بيان من الحزب الشيوعي السوداني ... لنوقف مهازل السلطة المتهالكة

Murtada

Thank you for your comments

You are absolutely right – I made no attempt to answer your questions. I merely responded to the point that I quoted, which implied that since the SCP and the NDA welcomed the Peace Agreement they forfeit any right to question/limit its liabilities. Please note that this position by the NDA was published in July 2004. The SCP also outlined many liabilities of the Protocol in Dec 2003

I assure you that whatever may become of the NDA’s position will not cause me any personal embarrassment – if I agree with it I will say so, if not, I will also be equally vocal

The Communiqué did not detail “fair/just” ratios – why it did not do so is to remain an open point for conjecture for the time being

The disagreement, in my opinion, is about the approach, which resulted in a faulty mechanism. Yet, by fixing the issue of representation one can also address the approach in this instance. A constitution for the Sudan is one that will govern us all; it should be drafted with the most comprehensive representation possible

The premise of the SCP’s movements in post-Naivasha is that building peace, sustaining democracy, achieving equitable socioeconomic development, and enhancing the prospects of unity requires wider representation. Previous attempts at exclusion had catastrophic consequences

Aside from what Arman may have said or did not say - the communiqué carried no new or radical ideas (as far as the SCP is concerned) – lifting the state of emergency, tending to other conflicts, making the Ingaz/SPLM accord more inclusive and hence sustainable requires a wider forum, a government of national unity ….etc

I hope I have answered your question and addressed your other points



السودان لكل السودانيين
المجد لشعب السودان ... المجد لأمة السودان