Women's Rights in the two Sudans : A study on the adoption of legislation on women’s rights in Sudan and South Sudan

Abstract: In 2011 the state of South Sudan gained its independence from Sudan and thus became the world’s youngest country to date. During its nine years of existence the country has ratified several major conventions and protocols on women’s rights, whereas Sudan has yet to ratify any. Despite being the same country until barely a decade ago the two authoritarian countries have approached the legislative rights of women in very different manners. Based on a Method of Difference-design, and with the help of process-tracing, this study seeks to answer why this is. By consulting previous research on why authoritarian states advance women’s rights, this study distinguishes three main, indicative theoretical patterns from earlier research which argues under what circumstances authoritarian states advance women’s rights, and when they do not. These patterns include the stability of the government, the work of women’s rights movements and the states relations with the international community. It is concluded that the explanation for the different behaviours of the two Sudans lay mainly in their tactics of governing. South Sudan adopts reforms on gender equality to keep its population content but makes sure to closely control and monitor these reforms. Their women’s rights organisations can be outspoken, and they share the goals of ratifying certain women’s rights conventions. Furthermore, their main donors often include conditions of state-building on their foreign aid, forcing South Sudan to advance on issues such as women’s rights. In contrast, Sudan applies a more violent and oppressing stance against its population, suppress women’s movements and rely mainly on unconditional investments rather than conditional aid from the international community. Furthermore, the women’s movements of Sudan have not expressed a shared goal of ratifying conventions on women’s rights.