Confidence in Victory: Performance or Institutional Influence?
The SPLM appears confident that it will win the elections. However, its critics argue that this confidence rests less on its achievements since it began governing Southern Sudan in 2005 than on its influence over institutions that are supposed to serve the public impartially and independently.
The concern is that the Political Parties Council, the National Elections Commission, and the security sector may be used to preserve the SPLM’s hold on power rather than guarantee fair political competition. These allegations strike at the heart of public confidence in the electoral process.
Institutions entrusted with regulating political parties, administering elections, and protecting citizens must serve the country rather than the political interests of those in power. Their legitimacy depends on their ability to demonstrate independence through their decisions and conduct.
The ruling party should seek a renewed mandate by presenting its achievements, acknowledging its failures, and explaining how it intends to address them.
Confidence in victory should come from public trust, not from the belief that competitors cannot challenge the ruling party effectively.
The Danger of Recycling Political Elites
Recycling political elites within the SPLM through elections that lack genuine competition will not resolve South Sudan’s underlying governance problems. Instead, it will allow the same leadership to remain in power without adequately accounting for its record.
The danger extends beyond party politics. Preserving political power while leaving governance failures unaddressed threatens the national interest, weakens public confidence, and raises concerns about national security and South Sudan’s future as a nation.
Elections should provide an opportunity to assess leadership and demand accountability. They should not become political theatre through which existing elites renew their positions while citizens continue to face insecurity, unpaid salaries, displacement, inadequate services, and unfulfilled development promises.
The fundamental test is whether the electoral process gives citizens a meaningful opportunity to reward good performance, reject failure, and choose a political alternative.
The issue is not the existence of the SPLM as a political organisation, but whether its leadership has implemented its stated objectives and translated them into tangible improvements in people’s lives.
Similarly, the central concern is not simply that one political party dominates the government. It is why its leaders have failed to implement national strategic plans and why questions continue to arise about their respect for national and state constitutions and laws.
The debate must therefore move beyond the question of who occupies public office to examine how public authority is exercised.
Do leaders honour their commitments? Do they implement development plans? Do they respect legal obligations and manage public resources in the national interest?
At the heart of these questions lies accountability. Neither a political party’s historical role nor its continued dominance can substitute for responsible governance and measurable results.
The SPLM’s stated objectives should serve as a standard against which its leadership is assessed, rather than merely as political language used to justify its continued rule.
Lessons from China and the Gulf Monarchies
Comparisons with China and the Arab Gulf countries illustrate the argument that political continuity, in itself, is not necessarily the central problem. China’s one-party system and the ruling-family systems of Gulf monarchies are often cited as examples of development under concentrated political authority.
Why, then, does the SPLM not seek to learn from the development experience of the Communist Party of China? If one political family aspires to dominate South Sudan’s political future, why not study the governing and development experience of Saudi Arabia’s royal family?
The purpose of these comparisons is not to argue that South Sudan should adopt either system. Rather, it is to question why those seeking continued political control do not demonstrate a corresponding commitment to effective governance, service delivery, and the achievement of national development objectives.
Citizens judge leadership by what it delivers, not merely by the identity of those in power. The argument is that functioning public services and tangible development may matter more to citizens than the political labels under which they are governed.
However, political continuity cannot, by itself, justify poor performance. Those seeking to remain in power must accept the obligations that accompany authority: respect for the law, responsible management of public resources, and sustained efforts to improve people’s lives.
Elections Must Serve the National Interest
The SPLM’s election preparations should be judged by more than the collection of nomination fees or the selection of party candidates. The real test is whether the process enables peaceful competition, meaningful political participation, and a credible expression of the people’s will.
The memory of the 2010 elections makes institutional impartiality particularly important. Unresolved questions concerning salaries, insecurity, public revenues, infrastructure, displacement, national unity, and implementation of the peace agreement make scrutiny of the government’s record equally necessary.
An election campaign should not merely provide an opportunity to renew promises or exchange political slogans. It should offer a platform for reviewing leadership performance, holding officials accountable, discussing national priorities, and presenting practical programmes that respond to citizens’ needs.
Accordingly, the SPLM and its candidates must provide clear answers about past failures and identify measurable commitments for the future. Electoral and security institutions also have a responsibility to guarantee a level playing field, protect political rights, and respect the will of the electorate.
The question is: Will the coming elections provide a genuine opportunity for democratic change and national accountability, or will they become a political drama designed to reproduce the existing ruling elites?
The answer will not be determined by the number of nomination forms sold or the number of candidates competing for the SPLM’s internal nominations. It will depend on the integrity of the electoral process, the freedom of citizens to participate, the ability of voters to choose their leaders without fear or coercion, and the willingness of those in power to provide an honest account of their performance.
South Sudan’s future should not be reduced to a struggle among political elites for public office. It must be linked to building a state that respects the law, protects its citizens, manages its resources responsibly, delivers peace and development, and ensures that public authority is a means of serving the people rather than an end in itself.
Genuine democratic elections are not measured merely by whether they take place. They are measured by their ability to empower citizens to make free choices, hold leaders accountable, and bring about peaceful political change when those in office fail to fulfil their obligations.
South Sudan’s national interest demands that elections become a means of renewing political legitimacy through performance and accountability, rather than an instrument for reproducing existing power structures without meaningful change.
The writer, William Sunday D. Tor, is a political and social researcher and currently a Lecturer of Security Studies, International Development, and Regional Planning at Starford International University, Juba. He can be reached via williamtor2011@gmail.com /+211922402162.
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.
The post Opinion | SPLM’s election preparations: Political drama or a genuine democratic exercise? (Part 2 of 2) appeared first on Radio Tamazuj.