| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
154223
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
161413
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
170843
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
135909
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
South Sudan is a prime example of how governance arrangements can either achieve and maintain peace, or become the trigger for civil war. South Sudan’s experience shows that the appropriateness of constitutional provisions to a local context remains key, and that the time-tested elements of good governance still matter: devolution and separation of powers, appropriate government and electoral systems, and strong institutions. In nations as ethnically diverse as South Sudan, decentralization is necessary for effective public participation, and it also contributes to bringing government closer to the people and empowering local governments to be more responsive to their constituencies’ needs. Ineffectual decentralization, on the other hand, leads to marginalization of some groups, and causes allegiances to form along ethnic rather than national lines. Should fighting break out in such a context, the conflict frequently takes on an ethnic nature, as it has in South Sudan. While failures in decentralization and other governance arrangements may have provoked civil war in South Sudan, addressing such weaknesses through constitutional amendments and capacity building, for example, may put the country back on track towards achieving and maintaining peace and stability. Other key reforms would include economic diversification, improved natural resource management, and tighter budgetary control. Despite the significant challenges ahead, there is hope yet for the world’s youngest nation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|