South Sudan New Capital Ramciel Doesn't Need a Claimer

"The government has become so vulnerable before people standing up to say no to noble projects for the same people."

By Isaiah Abraham

To Editor, Gurtong - The Republic of South Sudan leadership (represented partly by the Executive) has chosen a piece of land in Lakes State as the national seat for the government of the people of South Sudan. The decision was taken by the Council of Ministers a couple of days ago, subject to Parliament’s endorsement.

The President has formed a Task Force Committee to look into the geographical area of the new land, and to map out strategies for possible planning leading to relocation. This is a second team (Task Force) within six months. Everyone knows every detail therein, yeah?

But the urgency of the matter at hand, especially this year, was felt by everyone, as the current city, Juba, isn’t any more suitable to host the national capital due largely to land problem as well as un declared deadly politics. The dice therefore has gone in Ramciel’s favour in the aforesaid state, and the issues at hand are: will the Task Force complete the mission more successfully on time, or will it end up like others before it? How about resources?

I know some people have started to worry about financial support for that idea, but the government is the government; it may even borrow- why not!

On that land: who is the real owner of that land between Aliap and Ciec (Dinka sections there)? This is so because there are conflicting statements made by the same people on that land (Ramciel). But do we really need anyone to be part of the Task Force from there? No! If yes what does that tell you and me about another land problem awaiting the government in Juba?

Land issue in our homeland has become a hot cake as communities interpret land law differently. It wasn’t like that before. I have seen people beating their chests against the government that ‘unless we are part of land arrangement, any service done on that land isn’t needed’. The government has become so vulnerable before people standing up to say no to noble projects for the same people.

Some communities have tight the hand of the government, as politicians (State Legislative Assemblies) manipulate everything to ensure the government doesn’t function. This is what am reading early now about Ramciel as it was the case yesterday in Juba.

I heard Ciec or Aliap putting up conditions before the Task Force could have even sat that unless A or B is done, Juba Task Force should forget about establishing a seat there. They need compensation for land, or at least something done before hand on environment. May be the authors of the said conditions aren’t representatives of the people there, but the fact that it was made public and no single politician from there raised a voice makes it an official position of the Ciech/Aliap about the land Ramciel, something so ominous for the start. They are forgetting that the Government is ahead, as the composition of the committee entails.

People should study afresh the relationship between the government and the governed land laws and issues. The assumption by the people that they have to be everywhere on issues touching their land, isn’t a big reason to stop them from reasoning like part of the same government.

The government must be allowed to operate freely, and within its defined statue. It is not any good when people are so detached from the government they have elected to power.

The issue of Ramciel has been in the news for most of the Interim Period before independence and no one then had raised the issue of land to be auctioned. I don’t know whether we have become so materialistic or sheer selfish about life against others. Something must be wrong, and pray the attitude of our people changes. 

Take the issue of compensation, where will the government find a seat in this land if that land is to be paid for? Leaders ran away from Juba because Bari people were tough on land, a no secret thing, something everyone has nothing to do. Ciec/Aliap hence ought to spare us another Bari style in Ramciel. The government relocation there is not stoppable; and hope the tide must not be changed about moving away the capital from Juba to Ramciel whether there are differences or not. The place is large and good, surrounded by all.

But did I hear someone from there saying that the land isn’t a no man’s land? If yes then the protester must get it right that it is not about the land having no one, but the true meaning of ‘no man’s land’ is about any land where people don’t have permanent status. ‘No man’s land’ dictum is an overstated phrase meant for any place that has less human presence; it doesn’t mean that the land doesn’t belong to anyone. That is how Ramciel is and no fuss should be made about that statement (no man’s land).

The land yes belongs to certain groups, but not inhabited regularly by the same.  Ramciel people ought not to cough excuses aim at scaring the government from going there. Ramciel time has come, and no claimer has any right at this point to stop the government from moving its seat there.

Juba bottle necks related to land were enough; we must learn to have the government space to work. Hon. Dr. Achol Marial can you talk to your people?
 

Posted in: Opinions
Comments
RSS comment feed
19/09/2011, 3:22 AM
 - Posted by Ater Guem
Dear Isaiah
Thank you for your opinion on the so call capital city of Southern Sudan ( Ramciel ). You suggested that " the land doesn't need a claimer" Why? and you stated your reason as such as etc...
I would like to thank you again, why?. Because, if there are rules that the South Sudan government set for all people and the all then all are abbide by the rules not some people, then your suggestion will be Ok. But if other communities refussed to giveup their land because they have the right to do so, why not people of Ramciel to raise their concerns about land grabbing issues like what happened in other areas in the South and we don't examples because they are many.
Their concern in my opinion would be;
1) Priority of land ownership for who and (who mean first the local communities in that particular area)
2) No one and not any foreign people should be grant the land ownership. By foreign i mean other nationalities excluding Southern Sudanese.
3) Proper land surveying not just 6 month surveying, because this will be for future generations at least 3 years surveying and the final outcome report about the findings
4) Drainage, sewage, and water service
4) Health, education, and general public survice
Before that all community representative in Yirol counties and lake state government representative must be included in the committee to discuss such issues.
You do not have a right to give permision to other people land while you have accepted the rights of those who lived in Juba to refussed their land to other people. Is this is the new South Sudan as we have learn from late Dr John, it means those who have power or they are well reresented in the government can do anything in South Sudan, and those who are not in power for this period their rights are abused infornt of their ice because they said we are worried about our land. I tell my brother Iam not a tribalist, but people rights must be addressed and well exercised. I sound harch but what I know in Southern Sudanese culture, if you say the right thing it meant that you are enemy full stop. No matter how your are concern about your rights. Least not last I tell you this saying which i learne from live expereince " For every thing have time and if times change everything will change" in other words all things goes around. Thank you for your time taken reading my comment. Thank you
Add Comment
Log in
to post a comment. If you are not a Gurtong member yet, register here.
Designed and built by Brand X