The author of this piece, a writer on public policy, argues that South Sudan’s National Security Service Act is unconstitutional and did not pass parliament with the constitutionally required quorum. He says the bill is an embarrassment.

Some of the complaints one hears against the current government in South Sudan is that its advisors are ineffective or incompetent. One of the recent acts of this government that makes this crystal clear is the National Security bill, which was long ago exposed as a bad, draconian security bill. 

Dozens of MPs have written to the President saying please do not sign. Also more notably some brave lawmakers walked out of parliament to protest the bill, which meant there could be no constitutional quorum as required to pass the bill.

Earlier fourteen Opposition political parties agreed the bill had no quorum and should not be signed by the President. As well, South Sudanese civil society organizations asked for the president not to sign the security bill. The Enough Project and other international groups recommended for the bill to be returned to Parliament for reconsideration.

The president should not sign this bill if he wants to have some legacy left for his grandchildren or peace of mind. His advisors are letting him down, and have put him in a globally embarrassing situation. Why?

Well, the advisors’ argument for passing this bill is that it has been long overdue, and the nation needs a legal framework for the security service.

Meanwhile, Assembly Speaker Magok Rundial has categorically denied that the House “passage” of the bill contravened any of its guiding rules and regulations. Northern Bahr el Ghazal MP Agany Deng Kwac, who supported the motion, also said that the bill met proper parliamentary procedure.

South Sudan Information Minister Michael Makuei, the chief spokesman for the government, said President Kiir will sign the bill and, “If there are any loopholes... you correct them later.” Makuei also said, “Issues of security of the nation are not matters of jokes. It’s not the right of anybody in this world to come and tell me that your security is like this or like this.”

“There is not any controversy -- it is a good law,” he said. “Let us wait for it to be operational and we will see where the loopholes are and they will be filled.” 

One of the security bill authors, Samuel Duwar Deng, the chairman of the parliamentary committee for defense, security and public order, had this to say about it: “It is actually very good, it is joyful to the people of South Sudan and to the services itself because, from here, we will be assured the work of the (security) service will be running smoothly.”

After all these high ranking officials, some executive, some legislative, it seems all skipped over the issue of constitutionality of the bill, none of them question the legality of this globally opposed security bill - not one!

Because it is very clear this bill gives new powers to the security service like police (arrest, search and seizure) while the security forces' actual mandate in the 2011 Constitution is only to gather information, analysis and advice - this bill is a big, dangerous and unqualified leap that could spell additional problems for the totalitarian-leaning government.

Does SPLM-Juba believe it can chose to ignore the 2011 Interim Constitution when it suits their purpose? You cannot follow the constitution one day and ignore it the next day. This is not how nations with respect act or conduct their business.

President Kiir should not sign the National Security Bill, for it will be tainted forever with the incompetence of his advisors. It is flawed. It should be returned to parliament for retooling.

The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made are the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.