# **_The quota system introduced in the National Elections Act_**

The 2008 National Elections Act mandated that 25 percent of the seats in both State and National Parliamentary Assemblies should be held by women. This act follows article 32.2 of the Constitution which reads: “The State shall promote women rights through positive discrimination actions” (UNDP 2018, 11). One of the rationales for setting various quotas for Parliaments is that the inclusion of a diversity of groups, for example, gender, ethnic, religious, will not only benefit the members of those groups but will also benefit society as a whole. In Sudan, this quota system led to changes in the share of women in Parliament: while in 1980, only 5 percent of the seats in Parliament were held by women, by 2010, that figure rose to 28 percent (UNDP 2018). At present, 133 of the 426 seats in Sudan’s National Assembly, or 31 percent, are held by women (International IDEA, International Parliamentary Union, and Stockholm University 2020).

However, there is an ongoing discussion about the quota system and whether it really paved the way for increased female participation in decision-making positions. According to the 2018 Arab Barometer, while 79 percent of respondents are supportive of quotas to increase women’s political representation, 83 percent believe that men make better political leaders than women. The Afrobarometer (2018) provides additional telling insights related to the rights to be elected: 61 percent of female respondents agree that women should have the same chance as men to be elected to political office, compared to 36 percent of men. Despite the comparatively high percentage of women in Sudan’s National Assembly (as a comparator, only 23 percent of the seats in the US House of Representatives are held by women), there has been little discussion on reforming the aspects of the 1991 MPSL that subordinate women to men. Tonnessen and El Nagar (2013) posit several reasons for this. Namely, the 2008 National Elections Act was passed because women who represented a diversity of geographic regions, socioeconomic strata, and political leanings came together to form one broad coalition. Since the passing of the 2008 National Elections Act, however, the great majority of the seats in the National Assembly have been filled by women who represent a narrow spectrum of that coalition. Tonnessen and El Nagar classify these women as the ‘gender equity’ bloc. This bloc supports the existing 1991 MPSL. Disagreeing with these women are women who are not in the government but in civil society who Tonnessen and El Nagar classify as the ‘gender equality’ movement. This movement’s platform is synonymous with Western human rights platforms that oppose gender differentiation and the gender subordination that the 1991 MPSL condones (Tonnessen and El Nagar 2013). In a recent article about the role that international law might play in removing gender disparities in Sudanese law, Halim (2019, 41) suggests that, “The state may give token recognition to gender equality by placing some women in governmental offices and appointing some to the legislative body. Lip service may be paid to the important role of women in the development of the country, but women are only permitted to perform the role designed for them by the ruling patriarch.”

# **_Land and property rights_**

Despite Sudan’s significant landmass, communal access to and legal ownership of land have become sources of conflict in recent decades, as customary rights have clashed with the state’s rights over, among other things, foreign companies’ rights to drill and mine (Calkins et al. 2015). According to a UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) Gender and Land Rights Database, there are two different systems of 27