Face of Truth: Parliament… Between Legitimacy and Politics

Ibrahim Shaglawi

The state is no longer facing only an existential war, but a war against its very meaning, its institutions, and its right to represent its people. The absence of parliament since 2019 was not merely a legislative vacuum, but a strategic breach through which internal divisions were exploited, regional pressures were activated, and international blackmail attempts intensified, until the national decision became suspended between external platforms and the challenges of internal war.

In this context, the meeting that brought together President Al-Burhan and political forces in Port Sudan last January — which included leaders of the Democratic Bloc, the National Forces Coordination, and the National Movement Alliance — reopened the postponed question: How can the state be restored when guns precede it and institutions are absent? The message carried by the meeting was clear: military power alone does not build a state, and legitimacy cannot be restored except through institutions that represent the people and protect their decisions.

From here, the request by the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council and Commander of the Army for political forces to submit their visions regarding the formation and timing of the Legislative Council is understood as a move to reproduce legitimate authority and protect the national decision from subordination.

However, this move opened the door to synchronized statements from various forces, parties, and entities. These did not merely reflect differences in visions, but revealed a muted political battle over who owns the right to represent Sudan in the post-war phase. The Democratic Unionist Party (Original) issued an expanded political statement warning against hijacking the scene through an appointed parliament without broad consultation, and called for managing the phase with an inclusive national spirit.

In contrast, the National Movement Forces affirmed the necessity of establishing the council as an entitlement to complete the institutions of the transition. In the same direction, the Future Party for Reform and Development stated that forming the council represents an urgent political entitlement for the success of the transition, provided it is done on the basis of broad national consensus and with fair and transparent standards.

The National Forces Gathering also announced its support for the direction of the Chairman of the Sovereignty Council, considering that the previous suspension of parliament was out of fear of accountability, while Minni Arko Minnawi revealed the formation of a committee to develop visions for its formation, in a clear indication of the desire of the Juba Agreement parties to reposition themselves within the equation.

The Democratic Bloc also emerged as one of the actors pushing toward this path.

This rush to issue statements reproduced the logic of the “bloc” rather than the logic of the “state,” and raised the level of political blackmail, so that parliament — before it is even born — has become hostage to balances of influence and arms, instead of being a tool to open a new national horizon.

The establishment of parliament was an original entitlement since the first Constitutional Document in August 2019, and it was reaffirmed in its 2025 amendment, where its composition, membership ceiling, and guarantees of representation for peace parties and women were defined. Nevertheless, this entitlement remained suspended between committees that are announced and then disappear, and balances managed behind the scenes, while the Sovereignty Council and the Council of Ministers continued to exercise temporary legislative authority that lacks the depth of representation and sufficient legitimacy.

Thus, a dual predicament has accumulated: an internal one

manifested in the absence of oversight and accountability, and an external one represented in opening the door to interventions seeking to shape the national decision in a state emerging from war. Legitimacy is not built through alignment, but by expanding the base of participation.

The anticipated parliament, if achieved with broad and balanced representation, can transform from merely a transitional body into a sovereign wall upon which leadership can lean in confronting blackmail, and through which it can base decisions of war and peace alike.

Here, the difference becomes clear between a people who live the war with all its cruelty and want it to stop because they are burned by its fire daily, and networks of discourse that speak in their name from exile without paying its price. Parliament is the only tool to organize this internal voice and translate it into a clear political will, so that destiny decisions are not attributed to individuals or groups, but are taken in the name of a national consensus that grants them the necessary legitimacy.

Yet, the road to the state is not completed by parliament alone. Sudan needs a new social contract that links the citizen to the state, defines clear lines between authority and society, and transforms institutions into mechanisms for protecting national rights.

This project must include empowering all state institutions, from the army to the police to the judiciary, to the elites, with active participation of society in political decision-making, so that the state becomes a platform for peace and development, not merely a tool of power.

On the other hand, this phase represents an unprecedented opportunity to re-engineer the state. The transitional parliament, if selected according to clear and objective criteria, can be a starting point for restoring trust in national institutions. Focusing on regional and societal representation, while selecting scientifically and practically qualified figures from various disciplines, ensures that parliament transforms from a political tool into a supervisory body that contributes to state stability and strengthens national legitimacy.

According to #Face_of_Truth, parliament — between legitimacy and politics — is the backbone of restoring the Sudanese state and building its national institutions. It is not merely a legislative body, but a platform for translating the will of the people into real decisions, and a fortress that protects national sovereignty from chaos and external blackmail, and a bridge linking the citizen to the state after years of vacuum and conflict. Its broad and balanced representation transforms military victories into an effective and stable state, and lays the foundation for a real political transition, where parliament becomes the essence of national construction and the umbrella of sovereignty that brings all Sudanese together under the roof of the true state.

Stay safe and well.

Monday, 9 February 2026

Shglawi55@gmail.com