IMMEDIATE STEPS RECOMMENDED

May 9, 2014 (SSNA) -- The South Sudan Women Cry for Peace Group have been following the unfortunate events that unfolded on the 15th of December 2013 with sadness. To that effect the group was established in January 2014 and thereafter released two statements dated the 7th of January and the 21st of February 2014 respectively. The first statement contributed significantly to the cessation of hostilities draft and the second called for a renewed commitment to the cessation of hostilities agreement, including the release of the remaining four in detention and Hon. Dr. Adwok Nyaba. We are grateful for the release of the four detainees and will continue to call for the government to lift the travel ban on Hon. Dr. Adwok Nyaba to allow him participate in the ongoing negotiations in Addis and/or undertake his personal needs as desired.

Addressing the key leaders in this crisis ahead of the Friday 9th May crucial meeting, we take the opportunity to brief H.E. the President, the leader of the SPLM-OP and the international community on the South Sudan Women Cry for Peace position on the way forward. The aim/ objective of this position is to achieve the following goals:

1. Stop the killings and revenge killings of innocent civilians caught up in the ethnic conflict.

2. Create space for the urgently needed humanitarian response for the victims of this crisis.

3. Create a conducive environment for an effective reconciliation process among the people of

South Sudan.

4. Take the country back on the right path, the path to unity, equal distribution of wealth and livelihoods opportunities; accessible and trusted justice system; inclusive and representative political system; and an independent (of politics and tribalism), professional, efficient and structured military and paramilitary structures, among others.

5. Ensure the factors that led to this crisis are addressed in a conclusive and sustainable manner to avoid a repeat of a similar experience in the future.

With this in mind, we believe a return to basics is necessary, to undo the factors that led to the crisis, and recommend the following as immediate steps to be agreed by the two leaders with the support of the international community:

A. Dissolve the current government, including the parliament, independent commissions and set up a transitional government that does not include H.E. the President, the leader of the SPLMOP, the current cabinet Ministers in government, members of the mediating delegations on both sides, as well as former senior government officials since the independence of South Sudan, so as to create a neutral space for reconciliation, an important pre-requisite for peace.

B. Establish a transitional government with lean structures mainly led by experienced local/national technocrats (representative of the Country) in partnership with the United Nations.

C. Task the transitional government with a consultation process throughout South Sudan, to ensure all citizens voice their frustrations and contribute to the solutions to issues that led to thecrisis. Their contributions should be factored into the wider mandate of the transitionalgovernment and inform the reconciliation process.

D. Agree on an initial mandate for the transitional government to include: disarmament and military restructuring/trauma counselling and reconciliation/reconstruction of basic infrastructure/re-establishing basic services and strengthening livelihood opportunities/reestablishing a transparent electoral system and reviewing political party registration rules and conditions, (each of these areas can be fleshed out with the help of the respective technocrats) and a final draft can be finalised once contribution of citizens are synthesised.

E. Agree on a duration for the transitional period, and here we recommend a minimum period of two years, with the first year fully concentrating on programmes that strengthen reconciliation, healing and restoration of livelihoods among all people of South Sudan.

F. During the two years of transitional government, agree on a process for political party regulations review, taking into consideration factors within the SPLM that led to the currentcrisis and the factors that have strangled the emergence of a strong opposition party, a necessityfor democracy. The two year period will also be essential for new and existing political partiesto re-establish their identity as necessary and prepare for re-registration based on newregulations agreed, and election campaign.

G. Certain pre-agreed essential agreements with other Countries, such as the oil agreement with Sudan should continue as it stands, to ensure revenues derived from the oil continue to be the main source of revenues required for the transitional programme.

H. In addition to the mandate recommended above, the transitional government should be mandated to re-activate a joint human rights investigation team that includes the Human Rights Watch INGO, the UN Human Rights group, the AU Human Rights Committee and a local Human rights team, to work together in the investigation of atrocities committed as of the 15th of December 2013, for increased trust in the reconciliation process. The findings should be shared widely and inform both the reconciliation process as well as recommendations to ensure the experience never repeats itself in future.

I. A comprehensive reconciliations process should be determined in consultation with the victims in South Sudan and informed by the HR investigation findings that include among others access to the findings of the HR investigation, a compensation package, comprehensive support for return and resettlement of refugees and the internally displaced citizens; Country wide disarmament; trauma counselling for both the victims and the combats, a forum for dialogue between the most affected ethnic groups as well as among all citizens in the Country.

The SSWCFP group believes reconciliation is a pre-condition for sustainable stability in the Country and therefore should be mainstreamed sufficiently into the ‘road map’ to sustainable peace and stability in South Sudan. As such the recommendations above are all geared towards creating the right environment for an effective and efficient reconciliation process among the people of South Sudan. The SSWCFP also believe that short-cuts to ending this crisis will only create a temporary solution and we strongly advice that this is avoided at all costs. Efforts of all stakeholders should be geared towards a permanent solution for all disgruntled groups in South Sudan.

Signed: South Sudan Women Cry for Peace

Press Release

Nairobi, May 11, 2014 (SSNA) -- We the Nuer Students’ Union in Kenya welcome the agreement signed by Gen Salva Kiir and Dr Riek Machar yesterday in Addis Ababa. The agreement came at a time when South Sudanese citizens are in need of humanitarian assistance from the UN agencies; these international rights have been violated due to the crisis currently taking place in South Sudan. We believe that this agreement will be the road map for South Sudanese to achieved everlasting peace compounded with love and the spirit of Nationalisms.

We urged the IGAD, EAC, UN, EU, USA, and other international bodies to monitor the cessation of hostilities as the 24hr periods have elapsed. It is unfortunate that the government troops attacked Rubkona yesterday while their leader was in Addis Ababa to sign the peace deal, we are concerned with the way Gen Salva Kiir spoke and intimidating the general public that he is the president and must remain the president of the republic of South Sudan. That was an indication that he was not committed to the agreement.

We also welcome the released of the 4 political detainees who had joined their colleagues in Addis Ababa and their subsequent inclusion in the peace talks process. It is now clear that Kiir Mayardit fabricated his own coup and he should be responsible for all the lives lost in South Sudan. IGAD must remember that Adwok Nyaba is still under house arrest in Juba and his rights as enshrined in the interim constitution of South Sudan are violated. We demand for his immediate release as he is an important person in the peace talk process.

It is our believes that South Sudan needs a federal government that not only devolved resources from the national government to county government but also reduce the level of corruption and helps infrastructural development in our country. Federalism is defined as a political concept in which a group of members are bound together by covenant with a governing representative head. The term "federalism" is also used to describe a system of government in which sovereignty is constitutionally divided between a central governing authority and constituent political units such as states or provinces. Federalism is a system based upon democratic rules and institutions in which the power to govern is shared between national and provincial/state governments, creating what is often called a. Federalism is a system that favours a common federal government, with distributed power at regional, national and supranational levels. This is a system that was adopted by Canada, Brazil, Australia and India just to mentioned a few, South Sudan needs to adopt a federal system of government like the one in INDIA The Government of India (referred to as the Union Government) was established by the Constitution of India, and is the governing authority of a federal union of 29 states and 7 union territories.

The government of India is based on a tiered system, in which the Constitution of India delineates the subjects on which each tier of government has executive powers. The Constitution originally provided for a two-tier system of government, the Union Government (also known as the Central Government), representing the Union of India, and the State governments. Later, a third tier was added in the form of Municipalities. In the current arrangement, The Seventh Schedule of the Indian Constitution delimits the subjects of each level of governmental jurisdiction, dividing them into three lists:

• National government includes subjects of national importance such as defence of the country, foreign affairs, banking, communications and currency. The Union Government alone can make laws relating to the subjects mentioned in the Union List.
• State government contains subjects of State and local importance such as police, trade, commerce, agriculture and irrigation. The State Governments alone can make laws relating to the subjects mentioned in the State List.
• County government includes subjects of common interest to both the Union Government as well as the State Governments, such as education, forest, trade unions, marriage, adoption and succession. Both the National as well as the State Governments can make laws on the subjects mentioned in this list. If their laws conflict with each other, the law made by the National Government will prevail.

India has a multi-party system, with political allegiances frequently based on linguistic, regional and caste identities,necessitating coalition politics, especially at the National level.

We believe with the above tier of government South Sudan will not only fairly distributed resources to the citizens but also bring towns to citizens as quoted by our late Hero Dr John Garang deMabior. South Sudanese are tired of a centralized system that creates a vacuum for corruption and lack of good governance.

The interim government and transitional arrangements should consider the following;

• Inclusive government
• Fair representation from all walks of life in the government
• Youth and women empowerment
• Constitutional dispensation
• Formation of an independent committee of inquiry to investigate atrocities committed during the crisis
• Formation of peace and reconciliation committee which will have youth and women representation to advocate for peaceful co-existence

We also urged the parties in the negotiation to include all stakeholders to the conflict in the negotiation process as suggested by the document signed on Friday the 9^th May, 2014. These stakeholders include youth, women, civil society groups, elders and church leaders. We condemned the sanction imposed up on General Gatdet Yaka by the US government, this sanction does not only imply lack of seriousness in South Sudan crisis but it also indicate that justice will never prevail to the massacred, such inactiveness promote impunity and contradict the task of US government as a superpower. We need the architects of this crisis to be sanctioned and their looted assets frozen.

Every South Sudanese need peaceful country because peace is good in itself, but it is never the highest unless it comes as the handmaid of righteousness. Peace becomes very evil philosophy if it serves merely as a mask for cowardice and sloth, or as an instrument to further the ends of nepotism and anarchy.

We are all for a better nation, a nation that our diversity is seen as a blessing, where freedom of speech is not a privilege but a right to every citizen, where jobs are given base on capabilities but not on nepotism.

May God bless Federal Republic South Sudan,

May 12, 2014

We urge the Western Bhar El Ghazal State Authorities and locals to provide safe path for innocent Nuer ethnic university students, women and children throughout the state. ASSD strongly condemns and urge Kiir led government to stop all ethnically related targeted killing of the Nuer ethnic group. The consequences of targeted killing of innocent civilians or any ethnically related killings will only deepening this crisis and will not serve anyone’s interest.

ASSD call on the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), United Nations, United States of America, African Union, Canada, United Kingdom, Australia, Norway, friends of South Sudan, and religious leaders to intervene and ensure that the signed cessation of hostilities agreement is immediately implemented by the warring parties .

ASSD call on all foreign forces in South Sudan to withdraw and stop aiding and carrying out further genocidal acts in South Sudan.

For more information, contact us at +1(202) 709- 7322 or via email at southsudaneseindiasporaallianc@gmail.com

New York, May 12, 2014 (SSNA) -- The United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) released its report on cluster bombs use in South Sudan.

The report declared that Uganda People’s Defence Force (UPDF) used the the banned weapons. The United Nations (UN) cites evidences it collected from UPDF and SPLA held areas at the time of fighting in Jongle State.

Uganda move quickly, condemning the report and accused unnamed countries of being ‘enemies of Uganda’.

The report, titled “Conflict in South Sudan: A Human Rights Report”, blasted Uganda for using dangerious weapons.

Uganda has on many occasions denied that it used the forbidden bombs in South Sudan.

“They pushed south and heavy fighting occurred between them and government forces [SPLA Soldiers] supported by UPDF [Uganda People’s Defence Force]. In that period UNMISS is aware of several instances of aerial bombardments by Ugandan forces”, the report reads in part.

The government of Uganda is a staunch supporter of the South Sudanese president kiir. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni asserts that Juba invited kampla and that Ugandan soldiers will stay in South Sudan regardless of what other nations or the Internation Community says.

Press Release

Juba, May 12, 2014 (SSNA) -- We welcome the peace agreement signed between the South Sudan Democratic Movement/Army and the government of the Republic of South Sudan said the undersigned representatives from the organized sector of the South Sudanese civil society.

We applaud the parties for reaching an agreement that brings to an end the bloodshed and suffering of the people in Pibor County as a result of the over two years of dreadful violence. This is a big step towards restoring hope to the people in the County. With certainty, Peace in this region is a great celebration not only for the people of Jonglei State but the entire republic of South Sudan.

We commend both parties for the compromises they have made for the sake of peace in Pibor County. We particularly congratulate the parties for reaching an amicable and quick solution to the conflict. We extend special thanks to the negotiators of both parties for their leadership in the process. We believe that if this agreement is implemented, it can lay essential foundations for sustainable peace and security in the Greater Pibor region and Jonglei.

We are calling upon the parties to live up to their commitments as stipulated in the peace agreement. We urge the Council of States to quickly approve the agreement in order to swiftly enter into force. We further express our interest and commitment to contribute to the full implementation of the peace agreement. We encourage all relevant stakeholders including the regional and international friends of South Sudan to join hands to provide the necessary support to translate this peace agreement into a reality on the ground.

We are concerned that the issue of accountability has been vaguely captured in the agreement. We look forward to this being revised at the implementation stages to ensure those responsible for atrocities committed during the hostilities are held accountable.

With great honor, we commend the religious leaders under the auspices of the Church Leaders’ Mediation Initiative for their efforts in facilitating the process that led to this peace agreement. We particularly commend the vital leadership of Bishop Emeritus Paride Taban, Bishop Paul Yugusuk and Bishop Arkanjelo Wani Lemi and urge them to continue steering the peace process during subsequent phases.

We urge members of the communities in Pibor country to embrace this peace agreement and work together to make it a reality on ground. We call upon the leadership of SSDM/A to initiate an inclusive local dialogue with the people of Greater Pibor Area to deliberate on the implementation of the peace agreement. The dialogue should bring together members of the communities from all walks of life including youth, women, elders and other community leaders who did not participate in struggle of the SSDM/A.

This will foster broad ownership and inclusive implementation process. This can avoid exclusion and the perception of the agreement as only a reward of “those who fought”.

We urge the government of the Republic of South Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army in opposition to follow the example set by this peace process by genuinely committing to the agreement on cessation of hostilities and quick resolution to their crisis through dialogue. We remind the parties that solutions to the problems of South Sudan does not emanate from the barrel of the gun. Besides, violence breeds violence, consequently creating protracted cycle of violence. The people of South Sudan want peace – and peace now. We urge the warring parties to heed to this call and work to make peace happen.

Additional Information

The SSDM/Army – Cobra faction picked up arms against the government of South Sudan for the latest offensives in the cycle of violence in the third quarter of 2012. Peace efforts steered by the Church Leaders begun soon after the beginning of the uprising. First round of peace talks begun in December 2013 at the Ethiopian Capital Addis Ababa and achieved a cessation of Hostilities agreement on January 30, 2014. No hostilities by the two parties has been reported since the signing of the Cessation of Hostilities Agreement. The peace agreement was secured during the second round of talks that took place in Addis Ababa that begun on April 30, 2014 at the Ethiopian capital, Addis Ababa.

Signed

Organizations:

Washington, DC, May 13, 2014 (SSNA) -- South Sudan’s rights organization, the Alliance for South Sudanese in Diaspora (ASSD), welcomed the signing of peace agreement between the government of South Sudan and the anti-government forces.

In a press statement extended to the South Sudan News Agency, the group welcomes the signing of the accord and urges the warring factions to take the accord’s implementation seriously.

“The Alliance for South Sudanese in Diaspora (ASSD) welcomes the Addis Ababa Peace Agreement between the Government of South Sudan and the SPLM/A-in Opposition. ASSD calls for inclusiveness, sincerity and seriousness in its implementation and negotiating long-term settlement to South Sudan’s conflict”, the agency said in the statement.

The block also calls on the International Community and Friends of south Sudan to take an active role in the peace talks.

“ASSD also call upon the International Community and friends of South Sudan to support the ongoing peace process between the South Sudanese warring parties in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, by making sure the underlying issues and fundamental problems are addressed for peace and trust to be restored among South Sudanese Communities”, the Alliance added.

The pact which was signed by President Kiir and his main rival Dr. Machar last Friday in Ethiopia has drawn mix reactions from South Sudanese Communities after reports suggest that the two rivals, Kiir and Machar, signed the deal under an immense pressure.

Below is the full text of the ASSD’s statement

_____________________________________________________________________

ASSD welcomes Addis Ababa Peace Agreement between the Government of South Sudan and the Opposition and call for Sincerity and Seriousness in its Implementation in order to realize a durable Political stability in the world’s youngest nation

The Alliance for South Sudanese in Diaspora (ASSD) welcomes the Addis Ababa Peace Agreement between the Government of South Sudan and the SPLM/A (In Opposition) and the rededication to the Cessation of Hostilities signed on Friday, May 9, 2014 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. ASSD call for inclusiveness, sincerity and seriousness in its implementation and negotiating long-term settlement to South Sudan’s conflict.

ASSD urges the signatories to the Addis Ababa Peace Agreement to adhere to the Cessation of Hostilities as articulated in the peace agreement. ASSD also call for inclusiveness of civil societies, faith-based groups, South Sudanese Diaspora and friends of South Sudan around the world to help negotiate comprehensive long-term political and durable solutions to issues faced by the people of South Sudan before and after independence.

ASSD also call upon the International Community and friends of South Sudan to support the ongoing peace process between the South Sudanese warring parties in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia by making sure the underlying issues and fundamental problems are addressed for peace and trust to be restored among South Sudanese Communities.

We firmly believe that for long-term settlement of South Sudanese current crisis and prevention of future conflicts, those whose actions led to mass murders be held accountable and prosecuted for crimes against humanity.

For information, contact us at +1(202) 709-7322 or viaemail at southsudaneseindiasporaallianc@gmail.com

About the ASSD: ASSD is an umbrella organization for South Sudanese organizations and individuals advocating for peace, freedom, democracy, human rights, good governance and development in South Sudan.

Greater Bor community of the United States of America

Press Release

May 12, 2014

Re: A Response to the May 09, 2014 Press Release by the group that called itself, “Greater Twi Community of South Sudan, USA”

United States, may 13, 2014 (SSNA) -- This is in response to the unfortunate press piece that was released by a group that called itself, Twi East Community of the United States of America.

Dear South Sudanese people and the people of Greater Bor, in particular, we regret seeing such a destructive article by the said group.

The group does not represent Twi East community in the United States nor does it represent anything about the official entities of the said community and Greater Bor in the United States.

The group is made up of individuals who have long been working hard to cause disunity among the people of Greater and it is a well known entity by many people in the United States.

The content of the press release is filled with hatred, bigotry and character assassination directed toward an overall goal of causing cleavages within the Greater Bor community. The quoted statement that the group attributed to the Minister of Defense in a meeting the group claimed to have taken place between the minister and the office of Greater Bor community-USA in which the chairman, Deng Lueth mayom, is referenced ("Deng Lueth you don’t have to worry, if Nuer comes, they will start in Jalle Payam of Bor County..." By Minister of Defence, Mr. Kuol Manyang Juuk) is baseless, non-existed and a cunning work of character assassination. We call on all readers of that press release to disregard that as a baseless claim. The Greater Bor community leadership condemns that statement and the overall, unwise press release, in the strongest terms possible.

To the people of Greater Bor, be aware that groups like this self-proclaimed Twi group and many others who are doing latent damages to the unity of our people have no place. We accept nothing short of unity of our people during these critical times. The people of South Sudan, and this community included, must be united more than ever before because South Sudan needs us in that solidarity.

Signed by Greater Bor community executive office:

1. Abraham Deng Lueth Mayom de Ayiik, GB President

2. James Maluak Malou Deng, GB Vice President

3. Mayom Bol Achuk, GB General Secretary

Greater Bor community of the United States of America

Re: A Response to the May 09, 2014 Press Release by the group that called itself, “Greater Twi Community of South Sudan, USA”

United States, May 13, 2014 (SSNA) -- This is in response to the unfortunate press piece that was released by a group that called itself, Twi East Community of the United States of America.

Dear South Sudanese people and the people of Greater Bor, in particular, we regret seeing such a destructive article by the said group.

The group does not represent Twi East community in the United States nor does it represent anything about the official entities of the said community and Greater Bor in the United States.

The group is made up of individuals who have long been working hard to cause disunity among the people of Greater and it is a well known entity by many people in the United States.

The content of the press release is filled with hatred, bigotry and character assassination directed toward an overall goal of causing cleavages within the Greater Bor community. The quoted statement that the group attributed to the Minister of Defense in a meeting the group claimed to have taken place between the minister and the office of Greater Bor community-USA in which the chairman, Deng Lueth mayom, is referenced ("Deng Lueth you don’t have to worry, if Nuer comes, they will start in Jalle Payam of Bor County..." By Minister of Defence, Mr. Kuol Manyang Juuk) is baseless, non-existed and a cunning work of character assassination. We call on all readers of that press release to disregard that as a baseless claim. The Greater Bor community leadership condemns that statement and the overall, unwise press release, in the strongest terms possible.

To the people of Greater Bor, be aware that groups like this self-proclaimed Twi group and many others who are doing latent damages to the unity of our people have no place. We accept nothing short of unity of our people during these critical times. The people of South Sudan, and this community included, must be united more than ever before because South Sudan needs us in that solidarity.

Signed by Greater Bor community executive office:

Press Release

REF: PLANNED GENOCIDE AND DISPLACEMENT OF NUER TRIBE BY SALVA KIIR’S GOVERNMENT, SOUTH SUDAN

Canada, May 21, 2014 (SSNA) -- We are expressing our regrettable and disappointment to the international community for its inaction of the killing of the Nuer innocent civilians in Juba and other states; we the community members known as the South Sudanese Nuer Community in Canada have been affected by genocide committed in Juba as well as the ongoing conflict in the Republic of South Sudan. In the light of the political crises prevailing in our beloved country, South Sudan, we the Nuer Community members and leaders in Canada are very sad and deeply concerned by the loss of innocent lives and continuous living in fear of our people in the Republic of South Sudan, especially in major cities and towns in Juba, Jonglei, Unity and Upper Nile States because of the tribal government’s ignorance to the people. The tribal government has killed enough and continues to kill hundreds of thousands of people from the Nuer Ethnic Group in particular, as it hires many notorious, criminals, and terrorists or mercenaries from Uganda and M23, three Rebel groups of Sudan, and recently from Egypt. The international community should not sit and watch all the foreign armed groups that have been hired by the government in Juba to massacre millions people of Nuer so the tribal government implement its long term plan to displace Nuer people from their territories in South Sudan to Ethiopia and to other neighboring countries. We regret for the loss of innocent lives of foreigners who are assisting us in various capacities, including peacekeepers, humanitarian activities, capacity building, and businesses in Juba and across the country. We convey our condolences and sympathy to all the families who lost their dear/loved ones and those who have been wounded in the recent violence in various parts of South Sudan.

After careful assessment and deliberation on messages coming from different sources including our own relatives, news media, South Sudanese Government, the opposition within SPLM Party, various levels of governments, we the Nuer people in Canada’s leadership reached the following resolutions based on how the international community views the current conflict in South Sudan:

1. We condemn in the strongest terms possible any act of violence aimed at settling political differences but ended up in massacred one ethnic group by the Salva Kiir Government. We encourage our people, the international leaders at the United Nations Security Council, the European Union, the United States of America, IGAD, African Union, and Government of Canada and the people in South Sudan at large to look at the root causes of this current conflict, including who did what in the first place to embrace a true and genuine dialogue for the interest of our new nation to prevail. We have learned through our history of struggle that through a just and a true dialogue we reached in Addis Ababa Agreement and the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) were achieved because the world bodies understood the root cause and the way forward. We do not want more bloodshed, self-inflicted suffering to our people, and loss of property as well as the massive displacement of our people both within South Sudan and to the neighboring countries. We do not want the implementation of displacing Nuer from their places into Ethiopia as a solution. Instead, we want our people to enjoy the fruits of their collective struggle without loss of lives and fear under self-claimed dictatorship. We urge IGAD and other international community partners to expeditiously resolve the political differences through condemning the main genocidal of the leadership in Juba and embark on really reconciliation, nation building, and development. Without pointing out those who planned to kill the people of South Sudan’s one ethnic group, the Nuer People in Juba from December 15-30, 2013 that fueled this conflict, South Sudanese’s various ethnic communities’ future are in jeopardy/danger.

2. We, the South Sudanese Nuer People have condemned the turning of what was purely a political differences in order to serve the nation well within the SPLM Party into tribal conflict. Any ethnic group whether from Bari, Moru, Shilluk, Murles, Anyuak, and Dinka to be massacred by their own leader is a crime, leave alone Nuer People being deliberately and intentionally killed in Juba.  We the South Sudanese Nuer Canadian members and leaders in Canada have condemned the tribal government and its like who incited our tribes to involve in violence for the interest of Salva Kiir and his inner circle leaders, who planned the massacre to gain leadership. We want to make it clear that our general populations in South Sudan and around the world have strongly condemned the killing of innocent people by Salva Kiir in order to remain in power; this is a crime. We the Nuer Community at home and in diaspora still wonder of why a political differences within the SPLM Party unfortunately turned by some opportunists into a tribal confrontation. The SPLM Party does not only belong to the Dinka and Nuer as the initial killings in Juba suggested; it is the South Sudanese Political Party with the membership from across all tribes in the South Sudan. For instance, those who eager to reform the SPLM Party are not from Nuer Tribes alone. If so, why there were no other tribes got kill in Juba?

3. Therefore, we urge the international communities of AU, IGAD, and UN to Not only condemning Salva Kiir but to stop him and his government from killing one ethnic group, than  bring him and those perpetrators to book in order to have a nation that belongs to all people. Abusing, harassing, and killing of the innocent citizens based on their tribal affiliation leave a lone Nuer is a crime in 2014. Killing people in order to defamed individuals is unacceptable in South Sudan. The people of South had suffered a lot and fought the war together to create this nation. All opposition leaders and media leaders have been targeted due to their being informed and promoted the spirit of working together and continue to live together as one nation for generations to come. Killing and dividing the citizens and human rights abused was not what the People of South Sudan Fought for. Is it what the international community members were looking for to be upheld in our entire country? Our leader and his inner circle groups should desist from using hate or provocative languages that could prolong the conflict and misery of our people.

4. This message is to the Leadership in the United States of America under the current leadership of President Barack Obama. For South Sudanese Citizens to have bright future as America Dream, the Obama Administration has to look back into the American Transformations, the long struggle for freedom for all Americans, including the Black Walk to Freedom in the US History that inspires the whole world.

5. It is important at this juncture that the United States’ Leadership and the UNSC Chief (Secretary General Ban-Ki Moon) understand the US Secretary of States, John Kerry’s recent sanction that involved Peter Gatdet Yak has been received as unjustified based on reality. We and many other people both in South Sudan and in diaspora did not receive this sanctioning of General Peter Gatdet as legitimate for one reason. Peter Gatdet didn’t commit any crime rather, refusing and reacting to the systemic humiliation and killing to citizens of South Sudanese who were intentionally displaced from their country by their own government in Juba. Killing one ethnic group in Juba unlike the rest of the state men, women, children, and elders in South Sudan is unjustifiable. We believe the US Government should head up to it principles of all people. We hope the people of the United States have to re-read the long walk to freedom and how it came to be as a nation. We hope Secretary of States John Kerry recalls back his speech when he endorsed President Barack Obama at the National Convention of the Democratic Party to run for the US President. The question that the American people may answer is this; is it okay for them to to see South Sudan be a country like the US in terms of its political system? Or does the US want another dictatorship country in South Sudan? The common citizens of the people in South Sudan and in diaspora not one tribe were the ones consenting nation to be led by Salva Kiir in 2010 Sudan General Election and 2011 through the ballot box at the time of the Referendum. Every single citizen is important and dear in South Sudan and indeed, in the eye of the international community. The question is this; why did the AU, IGAD and International Community Leaders recently condemned the fighting in Bentiu, Unity State while forgetting or turning away from one of the most painful killings in the nation’s Capital, Juba? Instead, the international community forgot the long planned of South Sudanese’s Massacre in Juba.

6. We, the South Sudanese Nuer Community in Canada want to alert the international community of what happened in Bentiu, the Capital of Unity State, South Sudan on May 04, 2014, immediately after the U.S. Secretary of States John Kerry left Juba, South Sudan. For instance, after he (Salva Kiir) met with the U.S. Secretary of States John Kerry in Juba; at the same time, Salva Kiir ordered his (South Sudan SPLA) troops to recapture Bentiu, the Capital of Unity Stat, Nasir, and Longchok Counties in Upper State. This can be termed as that, he the President of South Sudan Salva Kiir deceived the U.S. Secretary of States, John Kerry as he was advised not to use violence in the country again while peace process is going on. Moreover; Salva Kiir’s constant lies, he brought the North Sudanese Rebels of Blue Nile, Nuba Mountains, Darfur of Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), and his SPLA troops that enabled him to storm Bentiu, the Capital City of Unity State until now. We need all the international community leaders to take a look of how Salva has been supporting Sudanese Rebels in order to use them to preserve his power. One of the best examples from Salva Kiir Government’s lies was in 2011 when he lied to the U.S. President Barack Obama that he had no longer allied with the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM), SPLM-N whose missions are to topple the Khartoum Government. This president is using what so called “pretext” tactic. What happens daily is that Salva Kiir is using those (Sudan Rebels) as tools in South Sudan by financing them to fulfill his plan. The killing of Dar Fur in Bentiu was not done by the rebels in Opposition. The JEM personnel in uniforms were the one being killed in action. Two days before fighting, rebels announced to the civilians in Bentiu Capital to leave the city and to report themselves to the UNMISS Camp. Instead, government troops prevented the civilians to leave and used them as human shell. At the same time, most of the mercenary fighters had no military uniforms. Moreover; since South Sudan President Salva Kiir announced the state of emergencies for both Jonglei and Unity States in January 2014, there were no civilians from external traders. Those who might have been killed were mercenaries. What we the people of South Sudan and the UNMISS Authority in Bentiu knew was that all civilians left Bentiu since December 2013. Salva Kiir announced the state of emergency and that had never lifted. How did these people come to Unity States? Who provided them with vistas to come to a state that has been in the emergency? Therefore, those people are the rebels (mercenaries) allied to Salva Kiir for all these years.  

7. We urge all South Sudanese in Diaspora to be united, work together, and avoid promoting a tribal state like what Libyan Leader Mohammed Gadhafi did in his country before the citizens woke up and deposed him recently.  One of the best examples of Salva Kiir’s Tribal Government is when he recruited his tribal men to be his presidential guards whom he ordered to kill the Nuer in Juba on the 15^th-30^th of December 2013.  Salva Kiir has done this in his three states of Bhar El-Gazale Region by recruiting his private republic guards like what Sadam Hussain did in Iraq a few years ago. Another important example the international community and world leaders have to recall was one ethnic group that was being massacred in Iraq by the dictator, the notorious leader Sadam Hussain in Iraq a few years ago.  Sadam Hussain killed the Kurtis Ethnic Groups in Iraq by using nerve gas in the present of the international community.  Indeed, Saddam and his inner circle did the crimes against humanity in the events that took place in Dujail in 1982 (see also human rights abuses in Iraq) reference to the human rights abuses in South Sudan. Burning the Nuer People in Juba is one of the worst human rights abuses in modern human history. Even the Khartoum Regime with whom the people of South Sudan fought with never burned South Sudanese people in Khartoum by the Khartoum Government during civil war.

8. The people of South Sudan cannot afford to groom a dictator who will deliberately kill them in the years to come by using his own chemical weapons. A dictator who has been murdering people for the last 8 years and still killing them today in a bright day light. We wonder how the international community leaders view the leadership that is intentionally destroying the country. Is the international community waiting for a dictator to acquire biological weapons to kill more people in the years to come? Massacre had taken place in December 2013 in the National Capital City of Juba and still taken place daily in other parts of the country.

9. Killing of Internally Displaced Persons (IDPs) of children, women and elderly in Jonglei State, Bor Capital inside the United Nations Camp is a great example for the international community’s failure. National Minister of Information, Michael Makuei Lueth and Defense Minister, Kuol Manyang Juuk ordered the killing of the vulnerable Nuer Civilians in the UNMISS Camp. These are the nations’ national ministers. Back in the past, the same Makuei Lueth with SPLA Army Forces from his own ethnic tribe tried to enter the UNMISS Camp in Bor, Jonglei Sate, which accommodates the same thousands of IDPs Nuer Ethnic Group whom he killed.

10. The United States needs to sanction the Presidential Guard General Marial Chieinuong Mangok, who killed the Nuer Civilians in Juba that fueled the current conflict. How does the US leadership view its position as it has been the human rights and democracy advocacy?  Many people believe the United States and other international leaders would fairly direct sanctions to the following known officials. Defense Minister Kuol Manyang Juuk, Minister of Information Michael Makuei Lueth, Former Governor and Chief of Staffs Paul Malong Awan, Foreign Affairs and International Corporation, Dr. Barnaba Marial Benjamin, and President Salva Kiir. These are the rights people who planned the genocide plus some of the SPLM National Liberation Council Members. Paul Malong Awan was the one who recruited his private tribal militia men from his own Bhar-El Gazale Region whom Kiir used in December 2013.

11. President Salva Kiir issued his God Given Presidential Decree in January 2014 and declared both Jonglei and Unity Sates as the states of emergency. That decree has never been lifted till today. We believe the African and Western leaders know the term “state of emergency” than we the ordinary people know. There were no civilians in Unity State with the exception of the host citizens and those in the UNISS Camp. We, the people of South Sudanese Nuer Community have realized that the world now is implementing the plan to eliminate the Nuer People (Tribe) in South Sudan. This plan has been there for years even during the 21 years’ war between North and South Sudan that the Nuer should be pushed to Ethiopia by some ring leaders in South Sudan and the neighbouring countries’ leaders. Could that be nation’s resources?

12. South Sudan’s elected leader VS. Egyptian Revolution against their elected leader; when comparing the current South Sudan’s conflict to Egypt’s conflict, this can be termed as naivety. The Egyptian People removed their dictator of Muslim Brotherhood Government three years ago because of his divisive leadership between communities and religions. We, the people of South Sudan are wondering what Foreign Minister Barnaba Marial Benjamin and the Egyptian Leadership signed a month ago so Egypt to send its troops to fight alongside with Salva Kiir troops against opposition Forces. Even the United Nations, the United States, European Union and IGAD leaders did maintain their positions in Egypt, Syria, and Libya conflicts and support those are eager for democracy. Furthermore, now Egypt deployed its military assets and began fighting in South Sudan alongside Salva Mercenaries against opposition forces. Some are deployed in the Ethiopian border with North Sudan and South Sudan.

13. We wanted the international community to recall back the security situations in South Sudan before the current conflict. Many journalists and media personnel were abused and some even murdered by the regime in Juba. Isaiah Abraham who was murdered is a good example. When Isaiah Abraham was murdered, the United States of America sent the FBI Team to investigate the case. Did the team announce its finding in the media up to now? Not really.

Reference to citizens being murdered in South Sudan http://www.sudantribune.com/spip.php?article44748  Isaiah Ding Abraham Chan Awuol

14. Therefore, we want the international community leaders to recall back their best experience in the leadership in Juba. We urge the international community to be relevant when reacting to the reports on the ground and the damaging the media reports and rumors that is tearing South Sudan apart. Those media outlets and some neighboring leaders have their own interests in South Sudan.  Take Uganda’s Military involvement in South Sudan for example. We wanted the world to view the situations in South Sudan as what happened in Iraq many years ago. There is no different between the current conflicts in South Sudan with what happened in Iraq under Saddam Hussain in the 1980s. Sadam used nerved gas against Kurtis Ethnic Group in Iraq using the country’s military assets (helicopter gunships and jet fighters). Salva Kiir used Uganda’s military assets in exchange for oil money to remain in power while doing nothing for the nation except divisions. The results were very clear when Salva and Museveni used cluster bombs against the civilians and rebels in Jonglei State. What were the international world leaders’ reactions? None. Instead, they all praised the Ugandan President by killing the Nuer People. Do IGAD and other international world believe in the unity of the people of South Sudan? The message of hope and peace to the people of South Sudan both in South Sudan and in diaspora need the world to carry out a thorough investigation into the current conflict not randomly in order for our various communities to promote peace and a national reconciliation among our political leaders and tribes.  We need the international community to set a thorough and a genuine investigation in regards to the root cause of this conflict and who did what. Why did the political differences within the SPLM Party resulted in one ethnic group (Nuer) being? Without publicly denouncing the Government of Salva Kiir for the crime he had planned for years, South Sudan will not be a perfect nation. We want the troika countries to recall back the experiences their officials from embassies in Juba, South Sudan had experienced from the security situations in the country.

15. Violations of freedom of expression and censorship of the press: In the months prior to the outbreak of Nuer Genocide in South Sudan, the climate for freedom of expression in South Sudan had progressively worsened. With the outbreak of violence on 15 December 2013, a sharp deterioration was evident by all the embassies: US, UK, IGADs, and other European Diplomats. That a political debate between the party members, particularly those who eager to reform SPLM Party and those who opted for dictatorial rule. Because Salva Kiir and his inner circle groups have planned to remain in power without democracy in South Sudan, he ordered to massacre the Nuer to turn/incited communities against one another. Recall his announcement for the postponement of the election supposed to be held in 2015 and extended to 2018-2020. In mid-January, the HRD was informed of dozens of incidents involving the illegal arrest, detention, intimidation, harassment, and expulsion of national and foreign journalists, as well as the surveillance and censorship of media houses. We call upon the international community to look back and analyze what the regime in Juba has done to the UNMISS personnel, including the representative of the UN Secretary General. Calling the UNMISS Representative and other officials rebels and abusing their names in the media is another important violation of international norms the Juba Government has deliberately has been doing. This government has some of the most notorious elements, who have committed war crime and crime against humanity for so long and has torn the country apart. Because of all these human rights violations and atrocities committed by President Salva Kiir against the same people who brought him into the power, we the people of South Sudan concluded that Kiir must go so that the people of South Sudan will remain united as one people, one nation and to live in peace and harmony for the generations to come.

Signed By: South Sudanese Nuer Community Members and Leaders in Edmonton and Alberta in Canada.

Twic East community of South Sudan-USA

Re: Twic East Community response to diminishing reputation of GBC President Deng Lueth Mayom of Twic people in the press- May12, 2014

May 25, 2014 (SSNA) -- The Twic East community of South Sudan is a legal organization founded by the sons and daughters of Twic citizens who are based in the United States. We are working collectively and tirelessly to promote good cause of unity in strength, respect for all walks of life and obviously striving to forge true partnership with those individuals and communities of South Sudan who adhere courtesy to our principles and values we represent as decent people. It is a historical fact and our deep tradition to live a life of truth telling to others who have offered different opinion. For instance, on May 9, 2014 we released a press which seemed appropriate for us at the time, and we stand firmly by its content but it could have been worded differently. The press has accurate information that was based on fact finding from its original source.

To our neighbor in Bor County, we have no problem to coexist on the near borders of Twic and Bor county lines. Let us be clear and direct: the president of Greater Bor Community and some members on his team attempted desperately in their press release on South Sudan News  Agency to demonize, belittling our character for no legitimate reason. In his capacity as president of GBC, Deng Lueth Mayom took that chance in the press to save face and, aggressively attacked Twic elected leaders to bolster his weak credibility at GBC. Mr. Mayom referred to us as “self proclaimed” of which we consider inflammatory language, that is out of touch with reality with larger Twic citizens in the diasporas. We also termed this derogatory behavior in his article as part of leadership survival. Deng, who is a son of Twic community by origin, is not a registered member to question our organizational operations nor has a role to speak for us. This particular GBC leader speaks for him, and he must leave Twic people alone to run their affairs without him meddling. Back to Mr. Mayom, we have a great respect for him, but unfortunately this individual has lost trust and confidence with most Twic people who had attended meeting in Michigan in early September 2010. We have not voted for him and that is why he is voiceless and faceless attacking Twic community in order to look good in the eyes of most Bor people. Such individual like Deng can be simply characterized as traitor because of his political expediency and championing personal interest, while recently left people of Wernyol in crisis without contributing to victims who need basic services. Frankly speaking, our press did not promote any disunity or describe Deng in direct terms; instead we highlighted facts that happen in ongoing crisis in South Sudan.

Moreover, GBC President Deng Mayom has constantly preferred social media to create division between Bor and Twic people and recent writing is evident. Nice try but we got him. As elected leaders of Twic community, we recommend to Bor community in particular to let Deng Mayom cease press attacks on us: otherwise expect robust response on our side tougher than this one. We completely rejected this mechanism of press demonization in the strongest terms possible and we believe our counterparts should follow that suite. This community of Twic we serve did reject him long time ago, and we want the rest to be careful with his policies of division and conquer. We did it in Michigan and that Mr. Mayom is now setting a stage to damage us in the press. If he wants more Twic citizens at GBC, charity begin at home and you need to recalibrate your thinking and be honest to embrace our position.

We’re disappointed with Mr. Mayom then, and we are still disappointed at him now, when we keep seeing such a repeated denial of Twic East Community of which he hails. In reference to his press release that said “ The group does not represent the Twi East community in the United States nor does it represent anything about the official entities of the said community and Greater Bor in the  United States” really!! Mr. Mayom. We are based in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania since 2009 before what known as GBC came to its existence. Such a truth killers’ individual like Mr. Mayom can be simply regarded as defector and hungry of position because of his political ambition and personal interest. In his May 9, 2014 press release, he also claimed that our writing was “filled with hatred bigotry and character assassination directed to word causing cleavages within the Greater Bor Community” which was filthy unwise recruitment of his loyalists to go against independent of Twic East. We love our county and our Twic, Mr. Mayom. We also love peace and unity; and more importantly, we should not be riveted nor will we be renamed especially when we have our own historical name. Twic, Duk and Bor will meet and united voluntarily, happily and jointly without any intimidation of anyone- special interest group as “Greater Bor” run by the self proclaimed group who is trying to disable our communities.

In short, our policy disagreements with Mr. Mayom are still profound and fundamental since the inception of Greater Bor Community in Michigan. As Twic elected leaders, we wanted leadership in three counties of Bor, Duk, and Twic to be key stakeholders in the early stages of this organization. But Deng Mayom and mostly certain individual who have no mandate and legitimacy from their payams as well as counties have hijacked the right process of formation and that is the simmering cause of this debate. So if meaningful unity of purpose ought to be achieved, Mr. Mayom who is leading this organization must completely stop ignoring approaches and find an alternative solution to settle his difference with us. To our viewers worldwide, it should be clear by now that we are interested in unity of purpose of which individual leaders respect existing organizations and abide by their objectives. We write this response with the aim to put GBC leader Mr. Mayom on notice and making sure that it is not business as usual to say inappropriate thing in the press.

Authorized by: Twic East community Executive Committee

Nairobi, May 26, 214 (SSNA) -- The Former Secretary General of the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) Pagan Amum Okech has denied having authored a controversial article/document which was published in many  South Sudanese blogs last week. 

In an exclusive interview with the South Sudan News Agency, Amum said he did not write any article and that he is stunned to learn this morning [Monday] that a fake article with his name as the author has been published in media outlets.

“I didn’t write the article, it was not written by anyone from the SPLM’s senior leaders, and the leadership of the SPLM doesn’t endorse or recognize such a letter or an article”, Amum told the South Sudan News Agency by phone on Monday.

Amum also said he is not going to issue a public statement, at least for now, asserting that the people of South Sudan know him better.

“You know, I am not going to issue an official statement at this time, South Sudanese know me, and I want them to know that I am not the author”, he continued.

“The people of the Republic of South Sudan should ask the blogs that published that [bogus] article with my name on it”, Amum added.

Late last week, an article titled: “Pagan Amum: Pagan Amum: SPLM Former Political Detainees are decided, not undecided”, has outraged so many South Sudanese with some people calling for the Former SPLM Secretary General to come clean on the matter.

In the piece, the writer claims that all senior leaders of the SPLM who opposed Kiir’s leadership style didn’t choose Former South Sudanese Vice president Dr. Machar as their leader. The author also added that the killing of Nuer in Juba should not be used as a ploy for war.

Juba, May 28, 2014 (SSNA) -- The Government of the Republic of South Sudan said it has borrowed $200 million dollars from oil companies that operate its oil fields, adding that it plans to delay “repayments on domestic loans”, the US-based newspaper, the Bloomberg reported.

Finance Minister Aggrey Sabuni did not provide the names of the companies that provided loans to Juba.

But, government source who prefer anonymity told the South Sudan News Agency that the loan was provided by at least one Chinese company. The SSNA cannot independently verified the claim.

The production of crude oil has been limited by the ongoing fighting in the country, forcing oil companies to reduce the size of their employees.

“South Sudan borrowed $200 million from oil operators and postponed repayments on domestic loans after the country’s six-month-old conflict cut crude output, the government’s main source of revenue”, South Sudanese Finance Minister Aggrey Tisa Sabuni, was quoted as saying by the Bloomberg.

Minister Sabuni described his government reliance on oil as a “very highly risky situation”.

South Sudan depends heavily on oil revenues and many regional analysts warned that the young nation’s economy could collapse without warning.

A Working Paper by David K. Deng

May 2014

Contents

May 31, 2014 (SSNA) -- Since 15 December 2013, South Sudan has been engulfed in a brutal civil war. Tens of thousands of people have been killed, more than a million internally displaced, and some 360,000 forced to flee to neighboring countries. The state capitals of Bor, Bentiu and Malakal have been subject to widespread destruction and looting. Entire neighborhoods in Juba are deserted, as their occupants have fled to seek refuge in United Nations (UN) compounds. In a mere six months, the benefits of nine years of relative peace and two-and-a-half years of independence have been squandered.

Peace talks mediated by the Intergovernmental Authority for Development (IGAD) have done little to contain the violence. A cessation of hostilities agreement signed on 23 January, a recommitment to this signed on 5 May, and a 9 May “agreement to resolve the crisis” were all violated within days of being signed.[1] The monitoring and verification mechanism (MVM) provided for in the 23 January agreement did not begin work until mid-April, and since then, no public information has been released about its activities. Plans are in place to deploy an IGAD force to protect civilians and support the MVM, but there is no indication of when the force will actually be deployed.

Though the peace talks have not succeeded in stopping the violence, some modest gains have been made. In the 9 May agreement, for the first time, the parties committed themselves to an inclusive peace process and to discussions of transitional administrative arrangements. According to the agreement:

“[The parties] Agree to ensure the inclusion of all South Sudanese stakeholders in the peace process, and the negotiation of a transitional government of national unity, in order to ensure broad ownership of the agreed outcomes; stakeholders include: the two direct negotiators (the GRSS and the SPLM/A in Opposition), and others such as the SPLM leaders (former detainees), political parties, civil society, and faith-based leaders.” [2]

As the talks are broadened to include additional actors and as systems for monitoring the ceasefire become operational, it is hoped that the fighting will subside to allow room for the parties to discuss political solutions to the crisis. Any such solutions must necessarily address the fundamental governance problems that have plagued South Sudan since the establishment of the regional administration in 2005. Unless the Government of South Sudan and the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM)-in-Opposition are able to put in place a credible plan to improve the delivery of public goods and services, stop widespread corruption, build a culture of respect for human rights, enable civic participation on matters of public interest, and eliminate the culture of impunity that pervades the military and political class, the country will continue to be susceptible to the type of violence that we have seen in recent months.

This paper is the first in a series of working papers developed by the South Sudan Law Society (SSLS) to stimulate thought on issues of truth, justice and reconciliation in South Sudan’s peace process. This paper proposes the establishment of a hybrid court, called the Special Court for Serious Crimes (SCSC), to prosecute individuals responsible for grave violations of international human rights and humanitarian law that have been committed in South Sudan since December 2013. As this working paper argues, the explicit provision for justice and accountability in the peace talks and any agreement that is derived thereof is necessary to deter acts of aggression by the negotiating parties, discourage cycles of revenge attacks, defuse the extreme tension that exists among communities, and support the development of a sustainable peace.

Why is it important to address justice and accountability in the peace process?

Successive peace processes in South Sudan, including the IGAD-led mediations that culminated in the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) in 2005 and negotiations with the numerous rebel movements that arose during the six-year interim period (2005-11), have repeatedly failed to hold perpetrators of serious abuses accountable for their actions. Peace talks in South Sudan are typically initiated with explicit or implicit amnesties and the promise of political and military appointments for belligerent parties. Perpetrators of serious crimes are thus rewarded for acts of violence, irrespective of the toll that they have taken on innocent civilians. While this approach may facilitate the negotiation of agreements among a small group of high-level actors, it gives rise to perverse incentives, in that political and military leaders are encouraged to wreak havoc in the hope that they will be personally rewarded for their actions in the context of a peace process.

Peace processes based solely political accommodation also fail to address the hatred and resentment that permeates relations among communities in conflict. When victims of human rights abuses see the people that have harmed them not only going free without sanction, but also being rewarded for their violent conduct, the rifts among groups deepen and longstanding tensions are further entrenched. In this respect, the escalating cycles of revenge killings that characterize inter-communal and politically motivated conflicts in South Sudan can be seen as a direct consequence of the pervasive culture of impunity in the country. People do not have confidence in the state to provide justice, so they take matters into their own hands and attack opposing groups to deter violent acts against their own communities and to seek retribution against those that have wronged them. Since impunity is the norm, individuals that engage in revenge killings can be confident that they will not be punished for their crimes.[3]

Addressing issues of justice and accountability in the context of a peace process can serve to delegitimize such conduct and contribute to political stabilization by helping to defuse inter-communal tensions. Although trials cannot take place until there is at least a minimum degree of political stability, when they ultimately do take place, fair and balanced criminal prosecutions can help to promote healing and reconciliation by establishing the truth about events and limiting the potential for revisionist histories. Individualizing guilt for those most responsible for atrocities can help to avoid collective responsibility being placed on entire communities. By coordinating such efforts with other truth, justice and reconciliation initiatives and broader justice sector reforms, criminal prosecutions of those responsible for international crimes send an important signal to the population that the government is making a genuine effort to combat impunity and build a culture of respect for human rights, thereby reinforcing state legitimacy and setting the stage for a renewed commitment to the social contract.

What is the Special Court for Serious Crimes (SCSC)?

The Special Court for Serious Crimes (SCSC) would be a hybrid court established in South Sudan or a nearby country to try cases against individuals suspected of serious crimes under international and South Sudanese law. National and international personnel, including judges, prosecutors, investigators, defense attorneys and administrative staff, would work side-by-side, conducting investigations and trials in accordance with international standards.

Over the last two decades, hybrid courts have been established to address the legacy of large-scale conflicts in a number of countries. Examples include the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL), the Regulation 64 panels in Kosovo, the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), the Special Panels for Serious Crimes (SPSC) in East Timor, the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL), the Extraordinary African Chambers (EAC) in the courts of Senegal, the War Crimes Chamber (WCC) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Iraqi High Tribunal (IHT), and the Specialized Mixed Chambers (SMC) in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). Each one of these hybrid courts is unique and each has had varying levels of success in achieving its objectives.

The idea of establishing a hybrid court to adjudicate international crimes in South Sudan was first proposed by members of South Sudanese civil society, just weeks after the violence broke out.[4] The proposal was then taken up by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the United States (US) in their advocacy with the US government.[5] In March 2014, as a result of this advocacy, more than 50 members of the US Congress, including the co-chairs of the Congressional Caucus on Sudan and South Sudan, wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry to ask for the US government to support the establishment of a hybrid court in South Sudan. The letter stated:

“[W]e encourage the Office of Global Criminal Justice and Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor to work with the Government of South Sudan to consider the establishment of an independent hybrid or mixed special court with both international and domestic representation for South Sudan. Doing so would help hold perpetrators of grave human rights abuses accountable, while respecting South Sudanese sovereign legal authority and building indigenous capacity in the judiciary sector.” [6]

When the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) published a human rights report in May 2014, a proposal for a hybrid court was among its recommendations.[7] Shortly thereafter, upon his return from a visit to South Sudan, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon included the recommendation for a hybrid court in a briefing to the UN Security Council in New York.[8] Most recently, in May 2014, the African Union (AU) Commission of Inquiry, a body tasked by the AU to “investigate the human rights violations and other abuses committed during the armed conflict in South Sudan and make recommendations on the best ways and means to ensure accountability, reconciliation and healing among all South Sudanese communities,” said in a press statement that it was “leaning” towards a recommendation to establish a hybrid court in the event that its investigations disclosed evidence of international crimes. [9]

Why a hybrid court?

Hybrid courts first arose around the turn of the millennium as a way for post-conflict countries to prosecute international crimes while avoiding the exorbitant cost and lack of local participation that characterized efforts by ad hoc international tribunals, such as the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia (ICTY) and the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR). Unlike hybrid courts, the ICTY and ICTR were located in the Netherlands and Tanzania, not in the affected countries, limiting both local participation in the trials and their significance for affected populations. They applied international law only, limiting the positive influence that the cases would have on domestic jurisprudence in Yugoslavia and Rwanda. They were also run by international personnel, which limited opportunities for knowledge transfers to the domestic legal workforce.

After the International Criminal Court (ICC) was established in 2002 as the preferred international institution to prosecute international crimes, ad hoc tribunals such as the ICTY and the ICTR lost much of their appeal. Hybrid courts arose as a more desirable alternative due to their lower cost and local ownership. Since they are established with the support of the state where the atrocities took place, hybrid courts are seen as a way for conflict-affected states to meet their international obligations without encroaching on the jurisdiction of the ICC. The ICC operates on the principle of complementarity, meaning that a case is only admissible before the ICC if a country is unable or unwilling to carry out genuine investigations and prosecutions.[10] Hybrid courts thus fill an important gap by providing states that lack the capacity to prosecute international crimes with a viable means to do so in accordance with international standards.

A hybrid court such as the Special Court for Serious Crimes (SCSC) could help South Sudan to overcome capacity constraints and conduct trials that meet international standards. South Sudan’s underdeveloped justice system struggles to deal with even commonplace crimes. Problems of extended pretrial detention, chronic underfunding, inexperienced investigatory and prosecutorial staff, shortages of defense attorneys, lack of legal aid, lack of witness protection services, corruption, torture, lack of security for judges and lawyers, limited geographical reach, overcrowded detention facilities, and dilapidated infrastructure severely restrict access to justice in the country.[11] Without international support, the justice system would be unable to investigate and prosecute the serious international crimes that have been perpetrated in this conflict.

If properly designed, staffed and resourced, a hybrid court would be better positioned to dispense justice in accordance with international standards. International standards require credible, fair and impartial investigations, prosecutions and trials; recognition and respect for the rights of both victims and accused persons, with particular attention to groups most affected by the conflict, including children, women, minorities and displaced persons; and the appropriate penalties that reflect the gravity of the crime.[12] In addition to helping the court meet international standards, international backing and the involvement of international staff could also help to overcome political obstacles that could present an insurmountable barrier to purely national trials.

Second, adjudicating these crimes in a hybrid court could stimulate much-needed reforms in the justice sector. If properly designed and if sufficient attention is devoted to maximizing the court’s legacy, a hybrid court could help generate renewed commitment to justice and accountability in South Sudan. National judges, prosecutors, lawyers, investigators and administrative staff could be equipped with skills that could improve the functioning of justice system. The legislative reforms needed to establish the hybrid court and the court’s judicial opinions could also help to develop domestic law in South Sudan so that it is better able to handle legal issues relating to large-scale conflict independently and without international assistance.

Third, a hybrid court could allow for a more flexible application of international and domestic law than trials in national courts. Since South Sudan has not ratified or domesticated many of human rights treaties that proscribe the minimum standards by which states must treat their citizens, judges adjudicating international crimes in purely national courts might find it difficult to apply rules of procedure and determine applicable punishments in a consistent manner. A hybrid court could overcome many of these problems by directly applying international criminal law and referring to the persuasive authority of cases from international and hybrid tribunals in other countries.

Fourth, a hybrid court could begin to alleviate some of the tensions among communities in South Sudan and promote healing and reconciliation. One has to be realistic about the extent to which the prosecution of a handful of people in an internationally backed court can overcome decades of identity-based politics and historical inequities, but impartial and balanced prosecutions could be one part of a broader process that helps to set the stage for a more inclusive and impartial approach to governance.

Finally, a hybrid court could help to build public confidence in the justice system and promote greater civic engagement on matters of justice and accountability. The involvement of a wide range of actors in the discussion from the very start would be critical to ensure that the broader public is aware of the court and its objectives and that the court receives the political support that it would need.

Policy Considerations

There are two main conditions that must be met for a hybrid court to be a viable option: one, the country in question must have a minimum degree of capacity in the justice sector to allow for the adequate staffing of the court; and two, there must be sufficient government cooperation to allow the court to conduct its activities without undue political interference.

As to the question of capacity, an assessment of the human resources of the judiciary, department of public prosecution, legal defense services and investigatory services could be undertaken to determine where gaps exist and how a hybrid initiative could be designed to maximize positive impacts. Individuals with appropriate qualifications and experience in the diaspora could be recruited to supplement existing human resources in South Sudan. To the extent that the necessary capacity is found to be lacking, international participation could be increased to make up for the shortfall.

The more difficult question concerns government ownership over the initiative. To a certain extent, government support can be encouraged through its participation in the design of the court and manner in which the court’s mandate is formalized. Genuine support, however, will depend in large part on the transitional arrangements that are agreed upon in the ongoing peace negotiations and whether there is political will to engage in high profile and sensitive prosecutions. The subsections below outline additional policy considerations.

Method of Establishment

The manner in which the SCSC is established would have implications for how it is perceived by stakeholders in South Sudan and its ability to secure government support and ownership. A first question concerns whether the hybrid court is established within the South Sudanese judiciary or whether it functions independently from the national justice system. The EAC in Senegal, the SPSC in East Timor, the Regulation 64 panels in Kosovo, and the WCC in Bosnia and Herzegovina are established as institutions within the national judiciary. These may be established as either temporary or permanent institutions. The WCC, for example, was established in the criminal division of the State Court of Bosnia, and international participation phases out over time leaving the institution to remain.

States will often enact legislation to provide a legal foundation for the hybrid court and to clarify its relationship with other justice sector institutions. This can present additional political risks, in that even if the executive agrees to the hybrid court in the context of a peace agreement or treaty, the parliament may fail to enact the legislation. Indeed, the failure of the Kenyan parliament to agree on the legislation for a hybrid tribunal to prosecute international crimes associated with the post-election violence of 2007 is what prompted the ICC to become seized of the matter.

Hybrid courts that are independent of the national judiciary may be established in any number of ways. Most commonly, they are established through agreements between the government in question and an intergovernmental institution, such as the UN or the AU. The SCSL and the ECCC, for example, were established through agreements with the UN, and the EAC in Senegal was established through an agreement with the AU. In situations in which a state has completely collapsed due to conflict, the relevant UN administration may establish the court as part of its mandate. The SPSC in East Timor and the Regulation 64 panels in Kosovo were established in this manner. In rare circumstances, the Security Council (UNSC) may establish a hybrid court through its Chapter VII powers, as it did when it established the Special Tribunal for Lebanon (STL).[13]

In the South Sudanese context, it might make most sense to follow the model used by the EAC in Senegal. The EAC was established both through an agreement between the AU and the government of Senegal and through domestic legislation in Senegal. The agreement with the AU assures the EAC of international support that is vital to its success, while the legislation gives it a strong legal foundation in the national system.

South Sudan could follow a similar approach in establishing the SCSC. The government could start by entering into an agreement with both the AU and the UN, as the UN already has a longstanding presence in South Sudan and the AU has been intimately involved with efforts to promote accountability through the Commission of Inquiry that it established in March 2014. Legislation could then be enacted to situate the court in the South Sudanese judiciary. This legislation would need to amend South Sudanese law to allow foreign nationals to serve as judges in South Sudan, detail the selection process for judges, prosecutors and other staff, lay out the structure of the court, including the process for appeals, and define international crimes and applicable sanctions, among other features of the court.

Personal Jurisdiction

In order to make its work manageable, the SCSC’s jurisdiction would need to be limited to crimes committed by a certain class of persons. Some hybrid courts, including the SCSL, the Extraordinary African Chambers (EAC) in Senegal and the Extraordinary Chambers in the Courts of Cambodia (ECCC), have jurisdiction over the individuals who bear the “greatest responsibility” for international crimes committed within the stipulated time period. By targeting individuals with command responsibility over criminal acts, the court could maximize both the symbolic effect of the trials as well as their deterrent and retributive effects. In most hybrid courts, prosecuting those who bear greatest responsibility usually translates into prosecutions against anywhere from one or two individuals to a maximum of 12 to 15.

Other courts have jurisdiction over anyone responsible for international crimes. The War Crimes Chamber (WCC) in Bosnia and Herzegovina, for example, is designed as complementary initiative to allow for justice to be extended beyond those individuals tried by the ICTY. Since starting its work in 2005, the WCC has completed over 200 cases involving serious violations of international law.

Given the scale of the conflict in South Sudan and number of people implicated in serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, the priority should be to investigate and prosecute those who bear greatest responsibility, and the mandate of the hybrid court should be defined accordingly. From there, one can explore complementary prosecutions in the national justice system to reach lower-level offenders. Customary courts may also provide opportunities for extending prosecutions to the local level, at least in so far as they involve compensation awards and other alternative punishments. Any such efforts would need to be carefully coordinated with the work of the hybrid court and steps would need to be taken to ensure that investigations, prosecutions, trials and punishments in national forums adhere to international standards.

Subject Matter Jurisdiction

In terms of subject matter jurisdiction, the SCSC would have jurisdiction over the international crimes of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. This would account for many of the serious crimes committed by all sides in the current conflict, including extrajudicial executions, targeting of individuals on the basis of ethnic identity, widespread and indiscriminate attacks on civilians, rape and sexual violence, abductions or forced marriages, disappearances, conscription or enlisting of children into armed forces, and torture. Definitions of these crimes could be taken directly from the Rome Statute or another authoritative source of international criminal law and should be included in the agreement or statute establishing the court.

The hybrid court would also have to decide how to address crimes committed by child soldiers. The SCSL, for example, allowed for the prosecution of children, but restricted sentences in the event of a conviction to alternative measures such as community service, supervision, counseling and correctional training. In managing cases involving minors, the hybrid court should draw from both international human rights norms and South Sudanese law. South Sudan’s 2008 Child Act would be a useful source of law, in this regard. The Child Act was drafted in order to implement the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and includes a number of progressive provisions on child rights. By applying the Child Act in conjunction with international law on child rights, the hybrid court could help to encourage respect for child rights in the context of criminal trials.

In addition to serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, the hybrid court would be able to prosecute violations of South Sudanese criminal law. This would enable the court to adjudicate crimes relating to the destruction or theft of property, murders, and other violent acts that may not rise to the level of international crimes. The court would also be able to require the payment of blood compensation, a remedy under South Sudanese law that allows the families of deceased murder victims to accept compensation in the form of cattle or other livestock from the perpetrator or the perpetrator’s family in exchange for a mitigated prison sentence.[14] Judges would have to determine if such remedies can be provided in accordance with the requirements of international law, but flexible approaches such as these are a natural outgrowth of hybrid justice and should be capitalized upon whenever possible.

Temporal Jurisdiction

The jurisdiction of the SCSC would also need to be limited to a certain time period. While it may be tempting to give the court jurisdiction over crimes committed in the context of inter-communal and politically motivated violence since 2005 or even for crimes committed during the 22-year north-south civil war, such an expansive jurisdiction would quickly become unmanageable. The court should therefore restrict its jurisdiction to crimes committed since the outbreak of the current conflict on 15 December 2013.

Applicable Punishments

International law requires punishments for international crimes to be commensurate with the gravity of the crime. In most circumstances, this translates into a lengthy prison sentence. Although South Sudanese law allows for individuals convicted of murder to be put to death by hanging, existing international and hybrid tribunals do not apply the death penalty, in accordance with UN’s position against capital punishment. Any treaty or statute for a hybrid court in South Sudan should therefore state that the death penalty is not an available form punishment.

South Sudan would also have to determine where convicted persons would serve their prison sentences. Prisons in South Sudan do not meet international standards and to sentence people to prison terms in South Sudanese prisons would be inconsistent with the hybrid court’s duty to apply appropriate punishments.[15] When Rwanda was confronted with this problem in relation to housing people convicted at the ICTR, it responded by building a prison that meets international standards in Rwanda so that people convicted at the ICTR could serve out their prison sentences in a Rwandese prison. South Sudan could follow suit and build a prison that meets international standards somewhere in South Sudan. Alternatively, individuals convicted by the hybrid tribunal could serve their sentence outside of South Sudan. Individuals convicted by the SCSL, for example, are currently serving their sentences in Rwanda.

Victim Participation

The hybrid court should make provisions for victim participation in proceedings and the rights of victims in the context of criminal trials. Unlike trials in the ICTR, which did not allow victims to participate in their personal capacity or to receive compensation or reparation for harms suffered, a hybrid court could allow victims and other interested parties to make submissions to the court and pursue various forms of compensation. A hybrid court could also establish a victim’s fund to provide reparations to victims who are not able to participate in proceedings. Victim participation would thereby help the court to fulfill victims’ right to a remedy and promote a form of justice that is more meaningful to survivors of atrocities.

In a country as divided as South Sudan, victim participation must be carefully designed to avoid further entrenching ethnic divisions. Since the violence has largely broken down along ethnic lines, there are wide divergences among different communities as to how they perceive the level of their relative suffering. No matter how balanced trials are, they may be perceived as biased by one side or another. Certain constituencies may also consider the architects of the violence to be heroes, while demonizing political and military leaders on the other side. Making sure that prosecutions are balanced as possible can help to limit their divisive potential among victims’ groups.

Location, Witness Protection and Security

Ideally, hybrid courts should be based in the conflict-affected state. This enables the participation of affected populations, simplifies evidence collection and witness identification, and increases the positive impacts on the national justice system. Whether or not it would feasible to establish the SCSC in South Sudan would depend on how the conflict progresses and the nature of the transitional administration that is put in place. If the situation becomes sufficiently stable, the SCSC should be established in Juba. However, if the safety of witnesses, judges and lawyers cannot be guaranteed, the designers of the initiative could explore the possibility of situating the court in a nearby country, such as Kenya or Rwanda. Alternatively, trials that are particularly sensitive could be held in a nearby country while other trials could be held in South Sudan.

Evidence from hybrid courts in other countries suggests that international involvement, and the heightened profile that comes with it, can serve as an incentive for witnesses to come forward and can help to discourage attempts to intimidate or threaten witnesses. However, international participation alone would not be enough to guarantee witness safety. In order to comply with international standards, a system would need to be developed for pretrial and post-trial risk assessments for every witness, the provision of protective measures, including safe transportation and accommodation during trials, post-trial follow-up and threat monitoring, and access to trauma counseling.[16] The court may also need to arrange witness relocations, including international relocations for the most at-risk witnesses. Longer-term protection strategies could include the establishment of a witness protection agency and legislation formalizing the state’s witness protection program.

Funding

One of the fundamental factors determining the success or failure of hybrid courts is the issue of funding. As noted above, hybrid tribunals are much less expensive than ad hoc tribunals. However, if sufficient levels of funding are not assured, it can undermine the smooth functioning of the court, and in some circumstances, may even force it to unduly delay trials in violation of defendant and victim rights. It is therefore necessary to carefully think through the court’s funding structure from the outset.

Typically, hybrid courts are funded through a combination of contributions from external donors and from the national budget of the state in question. By allocating a certain percentage of funds to the initiative, the government of South Sudan could demonstrate its intent to combat the culture of impunity and promote the respect for human rights. Contributions from UN and AU member states, NGOs and private donors would also be required. Although the UN Secretary General has expressed a clear preference for assessed contributions from UN member states to fund hybrid courts, in practice, most hybrids are funded by voluntary contributions.[17] Lessons from other contexts show that judicial interventions such as hybrid courts are invariably more expensive than initially predicted. The agreement establishing the court should therefore allow for grants from the UN regular budget to ensure that the court does not languish due to a shortage of funds.

Relationship to Other Transitional Justice Initiatives

As noted in the introduction, a small number of criminal prosecutions in an internationally supported court would be insufficient to address the legacies of hatred and trauma that South Sudan’s conflict will leave in its wake. In order to promote genuine healing, South Sudan would need to pursue a number of complementary truth, justice and reconciliation initiatives. The AU Commission of Inquiry and the National Platform for Peace and Reconciliation (NPPR) may provide insights in designing such complementary initiatives.[18]

Whatever approach is adopted to address the broader issues of truth and reconciliation, it should be carefully coordinated with the activities of the hybrid court so as to minimize or avoid conflicts. For example, if South Sudan decides to establish a truth commission to build an objective and impartial narrative of events and document the experiences of perpetrators and victims, the truth commission would need to take into account the potential for overlap with the the hybrid court in terms of investigations and witnesses. Perpetrators may be reluctant to appear before the truth commission out of fear that their statements will be used against them in criminal trials. Conversely, courts may try to force the truth commission to relinquish information about criminal activity in contravention of the truth commission’s duty to maintain the confidentiality of people that appear before it. Careful thought given to sequencing and the coordination of these initiatives can help to limit these sorts of conflicts.

Legacy

As international personnel would only be serving in South Sudan for a limited period of time, thought should be given from the outset to maximizing the legacy of the SCSC.[19] A common criticism of hybrid courts, including the SCSL and the WCC, is that they have not taken full advantage of international participation due to insufficient planning. South Sudan should not make a similar mistake.

There are a number of practical steps that should be taken to maximize the hybrid court’s legacy. South Sudanese should serve in senior positions in all investigative, prosecutorial and judicial departments, efforts should be made to bring charges under national law, South Sudanese law should be amended to incorporate international crimes and respect international standards, and the court should pursue strategic partnerships with legal associations such as the South Sudan Bar Association (SSBA) and the South Sudan Law Society (SSLS). Close cooperation should be encouraged between national and international staff by recruiting international staff that have experience with capacity-building, pairing international and national judges and prosecutors, using knowledge transfer as a criterion to evaluate staff performance, and holding regular meetings to encourage a collegial atmosphere.[20] The various departments involved should also develop operating procedures and other internal governance instruments that will guide the institution after international participation is phased out. Such initiatives should be formally incorporated into hybrid court’s mandate and operational policies, and should be ensured of adequate funding at the start.

Residual Issues

Residual issues would also need to be considered from the outset, including such matters as the supervision of lengthy prison sentences, the review of convictions due to new evidence or changing circumstances, and the provision of ongoing witness protection services. South Sudan might consider adopting a model similar to that used in the WCC in Bosnia and Herzegovina, where international participation is phased out over time and the institution remains. Exit strategies such as this must remain flexible, however, to accommodate any unforeseen delays that arise over the course of trials. Rather than setting a specific time period upon which the international participation would phase out, it might be preferable to tie the scaling down of international personnel to specific benchmarks. Relevant benchmarks could include the number of cases tried to a final verdict, the degree to which the political climate favors accountability, and the development and implementation of prosecutorial and judicial strategies and policies. [21]

Outreach Strategy

The government and intergovernmental organizations involved in the court should develop an outreach strategy to generate awareness of and support for the court. The SCSL’s outreach and communications programs, which included the dissemination of video and audio summaries of proceedings and town hall meetings across the country, could provide a useful model. Outreach activities should also take into consideration the likelihood that public perceptions of the hybrid court may change over time. As prosecutions proceed, they could become politicized and perceptions of bias could become more pronounced. The outreach plan should anticipate changes such as these and have strategies in place to address them. For example, the court could work proactively to inform the public about key decisions and the adoption of important policies in order to counter any attempts to politicize its activities.

Alternative Responses

One may also need to consider what to do if the government of South Sudan fails to move ahead with a mechanism to secure justice and accountability for international crimes. One option would be to include a provision in the peace agreement that would automatically refer the matter to the ICC. South Sudan is not a party to the Rome Statute and for the ICC to become involved would require either a referral from the UNSC under Article 13 of the Rome Statute or the expressed consent of the government of South Sudan. An ICC referral could also be an option if the government of South Sudan proceeded with the hybrid court initiative but failed to satisfy its international obligations, either because the proceedings sought to shield the accused person, there was an unjustified delay, or the proceedings were not conducted independently or impartially in a manner consistent with an attempt to deliver justice. [22]

Recommendations

The issue of justice and accountability raises a dilemma in the context of peace negotiations; the mediators need to secure the agreement of belligerent parties and their commitment to abide by the terms of the agreement, but political and military leaders may be reluctant to submit themselves and their supporters to the scrutiny of criminal investigations and trials. While addressing these issues inevitably introduces additional complications to an already complex mediation process, failure to do so risks condemning South Sudan and her people to a future of perpetual conflict. At a minimum, the mediators should make clear to the parties that amnesties for serious international crimes are against international law and unacceptable in a conflict that has involved so many egregious crimes. But a rejection of amnesties is not enough. To set the stage for sustainable peace, the parties must commit to an accountability mechanism that will allow for justice to be served in a balanced and impartial manner in accordance with international standards. Towards this end, the SSLS recommends the following:

1. Include language in a peace agreement providing for justice and accountability – Any peace agreement that results from the IGAD-led peace talks in Addis Ababa should include a stand-alone section that addresses justice and accountability for international crimes committed since 15 December 2013. The amount of detail required in the peace agreement would be a matter to be discussed in the context of negotiations among the parties, but it should include a commitment to establish a hybrid court tasked to bring cases against those that have greatest responsibility for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law committed during the conflict.

2.  Prohibit amnesties for international crimes – While amnesties may be permissible for political rebellion and lesser crimes under South Sudanese law, amnesties for war crimes, crimes against humanity and other gross violations of human rights violate international law. IGAD should require the parties to explicitly acknowledge that amnesties for serious international crimes will not be permitted. The parties should also pledge to refrain from pursuing such amnesties through national processes in South Sudan.

3.  Conduct civic engagement activities to educate people on the hybrid court’s objectives and activities – National and international civil society organizations (CSOs) should conduct civic engagement activities to raise awareness about the treatment of international crimes under international law and the ways in which a hybrid court could help South Sudan to satisfy its international obligations and promote healing, truth and reconciliation among local populations. If the parties adopt the SCSC proposal, CSOs should to conduct additional activities to educate people about the SCSC’s structure and objectives. Once the court is operational, it should also conduct its own independent outreach activities. These activities should be streamlined into the court’s core funding.

4.  Assess national capacity to administer a hybrid court – The UN or AU should commission human resource experts to conduct an assessment of the capacity of the South Sudanese judiciary, department of public prosecution, legal aid services, private lawyers, police and prisons. The assessment should identify capacity gaps and provide recommendations for how a hybrid court could maximize knowledge transfers and other positive spillovers into the national justice system. This exercise should be thorough but rapid, given that other activities will be influenced by its findings.

5. Ratify and domesticate regional and international treaties – The government of South Sudan should move quickly to ratify the core human rights treaties that proscribe the minimum standards by which states may treat their citizens and to deposit the instruments of ratification with the relevant intergovernmental institutions. The government should also ratify the Rome Statute demonstrate its commitment to combating international crimes and establishing a culture of respect for human rights. The government should also enact an International Crimes Act to domesticate substantive and procedural law regarding international crimes into South Sudanese law.

Juba, May 31, 2014 (SSNA) -- A high level government source in South Sudan’s capital, Juba, reported that at least twenty (20) bodies with their heads cut off lay in Juba’s Teaching Hospital. The source added that there was a security presence in and around the hospital.

In a chilling message to the South Sudan news Agency, the source revealed that a pile of dead bodies without heads and hands are in Juba hospital awaiting identification.

“I received a call this morning from a security agent who instructed me to visit Juba Teaching Hospital. I asked him why. Then, he told me that there are more than 20 bodies of Nuer ethnic group with their heads cut off in the hospital. I can confirm to you that I went to the hospital and I saw the bodies with no heads”, the source wrote to the South Sudan News Agency.

“There is heavy security there [hospital], I was asked where I was going and what I was doing in the hospital. I don’t know why I was being questioned by plain clothes individuals, it was strange to me”, the message reads in part.

“Updates are coming soon. Please, please protect my identity”, the source pleaded.

Meanwhile, residents of “Mia Saba (107)” in Juba reported that they have heard screaming voices last night and called police but no one showed up till this morning.

However, the SSNA has learned that the dead bodies were collected by employees of the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS).

Most of the decapitated bodies are believed to be people who have taken refuge in UNMISS compound in Juba and were told by the government to go back to their homes, citing “security improvement” in the capital.

Reports indicate that disappearance increases after fighting broke out in Juba late last year.

The SSNA could not independently verify the report due to safety and security concerns.

Moremi Initiative Announces 2014 MILEAD Fellows

The MILEAD Fellows will converge in Accra, Ghana to kick-start the 2014 MILEAD Leadership Institute- a three-week intensive training program, which will be hosted by the Institute of African Studies, University of Ghana, Legon. The Institute will serve as a platform for Fellows to cross-examine concepts of leadership in a broad African context, cultivate the skills and experiences necessary to occupy and excel in leadership positions, and gain knowledge on cutting-edge issues critical to African women and their communities. In addition to knowledge building lectures, skills-training workshops, teambuilding activities, role plays and other interactive activities, Fellows will be mentored by experienced and accomplished women leaders who are committed to supporting and nurturing the next generation of African women leaders.

About The MILEAD Fellows Program

The MILEAD Fellows Program is a uniquely designed initiative committed to the long-term leadership development and promotion of Africa’s most promising young women leaders. Fellows go through a yearlong training and mentoring program, designed to build skills, strengthen networks, and support women’s leadership on critical issues. Over the course of the year, the selected Fellows progress through three phases. The first identifies and prepares Fellows through leadership development, networking, mentoring, and training. The second promotes the visibility and accomplishments of Fellows through media coverage and networking. And lastly, the third phase supports Fellows through career planning, management, and access to opportunities and resources. Moreover, Fellows will benefit from a lifelong solidarity and support through the MILEAD Network.

About Moremi Initiative

Founded in 2004, The Moremi Initiative for Women's Leadership in Africa strives to engage, inspire, and equip young women and girls to become the next generation of leading politicians, activists, social entrepreneurs, and change agents- leaders who can transform and change institutions that legitimize and perpetuate injustices and discrimination against women. We firmly believe that the full and active participation of women in leadership is a pre-requisite for positive change and development in Africa, and addresses the current problem of leadership imbalances. Moremi engages, inspires and equips a new generation of African women leaders.

For more information, contact Moremi Initiative: Tel: +1 917.327.5235 (USA) +233 242 901222 (GHANA) F: www.facebook.com/MoremiAfrica E: info@moremiinitiative.org W: www.moremiinitiative.org

New York, June 1, 2014 (SSNA) -- Prime Minister David Cameron, President Barack Obama, and other leaders from UN Member Countries would be guided and controlled by Mr Kutesa, if he becomes the UN General Assembly President.

Currently, Mr. Kutesa’s boss Gen. Museveni, harbours the leader of the M23 rebels group, Sultani Makenga, already on the UN sanctions’ list. Ugandan government refused to hand over Makenga to the Congolese authorities or to the International Criminal Court to answer charges of crimes against humanity.

Norman Miwambo caught up with Milton Allimadi, who recently launched an online petition against Uganda's Foreign Affairs Minister, Mr. Kutesa from becoming President of the UN General Assembly. Here is an exclusive interview Allimadi.

Q. In briefly, can you tell the readers, who you’re and what exactly drove you to the extreme and start this crusade.

MA: I publish The Black Star news www.blackstarnews.com and I hail from Uganda. I live in New York City. I consider myself a Pan-African and care about what happen to African people everywhere. I believe Africa, perhaps the richest continent in terms of natural resources, has been held back due to the culture of political tyranny, impunity and misgovernance. I don't believe what I'm doing is a crusade or extreme in any measure. This is the type of global citizen activism that people all over the world should engage in. Would you allow the Mafia to guard a bank? 

Q. You sound to be in a very good position with vast knowledge about Mr Sam Kutesa. Who is this gentleman?

MA: Mr. Kutesa is a lawyer by profession. By occupation he is the foreign affairs minister of Uganda. That means he is the architect of how the regime of General Yoweri Museveni markets itself to the rest of the world. The outside face of the regime which has been there for 28 years. General Museveni is a ruthless tyrant and Mr. Kutesa is the architect of Museveni's foreign policy which has been characterized by wars of aggression against neighboring countries, ethnic cleansing, and plunder of resources.

Q. In your petition, you mention lots of incredible human rights abuses and attribute them to Mr Kutesa's boss. How can you convince the readers that all what you mentioned in the petition are not fiction but facts?

MA: The human rights abuses sound incredible only to those hearing them for the first time and this is often because the Ugandan regime is considered an ally of Washington and London, for geopolitical reasons, so many of the crimes are ignored by establishment media such as The New York Times and the BBC.

All these things are widely known and documented by the United Nations, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. The Petition are not just by words but if readers go through the Letter to U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, they will see that there is a link to a reference or sourcing to all the statements of the Petition. The International Court of Justice issued a ruling that Uganda did in fact engage in a war of aggression against Congo. During that war of aggression Congolese civilians were murdered or raped. Congo's resources were plundered. Congo was awarded from $6 billion to $10 billion, which Uganda has not yet paid. How is this fiction? The Wall Street Journal reported on June 8, 2006 that General Museveni contacted Kofi Annan who was then Secretary General of the United Nations and asked him to block an investigation by the International Criminal Court of the same crime for which the International Court of Justice had already ruled that Uganda was liable for. How is this fiction? Clearly General Museveni feared that he would have been indicted. There is no statute of limitation on those Congo murders and I don't see why the ICC should not continue the case. But instead of continuing the case against General Museveni and other senior Uganda military officers involved in the crimes against Congo, where some estimates says more than 7 million people may have now perished through the many wars, we are instead talking about General Museveni's foreign minister becoming President of the United Nations General Assembly? Has the world gone mad? Even George Orwell could not dream up such a scenario.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB114971481626174102?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB114971481626174102.html

Q. For those who haven’t seen or read your petition; can you remind us the issues you raised that contained in your petition?

MA: The Petition is found on http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-sam-kutesa-from-becoming-president-un-gen-assembly

The issues are very clear. Uganda, and the country's foreign minister Sam Kutesa, represent the antithesis of the ideals of the United Nations Organization, which is global peace and stability and the rights of all citizens regardless of their nationality, ethnicity, race, religion, political beliefs or sexual orientation. A country that epitomizes conflict through wars of aggression, domestic political repressionsm at home and abroad, inciting violence against sexual minorities through the Anti-Homosexuality Act, does not deserve to have its foreign minister as President of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization. This would be the zenith of hypocrisy. This would be very preposterous.

Q. You  specifically petitioned the US Secretary of State John Kerry and UN Member Countries, what reactions have you received?

MA: The Petition itself has now been signed over 2,500 people as we speak. The Petition is addressed to Secretary Kerry because he is in a unique position to stop this potential outrage. All he has to do is revoke Sam Kutesa's visa and he would not be able to come to the United Nations for that post. There is precedent of the Secretary of State using that power as you know. In April when it was revealed that Iran's newly designated Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Hamid Aboutalebi, was one of the students who seized hostages at the American embassy in Tehran in 1979, the U.S. refused to issue him a visa. Surely the same can be done for the foreign minister of a country found liable for the crime of a war of aggression against a neighboring country with the attendant bloodshed that continues today? Surely the same can be done for the foreign minister of a country that the ICC launched an investigation into its alleged war crimes in the Congo. Surely it can be done for a foreign minister who was named in a memo to the State Department in October 2009 by then U.S. ambassador to Uganda Jerry Lanier as one of three ministers whom General Museveni was unwilling to hold accountable for corruption?

Secretary Kerry through a spokesperson has replied that he has publicly denounced Uganda's homophobic Anti-Homosexuality Act. We are waiting for him to respond as to his position on Sam Kutesa's candidacy. The Petition is gaining traction and already two U.S. Senators, Charles Schumer and Kirsten Gillibrand, both of New York and both very influential, have issued strong statements questioning Kutesa's candidacy. We expect more elected representatives to issue statements and to ask Kerry to do the right thing.

Q. Are you contented with the kind of reaction from John Kerry?

MA: I am please that the momentum continues to build. I imagine Secretary Kerry will take a position soon on behalf of the United States. Either way, the facts against Kutesa's candidacy will remain the same.

Q . What about reaction from other UN Member Countries?

MA: As you know the United Nations operates in a secretive manner. Representatives of most of the member countries are aware of the Petition. The U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon has not responded and we would not expect him to at this point. Kerry's decision would be most effective. Of course it would be good if the victim of Uganda's multiple wars of aggression, the Democratic Republic of Congo, through its representatives, made a statement about Kutesa's candidacy.

Q .   A layman would like to know, if succeed and become President of the UN General Assembly, what would be Mr Kutesa’s role?

MA: I think his record speaks for itself as does the record of his boss, General Museveni. Mr. Kutesa himself personally is burdened with numerous allegations of serious corruption and in 1999 he was actually censured by Uganda's Parliament for corruption. The transcripts of the proceedings are quite chilling, not only in terms of the charges, but the apparent arrogance he displayed. I would advise everyone who takes the United Nations seriously to read those transcripts. At one time after we wrote about the matter on the Huffingtonpost.com we saw that the one transcript that was online was removed. After we mentioned that attempt to conceal information, it was restored. Now there are even more transcripts than before which means there are also people in Uganda who don't want Kutesa to embarrass the country by getting the post.  Kutesa was censured after Parliament heard how, through serious conflict of interest, he essentially siphoned millions of dollars away from Uganda Airlines into his own private company Entebbe Handling Services, or ENHAS. What would you expect him to do at the United Nations?

Q. Again can you remind us over what period Mr. Kutesa would be carrying out this role?

MA: The United Nations General Assembly Presidency is a one-year position. The post rotates among the world's regions. This year is Africa's turn. Should Kutesa not get the post I imagine that Cameroon's foreign minister, who had withdrawn, would resume his candidacy.

Q. With the kind of information and your knowledge about Mr. Kutesa, if you were President Obama’s advisor; how would you advise him before attending important meetings controlled and chaired by Mr. Kutesa?

MA: The fact are known to the United States administration, through the several cables sent by the United States ambassador to the State Department, some of which were published by Wikileaks.

It would be most inappropriate for President Obama and many other world leaders to attend the General Assembly if Sam Kutesa presides as President in September. Secretary of State Kerry should do the right thing and ensure that this does not happen. The U.S. should not feel beholden to Uganda because there are thousands of Ugandan troops in Mogadishu helping to stabilize Somalia. That is not General Museveni's private army. He always threatens to withdraw them in order to blackmail the U.S. He can't even afford to do so. How would he pay to maintain them in Uganda? The U.S. pays for their upkeep in Somalia and the U.S. also provides the regime with hundreds of millions of dollars for its upkeep. Museveni needs the U.S. more than they need him.

Q . Morally; what kind of precedent will this set if Mr Kutesa sail through and take charge of such important position?

MA: It would seriously undermine the United Nations and expose it to more ridicule and humiliation.

Q .  Now, it’s less than 3 weeks to the D-day date, how  successive is your crusade?

MA: That is not how we should assess things. In life one must always do what they believe is the right thing. Even if Kutesa somehow gets the post, we will continue exposing why he is not suitable for the position.

Q. When you step back for a moment; do you have specific evidences to support the issues you raised against Mr Kutesa?

MA: I have already told you about the available documentation. In terms of the crimes against Congo people can access the information through the websites of the United Nations, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International. In terms of Kutesa himself people should start with the transcripts of the Parliamentary censure of 1999 when 152 members against 94 voted to censure him. And this Parliament was dominated and controlled by his own colleagues in the National Resistance Movement ruling party -- so imagine that.

Q.  What would be an appropriate number of signatures to have your petition considered?

MA: There is no appropriate number. I believe we had about 30 after the first week. We now have 800 as of today. That is tremendous. Of course the more the better. I don't see that Kutesa's candidacy is rationally defensible. Perhaps only by Kutesa himself and by General Museveni. They don't believe in the ideals of the United Nations -- global peace and stability and non-discrimination. So why do they really want him as President of the General Assembly of the UN? There can only be ulterior motives including sending a signal to Ugandans that the outside world has no problem with General Museveni's brutal militarism outside and inside Uganda. That would be wrong.

Q . What do ask of the masses to see this petition sail through?

MA: I am very satisfied with the support coming from people from allover the world. People of various nationalities. The best thing is that more people have now becomed inbecomes thanks to Sam Kutesa, about the nature of the regime of General Museveni.

Q . This sound a very sensitive issue that the subject may feel aggrieved as his space been encroached. Are you not worried about the assets [secret agents] that could be dispatched to deal with you?

MA: Are you referring to assassination or personal harm to me? You cannot stop a person if they are determined to take desperate acts. I would hope that there would be serious consequences. We must never be cowed into silence when faced with serious crimes otherwise we aid and abet such crimes.

Q . Since you started this crusade a couple of weeks ago, what has been the kind atmosphere? I mean voices or messages from Mr Kutesa’s camp into your mailbox.

MA: I have been a journalist for more than 20 years now and stood up for what I believe to be the right thing all these years. I have covered stories where there was intimidation. A story where there was a potential bribe to kill the story, which I never considered for a second, that would have made be very wealthy. I have covered stories for victims that deprived my publication of tens of thousands of dollars in advertising because it was the right thing to do. Nothing intimidates me. Of course I do not invite, or wish for, suffering. But as I said, you always hope there would be serious consequences to anyone who harms you. 

Q . What message would you like to pass on the rest of the world before D-Day of June 11, 2014?

MA: Always stand up against injustice and spread the world. You will be pleasantly surprised to find out that there are many people out there who are willing to join the fight against injustice and crimes with impunity.

Miwambo is an exiled Ugandan journalist based in the United Kingdom.

Sudan Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM – in Opposition)

Revolutionary Greetings

Dear Comrades,

Canada, June 2, 2014 (SSNA) -- We salute you in the name of our beloved sovereign nation, the Republic of South Sudan and the name of our political party. You might already been thoroughly briefed on the political nature of the aggression presently occurring in our country. You have learned and are aware about the unfolding situation and the genocide that has been deliberately carried out by the government of South Sudan under the leadership of President Salva Kiir Mayardit. This war which was imposed on the people of South Sudan by the regime in Juba has not only devastated the whole country but brought shame and profound humiliation to the people of South Sudan in general and particularly to the SPLM party members. This is a war that has been preplanned for long time within the inner circle of SPLM Party by few individuals whose aim is to impose their person ambition on the people of South Sudan.

On December 15, 2013, the secret strategic plan of targeting people from the Nuer tribe was executed by privately trainedethnic base militias from Warrap and Northern Bhar Elghazal (Aweil) states with the help of South Sudan National Security Forces in Juba which has resulted in ethnic massacre and army division in which more than 17,000 people from the Nuer ethnic group alone were arbitrary targeted and murdered in cold blood. Despite numerous attempts made by some concerned citizens within and outside of the SPLM Party, the chairman of our political party and president of our country did not heed the call of the citizens and of the stakeholders in order to save the country from the imminent danger. The President and the regime opposed all attempts to bring democracy and good governance and instead, the regime and president decided to rule the country with iron fists. Ill advises from wrong advisors and wrong elements within the president’s inner circle; whose objective is to see the fulfilment of their selfish ambitions, have surpassed the wishes of the majority of SPLM Party members and the people of South Sudan.

The level of crimes committed during our struggle against the successive regimes in Khartoum did not reach to the same level where the crimes committed by South Sudan government against its people in Juba on December 15-19/2014 have reached. The regime does not even differentiate those who are its loyal supporters from those who are its staunch opponents. It doesn’t care, for as long as you are from a certain ethnic group perceived to be a threat to the government; your life is in danger. The following events expose the intentions of the government and clearly describe the real nature of what is taking place.

The murdering of more than 17,000 innocent Nuer people in Juba between December 15-19, 2014 in which government war tanks and heavy military vehicles were used to crash down alive Nuer innocent women and children simply because they were Nuer.

The massacre of about 145 Nuer IDPs in Bor town initiated and organised by the government of South Sudan and the plan was executed and put into action by Dinka Bor Youth, with direct help from the organised forces under the command of Lt. General Malual Ayom

Murdering of 220 Nuer trainees in Mapel, Western Bhar Elghazal State in which unarmed Nuer government soldiers who considered themselves part of the government and loyal supporters to the president and the regime were cold bloodily murdered by their trainers and the people who were supposed to protect their lives. This is a horrible event that sent out a strong signal to all those who considered themselves loyal supporters to the government that no matter how hard you try to please the government or the president, your life is at stake as long as you are from an ethnic group perceived to be a threat to the regime.

The hiring of foreign troops (Mercenaries) whose primary interest is not only to help President Salva Kiir finishing off his fellow countrymen but to see that their own interest of wanting the people of South Sudan remain in status quo of being incapable of standing on their own economically and educationally. The real intention of some of the foreign troops fighting rebels in South Sudan is to kill everyone perceived to be an obstacle to their dirty project they have planned to implement in the near future in South Sudan. The use of internally banned weapons such as “The Cluster Bomb” is a clear indication of ultimate goal of President Salva Kiir’s allies. The Cluster Bomb used by President Kiir’s allies (The Uganda) will have long lasting harmful effects not only the people who were exposed to it during the confrontation but also to the residents of the local areas where the Bomb exploded.

The untold suffering of civilians residing at the IDPs camps across various states in South Sudan where 90% are people from the Nuer ethnic group. The life of these people is always at risk from government soldiers who openly attack them with guns and tanks.

With all the above-mentioned facts, we the SPLM members from various chapters across Canada are convinced that the current regime under the leadership of President Salva Kiir Mayardit, the chairperson of our political party is not for the common interest of our people and the SPLM party members.    

We SPLM Canada Chapters members want to make it clear to the people of South Sudan and International Community that we cannot tolerate or honor a dictatorship with all kinds of human rights abuses. Therefore, we voluntarily express our collective solidarity to join Democratic Freedom Fighters (People’s Revolution) and we are calling for democratic reforms to restore peace, rule of law and unity among South Sudanese citizens at home and in Diasporas under the SPLM In-Opposition leads by DR. Riek Machar Teny. We also urge the people of South Sudan, local leaders, friends and our allies to give us their solid supports, participations and their continuous contribution for freedom, democracy, and prosperity.

As you recall for our long historical struggle against the successive Islamic Regimes in the Old Sudan, we came out of it through the conduct of South Sudan Referendum of January 9, 2010, where the majority of our citizens overwhelmingly voted 98.8% for secession. On July 9, 2011, South Sudan became an independent nation with defined national borders and territorial sovereignty in Africa. We strongly felt our hard work of fifty years of struggle and the loss of 2.5 million lives had been paid off. Nevertheless, the oppression didn’t end with the independence as we thought. A new institutionalization of tribalism immediately emerged under the leadership of President Salva Kiir Mayardit. Therefore, we strongly reject the institutionalization of tribalism, dictatorship, political censorship, injustice, violation of National Transitional Constitution, Human rights abuses and the like. Thus, we are determined to fight to achieve true democracy to transform South Sudan into a Free State through the rule of law, accountability, transparency in the governance and the establishment of federalism base on decentralization system.

“Federalism (Federal System)

What is federalism, and why is it considered to be good for the Republic of South Sudan? We convince with one of Canada’s foremost constitutional experts, Honourable Eugene A. Forsey who explained in 1904-1091 that, “A federal state is one that brings together a number of different political communities with a common government for common purposes, and separate state or provincial…..governments for the particular purpose of each community”. For instance, the United States of America, Canada, Australia, Switzerland, [and Ethiopia] are all federal states. Federalism combines unity with diversity, it provides, as Sir John A. Macdonald, Canada’s first Prime Minister, said, “A general government and legislature for general purposes with local governments and legislatures for local purposes”(1867). South Sudan will not be a viable state without legitimate party SPLM used to b but declined.

Political parties: South Sudanese wanted to realize that government system could not work without political parties whether two or more. Federal parties were not created by any law, though they are recognized by the law. We the people created them as we did to create the SPLM Party in 1983. All political are voluntary associations for the people who hold broadly similar opinions on public questions. SPLM Party cannot bring public trust from members and citizens under the current regime in Juba unless we, the members transform it”

We wish all our brothers and sisters from the SPLM under President Kiir’s leadership good luck and we thanks and appreciate those whom we serve and those who serve us for all this time.

Signed:

Main agenda(s):

Johannesburg, June 2, 20114 (SSNA) -- Former South Sudanese Ambassador to the United State Ezekiel Lol Gatkuoth met Deputy President of the Republic of South Africa and African National Congress (ANC) His Excellency Cyril Ramaphosa in Johannesburg, South Africa, today, June 2^nd 2014.

Amb. Gatkuoth briefed Deputy leader Ramaphosa on the following issues:

The South Africa's Deputy President expressed readiness of the ANC and South Africa to help South Sudan to have peace and stability again and SPLM to be united and govern the country as the ruling party.

Amb. Gatkuoth appreciated the role of ANC and South Africa for supporting South Sudan during and after the war in 2005 by training over 1,500 South Sudanese Administrators in South Africa and also for their continuous support to bring peace and stability in South Sudan's current conflict, which erupted on December 15, 2013.

Amb. Gatkuoth also paid courtesy call to Honorable Speaker of South Africa National Assembly Honorable Baleka Mbele who is also the National Chairperson of the African National Congress (ANC).

Press Release No: 4

June 3, 2014 (SSNA) -- The National Youth Union condemned in strongest possible term the killing of twenaty (20) Nuer on Saturday dawn (31/5/2014) at Mia Saba (107) residential area. The ongoing killing of innocent people in cold blood in Juba and elsewhere, speak of the criminal SalvaKiir regime of pursuing genocidal policy against our people instead of peace and stability in South Sudan.

Kiir and his militias,motivated by hatred and lust for power, continue to carry out refined and systematic extermination of ethnic groups among South Sudanese with the sole purpose of thorough ethnic cleaning. The barbaric, inhuman, ruthless murdering and massacre of Nuer civilians in a cold blood is a testimony to the cruelty and brutality of the Killer, criminal Kiir and his Militias in South Sudan.

Juba and all government control areas became slaughter houses and concentration camp like Nazis camps in Germany during Hitler where appalling crimes and atrocities were committed. This is gang warfare for arbitrary executions, extra-judicial killing, and mass murder, torture, lynching and street massacre.  The world is witnessing similar crimes of genocide against Nuer people in South Sudan like what happened  in Ethiopia under Derge Regime-the Red Terror,  Tutsi by Hutus government in Rwanda 1994, Herero and Nama under German in South west Africa 1904 and 1907 (present day Namibian), 1804 Haiti massacred against French Creoles by the black population on the order of Jean-Jacques Dessalines, Armenians by Ottoman Turks in 1915-1916,  the mass murder of six million Jews by Nazis, Srebrenica massacre 1995 by Army of the Republika Srpska( Bosnian Genocide). The world cannot just sit back while the genocide is being committed by Kiir and his militias on their very watch. This inaction by the UN, AU and IGAD explains the total failure to stop ongoing genocide.

Intimidations by Fascist Regime in Juba.

The fascist regime in Juba have resort into tactics of intimidation by arresting family members of politicians and military leaders  who have joined the SPLM/SPLA for fight against dictatorship, injustice, tribalism, corruption and the ongoing crime of genocide against South Sudanese people. This intimidations and torture will not break the determination of freedom fighters but will instead give them more courage and determination to bring down the worse and deadly dictatorship in the history of South Sudan. We condemned the illegally detention of Ibrahim Ayii  Akol and all prisoners who are in the detention cells  of regime and call for their  immediate and unconditional release. 

UN, AU, IGAD and Trioka

The National Youth Union would like to reiterate its call on UN, AU, Troika, IGAD and all peace loving nation to bring Kiir and his cohorts to account NOW. Kiir and his militias(Paul Malong Awan, Kuol Manyang Juuk) are blood thirsty killers who have no interest in peace than promoting tribalism, corruption, hatred, dictatorship, injustice and genocide in South Sudan. They are traitors who have betrayed the cause of South Sudanese people to live peace, freedom, sovereign and independent country.

SPLM/SPLA Leadership (Freedom fighters)

The National Youth Union would like to commend the leadership of SPLM/SPLA under the wise and humble leadership of Dr, Riek Machar Teny for proposing federal system as the way forward in this national crisis.  We welcome the federal system as the base of governance in South Sudan under twenty-two former districts (22) arrangements.  As civil society representing youth across the nation and in all liberated areas, we will work to advance this noble objective and help to achieve it for the goodness and prosperity of our people.  The National Youth Union congratulates General Dau Atorjong Nyuol and welcomes him to the fold of freedom fighters. General Dau Atorjong Nyuol represents the true and living conscience of South Sudanese people. He represents the courage, determination and free will to strive against all obstacles for an equal, free and just society.  We reiterate our call for unconditional and immediate withdrawal of invading forces of Uganda (UPDF) and all mercenaries’ (Sudanese Rebels) from South Sudan soil.

Thanks,

2/June/2014