Minimizing the Risks of Statelessness in South Sudan
DEVELOPMENTS
In January 2011, south Sudan will hold a referendum to decide between continued unity with the north or independence. This event poses many important challenges for the Sudanese people, their neighbors, and the wider international community. A number of issues need to be resolved before the referendum, including sensitive questions of border demarcation and arrangements for sharing wealth from the oil located in the south and pumped out through the north. But perhaps the issue with the most serious potential humanitarian and human rights implications is the question of citizenship.
Negotiations between the parties on citizenship rights in a post-independence scenario are at the very early stages and no apparent consensus has emerged. Hundreds of thousands of “southerners,” as defined by the national referendum legislation, who were displaced to the north during the war, lack clarity on what their status will be in the event the country divides. Many of these displaced people have lived in the north for more than a decade and have raised families there. It is unclear whether they will be offered dual citizenship, citizenship in the south with residency in the north, a choice between different options, or no choice at all.
If no agreement between the parties emerges on citizenship issues, this group of people could potentially be vulnerable to forced expulsion, or even statelessness. Ambiguity about their future status alone could be enough to cause large numbers of people to move preemptively. Such scenarios are possible if political relations between north and south Sudan deteriorate significantly during the process of separation, as toying with the fate of this community, and similar communities of northerners in the south, will become an effective way for the parties to pressure and intimidate one another.
BACKGROUND
The 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between north and south Sudan ended more than 20 years of civil war, and assured south Sudanese the right to self-determination through a referendum. Although both the north and south committed to undertake efforts to make unity attractive during the CPA interim period, most analyses now suggest that southerners are overwhelmingly likely to vote in favor of independence, a result which, if respected, will lead to the formation of a new state in Africa in 2011.
According to UNHCR, 1.7 million internally displaced persons (IDPs) still live in Khartoum state, either in four recognized sites or in informal settlements throughout the city. A 2006 survey of IDPs located throughout north Sudan found that 40 percent were from the south and that the average period of displacement was 17 years. Following the signing of the CPA, more than two million IDPs and refugees returned to the south and the three transitional border areas of Abyei, Southern Kordofan, and Blue Nile. Since 2008, international support for organized IDP return programs has mostly ended and donor attention has gradually shifted elsewhere.
Many returnees to the south came home to almost nothing: no health care, little education, few jobs, or livelihood opportunities. Some donor support has sought to help returnees settle in, but the need has far outstripped the available resources. In some places in the south, returnees have gone back again to where they had lived during their displacement, due to the lack of basic services. And the poor rains and failed harvest last year in the south have led to concerns of serious food shortfalls.
ANALYSIS
The humanitarian consequences of a sudden, large movement of people from north to south would be devastating and nearly impossible for already overburdened UN and NGO actors in the country to deal with. With many people in the south struggling to secure food and livelihoods for their own families, the capacity of southern communities to absorb new arrivals is extremely low. With a scaled-back capacity for managing organized returns, the sheer logistics of moving so many people would be arduous and time-consuming. Those who do want to return to the south need international and government assistance, free from arbitrary time pressures associated with the referendum. A sudden massive population movement, forced or spontaneous, would be a humanitarian catastrophe on a significant scale.
In addition to the humanitarian challenges of a rapid large-scale return, ambiguity on citizenship issues poses serious protection and human rights questions. If people are unsure what independence will mean for them personally, for their families and their livelihoods, it will influence how and whether they exercise their right to self-determination at all. If those who are eligible to vote in the referendum believe that doing so would jeopardize their residency in north Sudan – where they have lived for more than a decade, where their children were born – they may opt not to vote, while at the same time feeling unfairly excluded. Further, should the south opt not to accept certain people back, or lack the capacity to process nationality claims on a large scale, the risk of statelessness is acute. IDPs who are not granted citizenship or legal residency in the north presumably would become refugees in the event of southern secession. Although Sudan is a state party to the 1951 Convention and the 1967 Protocol relating to the status of refugees, it is far from clear whether current IDPs would be granted refugee status and afforded the international protections that accompany it.
What needs to be done? First, the north and south should come to a bilateral agreement on citizenship issues in a post-independence scenario. The Sudanese government could demonstrate its good intent by becoming a party to the 1954 Convention relating to the Status of Stateless Persons and the 1961 Convention on the Reduction of Statelessness. In particular, Article 10 of the 1961 Convention calls for parties to ensure that transfer of territory does not result in statelessness. Not only would this be a step towards providing legal assurances, but it would also send an important message, reducing uncertainty, and easing fears for many people. Ultimately, strong international pressure on both the northern and southern governments will be required to ensure relevant agreements and legal commitments are upheld, even if the security situation and relations between the two sides deteriorate.
Jennifer Smith is an Advocate at Refugees International, focusing on Sudan and the Democratic Republic of Congo. She previously worked at International Alert in the United Kingdom and at the United Nations Department for Peacekeeping Operations.
