Attachment 4 THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT FRAMEWORK FOR SOUTHERN SUDAN

climbmoujeanteaΛογισμικό & κατασκευή λογ/κού

13 Δεκ 2013 (πριν από 3 χρόνια και 5 μέρες)

193 εμφανίσεις


1

Attachment 4






THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT FRAMEWORK FOR SOUTHERN SUDAN

















“Take the Towns to the People”

Cdr. Dr. John Garang de Mabior

Chair
man

of the SPLM/A
















October 2006








2

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

................................
................................
........................

7


Introduction

................................
................................
................................
...........

10

1.1.

The Southern Sudan

................................
................................
.......

10

1.2.

The Historical Perspective of Local Government in Southern Sudan

12

1.3. Southern Sudan Experience with Decentralisation

............................

13

1.4.

Local Government in Southern Sudan Today

................................
..

15

1.5.

Functions of Local Government

................................
.......................

23

1.6.

Resources of local governmen
t

................................
.......................

24


2.

The Local Government Framework

................................
.................

27

2.1

The Purpose of the Local Government Framework

.........................

27

2.2


The Concepts of the Local Government Framework

......................

28

2.3.

Development of the Local Government Framework

........................

34


3.Organization of the Local Government

................................
......................

44

3.1

Status of Local Government Authority

................................
.............

44

3.2. Competencies

................................
................................
....................

44


4.
Types of Local Government Authority
................................
........................

45

4.1.

Urban Councils

................................
................................
................

45

4.2.

Rural Local Councils

................................
................................
........

45

4.3.

Creation of local government councils

................................
.............

45

4.4.

Composition of the Local Government Authorities

...........................

46

Proposed Composition of Local Government Authorities

.......................

47


5.Structures of Local Government Authorities

................................
............

48


6.Traditional Authorities

................................
................................
....................

55

6.1.

Status of Traditional Authorities

................................
.......................

55

6.2.

Functions of

Traditional Authorities

................................
.................

55

6.2.1.

Executive Functions

................................
................................
.....

55


7.Functions of Councils

................................
................................
.....................

57

7.1.

Public Order Function

................................
................................
......

57

7.2.

Service provision functions of Local Government

............................

57

7.3.

Development

................................
................................
...................

57

Schedule One: Service Delivery Functions of Local Governments

.........

60


8.Resources of Local Government Councils
................................
................

67

8.1.

Financial Resource of Local Government

................................
........

67

Loans:

................................
................................
................................
.....

68

8.2.

Council Assets

................................
................................
.................

68

8.3.

Budget Preparation and Approval

................................
....................

76

8.3.

Supplementary budgets

................................
................................
...

79

8.4.

Accounts

................................
................................
..........................

79

8.5.

Audit

................................
................................
................................

79

8.6.

Taxes

................................
................................
...............................

79



3

9.
Human Resour
ces of Local Government

................................
...................

69


10.Management of Local Government Councils

................................
.........

71

Administrative and Staffing

................................
................................
.....

75

Project and Programme Implementation

................................
................

76


11.Legislative Committees of Councils

................................
.........................

81

Coord
ination Committee

................................
................................
.........

81

Finance and Planning Committee

................................
...........................

81

Public Relations and Ethics Committees

................................
................

81

Security Committee

................................
................................
................

82


12.
Proceedings of the Legislative Council

................................
...................

83

City/Municipal, Town and Co
unty Council Meetings

................................
...

83

Boma Assembly Sessions

................................
................................
......

84


13.Inter
-
Governmental Relations

................................
................................
.....

85


14.Strengthening of the Local Government
................................
..................

87

Local Government Associations

................................
.............................

87

Local Government Elections
................................
................................
.......

88

Franchise

................................
................................
................................

88

Authority for local government elections

................................
.................

88


15.
Transitional Arrangements

................................
................................
..........

90

Staffing

................................
................................
................................
...

91

Functions

................................
................................
................................

91

Elections

................................
................................
................................
.

91






















4



5

Glossary of Terms



In this Framework,




‘body corporate’ means a body having perpetual succession


and a
common seal, with power to acquire and hold movable and immovable
property, and transfer any
property held by it, and enter into any
contract and may sue and be sued in its name;



‘block’ means an intermediate tier area of administration in a Municipality
between the Municipal Council and the Quarter;



‘Boma’ means the lowest level of local govt. A
Chief’s area.



‘budget’ means an official statement of income and expenditure for a
financial year;



‘by
-
laws’ means supplementary laws made by local governments under
the Local Government Act;



‘Council’ means a County Council, City Council, Municipal Counci
l or
Town Council


as an entity comprising both the elected council and
the executive;



‘Elected Council’ means those members elected to the council;



'Councillor' means a member of elected Council;



‘County’ means the primary level of Local Govt below the S
tate;



‘decentralize’ or ‘decentralized’ means conferment under the Local
Government Act by the Government of its administrative and financial
authority for the management of specified offices of the Government to
the local governments;



"devolve' or 'devolv
ed' means conferment under this Local Government
Act by the Government of its political decision making authority for the
management of specified powers and functions of the Government to
the local governments



"deconcentrate" means the physical transfer of

government staff from one
level to another with only limited delegated powers to carry out
instructions received from the higher level.


This does not confer the
authorities similar to those of decentralization or devolution.



‘disaster’ includes famine, f
lood, cyclone, fire, earthquake, drought, and
damages caused by force majeure;



‘elector’ means a person whose name appears on the electoral rolls
prepared by the Government



‘Government’ means the Government of Southern Sudan (GoSS)




‘mal
-
administration’ me
ans a decision, process, recommendation, act of
omission or commission which is contrary to the law, rules or
regulations or is a departure from established practice or procedure; or
perverse, arbitrary or unreasonable, unjust, biased, oppressive, or
discr
iminatory; or based on irrelevant grounds, neglect, inattention,
delay, incompetence, inefficiency and ineptitude, in the administration
or discharge of duties and responsibilities or delivery of civic duty.



‘member’ means an elected member of a Council;


6



Neighbourhood means a group of streets, lanes or roads, designated by
Municipal Administration or Town Administration to be a
Neighbourhood;



‘Payam’ means an intermediate administrative level of Local Government
between the County and the Boma.



‘Quarter’ m
eans an electoral sub division of a City, Municipal or Town
Council.



‘tax’ includes any cess, fee, rate, toll or other impost leviable under the
Local Government Act;



‘town’ means an local area notified by the County Government


to be an
incorporated area
with the right to establish a local government



7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY


This Framework
has been developed and prepared through 5 drafts by a Local
Government Technical Team under the Chairmanship of the Commission for Local
Government, Judiciary, Legal Affairs

and Law Enforcement Agencies a
nd adopted
by the newly created
Local Government Board, to be:




The

vision for Local Government in South Sudan;



The
basis for consultation and negotiation of the system
s, structures and
functions
local government with all sec
tors of government, local communities
and external agencies;



The policy guideline of

a Local Government Act for South Sudan.



The

guide for international donors and the NGOs in contributing to
programmes for recovery and development ensuring they give app
ropriate
attention to the involvement of local government in planning and
implementation.


In view of the SPLM/A commitment to decentralisation and the current
vacuum in legal status of local government, the Board undertook to review the
5 drafts of the lo
cal government framework in order to determine and
recommend policy measures that would redress the current situation and set
up a new system of local government in Southern Sudan. Through the
processes of consultation and dialogue that resulted in the 5
drafts of the
Local Government Framework it was established that:

1.

The people of Southern Sudan demand self rule for self governance.
This demands the devolution of authority to a level of government
closest to the people;

2.

Experiences of other African coun
tries show that the enshrinement of
local government into the national constitution is a necessity, but not
sufficient in itself unless the relevant types of local government policies,
legislation and laws are enacted to provide the enabling basis for
orga
nisation of local government authorities;

3.

Two parallel systems of government have been established at the
community level in Southern Sudan the statutory and traditional
authorities. The traditional authorities, although having the recognition
of the peop
le, have been marginalised over the years. Any system of
local government developed for Southern Sudan must recognise the
traditional authorities and incorporate their mechanisms to be
responsive and successful;

4.


Any system of local government established

in Southern Sudan which
is
void of a system of planning and programming is irrelevant and will
fail. Therefore the establishment of planning units in all counties is
crucial to involve stakeholders in deciding the priorities of their
community;

5.


The devel
opment of fiscal decentralisation systems is key to the
viability of local authorities. This requires the assignment of sources of
revenue by law and the political will to allocate a determined
percentage of national revenue to local government; and

6.

Democ
ratisation of local government through the establishment of
universal suffrage for local elections, and the maintenance of checks

8

and balances to ensure transparent, accountable and responsive
practices in local governance.


The Recommendations of the Loc
al Government Board for the establishment
of a Local Government System for Southern Sudan are as follows:




LG Councils be organised by GOSS (through a Ministry of Local Government
and by State (through State Ministry of Local Government);



Local Government

Councils should be corporate bodies with the right
to sue and be sued in a court of law;




There will be two types of Local Government Authorities
;
Urban Authorities
comprising of Town, Municipal and City councils

and
Rural Authorities
comprising of Counti
es which are sub divided into Payams that are
coordinative units and the Bomas as the basic units of Local Government.



On the basis of an articulate
d

criteria, there will be 83 Local government
council across Southern Sudan;

70 Counties


1 City Council (Ju
ba)


9

Town Councils

(
all State Capitals, excluding Central Equatoria)


3

Town Councils

in the counties which have assumed Town status



In composition, the Local Government Authorities
will consist of local
legislative, executive and customary judicial orga
ns. Each Council will be
headed by an elected political office bearer; a Mayor for the City and
Municipal Councils, a Town Clerk for Town Councils, and a Commissioner for
the County Council.



Local government authorities should be funded by a mixture of l
ocally
raised revenue and grants from GoSS and donor agencies.



Financial transparency and expediency are central to the success of
local government;



Local Councils should adopt planning systems which involve the
participation of the communities, for the pr
eparation of council plans
and programmes that serve as the basis for effective council
management.




Traditional authority shall be an institution at local government level on
matters affecting local communities. The Boma, as an integrated basic
administr
ative unit of the local government, shall be the domain of the
traditional authority, with the Chief/Executive Chief holding the position
of the Boma Administrator.


In the interim period, prior to the local government elections, the Board recommends
the f
ollowing establishment arrangements:




(CORRECTED)


1)

Consolidation of the present number of Counties pending
the enactment of
the LG Act through which

relevant mechanism will be set for the determination
of viable local government author
ities.



9


2)

Categorisation of the existing Counties into Urban and Rural Council, to
ensure that each type of Local Authority assumes the performance of its
respective functions until they are confirmed by law;

3)

Classification of local Authorities into four gr
ades according to the current
levels of their development for appropriate assignment of interim functions
and equitable allocation of resources. The four grades recommended are:

a.

Grade A


local authorities established in former town councils;

b.

Grade B


lo
cal authorities established in the former District
headquarters and are now State capitals or fast growing towns;

c.

Grade C


local authorities in the former Area Councils and have
existing but ruined infrastructure; and

d.

Grade D


newly created local authori
ties, some of which lack basic
infrastructure.

4)

Formulation and drafting of the Local Government Act and other requisite
rules and regulations.

5)

Formulation of the Local Government Establishment policy document for
adoption by Cabinet.

6)

Creation of a Ministr
y for Local government at GOSS level or the assignment
of executive functions and powers to the Local Government Board to lead all
aspects of the establishment of local government in Southern Sudan.


In view of the importance of the Local Government Act to

direct the establishment of
Local
Government

in Southern Sudan, the Local Government Board will make every
effort to make
the

Act available in the next three (3) months.


10

Introduction


1.1.

The Southern Sudan


The territory of Southern Sudan comprises all

lands and areas that constituted the
former Southern Provinces of Bahr
-
El
-
Ghazal, Equatoria and Upper Nile as they
stood on January 1, 1956. In size, t
h
e area of Southern Sudan is 250,000 sq miles
or 640,000 sq kilo metres that
is one

third the total land

area of the Sudan. It has a
population of
approximately
10,000,000 million people
, 7,500,000 million of whom
live currently in the South and 2,500,000 millions are either internally displaced
people (
IDPs) or refugees.

According to the 1983 National Popu
lation Census of the
Sudan, 75% of the total population of the South live in rural areas while 25% are
found in urban areas, with only 25%
being

literate and 75% illiterate.



The people of Southern Sudan are predominantl
y Nilotics who make up about 80%
wh
ile the Bantus

and the Sudanic Ethnic groups

constitute

about 20%. In
concentration, the population of Bahr
-
el
-
Ghazal is slightly higher than Upper Nile
which is slightly higher than that of Equatoria.

Few people of Northe
r
n Sudan origin
and else where liv
e in the urban centres of Southern Sudan, however that it
“is

an all
embracing homeland for its people and others who are multi
-
ethnic, multi
-
cultural,
multi
-
lingual, multi
-
religious and multi
-
racial entity where such diversities peacefully
co
-
exist.




Th
e economy of Southern Sudan

is largely a subsistence economy which is
predominated by the Agricultural Sector followed by Trade and Commerce. It has
many

riches of national endowments comprising
of minerals and other natural
resources, but is low in popula
tion density compare to the size of territorial land area
and has a very poor absorptive capacity for resource mobilization
,

development and
utilization.
The Per Capita National income for Southern Sudan according to the
World Bank is less than one dollar
per a day, which is a clear indication of the level
of poverty and inadequacy in basic services delivered to the people.



Southern Sudan is governed on the basis of decentralization, it territory consist of
the ten States

of Norther
n Bahr el Ghazal, We
stern Bahr e
l Ghazal, Warrap, Lakes,
Western Equatoria, Central Equatoria, Eastern Equatoria, Jongle
i, Upper Nile, and
Unity.

Each State has an approximate population of 1,000,000 million people and
shall be divided into (7

to 10) Local Government authorit
ies given a population range
of (100,000 to 150,000) people per a Local Authority, in accordance with a Local
Government Legislation due for enactment by the Southern Sudan
Legislative

Assembly

soon.

The total number and the boundaries of each Local Govern
ment
Authority shall be determine according to a criteria

approved by the Southern
Legislature.


The 39 years of civil war in the Sudan (1955
-
1972 and 1983
-
2005) has
caused enormous destruction of the social, economic, cultural, and
environmental and the g
eneral infrastructure of the country, particularly in
Southern Sudan. The various types of local government systems set up since
formal independence in 1956 were never stable and never delivered due to
frequent changes of administrations and types of gover
nments ranging from

11

Secular through Socialist to Islamic regimes and now a Federal government
with different policies on Local Government.


In the Southern Sudan, Local Government was finally brought to a halt in
1983 at the break of the second civil war

when the majority of the skilled
human resources joined the SPLA and others went to refuge or got internally
displaced with an ensuing disruption of any forms of governance at the local
government level across the Southern Sudan. With its commitment to re
form
the Movement convened a National Convention in 1994 in Chukudum in
which the SPLM/A resolved to set up a civil administration and develop its
structures base on a decentralized system of government with special
emphasis on formal separation of the civ
il from military Administration (
resolution 18.2.0) and 18.2.1).

Two years later the SPLM/A organized a conference to define the relationship
between the civil society and newly created authority of the New Sudan
(CANS). In his opening address to the conf
erence the Chairman of the
SPLM/A Dr. John Garang De Mabior declared that:


“The most important task and challenge facing the, Movement today is the
establishment of an effective, democratic, participatory and accountable civil
authority, the central purp
ose of which is empowerment of the civil population
to become productive and the driving force of our struggle.”


Based on the proceedings of the National Convention and the conference on
civil Administration the CANS was set up as follows:


Boma (the smal
l unit of administration or the village level); Payam;
County; Region and Central Authority



However there was neither a legal framework nor adequate financial and
human resources to support this elaborate structures. The progress or
success of these stru
ctures in practices of governance was further impeded
by weak physical structures devastated by the war. The administrative system
overall was therefore inefficient, ineffective and therefore unaccountable.
There were many constraints which contributed to
this unfortunate situation
including staff working on voluntary basis and the overriding impact of the war
on the civil administration.


In August 2003 Cdr Daniel Awet Akot , the Chairman for the Commission for
Local Government, Judiciary, Legal affairs an
d Law enforcement agencies
appointed a focal point Team on Local Government and civil Administration to
coordinate with UNDP and other Donor agencies the development of
structures of government in the Interim period. The overall mandate of the
Team was to

develop a framework for the establishment of a stable local
government and civil administration in Southern Sudan. In December 2003
Cdr. Daniel Awet Akot also appointed a Technical Team of the SPLM Local
Government Secretariat to continue with the process

of the development of
the local government framework for Southern Sudan. The local government
framework was developed through five drafts culminating in the six and final
draft, this draft adapted by the Local Government Board. The first five drafts
were
intended to address various thematic issues on the current system of

12

Local Government Administration in order to develop new concepts to be
adopted as the basis for the development of a new local government system
for Southern Sudan. The task of the Local
Government Technical Team was
to conduct workshops, field studies, study tours, and consultative meetings
with professionals in the field of local government internally and abroad, civil
society stakeholders and the members of sectoral ministries of CANS.
The
refore the

major task of the Technical Team was to establish and
recommend relevant system of local government
which is
suitable to the
situation of Southern Sudan.




1.2.

The Historical Perspective of Local Government in Southern
Sudan


Southern Sudan

has
in existence a rudimentary system of local government that
evolved from many different models dating back to the historical period of the
development of the system of governments in the Sudan between 1821
-
2006. In
evolution the local government counc
ils in Southern Sudan grew from two provinces
of the then two provinces of Equatoria and Upper Nile (1821) which was subdivided
into three by splitting Equatoria into Equator
ia and Bahr EL Ghazal provinces
, and
further split to six provinces of Jonglei, Up
per Nile ,
Bahr El Ghazal, Lakes, Western
a
nd Eastern
Equatoria

in 1976. Same provinces were later amalgamated into three
regions of Southern Sudan of Equatoria, Bahr
El

Ghazal and Upper Nile in 1983 but
subdivided again into ten current states of Southern

Sudan in 1994. over all this
period the history of Local Government Southern Sudan and the Sudan as a whole
has sadly been that over centralization of authority, powers, and service delivery by
the central government in Khartoum and the provinces, regions

and states in
Southern Sudan while the under
-
development of the people of the South and their
areas remain the most prevalence scenery of governance in all spheres of life and
rule.


In retrospect, the people of Southern Sudan like their brethren in the N
orth lived
under a highly centralized system of direct rule for 130 years under the two colonial
regimes of the Turko
-
Egyptian rule 1821


1898 and the Anglo
-
Egyptian rule 1899


1955. They as well experienced different forms of decentralisation for 55 yea
rs
before and during the Sudan post independence period (1951
-
2006). But despite its
half a century year experience in decentralization the Sudanese people in the
marginalized areas of the Sudan, in the South, West and East remained poor,
illiterate and un
der
-
developed. During the same period of its practice of
decentralized system of government the Sudan experience a protracted civil war that
devastated most of the people of Southern Sudan and those in the marginalized
region of the country thereby renderi
ng the concept of decentralization meaningless
as national experience to be proud of except for the wealth of knowledge gained in
the practices of its variety of forms of decentralized government.


In terms of the actual number of local government authorit
ies, up and till 1975 the
Southern Sudan had 24 local government councils of which 2
1

were rural councils
and 3 were town councils. In status these councils were simply administrative units
of provinces exercising deconcentrated and delegated powers to mai
ntain law and

13

order and collect revenue on behalf of the province authorities. In 1981 these local
government councils were split to make up 48 area councils to which local
government power authority were devolved to become a level of government closest
to

the people. This number of
Local Councils

was prolifer
ated to the present number
of 79

counties during the war between1983
-
2005. During the same period of time in
Southern Sudan, power and authority were withdrawn first from garrison town
councils and ves
ted in the state under the 2003 Local Government Act and those in
the SPLM/A liberated areas were maintained with out any legal status due to the war
situation.


In this case whichever option for decentralization of authority and power the
Government

of Southern Sudan opts for will be rendered meaningless as long as the
previous experiences are not taken into account during the processes of the design
of a new system of Local Government for Southern Sudan and the legislation of its
policies and laws.


1.3.
Southern Sudan Experience with Decentralisation


As an entity within the Sudan, Southern Sudan has experimented with various types
of decentralisation during the 50 years of the independence of the Sudan. These
took the forms of delegation, deconc
entration of power and devolution of authority.
Delegation is a routine exercise of functional assignment of duties to subordinate
institutions acting on the behalf of

the centre. Deconcentration is

the

transfer of
power (not authority) from a central go
vernment unit to its agencies at the sub
-
national level of government and the community level of government. Devolution is
the transfer of authority through constitutional provision from a central authority to
sub
-
national level of government and the comm
unity level of government.




1.3.1

Deconcentration
of Power (1951
-
1971)


With the advert of independence in 1956, the Sudan government adopted a
deconcentrated system of transfer of power from the central government in
Khartoum to local government based in t
he nine Provinces
, the three Provinces,
Bahr el Ghazal, Equatoria and Upper Nile, of the Southern Sudan inclusive
. Each of
the
s
e provinces was sub divided into a number of local government units know as
rural councils in the rural centres and municipal and

town councils exercised
delegated powers from the Provincial Council that exercised deconcentrated
authority from the centre. Some of these
Local Councils

had councillors with little or
no participation of the people in ruling themselves.


1.3.2.

Devolu
tion of Authority (1971
-

2005)

In experience, the Sudan experimented with
four

systems of devolution of authority
of which are:

(a)

Devolution to local government authorities (1971 to 2003)
;

(b)

Devolution to regional government authorities (1972 to
2002)
;

(c)

Devolut
ion to State authorities (200
3

to 2005)
; and

(d)

Devolution to federal authorities (2005 to 2006)
.


14


Under the commu
nist

regime in the Sudan, 1970 to 1985, the Sudan government
devolved authority from the central government to local government

where authority
w
as based in the Province Executive Council (PEC) between 1971 and 1980, at a
sub
-
national government level. But power was vested in the Provincial
Commissioner whose mandate was the political orientation of the people of the
Sudan towards the ideology of
the Sudanese Socialist Union with less commitment
to service delivery and local development. In the failure of the communist system to
deliver the authority of the local government was further devolved to Area Councils in
1981 to a community level of gover
nment in the rural centres and municipal and
town councils in the urban centres. These authorities enjoyed a greater measure of
autonomy for elected councils who presided over the Peoples’ Local Government
Councils in the processes of local policy making
and the supervision of the executive
functions.


Following the signing of the first peace agreement of the Sudan in Addis Ababa
in
1972, between the Sudan government and the Anyanya Freedom Fighters (AFF) of
Southern Sudan, the central government devolved
authority to the Regional
government in Southern Sudan. The Regional government (1972 to 1983)
exercised
legislative and executive authority without judicial authority. The experience of the
Regional Government in Southern Sudan led to further devolution

of authority from
the Central government to Regional Governments in Northern Sudan. However,
unlike the greater measure of secular authority enjoyed in the South, between 1972
and 1980, the Regional Governments all the Sudan were in most cases directly r
uled
from Khartoum in compromise of the their constitutional authorities.


With the coming of a full fledged Islamic regime 1989 to 2005, State governments
were established to which Islamic Shari’a law authority were devolved with reduced
legislative, exec
utive and judicial authority. Powers were vested on the State
Governor (Wali) upon whom religious and political powers were conferred. In the
practice of governance the Wali delegated State powers to the local government
councils which diminished over ti
me as the councils became non
-
functional. Local
government systems disintegrated and services were poorly provided to the people.


The Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) introduced in 2005 a Federal system
of government of One Nation, Two Systems with fo
ur levels of government:




Government of National Unity



Government of Southern Sudan



State Governments



Local Government


Each of the three upper levels of government in the Sudan have own constitutional
authorities. The local government authorities are dev
olved through GNU legislature,
to the Councils in the North and through the GOSS legislature to the councils in
Southern Sudan.



15

1.
4
.

Local Government in Southern Sudan Today

While there are notably universally accepted standards and norms for the practice
s
of local governance world wide, the local government institutional arrangements,
structures and systems are designed relative to the state of affairs and organizations
peculiar to the existing state of affairs and the national institutional arrangements
put
in place in any given nation. With this view in mind and given the fact that there can
no ideal universally structured government institutions and systems the local
government institutions in Southern Sudan have to be designed, created and
established

within the context of the prevailing post conflict circumstances where the
functional operations of these institutions have to be judged against the capacities
and abilities of the respective authorities to deliver public goods and services relative
to th
e public demand based on their needs.

Hitherto

above, the existing post conflict situation in
Southern

Sudan provides for a
federal system of government where the national
institutional

arrangements are
hierarchically

patterned constitutionally into three
levels of GOSS,
State

and Local
Government. According
ly

local government institutions exist in each level of
government as shown in the table below.




Government Level

Local Government Institution


Number

Responsibility

1

GOSS

Local Government Board


1

Corporate policy making,

Legislation and regulation

2

State

State Ministries of Local

Government

and Law Enforcement

10

Functional policy making,

Legislation, regulation and

Coordination.

3

Local Government

Local Government Councils


79

Service de
livery planning,

Programming and
implementation.



1.4.1

Local Government Board


The Local Government
Board
is constitutionally provided for as an advisory body to
the President of the Government of Southern Sudan GOSS on local government
affairs vide article
173(2) and (3) of the Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan
(ICSS). Unless mandate by law it has no executive authority and power to enforce
law. However, the GOSS has the prerogative to establish a ministry of local at its
own level as a matter of polit
ical expediency as the institution of government that
exercises the right to formulate policies, prepare bills to be submitted to the Southern
Sudan Legislative Assembly for enactment of local government laws and legislations
which it can enforce, accordin
gly within its own jurisdiction.


In
consultations

with members of the GOSS leadership namely, H
.E. the legal
Advisor to H.E. the President, H.E. Minister for Legal Affairs and Constitutional
Development and H.E. of Public Service Labour and Hum
an Resource

Development, the members of the Technical Team of the SPLM Secretariat of Local
Government were in February 2006 assured of the possibility of the assignment of
executive functions and powers to the Local Government Board, thereby warranting
the Board a m
inisterial status and granting it Chair ministerial portfolio and therefore

16

the right

to

present Bills to the legislature as provided for under
the

ICSS. The
common stand of the three leaders was that of the establishment of a Local
Government Board in t
he Office of the President as provided for in the ICSS to begin
with as a platform in which the dialogue for the cr
eation and establishment of

the
Ministry of Local
Government at

the GOSS level shall be advanced.
Henceforth the
proposal presented to H.E. t
he President of the Government of
S
outhern Sudan for
the establishment of the local government Board took into account the
recommendation of the above mentioned consultations.


On the above grounds, the Local Government Board has the responsibility for the

corporate organization of Local Government at the GoSS level and that involves the
following:


a.

Adoption of local government policy framework to guide the formulation and
promulgation of all local government national legislations at GOSS level.

b.

The prepar
ation of the professional draft for the formulation and enactment of
Local Government Act for Southern Sudan.

c.

Proposing modalities for the determination

of the number of local government
councils based on acceptable criteria.

d.

Proposing the formation
of loc
al government boundary commission to identify
and delineate the
boundaries
of each county.

e.

Issue of warrants of establishment for the creation of approved councils by the
legislative
Assembly
of Southern Sudan.

f.

Setting national standards for the recruitmen
t, training, management and
performance appraisal of local government staff.

g.

Reviewing for re
-
appropriation of the local government resources, revenue
and recommend relevant model for local government grant allocation and
disbursement to ensure that each l
ocal authority has sufficient revenue that
makes it viable.

h.

Adoption of national models for Local Government planning, resource
management, service delivery and local development programming.

i.

The determination of appropriate transitional arrangements and m
echanisms
required for the smooth transformation of the Local Government Councils
from their present rudimentary stage to integrated modern Local Authorities in
Southern Sudan.

j.

Adoption of common norms and values to orient local government
administration t
o be more responsive to the people, pragmatic in service
delivery and palpable in advancing the course of local development. and

k.

Providing patronage to
the Local Government Councils in guarding against
unnecessary State interference into local government a
ffairs and any possible
misuse of State authority in the supervision of local authorities within its
jurisdiction.


1.4.2.

State
Ministries

of Local Government


There are 10 States Ministries of
Local

Government in Southern Sudan, one in each
State, They d
o

not have uniform titles but do combine

Local Government and law
enforcement functions in common. Their powers and competences are ascribed to
the coordination of
this Service delivery function

that are performed by the urban and
rural authorities in thei
r
Local Councils

but
inspected and supervised by the

17

authorities of the state Ministry of Local Government. Therefore, the responsibilities
of the authorities of the State Ministry of the Local Government are centred on
functional policy making and legisla
tion at the state level of Government so as to
effectively coordinate service delivery function at the Local Government levels.


State policy and legislation on Local Government


Constitutionally, the state has t
he statutory authority and
reserves the ri
ght to
promulgate policies and legislations for the functional organization of Local
Government activities within its own jurisdiction. The functional organization of Local
Government activities by the State Ministry of Local Government involves the
follow
ing:



(a)

The issue by the State

Local Government Ministry Authorities

of sectoral
policies to guide the
functional
organisation of Local Government Councils
functions

in line with State functional operations requirements.

(b)

The adoption by the State of integ
rated institutional planning arrangements to
harmonise the State and Local Government plans and programs
in order

to
avoid parallelism in implementation and output focus.

(c)

The development of State framework for effective coordination of Local
Government Cou
ncils affairs between the State Ministries and Local
Authorities and between the Local Authorities and Local Community
institutions.

(d)

The organisation of State periodic transfers of Local Government
Administrators and departmental Senior Staff in the genera
l list from one
County to another within the State in line with Local Government Board
guidelines.

(e)

The organisation of State financial schedules for periodic disbursement of
grants from State Treasury and making similar arrangements for the internal
and ex
ternal audit of the Local Authorities accounts.

(f)

The organisation of inter
-
county fora for the building of local coalitions
between the local authorities, civil society organisations, the private sector
and community based organisations to foster good relat
ions amongst one
another for full participation in service delivery.

(g)

The organisation of State Authorities routine field visits to the Counties to
inspect, monitor, appraise and evaluate local authorities operations and Staff
performances so to ensure effe
ctive service delivery to the people and
progress in local development activities.

(h)

The adoption of State human resource management systems through which
Local Government Staff are effectively supervised and disciplined in
accordance with Public Service Rul
es and Regulations.

(i)

The organisation and sensitisation of the local population of the Counties in
their preparation for the periodic local elections according to the National or
GoSS election rules and
regulations. and

(j)

The organisation and sensitization of

the local population of the Counties to
prepare themselves for full participation in national population, economic and
natural resources Census according to National or GoSS rules and
regulations.



State Coordination of Local Government affairs


18


The coo
rdination of L
ocal Government affairs by the State M
inistry of Local
Government entails the harmonious networking of Local Government service
delivery and rule of law activities to create the enabling environment needed for
effectiveness in
functional

perf
ormance
, responsiveness to people

s demands and
the
sustenance

of the entities of Local Government authorities in perpetuation.


In the pr
a
ctice
of governance, local Government authorities plan and implement their
service delivery and local development pr
ograms that are executed locally to achieve
their goals.

In this context t
he responsibility of the State M
inistry of Local
Government is to develop
that coordinative mechanism

by means of which Local
Authority plans and programs are in cooperated into its
State integral
plans and
programs as separate components while preparing strategies for the supervision of
their implementation processes on ground locally. Also the State authorities have to
adopt appropriate methods for reporting to the State Government
on the progress of
work of the Local Authorities during the implementation processes of their plans and
programs.


On the other hand, the law enforcement activities undertaken to ensure the effective
management

of rule of law within the State are directly

carried out at the Local
Government level but coordinated by the State Ministry of Loca
l Government at the
State level. That is to say, in their respective fields of public service, the police,
prisons, fire fighting and wildlife forces are service delive
rs who
se

functional
activities are supervised and reported on by the Local Authorities on ground in their
respective
Local Councils
. For this reason these forces are directly accountable for
the services they provide to the people and the Local Authorities

but are answerable
to the authorities of the Sta
te Ministry of Local Government. So the responsibility of
the Authorities of the State Ministry of the Local Government over the
L
aw
E
nforcement
A
gencies is that of sectoral guidance and regulation of servic
e delivery
operation while coordinating the service function they perform at local level.


State Local Government Functions


As a sub
-
national level of government and in the context of the federated Southern
Sudan today, the State has the statutory respo
nsibility
to

perform those local
government functions previously performed by the Province Executive Council (PEC)
under the 1971 Local Government Act. Constitutionally the State government has
the competence for the discharge of the secondary service fun
ctions of Local
Government as prescribed in schedule “C” of the Interim Constitution of Southern
Sudan. That is the State government has the authority and powers to provide
secondary education, health, public works, water, agricultural extension services,

security services, to mention but a few, thereby warranting it the service delivery
status
. So each State government has to plan and program the establishment,
development, construction and maintenance of secondary schools, hospitals, water
supply plants
, inter
-
county road network agricultural training centres and sustain
them.


The fact that these services are provided to the people by State
authorities

within the
territorial area of the local government councils, the local authorities have shared
resp
onsibilities with the State authorities in the inspection,
supervision

and

19

coordination of these local government functions performed by the State
government

far away from their head offices. For practical expediency, the State authorities will
have to est
ablish State institutions within each Local Council and develop
appropriate administrative mechanisms through which State staff under the guidance
of the County Commissioner or the Mayor in the case of a fully established U
rban
A
uthority.
Currently such a
rrangements are not in existence but will have to be
organised to ensure effectiveness in the secondary service delivery and give the
people their right to a say in the development processes f these services and their
right to participate in service provis
ion, monitoring, and evaluation stages to
ascertain the progress in the delivery of services to their communities.


Concurrency in State/Local Government Service Delivery


Ther
e

exists a cas
e

of concurrency in serv
i
ce delivery in Southern Sudan today tha
t
demands administrative settlement.

Currently the existing primary and secondary
services are concurrently provided at the State and Local Government levels without
d
ue

regard to the constitutional provisions which assign their functions and
responsibili
ty to either level of government.


At the State level, primary and secondary services are provided by the State
authorities in those State constituted out of the former garrison towns of Southern
Sudan under the Khartoum government. These are Central Equa
t
oria, Western
Bahr el Ghazal, Northern Bahr el Ghazal, Upper Nile and Unity which to a certain
extent maintain their functional capacities to deliver services to the people. In these
States there exists community primary and secondary institutions owned
by the
people, but support by the State government. In the other States the government of
Southern Sudan has not yet taken responsibility for the provision of both primary and
secondary services, particularly those States constituted out of the former SPL
M/A
liberated areas. At the local government level primary and secondary services

by
different providers

under the guidance of local authorities in those Counties which
exist in the former SPLM/A liberated areas. In this case the service
s

are mainly
prov
ided by international Non
-
governmental organisations and United Nations
agencies. At the same time there exist both primary and secondary service
institutions in these Counties, owned by the community and supported by donor
agencies.


Therefore currently
the situation is that the State provides both primary and
secondary se
rvices
and the
Counties (depending on
the
level
of
NGO support)
provide both primary and secondary service too. This suggests a confused state of
affairs in need of immediate
re
-
alignmen
t

and organisation, clear government policy
and support to resolve this problem of concurrency.





1.4.3.

Current
Local Government Authorities


The current Local Government Councils are not warranted as yet to operate as
local authorities with legal status. At
the moment there is only one type of
Local Council namely the County which is subdivided into Payams and Bomas
as its Administrative Units. They are 79 in number and are not classified
into
urban and rural councils. Some
of these Counties are a combination

of rural

20

and urban councils which are supposed to be two

separate

local authorities
e.g. Juba and Malakal which combine their former
Rural and Town Councils
into a

single County today.


Many of these Counties are not viable authorities
in terms of poor re
source base and some few do not even qualify for creation
as local govern
ment councils as their respective

populations are less than
30,000 people for example.


Although the SPLM/A tried to establish civil administration in the liberated
area
s

way back in
1994, the local administrative system lacked qualified
personnel and the rules and regulations applied were basically military in
nature. In composition, almost all the existing Counties do n
ot have elected
Councillors nor do they have the

sectoral depart
ments

which are the main
service providing instituti
on of the local governme
nt councils and the few of
them

which have

such departments maintain them in name.

In structure there
are on average 4
-
7 Payams in each County, and 6
-
7 Bomas in each Payam. The
po
pulation of each Boma is currently between 3,000


5,000 people and is too
small to constitute a basic administrative unit of local government.

Very few of
these Councils are seriously involved in service delivery to the people as of
now mainly due to lack

of resources but largely due to poor organisation.


The war that raged in Southern Sudan for the last 22 year
s…(COPY FROM
BELOW)


With respect to the Traditional Authorities, the Chiefs do perform their
administrative functions

at the Boma level but with
limited power to exercise
authority. They are generally recognised by the people
but marginalised by the
military and civil authorities alike on both sides in Southern Sudan. Like in
many countries in Africa, there are two systems of traditional
authoritie
s

Kingdoms

and Chiefdoms. While Kingdoms assume some forms of sovereign
status within the Sudan, the Chiefdoms have either autonomous existence
within the nation or are constituent parts of Kingdoms in the various regions
of Southern Sudan.
Although the tw
o systems of traditional authorities
maintain uniform traditional norms and customary standards, they do vary in
administrative and customary judicial structures, particularly among the
chiefdoms. In Upper Nile for example, there are Paramount Chiefs, Vice
-
Paramo
unt Chiefs, Head Chiefs,
Sub
-
Chiefs and Headman. In Equatoria and
Bahr El Gha
zal
there are Paramount Chiefs known at times as Head
-
Chiefs,
Executive Chiefs (BGR) or Chiefs ( ER), Sub
-
Chiefs and Headman. While each
of these levels of chieftaincies h
ave own customary
law courts including the
Headman, and an additional Boarder Chiefs Court in Upper Nile, there are only
two courts in Equatoria and Bahr El Ghazal and these are

the Executive Chiefs
Court (BGR) or Chiefs “A” Court (ER) and the Regional Cou
rt (BGR) or
Paramount Chiefs “B” Court (ER). There existed in the past a “C” Court at the
District level as an appeal customary court constituted by the District
Commissioner with the membership of the Paramount Chiefs to discharge
cross
-
customary cases or

a
ppeals against cases judged by the

Paramount
Chief
s
. These type
s

of

customary

courts existed in all Districts

all over the
Southern Sudan

and met once or twice a year, but with the collapse of the
local authority systems during the war they do not funct
ion as previously was
the case.


21


The naming of the Customary Law Courts and the titles of Customary Judges
changed during the war causing confusions all over Southern Su
d
an.

In the
liberated areas the statutory and customary law courts were uniformly named

as County, Payam and Boma courts

while those in the garrison towns were
named as Native Courts. I
n 2004 the County and Payam courts

in the liberated
area

were legally constituted

by the Judiciary of New Sudan

as statutory
courts, while the Boma Court
s

est
ablished as a customary law courts thereby
reducing the number and levels of the latter to only one on the contrarily.
These formations of the law courts were based on the understanding in 1994
that the Counties created then were Provinces which warranted
the
establishment of

Statutory

Province Circuits, and the Payams were
Districts
where Statutory Magistrate Courts were to be established. However, with the
subsequent proliferation of local government councils between 1994 and 2005,
the Counties created in

1994 with Provincial status were s
pli
t into between 2
-
4
new Counties
.

In other words the Payams of 1994 became Counties of District
status
where only Statutory

Magistrate Courts were established

and the
Bomas became New Payams

with ordinary status of an A
dministrative Unit
with the jurisd
iction of the

customary law court
s

of the second instance. This
re
sulted in the creation of

more new small villages named as Bomas

with the

jurisdiction of the customary court
s

of the first instance.


Nevertheless, the
N
ew Sudan Judiciary and now the Judiciary of Southern Sudan maintain
s

in
its statutes the naming of uniform courts in Southern Sudan as County, Payam
and Boma courts.

As such the names of courts established today in Southern
Sudan do not distinguish betwee
n statutory and customary law courts as a
case in p
oint to be resolved in due course.

On the contrary though the
customary law courts in
most regions of the Southern Sudan

today

are
established by County Commissioner (not by law) and are n
am
ed C
ounty,
Paya
m

and Boma Courts in both the urban and rural areas.





The customary laws of the people of Southern Sudan vary according to
variations in the nations ethnic groupings.
With an approximate total of 151
tribes (out of the 252 tribes of the Sudan), the Sou
thern Sudan is expected to
have up to 100 customary laws. Some of these laws could be harmonised and
classified into some cluster forms of customary laws regimes

except that even
within the nation
-
states of the South there exist many variations in the cult
ural
traits of the sub
-
divisions or sections of a single tribe which makes the
unification of customary laws difficult.

For example
:



1. I
n the Dinka nation the customary practices of the

tribal

sections of Dinka

Rec

and Malual

of Northern Bahr el Ghazal

differ from those of

Dinka
Agar and
G
ok
of Southern Bahr el Ghazal and the Dinka Ngok of Abyei.

However,
unifications of these customary practices for the purpose of codification is
poss
ible as was the case of Wan
-
Ale
r.

2. In

the

Lou nation the

customary
practices of the Shilluk, Jur, Pari and Acholi
sub
-
divisions

differ from one another.


22

3. In the Nuer nation there are differences in cultural practices between the
Western and Eastern Nuer except that harmonisation aimed at the
establishment of Nuer custom
ary law regime is possible.

4.
The customary laws of the Anyuak of Eastern Upper Nile differ from those of
its neighbours the Murule who are

the kin of the Didinga and Boya of Eastern
Equatoria.







5
. Within the Nilo
-
Hamites nation

the cultural prac
tices of
the Toposa and Lotuho
differ and

differ as well

between the
m

and their kin
of

Bari, Mundari, Fajulu, Kakwa
and Kuku

who however have some common practices
.

6. Among the Bantus, the customary laws of the Azande, Balanda, Baka and Mundu
differ from

one another, and

7. The customary laws of the Sudanic Ethnic groups of the Ndogo and Kereshi of
Western Bahr el Ghazal and the Moru, Avukaya, Madi, and Kaliko of Western and
Central Equatoria to mention but few

differ considerably from one another.


With
these differences

in customary practices, it may only be possible to classify
the

few

ethnic groups in Southern Sudan with common traditions and customs into
single customary law regimes to warrant codification, otherwise most of these groups
will have to
maintain their distinct customary laws as common laws. The other
difficulty in codification may arise from the conservative nature of the customary laws
of the people of Southern Sudan

which are in most cases gender in
-
sensitive and do
not confirm to natio
nal nor international standards.

In judicial practices the

main
issue
s

of codification of customary laws in Southern Sudan

are those

of the interface
between statutory and customary laws that are yet to be decided as well as the
competences of the statutor
y law courts and the customary law courts which

are

as
yet to be determined.



(to be copied and pasted

to same paragraph above) …….

The war that raged in South Sudan for the last 22 years has devastated the region in
many ways. Physical infrastructure got destroyed as well as
human resources. A

good number of the trained workforce

either died during

the war or are in the Diaspra


Hence the non viability of the 98 Counties

as of now is partly a function of delays in
the
ir
reorganisation and indecisiveness in fund transfers to the local government
authori
ties. In particular however the
non
-
functioning of most of proliferated local
government councils is largely due to:


(a)

Delays in timely establishment of the GOSS authority

with the responsibility
to reorganise the highly proliferated number of Counties. Against this
backdrop, the Technical Committee of the SPLM Secretariat of Local
Government did propose in 2004 a limited number of
Local Councils

of 7 in
each State (6 Count
ies and 1 Town Council) with provisions for special
cases.

(b)

Delays in the determination of the total workforce as a matter of GOSS policy
for the establishment for each level of government in Southern Sudan,
resulting

in

the maintenance of over staffed leve
ls of the Counties
establishments
.

(c)

The
incompetence

of the local authorities in the management of the
Local
Councils

that resulted from handing decision making powers to one or two

23

individuals, the Commissioner or the Executive Director and not
to an elec
ted
council

as case today.

(d)

Lack of financial resources for effective management of the councils
. This is
caused by

the collection of revenue from limited local sources and the poor
collection of
Social Service Tax as the

main source. These two reasons all
combined limit the actual amount of local revenue raised locally.

High rate of
corruption without accountability is the third reason for limited collection of
local revenue.

Unless the local government system in Southern Sudan is
reorganised and reformed t
he lack of financial resources will remain a major
bottle neck for management of the Counties.


Therefore, by and large the case for the existence of non
-
functional and hence non
-
viable Counties in Southern Sudan today is the case of justice delayed becomi
ng
justice denied to Local Government. In this regard however, the position of the Local
Government Board is not the standoff for either State or

Local Government but the
urgency for the establishment of
83

viable Local Authorities in Southern Sudan given
the constitutional provision that recognises local government as the level closest to
the people.


1.4.4.

Current organisation of
Local Government

(NOTE, EDITED)


During the movement local government in the SPLM/A liberated areas were
organised on adhoc basis t
hrough decree
s issued

for the creation of local
government councils. Initia
lly the total number of counties

was decided in

the SPLM
N
ational Convention of 1994, to
a total of 49 councils. More C
ounties

were created
by Presidential Decrees to respond to
political pressures in the movement. This
raised the total number form
49 to 98, between 1994 and 2005 some of which will
not qualify to be Local Autho
rities when determined
on the basis of

a
standard

criteria for creation and establishment of Local Gover
nment Councils.

No policies
and legislations were made to guide the organisation of these councils and so they
functioned without any legislative framework until today.


During the same period local government in the garrison towns was o
rganised on the
ba
sis of

Khartoum

Central G
overnment decentralization pol
ices and national
legislation.
Local
Government

Acts were promulgated to guide the organisation of
the local
government

councils except that they were ideological based on

Shari’a
Laws. While the num
ber of local government authorities

in Southern Sudan in the
garrison towns

was maintained at approximately 55, the authority and powers of
these councils were removed and vested at the State level.

So essentially
Local
Councils

were no longer corporate bo
dies, responsible of running their own affairs
losing the status to sue or be sued as a corporate entity.


There is therefore a glaring need for the development of the legal framework for the
organisation of local government in Southern Sudan, in both fo
rmer SPLM liberated
and the former Khartoum administered garrison towns.



1.5.

Current
Functions

of
L
ocal
G
overnment



24

From the field study reports of 2004 (leading to the 3rd Framework) conducted by
the local government technical team and the Three Team A
ssessment Mission of the
Local government Board of August to October 2006, tend to point to common
indicators on the functions of local government in Southern Sudan today.


2.

By and large most local government councils are none functional,
i.e. they do not p
erform the duties of the local council through which
services are delivered to the people
;

3.

The few existing services in the former liberated areas were and are
still being provided by International Non
-
Governmental
Organizations and United Nations Agencies
;

4.

Services in the former garrison towns are poorly provided directly
by the State level authorities;

5.

Generally the services are inadequately provided to the people in all
parts of Southern Sudan;

6.

Chiefs in the former liberated areas were not allowed to per
form
their administrative and traditional functions without political
affiliations, while those in the former garrison towns performed
politically designed functions to suit the purpose of Shari’a laws and
the Khartoum government policies. In fact the appo
intment of
traditional leaders

in the former garrison towns mostly, and to a
lesser extent in the SPLM liberated areas,

was on the basis of party
lines;

7.

Currently, it is
only
the appointed
C
ommissioner
s and their
appointed E
xecut
ive D
irectors
are
who are r
esponsible

for local
government service provision, but are failing dismally in the task.



1.6.

Current
Resources

of local government


Local government, as with the other levels of government has two crucial

but
inadequate resources
,

the human resources

an
d
the

financial resources.


1.6.1.

Human
Resources


With respect to human resources, Southern Sudan

there is a critical shortage of
qualified personnel across the board, and even more so in local governance
specifically.


According the recently completed

Three Team Assessment Mission of the Local
Government Board, there a serious problem of highly inflated of local government
staff that is not qualified and/or competent to be employed as local government
administrators and staff. Most of the staff in bot
h the former garrison towns and the
former SPLM liberated areas are of advanced age and minimum ability to continue
as productive staff.

In the former liberated areas, although some in
-
service training were provided to
update the skills of local governme
nt officers it was not enough to prepare them to
now manage the reestablishment of local government in Southern Sudan.


A head count of the State and local government staff assessment mission report
conducted by the SPLM in 2005 in the former garrison town
s, showed that 80% of

25

the total staff were unclassified and only 20% were classified. In the majority of the
former liberated areas, the majority of simply have not staff, apart from the appointed
Commissioner and the appointed Executive Director. As a r
esult, to fill the gap, the
Commissioner
s

are recruiting more unqualified staff.


The establishment ceiling for the local government staff has not been determined as
yet and so the local authorities so not prepare establishment nominal roll showing
the to
tal number of posts, filled and vacant. No Public Service regulations were used
by those in the former liberated areas, while those in the former garrison towns are
using outdated Public Service Rules and Regulations, based on Shari’a, which need
t be rev
ised and updated. The system of maintain two types of local government
staff, i.e. those appointed directly by the council and those seconded from the central
Khartoum and sub
-
national governments still continues in the former garrison towns
and well as in

the former liberated areas. This system has been abused
b
y
authorities at eh State and Central government levels, resulting in the inflated
numbers of local government works currently employed.


1.6.2.

Financial

Resources


Currently there are three desig
nated sources of local government revenue, namely
local revenue

(local taxes and rates)
, government
grants
and donor grants
.
The
local

revenues

are supposed to be collected in a
systematic
, self sustaining method
if they are to support the financial requi
rement of

local government. However in
Southern Sudan at
moment there are no financial rules and regulations to guide
revenue collection at the local government level. Where same rules and regulations
exist, they are predominantly under the Shari’a laws
of the zaka’a, in which collection
is done through the religious institutions.
There are therefore no financial records or
no prescribed financial forms used in revenue collection and utilisation.
Subsequently there is a high level of incompetence in a st
aff that has had no training
in sort of systems in the last 23 years, thus creating a fertile ground for the challenge
of corruption.


Additionally, no tax schedules have been put in place and the tax rates have not
been revised since they were enacted in
the 1940s and 1950s. There is no incentive
for revenue collection, particularly for the social service taxes collected by the
traditional authorities. Whatever little money is collected is ultimately use
d

by
unauthorised person in all Counties.


Grants


While in the former garrison towns local government grants were disbursed through
the States, no similar system existed in the SPLM/A liberated areas since there were
no central grants, in the first place. In the former garrison town though, throughout
the

war period

there
were

no budget authority determined
, and so no local
government budgets were prepared and m
uch of the money transferred to the
councils
was

not put into
government

treasury. It was basically money that was
shuffled between the Wali, to t
he Commissioner and then to a few selected
privileged groups or individually. Salaries of staff in the local council were not paid
on a regular basis, except in 2005 with the signing of the CPA.

Similarly no local

26

government budget authorities were estab
lished in the SPLM/A liberated areas, no
budget were prepared and no money was remitted to treasury, or its equivalent.


Between 1994 and 1996, the support from the international community was focused
on humanitarian relief, with limited service delivery s
upport in very few liberated
Counties which were relatively peaceful. From 1997, although relief had to continue
,
the SPLM/A adopted a principle of
Peace through Development in which the aim
was to shift donor support to service delivery, so as to provide

services and
development in the SPLM/A liberated areas. As a result were now channelled into
service delivery through the South Relief and Rehabilitation Association (now known
as Southern Sudan Relief Commission (SSRC).
However, up to today, it is
impo
ssible to determine how much in grants was spent on development in Southern
Sudan and how they were managed.


Current Practices
Management

of local government


Presently Local Government is poorly managed in Southern Sudan. In the real sense
of the word se
rvice delivery in Southern Sudan, services have almost always been
managed at the sub
-
national level of local government and not by the local
authorities themselves. This started during the period of the Province Executive
Council (PEC) through the periods

of Regional governments and now to the States
as the case today where services are directly managed at the State level. Practically,
it is the State managing local government while the local authorities simply do the
facilitation of the processes. For ex
ample teachers are paid and transferred by the
State and not by local councils. So the management of local government remains at
the daily routine level that is devoid of any real authority, and sanctioned by directive
from the State. The main preoccupati
on of local government, therefore, is
maintenance of law and order. The local government councils do not have their own
plans and programs that guide service delivery and programme management.


There is no management policy in place, no programme guidelin
es and the resource
inputs are not determined, therefore no real sense of direction exists. In other words
the thought process that has to go into designing the management processes in
local government is null and void. The local government management sys
tem has
disintegrated. For example, the revenue collection system is non
-
existent, the public
service system of service without fear and favour in personnel recruitment, training,
promotions, transfers and retirements do not exist. The management systems

are
effectively networked so it is not possible to coordinate and control the local
government functions. The system of coalition building for service provision with
other service providers in the County has to be harmonized to ensure cohesion in
contrac
ting service delivery responsibility to the civil society organisations, private
sector and other agencies within the local authority.


27


2.

The
Local Government Framework


2.1

The
Purpose of the Local Government Framework



Therefore the
Local Government Fra
mework is the foundation stone designed for
the production of a policy umbrella document needed to guide the legislation of
local government polices, laws and regulations required to direct the course of
proper establishment of viable Local Government Auth
orities in Southern Sudan
,
which has suffered 50 years of centralised governments, marginalisation,
mismanagement, lack of service delivery, denial of social, political and economic
participation and development.
.


In purpose, the main aim for the develop
ment of the Local Government
Framework for Southern Sudan was to determine the reasons for the failure of
the Local Government system to deliver goods and services to the people
adequately. It was also aimed at the adoption of the most desirable course of

action needed to redress the systems defects so as to put in place viable
institutions of local government capable of serving and developing the people
effectively.


In retrospect the 21 years war of liberation wagged by the
SPLM/A

in the Sudan
during the

period 1983
-
2005 caused the disintegration of the local government
system in Southern Sudan. The service provision systems of education, health,
water supply, public works etc were rendered non operational, and the order of
the day of general insecurity f
urther rendered local development impossible. As a
result goods and services were in short supply and dwindled progressively as the
as the war situation progressed and so the service delivery situation
progressively deteriorated year by year in concurrency
. Equally as well, prior to
the liberation war period the local authorities in Southern Sudan exercised only
deconcentrated and delegated authority and power with the main assigned
function being the maintenance of law and order as the responsibilities fo
r service
delivery and development were the prerogative of either the Provincial Authorities
in the South or the Central government institution of government in Khartoum in
the North far away from the people.


a)

A vision for Local Government in Southern Suda
n;

b)

A basis for consultation and negotiation of the systems, structures and
functions for local government with all sectors of government, local
communities and external agencies;


c)

A precursor to a Local Government Act for Southern Sudan.

d)

A guide for international donors and the NGOs in contributing to
programmes for recovery and development ensuring they give appropriate
attention to the involvement of local government in pla
nning and
implementation.

e)

The

Local Government system, established under the Local Government
Act should be consistent with the CPA, Interim National Constitution,
Constitution of Southern Sudan, the Constitutional Provision creating
States and should adhe
re to GoSS laws.


28

f)

In performance of their functions, the Local Governments should not
impede or prejudice the exercise of the executive, legislative or judicial
authority of the Government of National Unity, Government of Southern
Sudan (GoSS), and State Go
vernments.

g)

County, Municipal and Town Councils should be bodies corporate with
perpetual succession and a common seal and may sue or be sued in their
respective corporate names.



In conclusion, the primary aim for the development of the local government
f
ramework for Southern Sudan is to establish the reasons for which the local
government system disintegrated and the authorities became and remained non
-
functional to date. This sparked the search for a relevant system of local
government that is suitable
to the post
-
conflict situation in Southern Sudan upon
which viable local authorities can be created and established to serve the people
adequately. It was anticipated that with the findings of research works, field
studies, study tours and wide consultati
ons with stakeholders and professionals
in the fields of government, there would be ample opportunities to develop those
local government policies and legislations required as vital inputs for the adoption
and establishment of a new system of local governm
ent in Southern Sudan. It
was envisaged that the new system of local government will build in the
modalities and mechanisms through which the statutory and traditional systems
of governments could be harmoniously integrated as the means for the creation
of

the enabling environment for the people to play their central roles in taking
local government decisions while owning the processes of their self rule locally to
make the new system relevant. Finally, the need for the adoption and
development of reliable

local government resource base and the establishment of
modern local government management systems which allow for proper planning
and programming at the local level was envisaged as crucial for effective service
delivery and local development, if the pur
pose for local government is to be
achieved at all.


2.2


The
Concepts of the Local Government Framework


2.2.1.

What is Local Government?


UN Technical Team led by D
r.

Medic made a study in 1962 and produced a report
titled, “Democracy Decentralization an
d Development” defined Local Government

as:


“a sub
-
national government that has the power to impose laws and where members
of the government are elected or selected and has the power to collect taxes

.


The definition of Dr. Medic is representative of loc
al government in a unitary system
of government in which there are two levels of government, the central level and the
local government. The later had autonomous authority and power within the central.
Therefore the definition of Dr. Medic does not infor
m the situation prevailing in
Southern Sudan today.