SUDAN: Durable solutions elusive as southern IDPs return and ...

The electoral law presented particular problems for Sudan’s IDPs. First, the electoral law required
prospective voters to register in the constituency where they had lived for the last three months
and present some form of personal identification. For most IDPs, this meant that they had to vote
in their place of displacement, rather than their place of origin, if they managed to register at all.
Second, the electoral framework is based on single-seat constituencies, with the candidate with
the most votes winning the only seat. This presents a significant obstacle to the inclusion of
minority voices. Compared to multi-seat constituencies, where proportional representation would
enable representations of different views within each district, a single seat constituency means
that the candidate with the most votes wins the only seat. In many voting districts in the north and
in Southern Sudan, the districts are largely homogenous in terms of political support for either the
NCP or the SPLM, and therefore the single-member district does not present a significant
obstacle. However, in Darfur as well as in Khartoum, political support is mixed. Because those
who were displaced are more likely to be opposed to the government, spreading their votes
across the constituencies where they are currently living may skew the vote in favour of the more
pro-government forces. Even if IDPs and other minority supporters voted in their current locations
for a single party, because their presence is so dispersed the system of single-seat
constituencies is likely to prevent them from gaining a seat. According to the Tufts-IDMC IDP
profiling study, IDPs comprise 18-23% of the population in Khartoum, but only one district in
Khartoum, Omdurman, has a majority of IDPs (Tufts-IDMC, August 2008, p.8). Therefore, the
system of single-seat constituencies risks marginalising IDP voters (US Institute of Peace, March
2009, pp.4-5).
Observers of the voter registration commented that “there was under-registration in areas with
large number of IDPs” (IDP Action, 11 March 2010). This was reportedly most prevalent in
Khartoum, where the IDPs would most likely not support the ruling NCP. Khartoum State had the
lowest percentage registration of any state in the country (UNMIS, 15 March 2010). The
countdown to voting day was marked with confusion about which parties were boycotting the
elections, where, and at what level (Flint, 13 April 2010). Two of the largest parties, the Umma
Reform and Renewal Party (URRP) and the Sudan People Liberation Movement (SPLM) agreed
to boycott the polls in most of Sudan’s north, while other smaller groups remained in the race
(Sudan Tribune, 10 April 2010).
The Referendum Law
The CPA stipulates a referendum on secession that will give Southern Sudan a chance to decide
for unity or independence. The referendum law that was adopted on 29 December 2009 opened
up several questions regarding: (i) the majority needed for secession, and (ii) voter eligibility.
On these two points the Chatham House report states:
"The majority needed for secession: The NCP initially proposed a super-majority to pass the
secession vote: 75% of all voters on a 75% turnout. The SPLM called for a simple majority in
turnout and in the vote. The law adopted in December 2009 required a simple majority vote on a
turnout of 60%.
Voter eligibility: The SPLM initially wanted to restrict eligibility to voters of Southern origin in the
territory of Southern Sudan. This is in some respects a secessionist position – many in the SPLM
believe that Southerners resident in Southern Sudan would vote overwhelmingly for an
independent state, while Southerners outside the South might be more open to the possibility of
unity. The NCP proposed that people of Northern origin in Southern Sudan should be
enfranchised. The NCP also proposed that all persons of Southern origin outside Southern Sudan
– those in the North and those overseas – should have a vote" (Chatham House, 2010, p.16, box
6).
It was finally decided that “south Sudanese living outside the south and born before January 1,
1956, the date of Sudan’s independence, must vote in the south. But south Sudanese living
outside the south and born after January 1, 1956 would be able to vote in their place of
121