The recent decision by the Ministry of Trade and Industry to suspend the operations of Crawford Capital Company and review its digital payment system for 90 days, raises both administrative and legal considerations. The Minister’s decision appears to have been motivated by legitimate operational concerns, including connectivity problems, inadequate staff training, and potential compliance and efficiency issues.
From a public administration and regulatory perspective, it is within a minister’s remit to ensure that systems operating under their purview are functional, compliant with national regulations, and do not compromise service delivery or revenue collection.
However, the Vice-President and Chairperson of the Economic Cluster has correctly emphasized that the Crawford Capital system and contract were approved collectively through a Cabinet Decision No. 34/2024. Cabinet decisions constitute collective executive authority under the President, and therefore cannot be revoked or suspended by a unilateral ministerial action.
From the standpoint of constitutional governance and executive coordination, the Economic Cluster’s position is procedurally stronger, as any modification to a Cabinet-approved system must follow proper inter-ministerial procedures, including legal consultations and potential presidential review. Unilateral action by a single ministry could expose the government to contractual disputes, investor confidence risks, and potential revenue leakage.
The matter has significant implications for economic justice and public finance. Digital payment systems are critical to national revenue collection, encompassing taxes, fees, and service payments. Abrupt suspension could disrupt revenue flows, create opportunities for corruption, and undermine investor trust in public-private digital partnerships. At the same time, operational issues highlighted by the Ministry of Trade cannot be ignored; they must be addressed to ensure compliance, efficiency, and protection of public resources. This situation highlights a coordination gap in economic governance between ministries, clusters, and Cabinet authorities, which requires immediate attention.
While the Minister’s concerns are valid, the unilateral suspension exceeds legal authority, and the Economic Cluster’s directive to uphold Cabinet decisions is legally correct. A balanced resolution requires maintaining Cabinet authority, while addressing operational deficiencies through structured mechanisms. It is therefore recommended that the Vice-President and Economic Cluster establish an independent review committee, including the ministries of Finance, Trade, ICT authorities and Justice, and anti-corruption oversight bodies, to conduct a 60-day audit of Crawford Capital’s systems. During this period, the system should continue operating to prevent revenue disruption. The Minister of Trade should withdraw the suspension and formally submit documented operational concerns for review by the Economic Cluster.
Finally, the government should use this opportunity to create a National Digital Revenue Governance Framework, encompassing procurement transparency, cybersecurity standards, data protection, and accountability mechanisms for digital revenue platforms. Properly managed, this case can serve as a model for strengthening institutional coordination, safeguarding public revenue, and maintaining investor confidence while ensuring ministerial oversight and accountability.
The writer, Boboya James Edimond, is a policy analyst and governance expert. He serves as the National Coordinator of PWYP South Sudan and CEO of the Institute of Social Policy and Research (ISPR) in Juba.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.