In response to http://www.cicfcinc.com/uofk/html/response_01.html
Thanks Omer Elsayed for your responses. I will try to show my point of view in each according to your numbering:
- I actually like the fact that you are doing the impartial analysis, which nobody else is doing (at least publicly). This is a good starting point. My point is that you lack some of the pertinent facts, which ties with point 3 in the sense that I should give examples I guess.
- “It makes no difference if you are a member of the National Congress Party or the Communist Party! Members of the current Parliament are due for an election at some point of time.” I have actually been vague (as you said) on many points precisely because saying my opinions about somethings would carry the risk of torture up to (and including) death as far as the history of the current government is concerned. I have studied in Her Majesty’s Kingdom, and have voted there for the past two elections. Fair elections needs the existence of certain rights including free press and the rule of law: I won’t try to campaign for a change of law in the UK if I know that I can be punished extra-judicially by, say, the MI5 breaking in my house at the middle of the night and carrying me off to God knows where. As for the democratic process you know, if it exists here I would be in total support of your whole agenda.
- As an example, do you believe that closing the university was actually necessary according to the laws, or could the administration have taken some other path forward? (I am afraid I cannot give a better example without rubbing someone with power the wrong way)
- Totally agree. I just meant that the 1995 document might not reveal the whole picture to you. Example is the next point.
- The deans are recognised individually. The Council of Deans is created by the Vice-Chancellor who invests some of his powers in it as explained by Prof. Sami Sharif in many posts here. In particular, closing of the university is taken by the council under these invested powers, not under those of the individual deans.
- In short, many Sudanese including those in power lack the ability to manage. This has reflected in the tendency for micromanagement and dictatorship among Sudanese as evidenced by its modern history. In fact, I perceive the fact that none of the people in Sudan is willing to carry out the exercise you are doing as a small example of the lack of understanding of the concept of building concensus. See also the Sudanese government negotiations with internal and external and internal groups. (If people like General Lazarus Simboyo wrote books about Sudanese negotiations I would certainly buy them)
- I would agree with that, though work on a larger scale may be necessary. Thanks for the flattery!
- May be I am a bit frustrated, but bear in mind that my relationship with the university extends back to when I was born to a university PhD student in a scholarship paid by the U of K. He still works at the university, and I did work a few years here as well. I believe I am in a situation to compare a few successive generations of administration under various governments. Anyway, what I did mean is not the lack of theoretical knowledge or ability to master whatever skill they have the inclination to have. I meant a certain fact (which you may add to your collection) that the university has lost a large number of senior staff over the last few decades. For example, according to Prof. Sami Sharif, the university has only 35 full professors under the age of sixty. According to the web site (http://www.uofk.edu/en/slide/facts-and-figures.uofk) the university has 119 professors. We have lost organisational knowledge including experience in dealing with past crises. Just think what does that mean in terms of the senate and the governance of this institution. I can count 14 vice-chancellors since 1989, think how much experience is lost.
- The background given might not relate directly to the reopening of the university, but it should give you an idea why your suggestions to that end might not work. You seem to be assuming that the administration and the students can overcome their differences by trusting various governmental apparatus, from the judiciary to the ministry to the electoral commision probably. While I fully support building concensus to work towards a solution the way you are working towards, I believe that a number of tools that should be available to you actually are not. For example, you can’t assume that the Magna Carta or habeas corpus or its equivalent holds. As for the two points: in the first point I did not crucify the staff, just stated that they lack experience. I do agree with the writer that the university has a high quality of graduates in terms of academic distinction. As for the second point: Dr. Mamoun Humaida was the vice chancellor until 1994, so you need to check the act before the 1995 act. (My guess is that one of the reasons the law was changed was because of the well-known conflict between Mamoun and the then Minister Ibrahim Ahmed Omer, but I digress). Also note from the article that the university has no legal recourse to recover assets it lost to governmental agencies. I would add here that the last vice-chancellor did try to recover some of these, but governmental agencies by and large cannot be subjected to the law unless an internal political conflict in the governing party facilitates so. I alluded to this is my point about the rule of law.
- I never claimed your conflict of interest, and I have no reason to. I would tell you one thing: I would support your mission as you define it if you can guarantee my personal safety if I try the “legal” channels including a media campaign and electioneering to advocate changes to government and/or university laws. As it is, I have almost gone too far but it is less likely to be punished for writing in English. Also, my belief that I can flee the country (I have dual nationality) is the main reason I feel I can speak this much. In support of such a statement, I draw your attention to the two students currently under extra-judicial arrest.
- Related to the above point: if you can guarantee that the rule of law will be upheld by the government apparatus, and that the students can get their due rights by pursuing legal action, I believe that you will find them more amenable to negotiations.
My personal belief is that the current U of K problem can be solved partly or wholly by building confidence, and I have mentioned the importance of confidence building measures. If you still want to pursue this issue, I suggest you work it taking into account that Sudan is effectively a failed state. That is not to say that the problem can’t be solved, but that building confidence needs a different route than relying on a sham democracy, the type of “democracy” prevailing in Egypt in the Mubarak era.
In short, equality before the law is a precondition to democracy.