob your neighbor.
Do not hold back the wages of a hired worker overnight.
15. Do not pervert justice; do not show partiality to
the poor or favoritism to the great but judge your neighbor fairly.
16. Do not go about spreading
slander among your people.
Do not do anything that endangers your
neighbor’s life. I am the Lord.
P.S. The Bible is very clear about RESTORATIVE
JUSTICE to the victims.
This
is the role of Jieng educated class specially in the diaspora and S. Sudan to
take lead of wind of change within Jieng communities. Just to proof my point, for
the last couple years ago, Australia have experienced and seen youth and daycare
frauds crimes and I don’t have to tell you who are those communities members are
involved in these scammed crimes, but not all S. Sudanese communities in
Australia are part of youth crimes and daycare
frauds. Unfortunately, Australian authorities pained all African including S.
Sudanese communities with one brush-thus the rule of game and policy development
due to few bad apples in diaspora.
The
outcome of government policy is to banned resettlement of S. Sudanese to
Australia. The lack of respect of host hospitality, values, moral, and ethic
have damaged sponsorships program in a time there are many S. Sudanese in refugee
camps hopping to get use of sponsorships.
Furthermore,
my observation was that, the daycare frauds scammed shows few names if not
majority of them belong to cycle of two ethnicities of Juba regime (NOT ALL) members
of S. Sudanese community in Australia. Let us be honest with ourselves and speak
truth to power with fire, but not to bounced back to defense mode when talking about
these crimes. The perspectives on negative acts of Jieng who are committing these
crimes will continue to be with us until Juba regime address victims’
grievances and Jieng non-supporters of Juba regime must come out and challenge bad
governance of Kiir and his associates. This is the only way to put the grievances
to rest once and for all. The links
below provided you with the way how all community members came out to address
the crimes in Australia, otherwise, it would be out of hand and cost more damage
to image of diaspora.
https://qz.com/africa/1176308/australias-african-gangs-from-south-sudan-push-back-at-racist-stereotypes-in-melbourne/
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-australia-42643834
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/south-sudanese-youth-feel-held-back-by-media-stereotyping
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7823527/South-Sudanese-leader-says-gang-culture-Melbourne-teenager-stabbed-dead.html
Daycare
frauds
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-08-29/childcare-scam-melbourne-court/10176954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fd7cZrL3Rng
It’s clear from what
is happening in Equatoria is government policy with intention to settle Jieng in
Great Equatoria and forced native population out from their ANCESTRAL/NATIVE
LANDS. For example, Kiir has his cattle in south west of Juba. It is the
responsibility of the government to find solutions to these problems otherwise,
land grabs, injustice, structural inequalities, and marginalization policy, and
insecurity created by cattle keepers and bad governance will continue to divide
the country.
I’d
like to respectful disagree with you, Kiir as head of State, is legally responsible
for what’s taken place internally and externally (see: Concept of State in: An
Introduction to International Law (IL), AJan Klabber, 2007; IL Chiefly as
Interpreted and Applied in Canada: Documentary Supplement to the 7th, Ed; the
UN Security Council: From the Cold War to the 21st Century, Ed. David Malone; International
Human Rights in Context: Law Politics
Morals by Steiner, Alston and Goodman; Human Rights in Africa: Cross-Cultural
Perspectives, An-Na’im & Deng:1990, p. 159), but he chooses not to act, and
this is in line with Development Plan of Jieng-to rule the country for 200
years.
THE
RESEARCH QUESTION IS WHY SOME MEMBERS OF TWO ETHNICITIES IN DIASPORA SHARE
SIMILAR UNETHICALLY GAINS AND CORRUPTION BEHAVIOR WITH JUBA REGIME CLIQUE?
I said the article
is not balanced because the writer has not touched on the issues that have
affected other people who are not from Equatoria. You cannot solve some
problems that have affected the people of one section of the society and leave
the rest unsolved. We are interconnected. The article, on the other hand, seems
to give the impression that the people of Equatoria are the only ones who are being
affected.
RESPONSE:
As
stated in the earlier rejoinder that, it is to address grievances of victims
and it must be seen from viewpoint of the victims. But most, importantly how
could you strongly said that the article is not balance, and completely gave blind
eyes to unbalance government (rulers) in Juba. If government in Juba is balance
than you have legal ground and say so.
If
you understand policy development cycles, you be in a better position to know
why country is facing governance challenges. It is responsible of government to
address the current grievances and factor in legal framework to prevent such structural
injustices, inequalities, and marginalization in happening in future. The
problem is that, Juba regime has no clue about policy development, refused to reform
itself (self-regulate internally) and not welling to learn from pass mistakes
of former Sudan (See: Studying Public Policy: Policy Cycles & Policy
Subsystems, Howlett, Ramesh, and Perl,2009; Thinking Government: Public Sector Management
in Canada, Johnson,2006, p. 590; Feeding or Starving the organization, Caswell,
2008, Vol. 4, p. 16”solving the impossible problem”)
We all want to be
happy; we need to join hands together to find solutions that would make
everyone happy. It is unlikely that the people of Equatoria would find
solutions on their own. Unfortunately, the writer of the article tries to make
the people of Equatoria see themselves as Jews. When our S Sudanese were
fighting the Arabs, they thought of themselves to be like Jewish people in
Egypt waiting to be led into freedom by Moses (Dr John Garang). Now the same
story is being repeated by the people of Equatoria. And who knows, if the
people of Equatoria cut themselves out of the rest of South Sudanese, Mundari
would be the next hated people by the rest of the people of Equatoria. The rest
of the people of Equatoria would think of themselves to be like Jews. How many
Jewish types can you get? It not going to work, my brother.
RESPONSE:
Equatorians
have courage to point out the structural injustice, inequalities, and marginalization
policy of Juba regime, land grabs, cattle dumping, rape, forced marriages and depopulation
of INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) Equatorians from their lands. There are other
groups beside Equatoria who have expressed similar grievances. The groups are
Anywaa, Chollo, Fertit, Murle, and others (See: playing Different Games: The Paradox
of Anywaa and Nuer Identification strategies in the Gambella Region, Ethiopia, Vol
4, Feyissa, 2011:
Pps.
77,79,87 about Akobo is Anywaa native land
P.
88 is about how Nuer purchased Anywaas’ INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) land;
P.
96 is about Nuerized Anywaa,
P.101,
is about “Nuer Master Plan to depopulate Anywaa”; like Jieng Current Development
Plan to rule S. Sudan for 200 years.
P
106, Nuer taking Anywaa INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) land and
pps.117,
122)
Also
see: The Upper Nile Province Hank book: A Report on People and Government in
the Southern Sudan, Johnson, 2016.
Pps.176-178-
are about Anywaa INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands of Akobo, Itang, Pibor, Fhasala,
Gabbella and others. Today, many would argue that, above lands belong to Nuer
which false claim.
The war was fought
over so many, many years and the people who fought war couldn’t possibly had
escaped being traumatized? When they took over the power, of course you
wouldn’t expect them to run the government efficiently. Whoever tries to
challenge them in a violent way rather than using persuasion, things wouldn’t
go down well.
The people of Equatoria seems to think they are the only ones who are being
targeted. But that is not true. Jieng people are killing and raping other Jieng
people. The majority of those who are involved are are the SPLA veterans.
RESPONSE:
As
stated above non-Jieng/Nuer ethnic groups are targeted from day one of
liberation to this date. Targeted groups are: Anywaa, Chollo, Fertit, Murle, Jur
Chollo and others. Jieng is not the one ethnic group forced out of their INDIGENOUS
(NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands. In 1960s,1970s, 1980s, 1990s, & 2000s Equatorians
were forced to Congo, Uganda, Ethiopian, and CRA, but in Post-CPA era, all returned
to their respected INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands and continue to cultivate
for feed themselves-this is how Equatorians depend on self-reliance and not on
ready made things or to try to own someone properties. This is the culture and
behavior of Great Equatorians.
While
Equatorians in exile, they respected the host countries rules, regulations, and
never caused or accused of community violence, stealing, rape, forced
marriages, and acquired properties unethically-this is called good behaviors
when living in INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands. It is the opposite with Jieng.
ONLY
JIENG DELIBERATELY REFUSED TO RELOCATE TO THEIR AREAS AT TIME OF PEACE -WHY?
Johnson
Oliny is waging war against Juba regime (mis-rulers/misleaders) on what basis. I
believed you failed to watch the clip in the earlier rejoinder and reinserted for
you to take time and listen to his legal ground. So, it is not only Equatorians,
but Anywaa, Chollo, Fertit groups, Murle and others.
https://www.facebook.com/879270061/posts/10160256504505062/
Concerning ancestral
land, I gave an example before. If there is a danger facing Jieng people who
are neighbors to the people of Equatoria, where do you expect them to go to? To
the Equatoria lands. Would they feel like S Sudanese who have gone to
Australia, US and so on? Of course not. They are in their homeland. It would be
the same scenario were S Sudanese began to wag war with Kenyans or Ugandans.
They would take refuge in any land within S Sudan and feel the same. So, there
is no such a thing called “ancestral land” that was given to specific people
forever. God did not create Jieng and told Jieng, “this is your land” and then
created Bari and told Bari, “this is your land” god has never been a real
estate agent! The birth place of mankind is Africa. Since that time, mankind kept
moving from one place to another. The movement of people has never stopped.
Today I live in Australia. So, we should think about “ancestral land” loosely.
RESPONSE:
The
Lakes State Investigation Commission submitted its final Report on July 2011. The
mandate of the Commission was to investigate community violence, killing, cattle
wrestling and others committed in the Lakes State as a result of stealing, forced
marriage, rape, and killing cultures. So, it reasonable to concluded that, respect
of natives’ INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands, values, moral, ethics, legal and
customary laws are all contrary to Jieng bad cultures and harmful behaviours. The
fight in Jieng areas is because of bad cultures and behaviours of stealing,
killing, immorality and absence of civility, social ethics of respecting others’
properties and family and loved and normalization of unethically gains which became
business as usual.
P.S.
On May 3rd, 2020, the SSBC news, broadcasted that there are about 500
cattle stolen in Lakes State and local authorities received complains. I was
there 10 years for similar reasons and today same problem. What is going on?
SIDE
NOTE: Mundari,
Didinga, Bari, Larim, Logir, Toposa, and Tirma are cattle herders just as
Jieng, but you never hear them dumping and allow cattle to destroy farming communities
farms (feeding on it) either during or after the war. Additionally, Mundari was
the first in Greater Equatoria to be displaced by 1983 war, and they moved with
their cattle southward to Juba and areas around Juba. Everything was peaceful,
no stealing, occupying someone properties by forced, rape and unethically gains.
Like Jieng nomads. Great Equatoria nomads EXERCISED DISCIPLINE, RESPECT AND have
HIGH LEVEL OF CIVILITY, and even their cows when in the host lands. WHY CAN
JIENG DO THE SAME & LEARN FROM CIVIL EQUATORIAN NOMADS?
QUESTION:
WHY DO JIENG WANTED TO SETTLE OR LIVE IN OTHER PEOPLES’ LANDS IN TIME OF PEACE?
IT IS BY DESIGN. Example: in the post-CPA period, the Jieng IDPs and refugees were
repatriated to Equatorian States instead to state of their origins or birthplaces,
while many Anywaa, Equatorians, Chollo, Fertit groups, Murle, and others were
left stranded in Khartoum, Kosti and Malakal.
Please,
accept the fact that Jieng communities are troublemakers, wherever they went,
go and will go always caused problems and grievances to locals. WHY CAN
EDUCATED JIENG ELITES FIX JIENG HOUSES, AND CLEAN MESSES CREATED BY THE FEW OR
MAJORITY of Jieng (See: Animal Farm, Orwell. 1945).
Please
refrain from WHITE LIES, and no one with critical state of mind will buy your
argument that there is no such thing [phrase(s)] called INDIGENOUS (NATIVE,
ANCESTRAL) lands.
INDIGENOUS
(NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) LANDS MEANS:
INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands
estate means everything the ancestral/natives own, all ancestral/ natives’
assets (whether real property or personal property and liabilities. Ancestral/ native
lands are guided/administered by Chiefs who are empowered by power of attorney or
authorized to act as an agent for the sale or donation of land for public use.
Therefore,
based on this definition, for anyone to think that there is no such phrase(s)
called INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) lands, he or she has DISABILITY IN
THINKING, MENTAL DISABILITY, MYOPIC MENTALITY, AND CORRUPTED BRAIN.
On
your onward that you live in Australia and gave blind eyes to INDIGENOUS (NATIVE,
ANCESTRAL) lands you are the beneficiary of Australian INDIGENOUS (NATIVE,
ANCESTRAL) lands. The native/ indigenous/ ancestral lands of Canada and the U.S.A.
belong to the FIRST NATIONS AND ABORIGINAL and RED INDIANS.
It
appears that you re Australian citizen but have not read your own Constitution
which affirmed the existence of INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) land and Australia
is has INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) land. SECTIONS 25 AND 51 OF YOUR
CONSTITUTION AND AUSTRALIAN CONSTITUTION
- SECTION 127 - THIS SECTION WAS REPEALED BY REFERENDUM IN 1967 “IN RECKONING THE NUMBERS OF THE PEOPLE OF THE COMMONWEALTH,
OR OF A STATE OR OTHER PART OF THE COMMONWEALTH, ABORIGINAL NATIVES SHALL NOT
BE COUNTED.” SEE ANNEX for details.
Again,
you even do not bother to reflect on the painful history of INDIGENOUS (NATIVE,
ANCESTRAL) Australians, and you are no different than the criminal British colonizers.
If you ever read history of Australia, you would find and know that it was land
of criminals; convicts, law breakers sent to (exiled) Australia. The legal fact
is that, the First Constitution did not include INDIGENOUS (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL) was
by design of colonial criminals to write off the legal rights of INDIGENOUS (NATIVE,
ANCESTRAL) lands. I have taken liberty to include part of your Constitution
just to remain you that, there is phrase(s) called INDIGENOUS (NATIVE,
ANCESTRAL) lands and this is not my view, but legal.
If
your rational is correct than, criminal British colonizers are INDIGENOUS &
NATIVE/ ANCESTRAL OF AFRICA AS WELL SOUTH AFRICA & ZIMBABWE ARE (NATIVE, ANCESTRAL)
LANDS OF criminal British colonizers?
If
this is your premise, then late Presidents Mandela, Mugabe, Dr. Nkrumah, Nyerere,
Bishop Tutu, Dr. Diop, Cabral, Kenneth, and fathers of the AUO were wrong? Which
lands they fought for? It is not the (INDIGENOUS/ NATIVE / ANCESTRAL) LANDS OF AFRICA.
Do
you recall what happened in Kenya in 2007 and led to 2008 Genocide because criminal
British colonizers resettled Kikuyu into Luo INDIGENOUS/ NATIVE / ANCESTRAL lands
and memory played major role in 2007 General Elections. Why can S. Sudan learn
from Kenya’s’ experiences? (See:
1.
Ethnicity,
Nationhood, and Pluralism Kenyan Perspectives, ed, Ghai & Ghai, 2013.Pps.
21, 47, & 75;
2.
Black
Africa: The Economic and Cultural Basis for a Federated State, Cheikh Anta Diop
1978; &
3.
Legacy
of Freedom: The ANC’s Human Rights Tradition, Ed. Kader Asmal with David
Chidester and Cassius Lubisi, 2005. P.125).
I
have gone through the AU (AUO 1960) and Peoples Rights documents and could not find
anything to support your unsubstantiated position on the INDIGENOUS/ NATIVE / ANCESTRAL.
I think you are mixing between NON-INTERFERENCE POLICY OF THE AUO adopted in May
1963 (See the legacies of Julius Nyerere. it is about African colonial borders
drawn by criminal British colonizers should remain as drawn by colonial system
in order to avoid border disputes).
In conclusion, I support those people who point out issues. I don’t think there
is a Policy that would prevent anyone to obtain a piece of land legally, say,
in Bor, Rumbek, Aweil and so on. If there is anyone from Equatoria wish to buy
a piece of land, but he couldn’t because the locals do not want him to buy it,
that should be considered terribly wrong, even by Jieng themselves. Who should
be blamed? The government. Laws are supposed to be reinforced.
RESPONSE:
WHAT SHOULD MAJORITY OF 62 ETHNIC
GROUPS VICTIMS OF JUBA REGIME DO?
The final analysis base on corruptions,
stealing, daycare frauds, and youth violence
in diaspora; and community insecurity, cattle dumping, land grabs, rape &
forced marriage crimes, absence of respect for native morality and ethics and
crimes committed by SOME MEMBERS OF two ethnicities that controlled the centre
of powers in South Sudan against the victims’ rights, equality and justice.
It’s fair to say that, most of daycare
frauds and other youth crimes and violence in diaspora are committed by SOME MEMBERS
of S. Sudanese in Australia, Canada, the U.S.A., who have similar behaviors
of corrupted Juba regime officials and their associates.
The corrupt Juba regime officials
and their associates have stolen billions of dollars, loans from Word Bank, IMF
and donor states for major projects to build broken health care, education and
basic infrastructures. The SOME members of two ethnicities who held the country
hostage of their corruption purchased properties in Australia, Canada, the U.S.A.,
Kenya, Uganda, Ethiopia, Sudan and other parts of world, while SOME OF their relatives
are engaged in scammed the host government coffer and abusing host countries hospitalities
(daycare frauds in Australia is just one example).
There is one common denominator between
Juba regime and their relatives in diaspora, they share similar behaviors of unethically
gains and it could be describes as the followers of Islamic fundamentalist wherever
they travelled and settled accompanied by problems and it’s very difficult if
not impossible for 62 ethnic groups to co-exist with them.
The majority of South Sudanese 62
ethnic groups should ask themselves this Question: how can the rest CO-EXIST with
those who completed refused to acknowledge BAISC CONCEPT OF INDIGENOUS/ NATIVE
/ ANCESTRAL as well as their crimes such as stealing public money, taking
someone’s wife, grab ancestral/native lands, daycare frauds, structural inequalities,
marginalization and discrimination, and failed to govern, refused to reform public
services, foreign Services, organized forces, and others (people who caused majority
too much trouble?
Here are some samples:
1. The current composition of the SSFD
and other organized forces are controlled by two ethnicities members;
2. Majority of Foreign Services
Officers and Ambassadors belong to two ethnicities;
3. Majority of appointed rubber
stamp M.Ps., belong to two ethnicities;
4. Majority of national dialogue members
are controlled by members of two ethnicities;
5. Majority of national Ministers belong
to two ethnicities; and
6. The current IO Ministers and
officers who suppose to be integrated to SSFD are mainly Nuer.
The current IO Ministerial portfolios
and promotion of armed forces officers’ lists reflect nepotism-family ties either
to Riek or his wife-where is IO reform Riek was preaching about before December
2013. It is unfortunate, there are still some members of majority ethnic group
believe that Riek is their MINI GOD who can deliver South Sudan from Juba
regime.
Also, there are some who may argue
that, there representations of majority of ethnic 62 groups in Juba regime
government such as Dr. Elia and others. This representation is nominal and self-serving
interests’ representation for self-gain, but not to solve and address the structural
inequalities, discrimination, marginalization, land grabs, cattle dumping, rape,
forced marriages, bad governance grievances echoed by majority.
I think, it’s just to say that,
enough is enough and it’s time for 62 ETHNIC MAJORITY to unite and reclaim
their rights through LEGAL PROCESS OF SELF-DETERMINATION
to establish NATION STATE, if Juba regime fail equitable divide resources (oil
and others), ministerial portfolios, public service foreign services, and organized
forces base on quartos not representation. For instance, in order to form reform
SSDF, each state contributes equal number of men and women to serve in the national
army that reflects diversity of South Sudan.
The formula should be applying in
public service, other organized forces, foreign services, and anywhere there is
sign(s) of discrimination. Also, land grabs grievances should be address by
formation of land grabs tribunal court preside by qualified judges supported by
community experts to serve justice to the native landowners. Another, tribunal court
to address rape crimes with mandate to persecute (power to arrest).
The formula to reform S. Sudan
Senate and representation should be two (2) members from each ethnic group of
64 (Total of 128 Senate Members).
This is the only solution to put
an end to above bad governance, crimes, grievances, behaviors, and negative
attitude towards owners of NATIVE/ ANCESTRAL LANDS.
Why are these members of two ethnicities
wanted to live in others’ peoples ‘land? I am not saying they cannot/ shouldn’t
live in others’ lands, but they must respect native culture of good behaviors,
respect for native values, morals, and ethics.
WHY CAN JIENG BUILD THEIR STATES,
LOVED READY MADE THINGS AND HAVE DESIRE TO OWN OTHER’S PROPERTIES?
Please,
note that, what to led S. Sudan to separation was the successive Khartoum
regimes who never listen and not welling to address grievances raised by former
Southern Sudanese leaders from 1920s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s,1970s, 1980s, and 1990s.
Similar
to northern Sudanese, Juba regime have ignored and pay blind eyes to 62 MAJORITY
ETHNIC GROUPS grievances of injustice, structural inequalities, marginalization,
rampant corruption, bad governance, cattle dumping, land grabs, rape, force
marriages, reform of organized forces, public services and foreign services. Instead
of find holist solutions to above problems, Kiir and his associates keep
signing this false fallacy “ We liberate You and this gives Jieng the right to abuse
state power to grab land and committed state sponsored crimes such as unknown
gunmen.” The SPLA/M ideology is not building a nation based on rule of law, equality,
justice, good governance, but establish tribal country.
ANNEX
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW & HIS1101:
·
The
Constitution of Australia came into effect on 1 January 1901 and is the most
powerful set of laws in the nation.
·
The
Constitution still contains references (in Sections 25 and 51) that allow the
Commonwealth or State governments to discriminate against people on the basis
of race. This power has been used several times by governments to enact
legislation to affect only Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people.
·
The
Australian Constitution was drafted at two constitutional Conventions held in the
1890s. Women, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and members of
ethnic communities were excluded from participating in these Conventions. As a
result, the Constitution reflects the predominant views and prejudices of the
men of British heritage who were invited to attend the Conventions and draft
the constitution for the new Commonwealth of Australia.
·
Section
51 of the Constitution that provided: “The Parliament shall, subject to this
Constitution, have power to make laws for the peace, order, and good government
of the Commonwealth with respect to:- ...(xxvi) The people of any race, other than
the aboriginal people in any State, for whom it is necessary to make special
laws.
·
And
Section 127 stated: 'In reckoning the numbers of the people of the
Commonwealth, or of a State or other part of the Commonwealth, aboriginal
natives shall not be counted'. Both of these sections were changed in 1967
after 90.77% of eligible voters voted in a referendum to change the
Constitution to remove the words ‘… other than the aboriginal people in any
State…' from section 51(xxvi) and the whole of section 127.
·
Many
Australians don’t know that our Constitution still permits racial
discrimination in Sections 25 and 51. This makes Australia the only country
with a Constitution that allows for discrimination against its Indigenous peoples
based on their race.
·
An
Expert Panel - which included Indigenous and community leaders, constitutional
experts and parliamentarians - consulted extensively across the nation and
reported to the government in January 2012. It recommended that Australians
should vote in a referendum to:
·
Remove
Section 25 – which says the States can ban people from voting based on their
race;
·
Remove
section 51(xxvi) – which can be used to pass laws that discriminate against
people based on their race
·
Insert
a new section 51A - to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
and to preserve the Australian Government’s ability to pass laws for the
benefit of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples
·
Insert
a new section 116A, banning racial discrimination by government
·
Insert
a new section 127A, recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander languages
were this country’s first tongues, while confirming that English is Australia’s
national language.
1. Just like the 1967 Federal
Referendum, the Bridge Walks in 2000 or the 2008 National Apology to Australia’s
Indigenous Peoples, recognising Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in
the Australian Constitution as the first people of Australia will be another
important step in our reconciliation journey Recognition of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples in the Constitution has the potential to:
·
address
a history of exclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the
life of the nation
·
improve
the sense of self-worth and social and emotional well-being of Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples both as individuals, communities and as part of
the national identity
·
enshrine
the principles of non-discrimination in our Constitution
·
change
the context in which debates about the challenges faced by Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander communities take place
·
build
positive relationships based on trust and mutual respect between Aboriginal and
Torres Strait Islander peoples and the broader Australian community By supporting
improved social, economic and civic inclusion of Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islanders within the broader Australian community, Constitutional reform is a
critical step towards overcoming Indigenous disadvantage and bringing
non-Indigenous and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and communities
closer together.
2. The Canadian Constitution
expressly recognises the rights of Indigenous people, stating: “The existing Aboriginal
and treaty rights of the Aboriginal peoples of Canada are hereby recognised and
affirmed.” The United States has negotiated almost 390 treaties with American
Indian tribes which the Supreme Court recognises as similar to treaties between
different nations. The Constitution gives the Federal Government sole power to
deal with tribes. The Treaty of Waitangi encapsulates many of the rights of the
Maori in New Zealand. It’s used as the foundation for human rights for Mao
3. Acknowledging Indigenous Australians
in the preamble in a way that recognised and valued their special place as the
first Australians would not give them more rights than other Australians.
Changing the body of the Constitution to include equality and protection from
discrimination would give all Australians the benefit of better rights
protections (See: Identity Diversity and Constitutionalism in Africa, 2008, Deng
and
Demoracy
in America and Two Essay on America, Tocqueville, 2003).
