Home » Press & Media » Public Speeches

Nairobi, Kenya

8 March 2010

Chairman Sir Derek Plumbly's Statement at the IGAD Extraordinary Summit

It is an honour to address this meeting and a privilege to recall IGAD’s role in bringing the Comprehensive Peace Agreement into being in Kenya five years ago. It was an extraordinary achievement, and one that has stood the test of time. The peace the CPA brought has held since. The institutions of government established by it have been sustained. And the key wealth sharing arrangements have worked.

I do not need to tell you that there have also been difficulties, or that some CPA provisions – including ones which might have been thought central to the goal of making unity attractive, such as a programme of national healing and reconciliation – have gone unimplemented, or been implemented only partially. Nonetheless the Agreement has proved resilient.

Recent months have seen significant advances – including passage of the laws needed for the Southern and Abyei referendums and the popular consultation process in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan; and agreement two weeks ago on arrangements to resolve the longstanding difference between the parties on the impact of the census.

The Assessment and Evaluation Commission’s membership reflects the partnership between the parties, IGAD and the IGAD Partners Forum which contributed to the CPA. The Commission meets on an almost weekly basis in one configuration or another, as it has since it was formed, in pursuit of its monitoring and support mandate, bringing together the two parties and the witnesses to the CPA to consider developments and encourage forward movement; its members and staff make regular field visits to assess and report on the situation on the ground; and at times it has given support to other CPA commissions. In January this year we published a further comprehensive report on CPA implementation and the challenges ahead.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you, and through you the missions concerned, for the constructive participation and leadership of Kenya, the Deputy Chair; and of the IGAD special envoy, Lissane Yohannes of Ethiopia. His appointment has sent a strong signal of IGAD’s continuing support for CPA implementation on the ground.

I will draw in my remarks on the AEC’s January report as well as our subsequent discussions and my own personal impressions. Given the limited time I will focus on the challenges ahead. We are embarked now on what might be termed the “Year of Sudan”, a year of great opportunity but also one of risk and uncertainty.

Little over one month remains to polling in the national elections; only ten to the self determination referendum; and no more than sixteen to the end of the interim period covered by the CPA. Earlier stages of the interim period have seen repeated postponements, and deadlines missed, but somehow people have muddled through. That is no longer an option. The terminal dates in 2011, including that of the referendum in the South, are set firmly in the Agreement and all remaining timelines have to be seen in that context.

I personally detect a new sense of urgency in discussions between the parties, and on the part of the international community. Your meeting here should help to re-enforce it; but it will need to be sustained day by day and week by week through the coming period if the objectives of the CPA are to be met in the remainder of the interim period, and lasting peace assured thereafter.

That is the prize for which we must strive. The immediate focus is the election. The AEC is not an election monitoring body but it has kept electoral preparations on its agenda consistently in recent months, recognizing that elections are a key element in the CPA and central to the democratic transformation it envisages. In that context it is important that the elections take place at the time set, and with as broad a participation as possible. The very high number of voters registered (over 16 million), and of candidates - of all parties, and independents- nominated, are encouraging signs.

But if the elections are indeed to be a step change in democratic transformation it will be important that voters and candidates have confidence in them. The presence of domestic and international monitors will be one factor in this (and IGAD’s reported readiness to participate- alongside the EU, the AU and others- in sending observers is to be welcomed). The Electoral Code of Conduct promoted by the AU High Level Implementation Panel and endorsed in the South at last week’s conference of political parties there could still, it seems to me, help in charting a way forward on some of the issues which are currently proving contentious.

Electoral excitement has gripped much of Sudan, and the success of the elections is the most immediate concern at present. But discussion in the AEC has focused equally on the need to ensure that electoral pressures do not distract from steps that need to be taken now if subsequent challenges in CPA implementation are to be met. The most immediate and pressing is appointment of the commissions needed to prepare for the referendums. Without them nothing can be done to put in place the necessary administrative, staffing, logistic and funding arrangements. The self determination referendum in particular will involve complex and time consuming procedures, including a lengthy registration process covering Southerners in the North and outside Sudan as well as in the South. The process must be sufficiently robust to convince those voting that their right to self determination has been freely and fairly exercised. Preparations need to begin now.

A similar sense of urgency is required in respect of demarcation of the North/South border. The AEC has repeatedly drawn attention to the extent of the delay in this - it was due for completion at the beginning of the interim period – and to the negative impact of that delay on CPA implementation. The parties will I am sure update later, but my understanding is that the technical committee concerned has now been asked to initiate demarcation on the ground of the 80% of the border they have been able to delimit. It is imperative that discussions proceed without delay at the political level in respect of those areas the committee has been unable to delimit. The risks inherent in failure to agree the border as a whole, and demarcate it on the ground before the referendum, are obvious.

The AEC has consistently argued that border demarcation need not mean new barriers; border communities need to be reassured that their homes, livelihood and longstanding rights will be unaffected by it: projects aimed at strengthening cross border relations should be encouraged.

The brainstorming conference of governors and others from the ten border states, held under the chairmanship of Vice President Ali Osman Taha and Dr Riek Machar in Kadugli from 26 to 28 February was an important step forward in this regard. The concept of “tamazuj”, intermingling or interdependence, to which it gave new profile, and some of the ideas which were floated there for joint economic and security activity - including in support of communities that straddle, or migrate across, the border - have the potential, it seems to me, not just to overcome fears associated with border demarcation but also usefully to inform the popular consultation due to be held in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan, as well as discussions on Abyei and indeed on post referendum arrangements.

Abyei has seen progress over the past year, with the acceptance by the parties of the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration; the appointment of a new administration; and agreement in respect of elections. But demarcation of the Abyei border has been frustrated and the Abyei referendum commission, when appointed, is likely to find its most sensitive task – translating into practice the provisions of the Abyei protocol and referendum law with regard to eligibility to vote in the referendum – a serious challenge. These and other issues related to Abyei will continue to need political attention and support over the coming months.

A separate political process should unfold in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan. Both states have seen real progress in integration and partnership over the past year and a half. The legal framework for popular consultation has been put in place, and a certain amount of work has been done to sensitise opinion formers to the potential of the process. The two states are now on slightly different trajectories because of the agreement between the parties to delay state level elections in Southern Kordofan to allow for a new census there. But in both there is a need to work up more precise understandings with regard to the issues to be addressed in popular consultation after the elections, and to increase public awareness.

On all of these dossiers – border demarcation, Abyei, popular consultation – sustained effort will be needed through the remainder of the present year if a “soft landing” is to be achieved in 2011. But crucial to such an outcome will be agreement, before the referendum, on post referendum arrangements covering key issues on both scenarios - continued unity and Southern secession .The CPA contains no clear road map for what comes after the interim period, whether in the event of unity or secession. The aspiration to make unity attractive stands, but clarity is needed on the implications of both options. With regard to arrangements in the event of separation – which will need to address, among others, issues relating to resources including oil and the rights of individuals and communities- the interdependence I spoke of earlier would seem to be a sound starting point.

The AEC first underlined the importance of this in its Mid Term Evaluation in 2008.Good work has been done since in think tanks and elsewhere. The parties should be commended for the action they have taken recently to establish their own separate support arrangements for the negotiations, and to explore together the framework and agenda for them, and what international assistance may be needed, and what mechanisms should be put in place to ensure sufficient transparency for it to be delivered effectively. The AEC and its staff and members of course stand ready to help.

The task ahead is immense. But the potential prize in terms of peace and opportunities for development is huge. Getting there will require sustained partnership between the parties, and generosity based in the first instance on mutual self interest. The parties in turn will need support and encouragement in addressing the challenges, and from none more so than their neighbours. In this context IGAD’s initiative in holding this meeting and tomorrow’s summit is particularly welcome. I look forward to the summit’s conclusions and to working with IGAD colleagues in follow up.

End of speech