This was but just a philosophy developed to lobby masses against the then President Nimeri’s call that all land was for the government. Indeed, it is worth appreciating that land belongs to the community. But the question “Who exactly is the community?” is where controversy lies. People have divergent perspectives on the definition of a community.

The Interim Constitution of Southern Sudan has some element of ambiguity. That is, there is non-specificity in the definition of the community, to whom land belongs. It defines a community as by ancestral origin, or by residence, or by interest! So, a community of a given tribe or clan has the right to claim own land as ‘owner’ just like a community of professionals.

In the same pattern land can be defined as belonging to a group of people inhabiting it. All these groups can conflict on the same piece of land because they have their own definitions of the “community”, the said land owner. Herewith, many people are optimistic that it is important for the recently formed Constitutional Review Committee to come up with a precise definition of the community to avoid further confusion.

It is worth mentioning that most conflicts at hand are land issues. Even at government levels, there are grudges in land allotment because land titles are misinterpreted. Needless to mention, ethnic tensions associated with terms like ‘land grabbing’ are as common as the political term ‘marginalization’.

Our cities are exposed to limited expansion because native communities, who are closer to the intended definition of the community with regard to land ownership, refuse to lease land not only to immigrant individuals but also to government institutions. It is not until some financial conditions are met that land is acquired.

With all these, where shall South Sudan, a potential country, get free land for its expanding institutions, cities and towns? What if land is withheld by the government as its property, shall there be no other political organizations that will emerge in the name of ‘land belongs to the community’ just like the SPLM did some time back? The ball is in the court; it should be played in a fair, meaningful way.

The best mechanism, I believe, will solve potential problems associated with land is mass campaign and demarcation of administrative control over land. The state, the county, the Payam, and the common indigenous land owners should be allotted specified land categories, say class one, two three, and so on. This move can prevent encroachment by one level of authority in another’s area of jurisdiction. Also, land can easily be allotted to non-native individuals than it is now.

There are also exceptions over who should be in control. In traditional counties, which are of less national importance, authority should be given to the locals whereas in state capitals residence should be open to all.

For instance, any citizen in a state capital has the right to own land, because the state government belongs to all, not to the native community! In other words, the choice is one; either to permit land to all citizens or remove the capital and remain undisturbed.

This aspect is critical of Juba, where administrative conflict between GOSS and Central Equatoria state government, as well as the native Bari Community. A proposal for change of city is gaining ground.

During an interview with Prof. Isaac Cuir Riak, a senior Development Consultant and Chief Executive officer of Africa Development Consultancy Firm (ADCF) in World Bank, he said the community of Yirol County (in Lakes state) has wholeheartedly welcomed government’s plan of make Ramciel (an area within Yirol County) the capital of the new state. Meanwhile, consultations are underway for the Central Equatoria government to either transfer to a new town or else GOSS quits Juba for Ramciel.

It still remains in the hand of the Government of Southern Sudan (GOSS) to find any other suitable land crises dissolution mechanisms. Problems on land are quite numerous and assume varying shape, depending on how they present. Today only a handful of the population is in legal possession of land yet everyone has a residence. These people remain to question as to how they acquired the land and thereafter legalize it.

Also, some government decisions suffer severe criticism although the move may be appropriate. Take the 2009 Juba demolitions, for instance. Not many citizens welcomed it because it subjected the affected citizens to adverse destitution.

On the other hand, it created a suitable atmosphere for establishment in addition to impeding criminal activities in the previously jam-packed estates of Nyakuron and Juba town centre. At least some citizens appreciate the move up to this late.

So, it may take GOSS time for its daily moves to gain appreciation. They should never be discouraged of criticism provided there is logic in a decision. Reluctance to change even if the change has everything worthy enough to offer is a human character that should not put off progress.