Q&A: ‘Curb impunity for acts of violence before elections’-Dr Siegle (Part 2)

Dr. Joseph Siegle, the leader of the Africa Center for Strategic Studies’ research and strategic communications program, has delved into the role of judiciary within the election environment.

Dr. Joseph Siegle, the leader of the Africa Center for Strategic Studies’ research and strategic communications program, has delved into the role of judiciary within the election environment.

In part two of the exclusive interview with Radio Tamazuj, Dr. Siegle shares concerns about violence during elections, the suitability of current leaders, and the participation of the diaspora in the electoral process.

Dr. Siegle has emphasized the need for reform and the establishment of checks and balances to ensure a credible and inclusive political future for South Sudan.

Below are edited excerpts:

Q: Weve observed prominent figures from the South Sudanese Judiciary attending rallies of the ruling party. In the event of disagreements regarding the electoral process, can justice be ensured?

A: I believe this is an example that contributes to a perception bias. There are valid reasons why an independent observer might conclude that it doesn’t lend itself to having a credible, independent judiciary. Those representing independent institutions recognize that it’s not just about being independent; it’s also about appearing to be independent. The credibility and trustworthiness of these institutions are vital.

The example you provided is highly problematic, highlighting a need for reform in South Sudan. For the justice system to adjudicate on the legality of government actions and the credibility of elections, it must play a role in holding the executive accountable.

Reform packages should include the establishment of a process to ensure an independent judiciary. In many places, this is achieved through a constructive debate and dialogue between the executive and the legislature.

However, given the weakness of institutions in South Sudan and the ongoing challenges, an interim arrangement might be necessary. This interim body, whether comprising civil society or a multi-party coalition, could focus on upgrading these institutions. This step is crucial to establishing a credible judiciary, providing a foundation for fair and transparent elections.

Q: How would you recommend mitigating the fear of violence during or after the election, which is causing concern among the people, including civilians in the country?

A: Addressing the pervasive violence in South Sudan requires implementing checks and balances on the executive to curb the prevailing culture of impunity for acts of violence. Additionally, there is a critical need for greater independence to hold those responsible for violence accountable.

The current issue in South Sudan involves a political class and economic beneficiaries who are resistant to change, making it essential for popular pressure and the establishment of interim bodies responsible for organizing elections, conducting censuses, and overseeing independent judicial mechanisms. These steps can pave the way for a new and transformative political era in South Sudan.

Q: Do you believe President Kiir and his first vice president Riek Machar are suitable candidates for the upcoming election?

A: The suitability of President Kiir and Vice President Riek Machar for the upcoming election is a decision that should be made by the South Sudanese people. While both have played leadership roles during the turbulent periods in the country’s history, there is a prevalent narrative that suggests they need to step aside to allow for a new chapter in South Sudan. However, without a clear legal framework for such a transition, change must come from within South Sudan, where domestic stakeholders express their expectations for new leadership.

Q: What potential scenarios do you envision if both leaders are not allowed to contest in the upcoming election?

A: The emergence of new scenarios in South Sudan’s unique political circumstances needs to be driven by internal dynamics. Various possibilities exist, including leaders voluntarily stepping down and retiring peacefully within the country or in exile, provided they are not persecuted for alleged crimes. However, merely changing leaders without transforming the underlying system may yield similar results. Establishing checks and balances on those in power is crucial, as seen in various regions worldwide.

Democracy aims to limit executive power through constraints, power-sharing mechanisms, and multiple voices checking one another to prevent abuses, corruption, and impunity. Though time-consuming, such processes ensure a more inclusive governance system. Before any transition, a thorough assessment of institutional conditions and necessary reforms is essential to establish a system that upholds checks and balances.

Q: Many South Sudanese are still living as refugees in neighbouring countries, and some are even across the sea. Do you believe these individuals should be allowed to vote?

A: South Sudanese residing outside the country are not there by choice; rather, they have had to flee for their own safety. I strongly believe that their voices matter, and they should be counted in the electoral process. Inclusion and representation are crucial, as these individuals form an integral part of the solution and the future of South Sudan.

Many talented South Sudanese living abroad possess entrepreneurial skills, resources, and experiences from other places. Their perspectives and ideas about the way forward are essential for the nation’s progress. Therefore, it is vital that the diaspora is actively involved in the electoral process.

Q: Do you think conducting the election in such a situation will only legitimize President Kiirs stay in power?

A: Given the current circumstances, there is a lack of political will within the leadership to drive meaningful change. Political will must come from ordinary citizens, civil society, and others who seek justice, stability, and freedom in South Sudan. Mobilizing the masses, building coalitions, and fostering consensus among civil society groups about the necessary changes are essential.

If the expectation is that credible elections can only occur with these changes, it serves as a catalyst for domestic pressure for change. Demonstrating unity among civil society groups can also garner support regionally and internationally for transformative change.

Q: What message do you have for South Sudanese?

A: The key message is that globally and in Africa, countries that embrace inclusivity, accountability, and representation tend to fare better in terms of economic prosperity and security.

A stable and prosperous South Sudan benefits everyone. While those in power may perceive short-term gains under the current circumstances, a more stable country opens up numerous business opportunities, attracts investments, and offers chances for prosperity for all. It’s not a zero-sum game. Everyone stands to benefit under a more participatory and power-sharing system.

This is not just a hopeful vision for South Sudanese refugees; it’s also the potential legacy that leaders can leave behind—a decision to build a stable, peaceful, and prosperous South Sudan.