Writer: Thomas Muto Lo’Buda
Community politicisation in South Sudan is becoming an increasingly serious concern.
South Sudan is home to 64 tribes, each of which has constitutional rights to freedom of association, freedom of assembly, freedom of expression, and the promotion of its social, economic, and cultural development. These rights are protected by the Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan as well as international human rights principles.
Communities, therefore, have every right to organise themselves through community-based organisations to promote education, preserve culture, improve healthcare, strengthen economic opportunities, and address other development challenges affecting their people.
In my view, and from my own experience serving as a community leader within the Kakuwa community, these are the fundamental responsibilities that community organisations should prioritise.
During my time in community leadership, I consistently opposed the politicisation of community institutions. Whenever we gathered for leadership meetings, I reminded my colleagues that our role was to unite and develop our community—not to turn community structures into political platforms.
One experience remains vivid in my memory. During one leadership meeting, one of the agenda items was a resolution requesting the creation of a new county. I objected to the proposal and declined to sign the resolution. My position was not popular.
Some viewed me as lacking courage, while others misunderstood my intentions. However, I stood by what I believed was the correct constitutional and institutional principle.
The creation of counties, payams, bomas, and other administrative units is fundamentally a matter of public governance and legislation. South Sudan elects representatives to County Legislative Councils, State Legislative Assemblies, the National Legislative Assembly, and the Council of States precisely to debate and advocate for such matters through the established constitutional processes.
Those elected representatives have the legal mandate to introduce motions, present memoranda, and advocate for administrative changes on behalf of their constituents.
When community organisations begin drafting political petitions, lobbying for administrative boundaries, or pursuing partisan political objectives, they risk moving beyond their developmental mandate and becoming political actors.
This can weaken community unity, create unnecessary divisions, and blur the important distinction between community leadership and elected political leadership.
If an individual wishes to pursue political change, there is nothing wrong with that. The proper path is to join or establish a political party, seek public office, and advocate through the democratic institutions established by law.
What should be discouraged is using community organisations as political vehicles while presenting them as neutral community institutions.
South Sudan needs strong community organisations that unite people around education, health, economic empowerment, youth development, women’s empowerment, cultural preservation, peacebuilding, and social cohesion.
At the same time, it needs political leaders who pursue governance issues through the constitutional and democratic institutions entrusted with those responsibilities.
Keeping these roles distinct will strengthen both our communities and our democracy.
This remains my position as a South Sudanese citizen and former community leader.
About the Author:
Thomas Muto Lo’Buda, a leader in my own right.
Disclaimer: Any opinion published on our platforms does not represent our view or position.