From Reaction to Partnership: Redefining the Relationship Between State and Society

Ramadan Ahmed

In a previous article, I explored the growing influence of social media on official decision-making and how it has evolved into an effective instrument of public pressure—sometimes capable of exposing errors and prompting policy corrections. Yet the more pressing question today is no longer whether these platforms exert influence. The real challenge is this: how can we transform spontaneous digital pressure into structured, institutional participation in the making of public policy?

We are living in an era in which the state is no longer the sole custodian of information, nor the citizen a passive recipient of decisions. With the widespread use of smartphones and internet connectivity, the overwhelming majority of citizens can now participate in the digital sphere—directly or indirectly. This transformation opens the door to redefining the relationship between state and society.

From Reaction to Partnership

In many political systems, citizen engagement occurs only after a decision has been made—manifesting as protest, rejection, or media campaigns. What is required instead is a structural shift: moving citizens from the position of “objectors after the fact” to that of “partners before the decision.”

Citizen engagement does not mean governing by impulsive opinion polls or emotional trends. Rather, it requires building transparent digital mechanisms that allow the public to review proposals, discuss policy options, nominate candidates, and provide feedback before major decisions are finalised.

The objective is not to weaken institutions, but to strengthen them through broader legitimacy and shared responsibility.

A Practical Framework for Institutional Engagement

A concrete first step could be the launch of a national initiative to establish an independent body titled the Citizen Engagement Authority. This body would consist of ten members nominated through an official electronic platform, based on clear and publicly announced criteria, such as:

• Full Sudanese citizenship and legal capacity
• Academic qualifications in relevant fields (law, public administration, economics, information technology, etc.)
• Demonstrated professional experience
• No current executive affiliation with government bodies, ensuring institutional independence

The nomination platform would remain open for a specified period. All nominees’ names and CVs would be published transparently, allowing public review and commentary before final selection based strictly on merit and integrity.
The mandate of this authority would include:

• Organising structured public consultation mechanisms
• Managing interactive digital platforms for civic input
• Receiving and reviewing citizen proposals
• Submitting periodic reports to both executive and legislative institutions

Such a body would institutionalise participation rather than leaving it to informal online pressure.

Digital Nomination for Public Office

One of the chronic weaknesses in public administration is the dominance of patronage and personal networks over competence. A digital framework can help address this imbalance by:

• Publishing clear job descriptions for ministerial and senior leadership positions
• Opening electronic applications to qualified candidates
• Publishing shortlists of eligible nominees
• Allowing the public to submit feedback or express support

This approach shifts appointments from closed-door decisions to transparent, merit-based processes subject to public scrutiny. The goal is not to politicise every appointment but to reinforce trust and accountability.

Public Consultation on Major National Decisions

Structured digital consultation can also be applied to critical national matters, including:

• Draft legislation
• Major economic reforms
• International agreements
• Long-term strategic plans

Clear, simplified summaries of proposed policies should be made available on official platforms, followed by a defined consultation period. A synthesised report of public input should then accompany the final decision.

This process strengthens policy quality while enhancing societal ownership of national decisions.

Advantages of a Participatory Digital Model

This model offers several advantages:

• Reduced unilateralism: Broader input minimises poorly designed or socially unacceptable policies.
• Shared responsibility: When decisions result from consultation, accountability becomes collective rather than concentrated.
• Enhanced trust: Citizens begin to see themselves as partners rather than subjects.
• Inclusion of the diaspora: Digital participation allows equal engagement for citizens both inside the country and abroad.

In essence, participation improves both legitimacy and resilience.

Challenges and Safeguards

However, digital participation is not without risks:

• Populism driven by emotional or short-term reactions
• Manipulation through bots, misinformation, or coordinated campaigns
• Political exploitation of digital platforms

These risks require clear legal frameworks, technical safeguards, and strong institutional oversight. Citizen engagement must be structured, regulated, and protected—not allowed to devolve into digital chaos.

Conclusion

Social media is not merely a platform for entertainment or political debate; it has the potential to become a foundational infrastructure for modern democratic governance. The question is no longer whether to use it, but how to use it responsibly and effectively.
The era of decisions made behind closed doors, insulated from accountability, is rapidly fading. Any state that refuses to adapt to this reality risks constant friction with a digitally connected society that cannot be ignored.
Citizen engagement is not a political luxury. It is a prerequisite for legitimacy, transparency, and good governance in the twenty-first century.

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=11230