First and foremost, I would like to send my congratulations once again to the newly reconstituted members of parliament. The importance of this reconstitution lies in the fact that it occupies a big position in the R-ARCSS, and that, its implementation in particular, is a double step in the implementation process, deputized by that of the security arrangements.
It was thought that the August House would become a useful house where challenges facing the citizens are debated and given possible solutions, little did the citizens know the MPs would go muted. Has the house become so small for them? Are they struggling for oxygen that they find no time to raise motions and debate them? Has something been put into their mouths to chew and that, they find it hard to talk? What is actually behind the muteness of the MPs? Can someone help me know it?
Now that the political density has enormously increased two-fold with the decree of reconstitution, with the current concept of the citizens that the politicians are the ones destroying this nation, what impact does this increment carry? Each Member of Parliament represents a constituency and each constituency in and across the Republic of South Sudan expects service delivery in form of health, education, infrastructure, security, food and other services that raise living standards, but these services appear only in dreams and it is still night for South Sudan to put them in to actions in the morning.
With the MPs having the role of overseeing the executives in that whoever goes astray, including the president, is summoned to appear before the house to explain why he/she does that and other roles of having specialized committees overseeing health, education, security, infrastructure, economy, among others, it would appear that these roles have congenitally been diseased since 2010, in which the addition of new 100 MPs from different political parties is thought to be a part of treatment.
The increment of MPs from 450 to 550 is both advantageous and disadvantageous, it is advantageous in the sense that the dominated parliament by one party members, thought to be the origin of failure, is going to be counteracted by other MPs of different political parties, leading to counterbalance of services to the people of South Sudan, and it is disadvantageous in the sense that the current division of citizens among individuals of higher calibres, thought to be widely spread by politicians, is going to spike 5 times more than it uses to be.
This division is thought to be the major aetiology of the ongoing communal conflicts and the two rebellions in which their settlement has drained the country’s resources so much that they would have paved our roads, built our schools, health facilities and bridges, among others, if they were used for them. If the acceptance and flavour of the Revitalized Peace Agreement aid in changing the political atmosphere, then it would be of great importance in the livelihoods of much suffering South Sudanese, but suggestions from the central, northern and western parts of the country indicate an additional 20% rise in political havoc in which its tolerance by the citizens is as low as 0.5%.
As the saying goes “new brooms sweep clean”, the young MPs reconstituted, are a ‘breath of fresh air’ expected to reinvigorate the parliament and make it a house where MPs of different political backgrounds debate motions of unity, gender equality, healthcare development, infrastructure, economy recovery, to mention a few, and implement them to make sure the long-awaited fundamental change is seen.
The reconstituted MPs, to me and any other person having the same far-sighted spectacles, are like scalded snakes and shedded trees that have got rid of old skin and leaves, respectively and start growing new ones, full of momentum to commence new life with withstanding tactics.
With them, the “implementase”; a South Sudan’s congenitally deficient enzyme that functions to speed up implementation, will undergo gene therapy to make sure it functions.
In other African countries of which South Africa and Kenya are worthy to mention, their parliaments have advanced to give opposition MPs a room to participate and have their views considered for amicable purposes and smooth progress. In Kenya, opposition MPs argue to an extent of tearing bill documents being passed, but one unique thing about them is that, they still reach unanimity at the end of the day, which reflects its democracy and incomparable elucidation of parliamentary system in Africa. I wish South Sudan adopts it to help it quickly attain all colours of East Africa.
The author is a medical student, University of Juba