By Emmanuel Malual Makuach
The controversial decision by parliament to pass the Cybercrimes Bills does not reflect the democracy we, as South Sudanese, have fought for. The Cybercrimes Act should not silence South Sudanese when it comes to serious advocacy for good governance and the rule of law in a struggling country.
This shifting dynamic presents opportunities for South Sudanese parliamentarians, as it has since independence in 2011. Leaders have more advantages to do anything without citizens’ rights to participate in democratic processes or decisions.
South Sudanese politics is complex when it comes to public participation. Before anyone amends any bills that may shrink the freedom of expression of the people of South Sudan, there should be wider consultation.
The nature of decision-making in the country’s democratic space is poor and militarized, which prevents citizens from exercising their rights and obligations to participate in national decision-making processes.
I condemn the recent passing of the Cybercrimes Bills, which make it seem as though the State is privatizing the legal system of South Sudan. Such privatization will limit freedom of speech and expression, which goes against the rights and obligations provided in the country’s constitution—rights that should be guaranteed in any democratic nation.
The Cybercrimes Bills will help only the families and friends of the regime to loot the country’s resources in the absence of proper cybercrime advocacy. That is why the Bill is being celebrated by those who benefit from it.
South Sudan needs to pass Anti-Corruption and Human Rights Bills that can help stop the looting and killing of innocent people in the absence of the rule of law.
