The untrammelled exercise of power, without legal, political or moral restraint is the bane of many countries across Africa. That is why the abuse of power tends to manifest itself in a more grimly way amongst our peoples. It is not that politicians in other societies are not wilful or whimsical, but there are other institutions that can checkmate them or restrain them and control their excesses.

These will include the formal separation of powers between the Executive, Judiciary and Legislative functions. But outside of that are other autonomous and independent institutions and organisations that offer alternative centres of power and consensus building on values and goals of their society. They include vibrant political parties whether in government or opposition, independent media, religious institutions, academia and intelligentsia and above all an active citizenship including vocal public figures and dynamic civil society organisations at various levels in the society. All these will make varying claims on a democratic system that often restrain and engage with those in power.

I say often because sometimes there may be a dissonance between these forces and things may (and do) break down. But the essence of a democratic state is that periods of extreme pressures on the system tend to be temporary and society can look forward to a peaceful resolution of differences and return to the normal dynamic chaos of a democratic society.

There is nothing in Sudan that a genuine people-driven democratic governance cannot help to resolve. I say democratic governance not the more fashionable 'good governance' much beloved by NGOs and Donors. You can have a good government without it being essentially democratic.

The continuing tragedy in Darfur makes clear the need for democratic governance. If their government treated all Sudanese as equal citizens with the same rights and obligations, the impunity with which one section of the community can kill or exterminate another section of the society would not have risen. If the government of Sudan is one that cares about its people it will not be aiding and abetting these sectarian killings and hate campaigns.

Furthermore, if there are reasonable hopes for those who desire a change of government in Khartoum (as a means of effecting policy changes) then a resort to arms could have been avoided. This is not in defence of violent changes but a restatement of the old dictum: 'Those who make peaceful changes impossible make violent change inevitable'.

It is a central problem of the Sudan that all attempts at peaceful resolution always take for granted the existence of the Khartoum government of the day. The peace deals then become regime specific rather than for all Sudan. A comprehensive settlement in the Sudan has to be one driven not by the needs of the government of the day and armed groups they consider threats but all Sudanese otherwise rebel groups will continuously become more militant. Africa has had too many bitter and painful experiences of many pretenders to power and false messiahs, offering themselves and their rebel groups as liberators only to become worse than those they claim they have come to liberate people from. Therefore as we rightly criticize the government of Sudan for abrogating its responsibility to defend all its citizens and maintain the rule of law we should also look critically at the rebels, their promises, their actions and what alternative vision of society they are offering.

If the government is a killer government what are the rebels doing to protect the victims? How are people despite the emergencies and death that surround them being involved in decisions? It cannot be enough that rebel groups build good will from the badness of the government. The stress should shift from what they are opposing to what they actually stand for.

Talks between the government and the Darfur rebels are due to begin in two weeks in Abuja under the auspices of President Obasanjo, who is both Chair of the Peace and Security Council and the African Union. The SLA and JEM have both said they would attend after failing to show up in a previous AU brokered talks in Addis.

The Sudan Government is very good at showing itself as a victim of conspiracies. They play whatever music suits the ears of their audience. In AU circles they play up Pan Africanism and the anti imperialist card while arming one section of Africans in their country to exterminate another set of Africans! When they are in the Arab League they play to Pan Arabism and Islam. It is not surprising that the recent Arab League meeting came out in support of Khartoum and made a plea for more time for Sudan to comply with the UN deadline of the end of this month. Why should the government have more time to continue to kill its citizens?

And they have a baby face Foreign Minister, well-spoken Dr Mustafa Ismail, to sell their bad case diplomatically and politically. I first met the urbane Dentist early in 1994. I had gone to persuade the government of Sudan to attend the 7th PAC in Kampala. They had been very suspicious of our efforts largely due to the bad relationship between Kampala and Khartoum. Khartoum was not happy that Dr John Garang and the SPLA were being given prominent platforms in the Congress.

Ten years on Mustafa has emerged as the star of Bashir's killer regime while his former mentor, Dr Al Turabi is languishing in detention; Bashir is holding hands with Garang; Kampala and Khartoum have restored diplomatic relations and my good friend, Mustafa, has changed masters without anyone noticing! He may have smoothed his way from Turabi to Bashir effortlessly, but the rest of the world should not be that gullible. It is obvious that Khartoum is using talks to delay any meaningful action and the rebels will be colluding in that if they do not actively engage with the peace process.

Dr Tajudeen Abdul-Raheem is General-Secretary of the Pan African Movement, Kampala (Uganda) and Co-Director of Justice Africa ([email protected] or [email][email protected])

* Please send comments to [email protected]