Import Dollar… The People’s Dollar

Adel Al-Rifai Abulhassan
The term Import Dollar refers to the foreign exchange that the state allocated to importers at the official exchange rate—the subsidised dollar, or what was commonly known as the People’s Dollar. Its purpose was to ensure the availability of essential goods and production inputs required by both citizens and the national economy. It was therefore not a private resource, but a public one designated to serve the interests of society.
From the outset of this war, it was said that Sudan was facing a severe ordeal. Yet resilient nations know how to transform adversity into opportunity, turning crises into catalysts for comprehensive review and genuine reform. Today, after so much bloodshed, suffering and loss, the country cannot simply return to the way things were before the war as though nothing had happened.
Sudan has paid an enormous price: lives have been lost, many have been wounded or remain missing, families have lost their breadwinners, others have been left with permanent disabilities, and both public and private property has been destroyed, looted or burned. After all this pain, a historic responsibility now rests upon the state and everyone entrusted with public office to rise to the scale of these sacrifices and to work towards building a new Sudan founded on justice, the rule of law and strong institutions.
However, state-building does not begin by postponing difficult issues or merely tending to old wounds. It begins with honesty, transparency and a willingness to confront unresolved questions. Problems that remain unaddressed do not disappear; they accumulate until they develop into even greater crises.
This is why the issue of the Import Dollar—the People’s Dollar—must be among the first files to be opened.
The legitimate questions are straightforward: How was this programme managed over the years? Did it achieve the objectives for which it was established? Was the foreign exchange allocated by the state used for its intended purpose? And did ordinary citizens ultimately benefit through the availability of essential goods at prices consistent with the programme’s original objectives?
Public concern over this issue did not arise without reason. It stems from three principal factors: the lengthy period during which a limited number of beneficiaries reportedly enjoyed access to this public resource, the substantial financial value involved, and the concentration of those benefits in relatively few hands while ordinary citizens bore the burden of recurring economic crises and declining living standards.
Over time, some beneficiaries are said to have accumulated considerable wealth and assets—including investments, factories, land holdings and business interests both inside and outside Sudan. Such developments have generated widespread public questions regarding how these fortunes were built, the extent to which they were linked to opportunities created by access to the People’s Dollar, and whether they reflected genuine commercial returns or advantages derived from preferential access to public resources.
Opening this file should not be interpreted as an attempt to accuse individuals or settle political scores. Rather, it is about establishing the facts. The Sudanese people have the right to know how one of their national resources was administered, and the state has a duty to review the matter and, under the law, hold accountable anyone found to have acted improperly or negligently.
Similarly, export proceeds—the country’s principal source of foreign currency—should also be reviewed. Their management, the effectiveness of oversight mechanisms, and any structural weaknesses requiring reform all deserve careful examination.
At the same time, it must be recognised that the Import Dollar is merely one example rather than the only issue requiring attention. This review should extend across all sectors of government without exception. Every file should be placed on the table, every policy subjected to evaluation, and every legitimate grievance allowed being addressed through justice.
This moment calls not for piecemeal or temporary solutions, but for a new national strategy founded on coherent public policies, effective legislation, robust oversight and monitoring mechanisms, stronger institutions, better-trained public servants, and a clear link between responsibility and accountability.
The first step in this reform process must come from government itself. It should accept full responsibility by preparing the institutional foundations for the next phase through the development of comprehensive strategies, detailed policies, sound legislation and practical mechanisms capable of ensuring effective governance and responsible management of public resources.
Strong governments understand that their responsibilities extend far beyond a single function. Just as the state must possess an armed force capable of defending the nation, it must also possess another hand dedicated to reform, another committed to development, and another devoted to building enduring institutions. War should not halt the process of state-building; indeed, where political will exists, it can become an impetus for accelerating reform.
This period also demands broader participation. No patriotic citizen capable of contributing should be excluded, and the voices and aspirations of the Sudanese people should be heard. Nations are not built through political quotas, circumvention or temporary arrangements, but through an inclusive national project.
Addressing these issues represents not only an important step towards economic reform but also a pathway to genuine national reconciliation. Reconciliation cannot be built upon forgetting or overlooking grievances. Rather, it requires honesty, transparency, establishing facts, and rebuilding trust between citizens and the state.
When people believe that national resources are managed fairly, that the law applies equally to everyone, and that government listens to its citizens, the foundations are laid for peaceful coexistence and for preventing the accumulation of resentment that may otherwise give rise to future crises.
Ultimately, one fundamental question remains for every Sudanese citizen:
Why do we continually return to the beginning? Why does each generation have to start from scratch? Why do we fail to build upon the achievements of those who came before us?
Over many decades, Sudan has lost a significant part of its institutional and intellectual accumulation, while other nations have built upon their past experiences, strengthened their institutions and preserved earlier achievements. Too often, Sudan has returned to square one, repeating the same mistakes.
This war must therefore become a genuine turning point. The purpose of opening these files is not revenge, but the construction of a state that values truth, corrects past mistakes, protects public resources and ensures that such failures are never repeated.
The path forward is clear. The lessons are available, and the solutions are known. Many nations have emerged from devastating conflicts to reconcile, rebuild and prosper. What Sudan requires today is the sincere political will to transform this ordeal into an opportunity.
And that journey begins with a question that cannot be ignored:
Where did the Import Dollar—the People’s Dollar—go?

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=16596