De facto legal

The Sudanese opposition says the government's time has run out but no one seems to be listening, reports Asmaa El-Husseini

---

Tension has risen anew in Sudan due to a battle waged by the opposition parties against the government, this time a legal one. Sudan's opposition parties, which number 28, hold that the legitimacy of the current government formed by the 2005 peace agreement ended on 9 July. This legitimacy had been granted by the comprehensive peace agreement on which the constitution is also based. The constitution sets the government's fourth year as a final deadline for holding elections, but this deadline hasn't been met and the elections have been postponed instead to next April.

The opposition parties have stepped up their demands over the last few days, saying that they'll withdraw from parliament in protest over what they describe as the illegitimacy of the current government. They're calling for the formation of a national unity government that would enjoy national blessings, and stress their rejection of the census results on which the election process has been based. They also say that the elections cannot be held without realising peace in Darfur.

Yet it seems that the opposition doesn't know who to turn to in order to protest what it sees as the regime's illegitimacy. Some opposition leaders have said that they'll send memorandums to regional and international parties to inform them of the government's violation, while others have said that they'll turn to the constitutional court. Others still have said they'll take to the streets, the ramifications of which the ruling National Congress Party (NCP) has warned against, saying that it will not overlook any violations of the law or constitution.

The leadership of the NCP hasn't stopped with refuting the opposition's legal claims, but is waging a wide-scale campaign against the opposition, saying that its alliance isn't made up of parties in the real sense but rather of the fringes of parties. The NCP says that this alliance includes individuals calling for chaos rather than a peaceful rotation of power, and that the opposition is trying to exploit what it sees as legal loopholes as a means into power.

Talk of unconstitutionality, the NCP says, is merely a stepping-up of pressure. Government officials have dismissed the opposition's reference to taking to the streets, saying that it enjoys no popular support. Some NCP leaders have accused the opposition of treason and collaboration, and of receiving funds from foreign embassies. They say that the opposition spoke of the regime's illegitimacy after the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued its 4 March memorandum, and that now, a few months later, it is again trying to wrest the government's legitimacy through other means. The government has also said that the opposition's claims have no legal basis.

The NCP had turned to the opposition during its battle with the ICC, which last March accused President Omar Al-Bashir of committing war crimes and crimes against humanity in Darfur. The NCP did so in an attempt at conciliation and to draw the opposition towards its own positions. This overture resulted in some opposition leaders declaring their rejection of President Al-Bashir's arrest and calling for a balance between achieving justice in Darfur and maintaining stability in Sudan. At the time, most of the opposition leaders failed to make clear statements accepting the ICC resolution, dealing with it quietly if at all. The opposition parties' mobilisation could have had a greater influence had their ally the Sudanese People's Liberation Movement (SPLM), a partner with the NCP in the government, had supported their positions. Instead, the SPLM supported the NCP position stressing the government's legitimacy, and even formed a legal committee with it to respond to the opposition's claims that it was illegitimate.

Further weakening the opposition's stance is the fact that international partners sponsoring the peace agreement by which the current government was formed have agreed to extend the deadline for carrying out the peace agreement's requirements. Since the delay is in order to reach an agreement on points of difference, it wouldn't make much sense to abrogate the government's legitimacy.

Perhaps what led the SPLM towards its position is its desire to maintain its legitimacy in the peace process rather than moving towards the unknown. Another factor may have been its international ties. Some SPLM leaders tried to soften the effect of its position on its allies in the opposition -- when questioned on the movement's position, SPLM vice-secretary Yasser Arman diplomatically replied, "We are with the legitimacy of the government and with dialogue with the opposition." The question is how this eloquent formulation can be achieved given the current complications.

A final explanation for the opposition escalating its campaign at this time is its sense that the horizon is closing in. It is not prepared for the elections that it wants to be held on schedule, nor are the elections any longer an appropriate mechanism for the democratic change it is calling for -- the opposition holds that there is unfair competition resulting from the ruling sector's monopoly of power, money, and the media. The opposition parties are also unsatisfied with the current situation with regard to Sudan's crisis; they hold that if the situation remains as is, the country's present and future will be placed in grave danger. They accuse the NCP of monopolising power and of planning to implement extreme solutions. They are instead calling for a national accord solution that satisfies all Sudanese, and hold that the current government is based on a shaky partnership between foes brought together only by the fear of both being removed from power.

Although the Sudanese opposition currently battling the government represents wide sectors of the population, its influence in the days to come depends on how consistent and unified its positions remain. Observers doubt that the opposition will have much success in this, for the NCP will seek to draw some of it into its fold, while other elements of the opposition will seek to use the alliance to serve their own interests.

Whatever the reasons for the Sudanese opposition's current stepping-up of its protests and its legal claims to support its positions, the current escalation is a reflection of real problems in Sudan that the government has failed to resolve and deep-rooted elements of the political landscape that the government has failed to accommodate. This means that a more comprehensive, acceptable and legitimate formulation needs to be found, one that will help deal with pressing issues such as Darfur, the ICC, peace in the south, and democratic transformation. Delaying a solution to these issues will only lead to more foreign interventions and cause further harm to Sudan's interests.