South Sudan News Agency

Tuesday, Jul 29th, 2014

Last update04:10:17 AM GMT

You are here: Opinion

What Kills African People is a Power Struggle

By Bayak Chuol Puoch

What kills African people is a power struggle and African leaders never thought that they are representing their respective people and this shown us what is going on in their minds to kill and displaced people in order to rule the country for years and no one can ask anymore and this idea is absolutely wrong for a leader to kill its own people like what happened in Juba, South Sudan

June 12, 2014 (SSNA) -- The South Sudanese were sacrificed themselves to vote for the independence of this beloved country and they overwhelmingly voted for Independence of South Sudan on January 9th 2011 and we were thinking that we are freed from Khartoum regime that humiliated us for many years in our own country and we were denied to get education, health, roads and other basic essentials services and that was why we asked our independence and we got through voting. 

The some of our leaders are thinking that being in the bushes during the civil war between North and South Sudan is something that can keep them in power many years and they thought this is their reward to be in power even though there is no development in the country and I think that there are some people who sacrificed themselves to die for this land and they never test any tea or sugar and that is why we are enjoying right now.

All prisoners’ politicians should not be included in the coming transitional government because they are major party of this problem and they never contribute fully in this conflict that killed thousands of people because they already formed their own party in order to steal the upcoming transitional government and I think they will never any support from South Sudanese people and I agreed with Kenyan MPs who  calls to expel SPLM Former Detainees in the hotel in Kenya and they should be expelled from Windsor Hotel in Nairobi describing them as “selfish” people who have engaged in a “third bloc political reorganization, which does not help in the peace process” to end the war peacefully.

What we are seeing right now in South Sudan is something that we could not expected as citizens of this country because some of  our leaders are greedy enough for power and I was told by one of the officials that, this is time for eating not development as you the South Sudanese are waiting for because some of current leaders were in the bushes for many years and after that we will give it to you and I told him that the development will not come alone, it will come from the people who are serving in the government.

The African continent will not be stabled because of greediness from its leaders and that is why we see African people are suffering day and night lack of good governance in the continent. The African people will survive when their leaders rewrite a Constitution that can allows only two term in the office like what the Westerners are doing in their respective countries and that is why they have no more problems on power like us.

These are the solutions that we are expecting during the coming negotiation table in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

1. Ceasefire must be restored in the country, but all factions forces must be separately from their positions because we don’t know what will happen in the future during the upcoming election 2015.

2. Westerners governments must be monitoring the peace agreement and grantee the outcome and we need someone who will be responsible if war broke out again.

3. Constitution must be changed and the new constitution will take place, the constitution allows 5 years term and if you are good in your leadership, another term will be allowed only through election, but no more than that even though you are good in your leadership.

4. Federal system must be included in the upcoming talks and it is will of people

5. Free and fair election must be conducted on time.

6. No third term any more.

If we put these rules into action, our country will be peaceful and democratic state forever.

God Bless South Sudan!

Bayak Chuol Puoch is the Former Chairperson of the Nuer Community and Executive Director of the Naath Community Development Center in Cairo, Egypt. He can be reached at  This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

President Salvatore Kiir violates the May 2014 Addis Ababa agreement

By Elhag Paul

June 11, 2014 (SSNA) -- Dr Riek Machar, the leader of SPLM-in-Opposition narrowly escaped death on 15th December 2013 at the hands of President Kiir’s private militia popularly known as Dootku Beny (Koch Beny). Since then Riek in my assessment, give or take, seems to have become more understanding of the flaws of Juba politics. Unlike the Riek of pre December 2013, the new Riek appears to live up to his word. Riek has offered the people of South Sudan democracy and federalism in opposition to Dinkocracy and the phoney decentralisation in Juba. So far his offer appears to hold. 

It is highly possible that Riek’s unpleasant experience in the hands of President Salvatore Kiir has jolted him and turned him into a pragmatist. Riek now seems to display a mature understanding and care towards others. We do not have to go far to look for evidence. Riek on fleeing Juba on 15th December 2013 to save his life and set up resistance with others against the tyrannical regime of President Kiir, he prioritised and rightly so, the safety and lives of his colleagues who remained in Juba.

In the first talks under the mediators (IGAD) in January 2014, Riek honourably made the release of his colleagues (dubbed SPLM G11) detained in Juba a condition in the talks. Riek faithfully stuck to this condition which saved the SPLM G11 from the gallows of President Kiir. Shamelessly, the SPLM G11 once freed and out, shunned RieK without acknowledging the great effort he exerted to save them. This in itself is a topic for another day.   

No one in this ungrateful group of SPLM G11 should ever dream of leading the country as they seem to fantasise with the idea now. Their reputation is tainted. Their behaviour unsurprisingly symbolise the rot in Juba of which they have always been a part and parcel of.

The traits of good leadership Riek appears to have exhibited t so far have unarguably shown that he is fast developing his capacity in this area. This is something he was deficient in pre December 2013. The President himself up to now is devoid of such traits.

However one of Riek’s main reasons for demanding the release of his colleagues was to enable them gain their personal freedom and also to join him in the talks in Addis Ababa. Certainly as his negotiators but since the SPLM G11 distanced themselves from him, Riek happily accepted for them to join the talks as an independent group with a varied opinion. This again shows that Riek may be taking his newly adopted democratic values seriously this time. A credit to him. Unlike Riek, President Kiir on the other hand is entrenching his dictatorship. He is muzzling the media in the country and violently preventing legitimate delegates from attending the Addis Ababa talks.

The agreement of 9th May 2014 signed between President Kiir and Riek obliges participation of all stakeholders to find solutions for the chaos in the country. In line with the agreement, IGAD extended invitations to opposition political parties and civil society organisations. Most unfortunately, in direct violation of the agreement, the security operatives of President Kiir prevented the UDF team from boarding the flight to attend the talks in Addis Ababa. Why is Kiir’s government violating the agreement? Why specifically is Kiir’s government singling out the only vocal opposition party in the country? Is it because the leader of this party is not a Jieng? Or, is it because the leader of this particular party was in detention for two years on unfounded charges?  

If the leader of UDF and his colleagues are being denied the right to free movement because he was in detention, what about the SPLM G11? Why did President Kiir not violate the right of free movement of the SPLM G11?   Why has he singled out Justice Peter Sule’s party and his group?  Would it be wrong to assume that Justice Peter Sule’s right of free movement is being violated because he is an Equatorian? 

The oppressive treatment meted on Justice Peter Sule is a clear evidence to the world that President Kiir and his government are not only in violation of Justice Sule’s right of free movement but they are also in serious breach of the 9th May 2014 agreement which President Kiir signed.

What President Kiir has not worked out is that this refusal to let Justice Sule fly to Addis Ababa as invited by IGAD proves the regime’s undemocratic and violent nature. This obviously is going further to tarnish the image of the regime to its sympathisers and the international community beyond repair. If President Kiir wants to regain credibilty, the government needs to publicly apologise and immediately facilitate Justice Sule’s travel to Ethiopia for the talks. Anything less than this is not going to help them, especially after Michael Makuei, the regime’s voice has been caught red handed in peddling lies on the issue.

Now Riek has an opportunity to polish himself up as one of the few democratic leaders of South Sudan in waiting. If Riek can seize the opportunity and repeat what he did with the SPLM G7 and SPLM G4 to protect the rights of United Democratic Front (UDF) team to Addis Ababa, such action will in my view cement his democratic credentials. Riek has on numerous occasions stated that he wants all the stakeholders to take part in the talks. The opportunity has now arisen for him to demonstrate his seriousness over the issue.

It is worth noting that Riek endorsed the agreement and to a large extent he has honoured it, save in situations of self defence. Riek should now as the leader who is calling for democracy come out forcefully to defend the principles of democracy being violated by President Kiir in relation to the agreement. Riek needs to ask for the participation of UDF party team as invited to the talks in Addis Ababa. This is to first show conclusively to the world that he is honouring the agreement and would not collude with the tyrannical regime of President Kiir in excluding any stakeholder(s) from the talks. Secondly, to bolster his image as a statesman who wants to see a genuine solution emerge from the talks whereby nobody is excluded through abuse of state power. Thirdly, to win more support from the doubting South Sudanese and members of the international community. Fourthly, because the talks in Addis Ababa is the beginning of the healing process itself through dialogue which should be promoted for the greater good of South Sudan. Fifthly, because he needs to be seen to show leadership in protecting the liberties and rights of the stakeholders and through it the same to the entire people of South Sudan

If Riek does the above, no doubt he will score a huge victory against the oppressive regime in Juba.   This will raise his stature as argued by Margaret Akulia in her article titled, ‘To Dr. Machar: Adopt Nuer egalitarianism as your manifesto & watch your popularity skyrocket!’ http://www.southsudannation.com/to-dr-machar-adopt-nuer-egalitarianism-as-your-manifesto-watch-your-popularity-skyrocket/

In fighting to create a democratic South Sudan, Riek’s actions in defence of democratic principles greatly matters.   Noam Chomsky, the renowned American philosopher illustrates the importance of action elsewhere by arguing, “that a new society arises out of the actions that are taken to form it, and the institution and the ideology it develops are not independent of those action; in fact they are heavily coloured by them, they are shaped by them in many way. And one can expect that actions that are cynical and vicious, whatever their intent, will inevitably condition and deface the quality of the ends that are achieved.” There it is, words without action means nothing, absolutely nothing. It is the action that concretises the words and ideology.

President Kiir’s government is his own worst enemy. Instead of honouring the agreement of 9th May 2014, crudely it tries to shut up voices of the stakeholders through oppression. The stakeholders now as in the case of Riek have a chance to confront the Juba regime and force it to behave. All the stakeholders now in Addis Ababa need to complain about the violent exclusion of their colleagues from these important talks. They need to show clearly that the government in Juba is in violation of 9th May 2014 agreement. This is the golden opportunity for them to rediscover themselves and find their voices as the leader of the Youth Union has done. Please see,National Youth Union Leader: Intimidation Tactics by Kiir regime will not break the resilience of the people of South Sudan’ http://www.southsudannewsagency.com/opinion/press-releases/national-youth-union-leader

Right from the beginning of this crisis, IGAD failed to demonstrate impartiality and leadership in mediating the conflict. Uganda, a member country of IGAD took sides in the conflict. It threw its weight behind the regime in Juba. President Yoweri Museveni took liberties to make damaging statements in support of President Kiir murderous regime in the name of IGAD. For example, Museveni referred to the meeting of the heads of states of IGAD countries in Nairobi as his source of authority. Museveni’s open unconditional support (militarily, politically and morally) for Kiir’s discredited murderous regime undermined the role of IGAD as an impartial mediator. What was expected from the chairman of IGAD at the time was a clear statement to distance itself from Museveni’s unethical adventures to shore up a criminal regime conducting ethnic cleansing against a section of its society.

That is one aspect of IGAD’s failure. This was then followed by its poor strategy to revive the SPLM in order for it to lord it over the people of South Sudan. Here IGAD unknowingly sided with the very organisation responsible for all sorts of human right abuses in South Sudan. This clearly showed that IGAD was and is still not well versed about South Sudan political realities. Again here, its own conduct exposed its shortcomings in handling the peace talks.

With all the above, there is still hope for IGAD to salvage its reputation. It should now take its duty seriously and confront the regime in Juba about the oppressive nature of its dealing with the stakeholders. For the sake of its credibility, IGAD should ensure that all the stakeholders invited to the talks are allowed free and unhindered passage to Addis Ababa.

As with regards to the international community, the time for more stinging sanctions against the regime has come. Juba should not be let off here for its brazen oppression of the stakeholders and violation of the agreement. There must be penalties for this uncouth behaviour.

In ending this piece, the humiliation of the UDF team (as reported in the media) at Juba airport is wrong. It symbolises the rampant misuse of power by the regime. This should not be accepted because it undermines the agreement of 9th May 2014. It also denies the forum in Addis Ababa the invaluable contribution from all the stakeholders. For this particular reason, believers in democracy need to fight to protect the democratic rights of those abused. 

IGAD and the international community need to put their foot down firmly and hold Juba to account for their breach of the agreement. If they let Juba get away with this abuse, then they must be prepared for further obstructive behaviour from President Kiir which ultimately could destroy the peace talks leaving South Sudanese with no option but an ugly armed resistance and further loss of life.

[Truth hurts but it is also liberating]

The author lives in the Republic of South Sudan. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Bravo Equatorians!!

By: Bol Khan Rom

Quote “Those who opposed to the idea of Federalism will and cannot not be allowed to deny Equatorians their call for Federalism” Clement Wani Konga, Governor, CES.

June 12, 2014 (SSNA) -- The people of Greater Equatoria Region deserve thousands congratulations for having openly in a broad day light declared their embracement for a Federal system of governance. Many people took Equatorians for granted that they are just the kind of human beings in South Sudan who would never ever say NO for any tabled idea even the one which isn’t in their interest. Particularly, in a sensitive or threaten atmosphere like this. Unpredictably here they are, openly saying NO at the watch of the destroying machine. Ironically, it is not a lightly burden as I said, nowadays in Juba for one to express his/her dire need bravely in front of sitting individuals. Squarely, the three states’ Governors of Greater Equatoria region together with their governments’ officials and all grassroots have anonymously declared to go for federalism. By summing this up, Greater Upper Nile region is for federalism. Approximately, 50% of Greater Bhar el Gahazal region has also decided to go for federalism. Then South Sudan is here for Federal system of governance. There should not be question about that. Clearly, a need for federalism is not necessarily an expulsion of other citizens from Equatoria or ways for certain region to control own resources.

It is for the reason that federal system of governance had been a grave demand by all South Sudanese for years of struggle. So, Equatorians cannot be categorized as rebels just because they demand Federalism. It is not even the first time for Equatorians to favored or call for Federalism. Vividly, after Independence Equatorians held regional conferences in late 2011, 2012 & 2013 consecutively and called for federalism. Alas, their call had always been turned down by the government of South Sudan. Because, some people within the bureaucracy call it a new-kokora (division) or regionalism.

However, during the closure of the last Equatoria conference in 2013 it was accepted by the government for the first time. Dr. Riek Machar, the then Vice President accepted the call but implementation was not made. Afterward, the bureaucracy had to oppose itself on how South Sudan can be governance peacefully. And it has embroiled itself alone into present abyss, promptly led to peace negotiations in Addis Ababa. This is also a golden and last chance for other South Sudanese and Equatorians to forward their demands that had been turned down by the self embattled bureaucracy. Greater Equatoria, Greater Upper Nile and fifty percent of Greater Bhar El Ghazal region are for federal system. This was an accessed fact.

More so, Federalism isn’t a means of dividing the people of South Sudan as it has been misinterpreting. Rather, a means of dividing the powers, functions of government between a central government and a specified number of geographically defined regional jurisdictions. A federal system falls somewhere between the unitary and confederate forms in the method whereby it divides powers among levels of government. It has a minimum of two governmental levels, each of which derives its powers directly from the people (not from person or clique) and each of which can act directly on the people within its jurisdiction without permission from any other authority. Each level of Government is supreme in the powers assigned to it, and each is protected by a constitution from being destroyed by the other. Thus federalism is a means of dividing the powers and functions of government between a central government and a specified number of geographical defined regional (state) jurisdictions.

So it is not a call that divides the South Sudan according to tribes or regions. Instead it is a way of drawing a clear separation of powers or protecting constitutions of different levels of government from being destroyed by other. Even in one region, Greater Bhar el Ghazal, for instance; the powers of NBG State will be divided with that of WBG state. Each of these states government is supreme in the powers assigned to it. Mr. X or Y cannot interfere within the jurisdiction of one of these two states for the simple reason that they share Greater Bhar el Gazal Region. No!  Again, if the people of NBG state have elected Gen. Paul Malong as their governor in elections, Paul Malong must not be removed by Dr. Dhieu Mathok the President of central Government, for example, who would be seated in Ramciel, the National Capital. There will be no interference from other level of government at all. This is how federal system works/separates powers. And that is why it is being demanded by majority of South Sudanese. Hence, it should not be twisted as Kokora—division or something else. It is the same federal system South Sudanese have been searching for, since 1950s.

Therefore, to the best of my knowledge Equatorians are not demanding it because they want to target or eliminate particular region/tribe based on proposed interim constitution. Nor it is a mechanism to join rebellion. Australians are not Americans but both nations use or share an ideology of federalism. Likewise, rebels shouldn’t be seen as Equatorians and Equatorians shouldn’t be considered as rebels—Greater Upper Nilians for reason that they both demand Federalism. After all, Equatorians are human beings in a democratic country, so they cannot swallow their dire need simply because somebody is opposed it/somebody is demanding it somewhere. IGAD led peace process in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, must be utilize by all stakeholders of South Sudan to settle and achieve what our bureaucracy failed to implement, right after independence in 2011. That is, an equitable sharing of national resources; federal system of governance and genuine devolution of powers.

“How many of South Sudanese need federal system of governance to be installed in up coming permanent constitution?” This question was accessed by IGAD—mediators and the result was a populace need to install federal system of governance in South Sudan. All Greater Equatoria and Greater Upper Nile are the leading regions in favor of federalism. Additionally, Greater Bhar El Gahzal favors the idea with about 50%. Moreover, with this statistic in mind, South Sudanese people by majority have declared support for federalism. Paved by Equatorians, for if Equatorians had decided to side with the opposite party, ideologically; federalism would have failed legally/democratically. Because, Greater Upper Nile alone plus 50% of Greater Bhar el Gahazal could only give us less than 50+1 of the (majority) whole country population needed. BRAVO EQUATORIANS FOR YOUR BOLD DECSION!!

The author can be reached This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

More Articles...

Page 19 of 557

Our Mission Statement

To bring the latest, most relevant news and opinions on issues relating to the South Sudan and surrounding regions.

To provide key information to those interested in the South Sudan and its people.