LIMITED DEVOLVED FEDERAL SYSTEM AS POSSIBLE OPTION: UNDERSTANDING THE TRENDS AND PROCESS OF CONSTITUTION MAKING IN SOUTH SUDAN
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22159/ijss.2026v14i2.51158Keywords:
Federal, Devolved,, Constitution, Option, Scenario, Limited,, DevolutionAbstract
South Sudan is a young nation that has been plagued by conflict and instability since gaining independence in 2011. To address the root causes of this instability, it is crucial to consider different options for governance structures, including devolution of power to regional governments. This paper argues for the implementation of a limited devolved federal system in South Sudan as a possible solution to the country’s governance challenges. A limited devolved federal system would involve decentralizing power to regional governments while still maintaining a strong central government. This system would allow for greater autonomy and decision-making power at the regional level, which could help address issues of marginalization and inequality that have fueled conflict in the country. At the same time, a limited devolved federal system would ensure that the central government retains control over key areas such as defense and foreign policy, thereby preventing the fragmentation of the country. To successfully implement a limited devolved federal system in South Sudan, it is important to engage in inclusive and participatory dialogue with all stakeholders, including government officials, rebel groups, civil society organizations, and marginalized communities. This process should be guided by principles of transparency, accountability, and respect for human rights to build trust and consensus among diverse groups. While the road to implementing a limited devolved federal system in South Sudan may be fraught with challenges, the potential benefits of this governance structure are significant. By devolving power to regional governments, South Sudan could potentially reduce conflict, improve service delivery, and promote stability and development across the country. Ultimately, a limited devolved federal system offers a promising option for South Sudan to address its governance challenges and build a more inclusive and sustainable future for all its citizens.
References
Adewale, T. (2016). Affirmative action and devolution of power in Nigeria. Journal of Law and Social Sciences, 5(2), 1-18.
Anderson, J. (2012). Power and authority in a federal system. Journal of Government Studies, 35(2), 43-57.
Arblaster, K., & Chalmers, J. (2011). The paradox of asymmetric federalism and changing party politics: The Australian case. Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 41(3), 491-514.
Australian Government. (2021). GST Revenue Sharing. Retrieved from https://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/business-and-industry/budgets-and-taxation/gst-revenue-sharing
Bakvis, H., & Jarvis, M. D. (2012). Intergovernmental relations in Canada: Emerging trends and developments. In From new public management to new political governance: Essays in honour of peter C. Aucoin (pp. 275-302). Kalamazoo, MI: W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research.
Banerjee, P. (2018). Affirmative action in India: Past, present, and future. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 15(1), 50-74.
Barcellos, I., & McNollgast, M. (2014). Devolution in a unified judicial system: An empirical investigation of case processing time in Brazil’s state courts. The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, 30(3), 628-650.
Bel, G. (2019). Decentralization, governance, and economic performance: A review of the empirical evidence. Public Administration Review, 79(1), 78-92.
Bergstresser, H.A. (2016). Coordinating multiple levels of government: Lessons from federal systems. Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, 18(2), 126-140.
Bird, R.M. (2014). Intergovernmental fiscal relations: Universal principles, local applications. Annual Review of Resource Economics, 6, 259-279.
Burdett, J., & Sudbury, A. (2019). The coherence and effectiveness of EU external migration policies. In EU Immigration and asylum law (pp. 33- 58). Germany: Springer.
Burlingame, R. D. (2013). Comparative constitutional law: Cases, materials, and problems. United States: West Academic.
Cheibub, J. A., & Elkins, Z. (2001). The rise and decline of military rule. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Daly, H., Farley, J., & Batker, D. (2005). Local control for local ecosystems: Tailoring municipal land trusts for bioregional sustainability. Ecological Economics, 53(1), 151-166.
Ebel, R. D., & Yilmaz, S. (2002). On the measurement and impact of fiscal decentralization. Washington: World Bank Publications.
Fagan, C., & Davies, J. (2017). Policing and crime control in local communities. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
German Federal Ministry of Finance. (2021). Equalization and basic fiscal relations. Retrieved from https://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/ web/en/issues/federalism/federalism.html
Government of Canada. (2021). Provincial and territorial natural resources.
Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/services/business/natural-resources/provincial-territorial.html
Hamilton-Hart, N. (2009). Federal governance: Limited devolution as an alternative to decentralization in developing countries. World Development, 37(11), 1742-1754.
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233-243.
Ishmael, E. (2018). Devolution and County Governments in crisis? beyond the hustle of institutional change. Johannesburg: Africa Portal.
Joshi, D. (2019). Federalism in crisis: The decline and revival of self-rule arrangements. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Kamrul, H. (2020). A Comparative Study on Fiscal Federalism and Decentralization in India, USA and Canada. International Journal of Social Science and Economic Research, 2(12), 784-794.
Latham, M. (2012). Federalism: The Australian experience. Melbourne University Law Review, 36(1), 214-230.
Leon, R. (2010). Renewing the role of traditional leaders towards sustainable communities in Southern Ghana. International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, Economic and Social Sustainability, 6(1), 27-36.
Lijphart, A. (1977). Democracy in plural societies: A comparative exploration. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Machakanja, P. (2015). The role of traditional leaders in development decision-making processes: A case of rural communities in Zimbabwe. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 6(3), 321-327.
McGarity, T. (2018). Policy disasters: Federal emergency declarations and the limits of devolution. Environmental Law Reporter, 58(11), 10-14.
Mkandawire, T. (2014). Neopatrimonialism and the political economy of economic performance in Africa: Critical Reflections. African Development Review, 26(1), 2-14.
Nadler, J. D., & Giammo, J. L. (2019). The politics of dual federalism. American Politics Research, 47(5), 935-957.
Nuseibeh, F. (2017). Challenges of devolution in federal systems: Implementing the Yemeni peace agreement. Regional and Federal Studies, 27(2), 195-220.
Olowolaju, P. (2015). Resource control and fiscal federalism in Nigeria: Issues and challenges. Journal of African Studies and Development, 7(7), 254-263.
Ponsaers, P., & De Kimpe, S. (2019). Policing inner-city neighbourhoods in global cities: A comparative analysis of Antwerp, Brussels, Chicago and Los Angeles. European Journal of Criminology, 16(3), 318-336.
Rodden, J. (2010). Federalism and allocation of powers in a federal system. In: Oxford Handbooks Online. Retrieved from: https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780199546213.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199546213-e-7
Schomerus, M. (2016). Implications of power fragmentation for stability and development in South Sudan. Geneva: Conflict, Peacebuilding and Development.
Sharma, R. K. (2016). Indian federalism: Competency-cum co-operative era. Delhi: Neeraj Publishing House.
Shugart, M. S., & Carey, J. M. (1992). Presidents and assemblies: Constitutional design and electoral dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Simon, R. (2016). The limits of presidential power in a federal system. Journal of Constitutional Law, 42(3), 75-89.
Sisay, Y. (2018). Ethiopia: Early signs of political change, economic impact and negative influence of the dragon policy. Ethiopian Journal of Economics, 27(2), 1-20.
Sorens, J. (2015). Six Normative arguments for decentralisation. In The Political Economy of Territorial Cleavages (pp. 17-34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Teorell, J., De Waele, J. M., Elias, A., Lafontaine, F., & Mykkanen, J. (2019). Breaking the chain of command: Decentralization and political contestation in Latin America and beyond. Comparative Political Studies, 52(3), 367-394.
Weingast, B.R. (2009). Second-generation fiscal federalism: Implications for decentralized democratic governance and economic development. Annual Review of Political Science, 12, 225-249.
Wibbels, E. (2006). Federalism and the politics of resource allocation in resource-rich states. The World Politics, 58(2), 232-262.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2024 Abraham Kuol Nyuon
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.