Sudan Between Decentralization and Federalism: How Can Reform take place at Different Levels of Government? (*) CAA-Centre for Arab Unity Studies.

an introduction:

Since the end of the twentieth century, the countries have been going to take in the federal system as an appropriate administrative organization, and in line with their environment and community culture. Perhaps these countries realize - based on the federal philosophy - that the federal system expands the political, and enables the state to cause balance in the distribution of money between the units that make up it, helps with a greater amount in achieving the service balance, development and economic renaissance. In this context, Sudan is the second country in the African continent to be taken in the federal system under the presidential system since 1994 - and if it has been modified - after Nigeria, which applied federal as a system of government in 1960. He followed these two countries in Africa to implement this pattern of government In a row, Ethiopia (1995), whose constitution does not begin with the phrase "We are the people of Ethiopia", but its beginning came with the phrase "We are societies, nationalities and peoples of Ethiopia" [1]. It comes after a rank of time in South Africa, which adopted the federal system as a philosophy of government (1996) [2].

During the quarter of a century (since the implementation of the federal system), the Sudanese experience faced a number of administrative and financial problems at all levels of the three governance, until the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in January 2005, which became part of the amended Sudan constitution in that year, whereThe system of government in Sudan is defined as an emotional system, but this constitution (amended in January 2015) is still classified as a system of government.And if the confusion between the concepts of federalism and decentralization - on the reality of practice - is still standing.

During the transitional phase that ended with the secession of South Sudan in July 2011, and after that until today, the decentralized system remained in multiple challenges in a bitter economic reality, accusing the regime of poor financial resources distribution, in addition to the weak performance of leadership and executive cadres in most of the localities and states of Sudan And the lack of knowledge of most of them with the fundamental philosophy and objectives of the decentralization. This reality confused the Sudanese political scene in terms of governance and administration, and made the provision of services unclear to citizens in most of the states of Sudan, but there has been an imbalance and an imbalance in providing these basic services. In addition to the weak development in its general concept, which is also almost no in a number of localities in Sudan.

This article provides a study in the shift from the federal system to the decentralized system in Sudan at its three levels, and with more focus on the current situation of the system of government, and if this second pattern of the ruling appears in its arrangements and the levels of judgment in it with its legislative councils, much closer to the federal form, it can be called. A minus federal system. The article also aims to know the deficiencies and challenges facing the current decentralization system in its administrative, political and financial aspects. The article seeks to provide new visions and ideas for the purpose of reforming the decentralized system in Sudan in a way that helps to strengthen the ties of national unity, and spread the developmental balance between all states of Sudan to achieve a greater amount of public satisfaction.

The fundamental question that this article is trying to answer is: How can the decentralized system be reformed in Sudan, especially in its base (local), which helps to activate the system and enhance its efficiency and effectiveness to achieve development balance at the level of all states of Sudan? Three other questions are branched from this main question: Is the problem lies in philosophy and the confusion between the two terms (decentralization and federalism) and in the blurring of the goals desired from the application of this type of incomplete federal rule? Why did many localities fail to carry out their duties and advance their responsibilities towards their citizens? How can work to reform the federal system, and to complete the deficiencies of its administrative structure in the absence of elected legislative councils, and the lack of financial resources to achieve development and the provision of service programs?

This article uses research tools that would help the scientific analysis of the challenges facing the decentralized system in its political, administrative and financial aspects, and how to overcome these obstacles in order to achieve the goals directed.The article depends on the descriptive and comparative descriptive approaches to highlight the main challenges and work to turn them into opportunities to succeed after reaching the research results.Consequently, the article aims to make specific recommendations from the hoped to contribute to strengthening the federal system, especially in its basic level if the political decision makers are taken in the country and were applied on the ground.

First: the concept of decentralization and federalism

The term "decentralization" gained various dimensions in administrative and political literature during the 1990s, as a result of the political, economic and technological changes witnessed by the world [3]. And decentralization is a term that interferes with the term federalism, just as it interferes with the means of transferring power for its decentralization. Henry Madik says that decentralization may take one of the two styles: for decentralization of delegation, which is the transfer of powers to the center's representatives, administratively. And the decentralization of abandonment, which is a waiver of powers and powers by law to local councils representing the local region [4]. Modern administrative thought distinguishes between three patterns of decentralization, namely: political decentralization, administrative decentralization, and financial decentralization [5].

As for the concept of federation, the British Knowledge Department indicated that the term entered the English language dictionary from the French language window [6]. There have been many discussions in the academic circles about the use of more than one method and more than one approach (in a pattern that balances the seriousness of meaning and ease of phrase) about the term federalism and its significance [7]. "The federation is a political organization in which the activities of the government are distributed between a central government and local governments and in a way that allows each of these governments to take activities on the basis of which final decisions are taken" [8]. As for Donald L. WhatsApp adds to this definition by saying, “The federation is based on the assumed value and credibility in the combination of unity and pluralism, and to absorb, preserve and strengthen identities within a larger political union” [9].

There is no single model of the federal system in the world that we can call an ideal model, but there are several different models [10].The federation has tribal characteristics and conditions if it is not available, the system that declares its federal adoption cannot be classified as a ruling system as a federal system.Among the most important of these conditions: the existence of a rigid constitution that explains the vertical and horizontal relations with a definition that enhances the powers and powers of the different levels of government, and the introduction of democracy as a system of governance, the multiplicity of ruling levels, and the provinces giving sufficient powers and powers based on the law through the way of abandonment [11].This is not available in the decentralized system.

A number of researchers and writers confuse the terms decentralization and federalism, and this is evident among Sudanese intellectuals, and it is manifested in their inability to differentiate between the two concepts, and a major confusion occurs in their use.Perhaps this is due to the failure of the federal culture between the rulers and the ruled in a reasonable amount, and the lack of clarification of the destinations of the federation as a form of government, as well as the lack of focus on clarifying its main goals.

Second: Sudan between federalism and decentralization

It is clear from a more comprehensive look at the problems that faced the rule and administration in Sudan that centralization spanned a longer period in the country compared to the other two systems that Sudan followed, which are decentralization and federalism, as the centralization produced a number of negatives that "resulted in administrative phenomena that were a place that was enraged by management scholars."[12].

The stage of establishing the federal rule was born constitutionally on February 4, 1991 with the issuance of the fourth constitutional decree, according to which Sudan was divided into nine states, and joint authorities were identified between the center and states [13].In a later development, and for the reasons for the increase in the political, the administrative shadow palace, and the vast area of Sudan, it was composed a committee to re -divide the states.After preparing the study, the committee made its recommendation and suggested that Sudan be divided into eighteen states.But the political decision then ruled that Sudan was distributed to 26 states [14].

The federal experience in Sudan has been required since its implementation in 1994 a number of problems, which has led the states of the (regions) to play its role according to its competencies and duties, especially in the field of providing basic services towards their citizens. The central government had a role in this default by the states due to the non -rational policies. Rather, a significant deterioration occurred in some states - Kulayiti, west of Kordofan and the White Nile - and there were no most basic elements of development. Likewise, despite the creation of many mechanisms for the purpose of achieving the development balance - such as the National Fund (to support the states as stipulated in the 1998 constitution in Article (116) paragraph (2) on its resurrection) - the financial deficit - and after a quarter of a century passed - is still accompanied by most states Sudan, if not all [15]. However, the federal system remained, based on the 1998 constitution, in its 26 states, until it came in 2005, when West Kordofan has melted in the states of north and south of Kordofan, and the states of Sudan became 25 states, and the regime became transforming into decentralization in form and not an application [16].

Since the beginning of its application in Sudan, federalism has missed many tribal conditions that must be met, such as the rigid constitution and democratic pluralism, to take it as a system that is compatible and consistent with the nature and privacy of the Sudanese state. The errors and deficiencies in the experiment also included the three levels of the federal rule, including the level of the local ruling that afflicted the administrative sag, the financial deficit, and the poor performance. This was the result of the weak public policies created by the (central) federal government, and the lack of commitment to the governors and the leaders of the local government to enforce the authorized plans and policies. On the same level, the loss of the independence of local government and the multiplicity of its laws that were designed during the period of the national era, especially during the past two decades, had the greatest impact on the atrophy of the powers and powers of the local councils. Perhaps these multiple laws have increased the opportunities for intervention and central control in local affairs, so the local governance was weakened and the latest negative results, including its deviation from its basic goals.

Chronic problems in Sudan since independence, such as not making a permanent constitution for the country, the economic problem, tribal conflicts, and the lack of national fusion, have worsened more due to the failure of central governments. This situation led to the high altitude of the tribal and regionalism, sharply and highly dangerous to the unit of social fabric and its cohesion. This situation was negatively affected by the civil administration in the various states, especially in light of limited financial resources, as it had its negative returns in the performance of all levels of the federal rule. On the other hand, the control of the governors led many localities to the latter's inability to play its role according to a sound administrative approach. With the limited financial resources, the absence of planning, or its weakness, the results were always ill in most of the states and locals of Sudan.

Third: Putting states in Sudan in the aftermath of the secession of the south

After the referendum was held for the people of South Sudan in 2011, its result was to choose the separation from the mother state and the formation of an independent state. With the secession of the south from the state, Sudan lost ten states that are all the states of the south in the Great Sudan, as Sudan lost the southern oil, which was an important resource for the public treasury. This has a significant impact on the country's financial budget, and the negative impact on reducing the volume of allocated and unoccupied transfers from the national revenues of all states. This new reality was a discount on providing services and human development, and the imbalance of comprehensive development due to insufficient financial resources. It was not the only financial deficit that negatively affected the performance of the states, but was poor planning as it was indicated before. That is, lack of commitment to implementing the priorities of plans in most states, led to administrative calcification, atrophy of development projects, the blurring of programs and community activities.

On the political level, the equation has changed in choosing the governors who had assumed their leadership positions in the states through the elections in 2010, while they were chosen by appointment in 2015. Perhaps the justification for this shift in the method of choice was related to the immediate circumstance surrounding Sudan, which is represented by some Internal and external security threats, and the height of tribalism and regionalism more. However, the necessities of that stage are added to preserve the rumor of security, the cohesion of the state entity, the preservation of its unity from fragmentation and the separation of any state from the mother state. There is no doubt that the best way is to choose the governors through direct voting, that is, democratically through the polls. Provided that the governor is from the state, and on the condition that he is stable for a continuous period of no less than four years before his candidacy; Because there is an advantage that makes the candidate familiar with the problems of the state to which he belongs, and with full knowledge of the importance of the issues that he must focus on and seek to solve it if he won the position of the governor democratically.

Fourth: The local ruling in the decentralized system: administrative sagging where?

The federal experience went through several stages before signing the comprehensive peace agreement in 2005 and after.The local rule in the post -peace stage did not pay much attention, while the agreement contained the most accurate details about the relationship of the federal national government with the states and the regional level (i.e. the government of South Sudan).And «the researcher can say - without criticizing a critic - that there is no place for local government in the Sudanese federation as stated in the comprehensive peace agreement that was included in the transitional constitution» [17].Even after the amendment of the constitution in 2015, the local government status remained marginalized, especially in its regulatory legislative apparatus.

The local government institutions dominated the weakness in the administrative organization, and the administrative work in the localities did not reflect the quality and methodology of the administration. Perhaps this is a legacy that was inherited by the departments that followed the rule of local communities several decades ago. “The methodology of administration was based on preserving institutions and changing their content in part, according to the new events in society” [18]. The local government in all parts of Sudan was lacking in trained administrative cadres; With the exception of the major cities. The workforce in many localities failed to develop and develop the local communities in which they work, as well as the weak coordination between the various development projects has a significant negative return on performance. The committees active in the localities did not arise for this purpose, and the censorship was also absent, so financial corruption was outlined and the emergence of patronage [19].

On the other hand, the loss of internal and external training had a major impact on the service of providing service work and the weak development in most localities in Sudan. In addition, the failure to use information and technology in a reasonable amount did not facilitate the administrative process and save time and effort to solve administrative problems that have been accompanied by local government in Sudan for a time. The administrative sag that occurred due to the establishment of localities for many political satisfaction and the variation in the organizational structures, especially in the states of Darfur, South and West Kordofan, and Gedaref, has caused a great administrative defect in the structure of the administrative organization of the localities, and put pressure on the state budget, and even on Federal budget on the side of public spending.

Fifth: Local Government Financial in La centralization of Sudan after 2005

The achievement of the general financial federation is a basic pillar of the federal system, and this is met by a number of challenges related to the management of revenue and requires the advancement of responsibilities a suitable amount of returns at local levels in order to distribute the necessary allocations to cover expenses and meet the state and local needs, as there are obstacles to the implementation of the financial federation It arises from the distribution of the federal government for its insufficient revenues at the lowest levels of the government (states and possibly localities) and the irregularity of allocated and unoccupied transfers from the federal government. Moreover, the intensity of the contrast between states and localities within these states requires the necessity of treating public spending management effectively [20]. As well as preparing job budget reports in a manner that takes into account inclusiveness and transparency, monitoring actual spending and its results for the purpose of promoting accountability, calculating the costs of sectoral policies and comprehensive policies with the aim of increasing the degree of transparency of the budget priorities, improving the budget credibility, linking strategic planning, development planning, the process of preparing the annual budget, and working in general To increase the use of spending analysis in decision -making.

Some economists attribute the reasons for the financial shortcomings in localities, but in Sudan as a whole, to several factors, the most important of which are:

1 -The narrowing of the vertebral vessels, especially in the distant and marginalized areas that lack education and development.

2 -The weakness of the infrastructure of the Sudanese state, represented by the methods that link production areas to each other, hinder collection and raise its costs.

3 -The weak services provided to citizens and the misuse of state resources in localities and others, and directing them for personal and regional purposes, which led to the reluctance of many regions to pay taxes, fees and titles.

4 -The tax evasion of many companies and other parties, weak tax collection, and the weakness of the cadres working in the field of taxes.

5 -The weakness of the spirit of national affiliation and the spread of tribal and regional intolerance besides self -introvertion [21].

It also became a number of states and localities in Sudan dependent on self -financial resources, so its budgets were weak, because the local revenues allocated to them were not sufficient. In the last era, many states (such as North Kordofan, Qadarif, and others) became their localities on the more agricultural revenues that are allocated to them than dependent on real estate (just as there is in the state of Khartoum that has a surplus of real estate revenues in particular). The state of Khartoum alone is the state whose localities have an organized development program without many other localities of Sudan [22]. Also, the central government is the Holding of Money in the shadow of the current system, and that the services provided by the local government on the local levels remained always without ambition, albeit not very weak, due to the weak budgets of the local government itself, as Mukhtar Al -Asam says (Professor of Administration. The former public at the University of Khartoum) «The local ruling after the signing of the comprehensive peace agreement has become a hostage to the mood of the governor of the state, which transformed the local government units into taxes for taxes instead of being budget units to provide its multiple activities.” [23]. This is a reading of a great deal of health because of the status of the local government in Sudan, and the resulting many problems that made it calcified and in many times that are consistently reproductively and unable to carry out his tasks for which he was established.

To activate the local government, spread justice and equality between all localities, "the societal partnership in power, wealth and responsibility remains strongly required" [24].This is in order to achieve a financial balance, and to raise the collective responsibility for the advancement of local government and its development in Sudan.

Sixth: The challenges facing the decentralized system in Sudan

1 - At the level of the federal government

The decentralized regime in Sudan faces challenges that prevented the regime from achieving its drawn goals and reaching its desired goals, in a way that strengthens and enhances the bonds of fragile national unity, for many reasons that accompanied the federal experience when applying in the country, as a better administrative method of government. Among the most prominent of these reasons, in addition to the aforementioned reasons, is the instability of organizational and functional structures as vessels of power and responsibility and as a basis for accountability. This situation led to the weak material and human resources, and the creation of more problems and obstacles to balanced development in the various states of the country, especially the peripheral ones (i.e. that is far from the center) as indicated from the above analysis [25]. During two and a half decades of implementing the incomplete federal system in Sudan, the need to amend the financial relations between the federal government and the units that make up its constantly increased, and calls for removing obstacles to investment and improving the tax base became one of the most important calls for reform to solve financial problems.

The most prominent challenges facing the country - as previously indicated - are not to distribute service and development resources fairly between the localities of Sudan and its various states. Consequently, the sharing of revenues and transfers in Sudan between the federal government and the units that make up it according to fair criteria (if possible) will enhance the implementation of service and development programs at all levels. Transferring the collected taxes, or making transfers from the federal government budget for the states will reduce differences and differences between those states that differ in their economic efficiency, and at the same time enhance the goals of the government's general policy. Hence the importance of arrangements and the legal mechanism that the National Commission must make to monitor and allocate revenues. This is in order to control the division of these revenues and inter -governmental transfers.

2 - At the level of states and localities

The Local Government Law for the year 1995 specified more than eight authentic jobs performed by the local, which included many and varied services, which the localities could not do under its weak financial conditions [26]. The situation continued as it is despite the slight improvement in some places. However, the 1998 law made that role larger and comprehensive for the achievement of popularity and the creation of comprehensive development, while the financial weakness in the end of the end without reaching these goals easily, especially achieving balanced development. In the 2003 Law, it was decided that the establishment of localities with a decree issued by the President of the Republic after consulting the state government [27]. The law represented a development in one of the stages of local government and its administrative construction through the link between the center and the states.

Then came the local ruling law for the year 2007, as a framework law that allows each state to establish its own laws for its own, provided that this does not contradict the framework law [28]. The product of this law, which was created by the central government, was the establishment of many localities without observing objective standards, and the administration sacked in many states of the country. In 2017, a new law for local government was authorized (which is also a framework law that made the establishment of the local establishment with the approval of the center and the state together) [29]. The most important thing in this law was the creation of a new ministry in the name of the Ministry of Local Government in every state of Sudan. This undoubtedly represents an advanced step that helps in establishing new localities in accordance with criteria that combine between the state’s desire and the governance of the center, in order to prevent the establishment of new localities without the availability of reasonable conditions, and to avoid administrative sagging at the basic level of rule in each state. But the challenge remains in law enforcement complete on the ground to complete the desired reform.

Seventh: The chances of reforming the decentralized government in Sudan

1 - Reducing the states in Sudan is an important option

In the economic conditions that the Sudanese state is going through as a result of the economic blockade imposed on it since 1997 - about two decades - and as a result of some errors in drawing and adopting total economic policies, serious thinking in reducing the number of Sudanese states remains one of the important options, to reduce exchange and spending The year, and the balance in the states in a consistency and economic sufficiency. The announcement of reducing the number of states represents a major challenge to political decision -makers at the federal level, but at the same time it can be easy and affordable if the matter is entrusted with experts specialized in governance and administration issues, and economists, by preparing studies and evaluating the current situation in the strict scientific method And conducting in -depth research with a critical vision that compares reality and example, and does not neglect to be overlooked with similar and successful experiences. In this regard - and given the existing states in Sudan - providing sufficient payments and justifications for the benefits of reducing in terms of reducing financial costs and developing good management, and creating a better organizational construction, would help achieve the developmental service balance between all new states of Sudan.

2 - Merging and reducing localities in the states of Sudan

Treating the duplication of the decision between the federal government, states and localities, and working to reform the imbalances in order to prevent the expansion and expansion of the authorities at various levels of the three governance, it is better to be fundamentally treated. Coordination must be tightened within the framework of inter -relations, especially in the level of local governance, which represents the base of the federal construction. Although the framework of the framework of local tire government for the year 2017 has dealt with the issue of establishing new localities - as mentioned before - the existing localities themselves must be reviewed in terms of number [30]. The treatment in this case requires that the number of localities currently be reduced to the lowest possible number, so that the number does not exceed one hundred and twenty local instead of one hundred and eighty local, by five to seven localities in each state. This proposed reduction would provide the economic sufficiency of the local, reduce the exchange of local government agencies, and enable localities to provide basic services in a reasonable amount and disease to citizens, in the area represented by the local. The goal of reducing should not only reduce the number, although this is strongly required. Rather, its goal should also be the supply of the local leadership with cadres with experience, skills and good capabilities, in order to enforce the plans for local councils in order to achieve the goals drawn up as possible, and in a way that leads to the satisfaction of citizens in the localities with the level of service provided to them and the development achieved in their localities.

3 - Reforming the head and horizontal financial relations between the regulations of government

Initial literature on the study of the financial federation was concerned with focusing on the concept of internal financial transfers (from the federal government to state governments), while modern literature is concerned with the concept of financial policies related to institutional changes.The diversity required in the powers granted to the states by the federal government, especially in developing countries, as is the case in Sudan.

Hence the importance of reforming public finances in Sudan to contain the escalation of the public budget deficit in the country, by reducing government spending through many optimal measures, the most important of which is gradually removing subsidies for goods and replacing it with the direct support system.Added to this is the restructuring of the state at all its federal, state and local levels, to reduce administrative cost and review state transfers, and to reschedule internal and external debts and the structure of spending, as well as rationalizing exchange and adhering to the budget priorities, and preventing exchange outside the budget.

The future of the financial federation in Sudan is subject to finding new criteria and weights, concerned with the issue of dividing financial resources between the federal government and the states. This is through a comprehensive view that focuses on the importance of the Sudanese state survival and preserving the unity of Sudanese soil. At the present time, the financial federation does not find social satisfaction with its achievements, especially in the states of Darfur and South Kordofan and the Blue Nile. This is the feeling of unstable political, economic and social conditions in these states. Therefore, the reform of the vertical relations between the federal government and the states must descend to the level of localities, considering the local building base for decentralization in Sudan, provided that the division of financial resources is fair, based on the criteria and weights that take into account the proportions distributed in it as in the experiences of the countries that took the regime Federal, whether advanced or developing. At the same time, financial reform also requires a review of horizontal relations at the state level, that is, between localities within a single state in order to cause a balance in the distribution of financial resources between different localities, according to criteria that take into account the need of local and taking into account that they are self -sufficient or poor dependent on The state and the entire position [31].

4 - Democracy and the reform of the decentralized government

The introduction of the democratic system in today's world has become the inevitable issues of any political system that is looking to recognize it regionally and internationally, and to cooperate with the countries of the region and the whole world, dictated by the laws of organizations, regional federations and the world organization. “The democratic transformation requires a great effort, a strong will, and a desire from ruling political leaders and opponents in one country alike.” [32]. In the case of Sudan, the reform concerned with the decentralization is evident in the promotion of democracy, and the strengthening of parliamentary control (in the National Council and the state and local legislative councils). And that is in order to control the violations and corruption of the central executive bodies in the capital, as well as in the states and localities as a whole, and to continue to provide embezzlement to the completed justice, in order to achieve public money and enhance the focus on the principle of accountability as one of the six dimensions of rational governance (i.e. the rule of law, justice, and transparency , Accounting, response). On the other hand, the implementation of Sudan is the federal form in a complete democratic environment, and to give states and localities a capacity of autonomy with the strengthening of the federal government authorities (the center), will prevent the state from thinking and secession from the mother state. The federal system that is based on the law and respect for minority rights is more successful than the formal system, because it also combines unity and pluralism and strengthens the political union within a larger unit [33].

Hands and recommendations

Sudan needs to review its experience in the decentralized rule in form and evaluate its content, and to refrain from it into a new federal style that depends on innovative curricula to apply the idea of federalism in a way that helps to achieve administrative and financial reform, and condemn the political.It is important for political decision -makers to realize at the same time that federalism can be failed if it is not applied on its tribal conditions that we referred to in the body of the article.

It is no secret to many that there are different visions of the federation, the owners tried to drop, marginalize them and obstruct their implementation in the country, so they prevented the fruits of federalism in Sudan.Hence the importance of targeting with successful federal experiences in the regional and global levels.There is also an urgent necessity to search for a new constitution that includes a clear definition of the system of government as a federal (federal) system and not an emotional, provided that it is applied in a complete presidential system.At the same time, the third level of rule (local) made an original level in the text of the constitution, with its share of national revenues as a ratio in the next constitution.

Attention to the administrative aspects and the choice of the capable and trained elements is a matter of the current stage in Sudan, because the human element is the basis of the success of the federal process. The article concluded that localities need to be reduced through integration, and to activate their work in a way that makes them able to provide services and achieve development to citizens better. There is a utmost importance to selecting members of local government councils through the election path in the next session of 2020, because the local government represents the federal construction base. In this regard, democracy is one of the most important elements of the federal success, and it must be taken at all levels of government - because this is a rumor of freedoms and an expansion of political at all levels of government, especially the basic basis. The collective political awareness of the Sudanese must be decided permanently in favor of democracy and the shura, values ​​and behavior, to achieve the desired goal in building a federal democratic system that protects the citizen and preserves his rights and freedoms. Democracy leads to political stability, peaceful circulation of power, and is a major and important general worker in reducing administrative corruption.

One of the most important recommendations

1 - Keeping the federal system in the presidential system as a virtuous form for the rule of Sudan, with confirmation that federalism only coexists with democracy, which must be established more at all levels of federal rule.

2 - Strengthening parliamentary control (in the National Council and state legislative councils and establishing local councils) in order to control the violations and corruption of the central, state and local executive agencies, and to provide embezzlement to the completed justice.

3 - Reconsidering the reduction in the number of localities now in Sudan to the lowest possible number, because this would provide the economic sufficiency of the local, reduce the expenses on the local government, and enable the localities to provide basic services in a reasonable amount.

4 - Reforming public finances to contain the escalation of the public budget deficit in the country through reducing government spending, by restructuring the state at all its federal, state and local levels to reduce the administrative cost.

5 - The importance of the local councils as a supervisory device that helps to control the work of the accredited in the local according to the plan permissible by the council, and focus on local priorities in providing basic services and development.

6 - Addressing the duplication of the decision between the federal government, states and localities, and working to reform the expansion and breadth of powers at various levels of the three rule, in addition to tightening coordination within the framework of inter -relations, especially in the level of local government.

You may also be interested in the Ethiopian-Sudanese border confusion ... the motives and fate of escalation

#Center of Arab Unity Studies #Sudan #Governance_Al -Sudan