Introduction
South Sudan is at a critical moment in its political trajectory. With national elections set for December 22, 2026, there are still significant concerns surrounding political inclusion, security measures, institutional preparedness, public trust, and the execution of the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS).
The government insists that elections should move forward, but opposition groups and civil society are voicing worries about whether the essential legal, political, and security frameworks are in place. The SPLM-IO has pointed out that unresolved issues from the peace agreement could undermine the credibility and peaceful nature of the electoral process.
In light of these challenges, one alternative being discussed is an internal SPLM elective conference or a broader party meeting. This gathering could serve as a platform to address leadership elections, set policy directions, ensure accountability, and prepare for the upcoming national elections and a smooth transition of power.
It's important to clarify that this proposal isn't meant to replace constitutional national elections. Instead, it could act as an internal party mechanism to bolster political organization and define leadership roles before engaging in a larger national dialogue.
The Central Argument
At the heart of this proposal lies a straightforward political principle: for a political party to genuinely compete in national elections, it needs to have robust internal structures, a transparent process for selecting leaders, well-defined policies, and effective accountability mechanisms.
Under this plan, an SPLM elective conference would take the lead in nominating or electing key leaders, starting with the top positions in the party:
• Party chairman.
• Deputy party chairman or deputy leaders.
• Secretary-General.
• Relevant leadership structures at national, state, county, payam, and boma levels.
This conference would also serve as a platform to discuss policy direction, assess the party’s performance, and lay out a clear agenda for gearing up the country for elections, implementing institutional reforms, and ensuring a peaceful transfer of power.
While the idea holds promise, its credibility hinges on how it’s executed. If the process is open, inclusive, and follows clear guidelines, it could really enhance internal party democracy. However, if it’s dominated by a select few or used merely to ratify pre-set decisions, it could further erode political trust.
Why Internal Party Democracy Matters
Political parties play a vital role in our democratic systems. They’re the ones who bring leaders to the forefront, shape policies, rally voters, and serve as a bridge between the citizens and the government.
However, the credibility of a party on a national level liea on how democratic its internal practices are. If leaders are chosen without any input from the members, if local branches are left inactive, or if decisions are made by just a handful of people, it’s only natural for citizens to wonder if that party can truly uphold democratic values.
An internal SPLM conference could be a great chance to:
1. Reconnect party leadership with grassroots members.
2. Involve delegates from states, counties, payams, and bomas.
3. Clarify what leadership roles entail.
4. Discuss policy priorities.
5. Set up accountability measures within the party.
6. Tackle grievances before they escalate into bigger political issues.
7. Get party structures ready for upcoming electoral campaigns.
The SPLM is already gearing up for its third national convention and has started to lay down guidelines for internal congresses, primaries, and candidate selection.
This sets the stage for exploring how a more thorough internal process could be crafted.
Leadership Elections and the Question of Legitimacy
The upcoming conference needs to clarify how party leaders are chosen—whether they are elected, endorsed, or nominated. Each of these terms carries its own significance.
An election typically involves a specific group of voters, candidates vying for the position, established voting procedures, and a clear method for counting and announcing the results. On the other hand, nomination might mean that candidates are selected by delegates or a designated committee. Endorsement, however, can simply reaffirm an existing leader without any competitive voting process.
To foster trust in the process, the SPLM should make public:
• The rules for selecting delegates.
• The eligibility criteria for candidates.
• The nomination procedures.
• The arrangements for campaigning and debates.
• The methods of voting.
• The mechanisms for complaints and appeals.
• The rules regarding conflicts of interest.
• The procedures for announcing results.
Additionally, the conference should clarify the connection between the party chairman and the national presidency. If one individual holds both roles, the party needs to explain how it will separate party duties from state responsibilities. This distinction is crucial because the state is meant for all citizens, while a political party serves its members and supporters.
4. Representation from States, Counties, Payams, and Bomas
For a national conference to truly represent the people, it’s essential to include local structures in a meaningful way. In South Sudan, the political landscape is deeply shaped by local communities, counties, traditional leaders, and regional issues.
To ensure fair representation, delegates should be chosen through clear and open processes that take into account:
• Geographic diversity.
• Gender balance.
• Involvement of youth.
• Representation for people with disabilities.
• Participation from veterans and long-serving members.
• Inclusion of minority and marginalized groups.
• Representation from party leagues and professional organizations.
Local structures shouldn’t just be passive recipients of directives from Juba; they need the opportunity to propose policies, voice leadership concerns, and highlight community needs.
A bottom-up approach can also provide the party with valuable insights into the real challenges citizens face, such as insecurity, poor infrastructure, inadequate healthcare, unemployment, educational gaps, corruption, and food scarcity.
Policy Direction Beyond Leadership Changes
An elective conference shouldn't just be about the people in charge. If we hold leadership elections without any real policy changes, we might end up swapping out officeholders but leaving citizens in the same tough spot.
The conference could roll out a policy platform that tackles:
Governance and Accountability
The party could pledge to enhance oversight, ensure transparent public spending, maintain a professional public administration, and enforce consequences for any misuse of public resources.
Security and Civilian Protection
Discussions could center on reforming the security sector, professionalizing the armed forces, ensuring civilian protection, and keeping military duties separate from political agendas.
Economic Recovery
Key policy priorities might include transparency in oil revenues, boosting agricultural production, improving roads and electricity, creating jobs, enhancing trade, and supporting small businesses.
Education and Healthcare
The party could set clear, measurable goals for schools, teacher recruitment, hospitals, maternal healthcare, child nutrition, and mental health services.
Decentralization
Local governments need defined responsibilities, reliable funding, and accountability. Structures at the county, payam, and boma levels should be equipped to provide essential services rather than merely acting as extensions of central authorities.
Peace and National Unity
The party could emphasize that political competition shouldn't revolve around ethnic divisions or exclusion. National unity should be reflected in equal citizenship, lawful institutions, and fair representation for all.
Accountability as a Core Conference Responsibility
The proposal highlights accountability as a fundamental goal of the internal meeting. This is crucial because while party accountability and government accountability are interconnected, they aren't the same.
Party accountability might involve checking if officials adhered to party rules, if elected representatives put party policies into action, and if leaders honored internal decisions.
On the other hand, government accountability encompasses aspects like public financial management, parliamentary oversight, judicial independence, procurement transparency, and safeguarding citizens’ rights.
An SPLM conference could pave the way for or enhance:
• An internal ethics committee.
• A disciplinary and appeals process.
• Requirements for financial reporting.
• Rules to manage conflicts of interest.
• Reviews of leadership performance.
• Procedures for handling complaints.
• A public register of significant party resolutions.
For these mechanisms to be effective, they must operate independently from those being investigated. If not, accountability risks becoming selective or driven by political motives.
Could the Conference Gear Up for National Elections?
An internal party conference could play a vital role in gearing up for national elections by crafting a solid organizational and policy framework. It could facilitate the selection of candidates through open primaries, provide training for campaign teams, set up voter outreach initiatives, and create a national manifesto.
However, it’s important to remember that party preparations can’t take the place of the responsibilities held by national electoral institutions. The National Elections Commission, courts, security agencies, political parties, and civil society all have distinct roles to play in ensuring that elections are credible.
Thus, the SPLM’s internal processes should be aligned with, but not confused for, the national electoral framework. National elections demand more than just party readiness; they require a welcoming political atmosphere, effective voter registration, civic education, fair administration, freedom of expression, peaceful campaigning, and reliable mechanisms for resolving disputes.
The National Elections Commission has also pointed out that legal inconsistencies and funding shortages could pose challenges to the preparation process.
The proposal comes with a few notable risks.
To start, it might be seen as a move to centralize power within the ruling party instead of genuinely promoting national democracy. This concern would be amplified if delegates are appointed without any consultation or if candidates aren’t given a fair chance to compete.
Next, the conference could exacerbate existing rifts within the SPLM if different factions view the leadership elections as a battle for dominance rather than an opportunity for policy innovation.
Additionally, there’s a risk that party structures could blur the lines with government institutions. While a party can put forward leaders, it’s crucial that public office is ultimately guided by the constitution and relevant laws.
Moreover, leaving out opposition parties, civil society, or independent observers could erode public trust. Even if a meeting is strictly internal, being transparent about its goals, rules, and outcomes can help alleviate any doubts.
Lastly, delaying national elections without a clear timeline, legal basis, and accountability measures could lead to an indefinite extension of transitional governance.
For an internal conference to genuinely support political stability, a few essential safeguards need to be in place:
1. A publicly accessible conference constitution or set of rules.
2. A transparent process for selecting delegates.
3. Equal chances for all eligible candidates.
4. Voting that is both secret and verifiable.
5. Independent oversight within the party.
6. Clear requirements for financial disclosures.
7. Inclusion of women, youth, and marginalized communities.
8. A published policy platform.
9. A clear timeline for putting resolutions into action.
10. A well-defined connection between party decisions and constitutional institutions.
11. Open dialogue with other political parties and those who have signed peace agreements.
12. A strong commitment to ensure that internal party processes respect citizens’ constitutional rights.
Additionally, the conference should produce a written communiqué that outlines decisions, responsibilities, and deadlines. Resolutions that lack implementation plans are unlikely to lead to any real change.
In conclusion, the idea of holding an SPLM elective conference or an internal party meeting brings up critical point about how party democracy ties into national elections and the political transition in South Sudan.
This conference could serve as a valuable platform for selecting leaders, discussing policies, boosting grassroots involvement, and ensuring accountability. It might also help the SPLM gear up for upcoming elections and clarify its stance on governance and peaceful political transitions.
However, the success of such a conference hinges on how it’s designed and executed. If it’s representative, transparent, and focused on policy, it could really enhance political organization. On the flip side, if it simply rubber-stamps pre-decided leadership, it could deepen existing mistrust.
It’s essential to remember that an internal party conference shouldn’t be seen as a quick fix for national elections. It needs to align with the constitution, honor the peace process, and fit into a broader national framework that includes all key political players.
The main challenge for South Sudan isn’t just about who leads a party; it’s about creating institutions where leadership is legitimate, policies are openly debated, public resources are managed responsibly, and political power can shift peacefully.
An internal party conference could be a step in the right direction—but only if it truly enhances participation, accountability, and ultimately, the citizens' right to choose their leaders.
Editorial disclaimer: This analysis looks at a proposed political arrangement and does not support any specific party, candidate, or electoral outcome. The legal viability of the proposal would need to be assessed against South Sudan’s constitution, relevant political-party laws, the R-ARCSS, and the decisions of the appropriate electoral bodies.
