Domesticating Treaties in the Legal System of South Sudan – A Monist or Dualist Approach?

Abstract

This article examines the approach for the domestication of treaties in South Sudan. Such examination is undergone in light of the theories for the domestication of international law norms into the domestic legal systems of state members of the international community. The article establishes that the approach in South Sudan is not clearly indicated, and seems to be inconsistent with regard to the practice of various institutions linked to the domestication of treaties process in South Sudan. However, the article expands on two foundations: the status quo and the ‘ought to be’ approach. The article argues that the approach as it exists seems to be a monist rather than a dualist approach. This is evident from the indicators of South Sudan's constitutional, legislative and judicial settings such as the text of the Transitional Constitution of South Sudan 2011, the treaty ratification process, the practices of the National Legislative Assembly in respect of international conventions and a judicial circular issued by the Supreme Court of South Sudan. Furthermore, the article advances that the ‘as ought to exist’ approach needs to be a clearly mixed approach, partly monist and partly dualist. Such approach combines the advantages associated with each approach in one place. The article recommends that there is a need to have a well informed, well established and clear status in respect of the domestication approach guided by the various arrangements and settings highlighted above. It may also take account of the various states’ attitudes towards international law and the legal school of thought which forms the basis of South Sudan legal system. Such recommendation could be materialised via an act of parliament, a regulation or a practice manual.