Ngor Garang and Dengdit Ayok: South Sudan journalist speaks out after illegal detention

By Tom Rhodes/CPJ East Africa Consultant

South Sudanese President Salva Kiir said the Destiny article was defamation. (CPJ)

Detained without charge for 18 days, tortured, and released without explanation, South Sudanese journalist Peter Ngor plans to fight back. “I am going to sue them [in] court. What they did to me was completely, utterly wrong,” said Ngor, the editor of a new, private, English-language daily called Destiny.

Still, Ngor believes that his illegal detention was the work of a few individuals, and that ultimately, the world’s newest country will support freedom of the press. “There are powerful individuals who want to stop the press for their own interests,” he said.

On November 1, security agents arrested Ngor and detained him at the national security headquarters in the interim capital, Juba. “The room was completely dark, you could not see anyone. The only way to identify people was through touch,” he said.

For the next 18 days, Ngor said, security agents tortured him with repeated beatings. Someone walked on his back. They forced him to stand for two days straight. “The cell was designed in such a way you could not sit. I am now having trouble walking.” He had no access to family or counsel.

Then he was mysteriously released. “I assume they could not find anything to charge me with so they just released me. I was detained illegally and released illegally.” According to South Sudan’s constitution, a suspect cannot be detained over 24 hours without being presented charges in court.

Editor Peter Ngor (Sudan Tribune)

What prompted such hostility? Ngor’s newspaper published an opinion piece on October 26 criticizing the marriage of President Salva Kiir’s daughter to an Ethiopian national. Ngor’s colleague Dengdit Ayok, who wrote the piece, was detained four days after Ngor was arrested. “They kept him in a separate cell in the same security facility. I never saw him, but they treated him like they treated me until we were released last week.”

Ngor said he had not approved publication of the opinion piece, and that he would have changed its language. Indeed, one can see how Ayok’s story could cause a stir – it accused the president of “staining his patriotism” for allowing his daughter to marry a foreigner. As such, Destiny‘s editorial team wrote an apology to the first family for the critical piece soon after its publication, and suspended Ayok for one month.

Nonetheless, South Sudan National Security Services suspended the publication upon Ngor’s detention November 1, saying the paper did not adhere to “the media code of conducts and professional ethics” and instead “continued to publish illicit news that are inciting, personalities invasion and defamation,” news reports said.

On November 10, President Salva Kiir commented on the matter, saying “media freedom should not be abused to the extent of attacking personalities. In any case that will be defamation.”

Defamation currently falls into a legal gray area in South Sudan. Under a set of three proposed media laws, which would create a self-regulatory media council, a public broadcaster, and provide greater access to information, defamation cases would be handled through civil arbitration. The bills, pending ratification since 2007, are allegedly under review by the Information Ministry. (South Sudan became a semi-autonomous entity with a peace agreement in 2005, allowing the interim government to initiate certain legal initiatives.) Information Minister Benjamin Marial assured me in September during a visit to Juba that the bills would be passed “soon.”

Ngor believes his illegal detention and mistreatment may have been avoided if the media laws had been in place. The chairman of the Association of Media Development in South Sudan, an organization that has advocated for their enactment, agrees. “Without the media laws we are like footballers playing without rules,” said Jacob Akol, who is also online editor of Gurtong. Akol started to doubt the government’s commitment to press freedom after “the prolonged delays in passing these laws and the continued intimidation and arbitrary arrest of journalists by individual ‘referees’ applying their own rules in the absence of official ones,” he wrote in Gurtong.

Even if the bills are passed, Ngor acknowledges that the same people who arbitrarily detained him, contravening the country’s constitution, could still do so.

“These people thought they could silence us by intimidating me and breaking the law,” Ngor told me. “But I told them even if they killed me they could not kill the freedom of the press.” He is still in pain from his ordeal.

Despite his ordeal, Ngor believes there is press freedom in South Sudan and that many in the government support it. “It is a question of individuals within the government,” Ngor said. Destiny has consulted the Information Ministry and hopes suspension of the paper will be lifted in the near future, he said.

South Sudan fought a protracted civil war with Sudan in a bid for greater autonomy and civil rights, culminating in its independence in July this year. Ngor said: “It’s as if they have forgotten what we were fighting for. How can you lose millions of people for freedom and now this?”

Tom Rhodes is CPJ’s East Africa consultant, based in Nairobi. Rhodes is a founder of southern Sudan’s first independent newspaper. Follow him on Twitter: @africamedia_CPJ

http://www.cpj.org/blog/2011/11/south-sudan-journalist-speaks-out-after-illegal-de.php

Dr. John Garang de Mabior: Responding to Sadik El Mahdi Open Letter (2000).

Mr. Sadek Al-Mahdi, President of the Umma Party, and Former Prime Minster of Sudan.

Dear Mr. Sadek al-Mahdi;

I had to suspend my disbelief when I read your letter dated 22nd December, 1999 which you distributed to the public before I even received it. Evidently, the letter is also meant for the gallery, and since that was really what you wanted, then so be it. Your letter is as bewildering as it suffers from grave economy of truth. Equally, it includes uncalled for remarks and propagandist allegations. I assume that you expected me to reply; for otherwise that would be taking me for granted, to let such a letter go unanswered. You therefore called for and deserve this reply.

At the outset your letter starts with a blatant inveracity about the role of your party, that: “As far back as 1964, the Umma Party leadership recognised the politico-cultural and economic aspect of Sudan’s crisis as reflected in the civil war”. You have been Prime Minister twice since 1964, and no other Sudanese politician or political party in our history has had, and squandered, two opportunities to correct things in the Sudan. Indeed, if your claim were true, the Sudan would not have been cursed with two bitter wars. The Sudanese people are not suffering from amnesia and know the facts. Since you chose to start with 1964, let us examine the facts from then. 1964 is recognised in the history of Sudan’s tumultuous civil war, as the year of the October revolution, the Round-Table Conference on the so-called “Problem of Southern Sudan” and the sequels of that Conference. And if there is one government that should shoulder the responsibility and blame for the failure and non-implementation of the decisions that ensued from that conference, for whatever they were worth, it is the Umma Party. Your share of the blame, Mr Former Prime Minister, is colossal since it was you who teamed up with Dr. Hassen al-Turabi to initiate for the first time in the modern history of Sudan, the monstrous idea of an Islamic Constitution in a multi-religious and multi-cultural country like the Sudan. Since then the politics of Sudan have retrograded and gone downhill until we reached the bottom in 1989 with the present NIF fascism. The people expect from you apology and atonement for contributing to the present Sudanese debacle, not the unfounded claims that came in your letter, that your party has always recognised the religious and cultural diversity of Sudan.

Your further claim that your party, obviously under your leadership, has pioneered, in an “uphill battle” all the new ideas that informed the new thinking about the issues of diversity is as false as it is nettling. Who then, one is forced to wonder, are responsible for the old ideas? Pioneering new thinking is hardly the description to be given to the man and party whose battle cry has always been the forcible Arabization and Islamization of Southern Sudan. In this regard let me remind you of the lecture you gave in the Gulf not long ago in which you unashamedly and quite openly talked of how Southern Sudan should be Arabized and Islamized. Those ideas came in your treatise: The Future of Islam and Arabism in Sudan (Mustgbal al Islam wa al Urouba) of which I quoted pages 114 and 115 in my address at Koka Dam on 20 March, 1986. I prefaced that statement by urging the Umma Party representatives not to be disappointed. We neither mince our words then, nor do we now. Let us also not forget that those who espoused the ideas of the New Sudan, whose parentage you now want to ascribe to yourself, were persecuted in Khartoum as fifth columnists by your government, when you were Prime Minister. Whereas the Sudanese people may forgive, they should not be expected to forget. The archives of your two periods as Prime Minister are available to history, as is the period of the Mahdiya, and many Sudanese, especially Southerners, would not want to be reminded of these periods.

What is more exasperating is your reference to your role in mediating differences between Southern and Northern borderline tribes. Let me recall, Mr Former Prime Minister, that in no time in the history of Sudan’s civil war, were borderline tribal conflicts escalated beyond control, than during your term in office; tribal pogroms were unleashed since then. The tribal militias, bitterly referred to as “the Marahiliin” in the South by their victims, were a creation of your government. What the NIF government did later was simply a continuation of the policy of “government tribal militias”, which your government had initiated and scandalously called “friendly forces”. In your type of Sudan, citizens are thus divided into “friendly and unfriendly tribes”. Tribal feuds over water and pastures were not unknown to the borderline areas of Bahr el Ghazal, Darfur and Kordofan, but they were always apolitical and settled by tribal elders. Our people on both sides of the divide have never been driven by the psychopathological politics of ethnic cleansing. It was also your government that transformed the Anyanya-2 guerrillas into a government tribal militia. Indeed, the NIF must have studied the archives of your regime when they negotiated the so-called Khartoum Peace Agreement.

The record of atrocities committed by your government in this regard also included brazen insensitivity towards the plight of those Dinka people who fell victims to those dastardly policies. When two patriotic university professors (Dr. Ushari Mahmud and Suleiman Baldo) raised the alarm bells about the massacre of the Dinka in Dhaein, rather than investigating the horrendous accusations, your government opted to shoot at the messengers, describing them as fifth columnists. Indeed, the resurgence of slavery in the border areas of Northern Bahr el Ghazal is traceable to your period in office, a fact ably documented by the two professors and other independent witnesses. But then should we be surprised since this is in line with your own line! You also alluded to your co-operation with us in the interest of peace, democracy and a restructured Sudan, as well as to your respect of agreements to that effect. Regrettably, this is not borne by the facts. Our cooperation did not start with the NDA; it has a long and tortuous history. In 1986, we met in Koka-Dam, Ethiopia, and your party was among the first to sign the Koka-Dam Declaration emanating from that meeting, only to be disowned by you later when you became Prime Minister. Two years on, we reached an agreement with al-Mirghani, the 1988 SPLM-DUP Sudan Peace Initiative. That agreement, despite the wide public support it received, as evidenced by the reception accorded to al-Mirghani at Khartoum airport on his return from Addis Ababa, was not considered by the official media under your government control as an event worth reporting.

The dilly-dallying of your government in implementing the agreement provided the NIF with the time they needed to prepare for their coup. In fact their inclusion in your government, and your foot dragging on peace, gave the NIF the wherewithal to carry out their plans with impunity.

Nevertheless, giving due to where it belongs, the Umma Party played an important role, together with others, in bringing about the watershed agreement of Asmara in June 1995. However, imputing to your good self and your Party that you were behind the inclusion of the SPLM in the NDA, as claimed in your letter, is simply a gross mutilation of history. All those who attended the 1995 Asmara NDA Conference know that the SPLM was officially designated as the “Convener” of that Conference. All know the role played by the SPLM to make the conference a success. It is mind boggling to read in your letter that it was by your favour and that of your party that the SPLM was included in the NDA! This is an inexplicable absurdity. You also claimed credit for allegedly “introducing the SPLM to Arab opinion in the face of mutual suspicions”. The three Arab countries that I have visited in the course of the struggle are Egypt, Libya and Yemen, and neither you nor your Party played any role in these visits. Actually you played a negative role in the Arab World against the SPLM/SPLA. Technology has made the world very porous. Our information indicates that you have done the exact opposite of your claim. Whenever you had the opportunity you are reported to have actually de-campaigned the SPLM/SPLA in the Arab world. In point of fact sympathetic elements in the Arab World have sometimes asked us such embarrassing questions as: “What is the problem between the Former Prime Minister and the Movement?”

Mr. Former Prime Minister, since the Asmara Conference of 1995, the SPLM and Umma Party have had good working relations, both within and outside the NDA. However, since your emergence out of Sudan, there was a weather change within the NDA. We could sense a desire by you to re-do every single agreement or institution of the NDA. On many occasions you have attempted to create conditions for the NDA to rubber stamp your reconciliation with the NIF regime. These attempts were of course successfully resisted by the NDA. Indeed, let me borrow a leaf from your own lexicon, many Sudanese had claimed and warned us that you came to the NDA as a “fifth columnist” for the NIF. The Geneva and Djibouti agreements and your continued warming up with the NIF regime point to some truth in these claims.

Your letter then came to points on which you claimed that we do not see eye to eye. On my part I can enumerate many others. Your first point, however, was the IGAD peace process, which you claim you wanted broadened to involve the “uncatered for aspect”. What is indeed uncatered for in the IGAD is not an aspect; but a party, the NDA within the IGAD negotiations, and Egypt as a state with legitimate interests in, and concerns about, the Sudan. As regards the first “aspect”, the NDA Leadership Council (NDALC) came out with a clear decision on the matter requesting inclusion of the NDA in the IGAD process (March 1998).

The SPLM signed up to that resolution while reminding all and sundry that the decision to include NDA in the IGAD process belongs to three parties, namely, the mediators and the two negotiating parties, which hitherto have been the SPLM and the NIF regime. So, it is unfair to accuse the SPLM with lack of enthusiasm for inclusion of the NDA in the IGAD process, indeed it is belied by the decision of the NDALC in Kampala in which it has acclaimed the SPLM position in this regard. We are sure of the position of the IGAD mediators on inclusion of the NDA in the IGAD process; but not so with that of your new allies in Khartoum as they are up till this moment silent on the issue. This being said, there were indeed lingering and genuine fears within our ranks that the inclusion of certain elements of the NDA in the IGAD process might be a harbinger to the undoing of the IGAD DOP, particularly on the issue of religion and state. Those fears were not off the mark as proven later by the Djibouti farce which, for all intents and purposes, amounts to watering down the IGAD DOP. This is a matter the NIF fought strenuously to achieve. The Djibouti agreement is otherwise a bastard amalgam of the IGAD DOP, the Asmara Resolutions and familiar NIF double talk.

Concerning Egypt’s participation in the IGAD process, the SPLM since 1997 and in direct consultations with that country, strove to include Egypt on the IPF. You also claimed that we had second thoughts about the Joint Egyptian-Libyan Initiative. This is not just a misreading, but a total misrepresentation of our position. That position was made, in no uncertain terms, in Tripoli when we espoused the initiative.

Briefly the SPLM position is summarised in the following three points:

There must not be two parallel initiatives at the same time. The Joint Egyptian-Libyan Initiative should therefore be co-ordinated with, or related to, the IGAD peace process to deny the NIF regime their reckless habit of forum shopping.

The NIF regime should respond favourably to the NDA requirements for creating a conducive environment for dialogue, including scrapping the so-called “Ganun al-Tawali” and unbanning of political parties.

The NDA must have one negotiating position before it negotiates with the NIF regime, and related to this requirement is that a comprehensive cease-fire should be negotiated as part of a comprehensive political settlement.

Both Egypt and Libya, with whom we have close contacts and open channels of communication, are very aware of this position. I had to travel personally to Cairo and Tripoli to present the position of the SPLM, and I held a press conference in Cairo, thus leaving nobody in doubt about our position. We therefore do not see in your misrepresentation anything other than an attempt to muddy waters between the SPLM and the two countries. Fortunately those countries have long histories and look at issues much more critically than Sudanese politicians who assume otherwise. Your letter then delves into another misrepresentation; this time of realities within the international scene; the spectre of an international resolution of the Sudan conflict forced on us and alleged human rights abuses. You referred to discussions you have had with “important players” in the international community that left you in no doubt that the SPLM together with the NIF are accused of perpetuation of the war and human rights abuses. Mr. Former Prime Minister, we live in a porous world and shall, therefore, not be taken by statements like this. We too have contacts with international players. I do not believe that there is any danger of international military intervention in the Sudan. Your thesis on the possibility of imposed solutions is eyewash meant to bamboozle the unwary, and an unscrupulous attempt to mobilize the North, and beyond, along racial and religious lines. Perhaps that is why you managed to smuggle the issue of alleged internationalization of the Sudan conflict into the Tripoli Declaration, a matter I raised with you in Cairo as unfounded and unnecessarily divisive of the NDA, and for which you apologised. Nevertheless, I wish to assure all and sundry that the SPLM is a grown-up organization that is guided by principles and consistency, which are known to the Sudanese people. For a number of years we have been steadfast in rejecting calls, coming from those “important players”, for a comprehensive cease-fire prior to a political settlement. We equally have never appealed to others to fight our wars for us. It is mind boggling for such an accusation, of internationalization of the war, to come from the same man who sought UN intervention to restore power to him as they did with Arstide in Haiti. Your lamentations on the duration of the war are also suspect to say the least. The Sudan could have been wallowing in peace since 1986 were it not for your prevarications on implementation of the Koka-Dam Declaration of 1986 and the Sudan Peace Initiative of 1988, not to mention the wasted nine hours of meeting that I had with you in 1986. I now come to your surprising accusations and questioning of the human rights record of the SPLM/A, worse still comparing it to the structured policy of the NIF government. I said surprising because you are the least qualified to lecture us on human rights abuses. Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Despite the inconsequences of your human rights remarks, indeed their inappropriateness to the main tenor of your letter, we shall address them head long, if only to put the record straight. Again, you solicited for our response on this issue, and so you shall have it.

The SPLM/SPLA, as you should know, is not a government restrained by internationally recognised covenants, norms and obligations. It is a liberation movement waging a war for justice, but nonetheless curbed by internationally recognised laws of war and good behaviour towards innocent civilians, as well as towards captured Prisoners of War (POW’s). As such, our record is an open book for all to see, particularly by those living and working in our midst. There are more than forty international NGO’s working in the liberated areas, and it is they, not those judging us from distant capitals of the world, who can attest to our human rights record. Your accusations of us are based on hearsay, newspaper reports and reports of international human rights groups, most of which are based on second-hand and dubious sources. Moreover, you should know that the SPLM/A is a movement supported voluntarily by the civil population. We could not have survived without the ready and willing support we receive from our grassroots. That being said and human nature being what it is, excesses by zealous warriors may sometimes lead to overstepping the bounds of propriety. When that happens and it is detected, it is always checked and those responsible for it are brought to book according to law.

On the conduct in the war, you more than anybody else, know that we have been holding thousands of Prisoners of War (POW’s) despite the onerous task that attends their upkeep. You would agree that in war human emotions are at their peak, and so it is in war that respect for human rights can best be judged. We have instilled in our soldiers, the SPLA principle that “the object of war is not to kill the enemy soldier, but to render him non-combative”, and that “if an enemy soldier is disarmed or unarmed, killing him would amount to murder”. Many POW’s were captured by the SPLA in battles with forces under your supreme command, when you were Prime Minister. May I ask how many POW of the SPLA did the army under your command capture and keep? History has it that to your army the only good Southern fighter, even when he was rendered inoffensive, was a dead one. When you were Prime Minister, your then Army Chief of Staff, General Abdalazim Sadik Mohammed, announced that your army had captured 27 SPLA POW’s, but that all of them had to be killed to relieve them of their pain! This pattern of behaviour reminds Southerners of the period of the Mahdiya, when whole tribes were wiped out in the South. Least you forget and have the temerity to want to become an authority and advocate of human rights, perhaps we should remind you of the Juba, Wau and Bor massacres of the 1960’s, all committed when you were Prime Minister.

This painfully brings back to memory other sad episodes. The remorseless pattern of insensitivity towards fellow citizens did not spare even your closest friends and allies among Southern politicians. The saga of William Deng shall remain indelibly etched both in our memory and psyche. William Deng, who was presumed to be your closest ally, was brutally killed by the army when your party was in power and what did you do? However, your energetic efforts to bring to task those who were accused of murdering your great uncle, Imam al Hadi, during Numeiri’s rule, 18 years after the event, tells us a different story; that in your scheme of things there are two classes of citizens in your vision of the Sudan. Up to this day, the killers of William Deng have not been brought to book, despite your having been Sudan’s Chief Executive twice, and you know who these murderers are, Mr. Former Prime Minister. I cannot end this paragraph on the subject of human rights, which you chose to bring up, without reminding you of the Bor “incident”, which occurred in the 1960’s when you were Prime Minister. You went to Bor then and wept profusely at the grave of a certain Captain of your army that had been killed in battle by the Anyanya guerrillas of that time. You are reported to have, in one way or other, ordered the army to avenge the death of this Captain. And not surprisingly, shortly after your return to Khartoum, more than 30 prominent chiefs, including the Paramount Chief, Ajang Duot, were murdered in cold blood by your army. Some of the sons of those murdered chiefs are now commanders in the SPLA. They may forgive, but they cannot forget, and it also adds insult to injury for you to lecture them on human rights.

Mr. Former Prime Minister, during the 1994 Pan African Congress in Kampala, Africans in diaspora from the Americas tabled a motion demanding reparations for the Atlantic slave trade. There was a very spirited debate on the subject, but finally a resolution was passed demanding reparations from the sons and daughters of those slave traders. In the case of the Sudan, Mohamed Ibrahim Nugud has recently published a very authoritative book on the saga of slavery in the Sudan during the Mahdiya. Nobody should be surprised if some Southerners demand reparations for the Sudanese slave trade from the Mahdi family. Perhaps you should be reminded that the present wealth of the Mahdi family includes income from the period of the slave trade, as can easily be verified in Ustaz Nugud’s book. We expect remorse and atonement from you for any meaningful national reconciliation, not the kind of lecture about human rights that came in your letter. Such a lecture evokes bad memories. Your inadequacy in the human rights sphere was not only limited to the periods of war, whether in the 1960’s or 1980’s, your democratic record left a lot to be desired. So let us revisit the 1960’s when you were Prime Minister. Were it not your party and you yourself who expelled elected members of parliament, banned a political party and introduced into the draft constitution the charge of apostasy, the same charge with which the 74 year old man, Mahmud Mohammed Taha, was indicted and executed by Numeiri? So, what right do you have to lecture us on democracy and human rights, when both your past and present are littered with a flagrant display of callousness spiced with arrogance? The problem, as I could detect from your letter, is that you think the past is irrelevant, the present is all that counts, and the future shall take care of itself.

You claimed that, within the NDA, the SPLM/SPLA “maintained a relative organizational and political distance”, that we (SPLM/SPLA) are “in the NDA but not of the NDA”. This is another of your several

misrepresentations of reality. Those who were present in the 1995 Congress of the NDA will attest to the sacrifices that the SPLM/SPLA had to make in order to be accommodative, so as to have the NDA moving. This explains the meagre representation of the Movement in both the NDA Leadership Council and in the Executive Bureau. You should really have commended the SPLM/A leadership rather than condemned us for the magnanimity we showed at Asmara in 1995. You also referred to your suggestions for reforming the NDA, which were largely rejected by the Alliance. I want to assure all and sundry that the SPLM/A’s commitment to the NDA is unswerving, in the battlefield as in the political arena. In the former, you know that we have the largest force; that is the ultimate sacrifice. This was not done througha vacuous appeal forHijra, which seemingly fell on deaf ears; but through sustained professional planning, commitment and leadership. You would probably counter that it is the political arena that matters, and you would further assert that your party is the biggest in the country, as came in your letter. But I challenge this; is it really the case that you are the largest party in the Sudan?

The SPLM has never contested elections with the Umma Party, and so there is no objective basis for comparison, since largeness is a relative concept. However, your claimed large size was never reflected in the NDA. Before you left Khartoum in 1996 to join us in the NDA, the story I heard was that the poor recruitment showing of the Umma party was due to your being held hostage by the NIF. However, when you finally came out and called for Hijra for your faithful to join you, there was no significant increase in your recruitment. I am the Chairman of the NDA Unified Military Command (UMC), and the reality is that the New Sudan Brigade (NSB) has more Northern Sudanese in it than the whole army of the Umma Party, not to mention Southerners, whom I presume to be Sudanese. I therefore fail to see the objective meaning of the claim that your party is the largest in the country. If the Northerners who are in the NSB could voluntarily give their blood to fight for the SPLA, why would they not give their votes to the SPLM in a free and fair general election? Indeed, based on our common experience with you in the NDA and in the war, one has justifiable cause to conclude that theSPLM would come out ahead of the Umma Party in a free and fair general election. The claim that your party is the largest party in the Sudan is therefore just another of the many misrepresentations or elusions in your letter. Mr. Former Prime Minister, calling your colleagues in the NDA “dead wood”, as came in your letter, has more to it than meets the eye. This “dead wood” are the same forces with which we want to carry Sudan through the interim period, unless if you believe that Sudan is destined to be ruled by one party; indeed one man. This is of course untenable and that is why we have all along accepted to cohabit with all manner of politician and live with the dead weights of history. Failure to accommodate each other’s views, however divergent, does not bode well for the New Sudan. As a man who prides himself of being Sudan’s apostle of democracy, perhaps you may need to appreciate that democracy is the most humbling, because it reduces men to natural proportions. As for those of us who were born natural, we naturally have no problem with this. However, for those who believe that they are divinely ordained with super human faculties or abilities that would put them above everybody else, they shall perpetually fail in a multi-faceted democratic environment, especially ours which is characterised by multiple diversities.

I was tickled to read in your letter that your meeting with al-Beshir in Djibouti was supposed to be “ordinary” but turned into something else. Equally revealing was your apparent ability to achieve in three hours what we failed to achieve in ten years of negotiations with the NIF. Alas, your joy with Djibouti is neither shared by your colleagues in the NDA (Kampala meeting) nor with the NDA inside Northern Sudan. Obviously, you were not overjoyed by their reaction; hence you referred to a staged Cairo rally. For all that I know the Cairo rally was attended by all the NDA parties. Moreover, the position taken by the NDA in Cairo was affirmed by the full NDA meeting in Kampala in which the Umma Party was censured for the Djibouti mishap. Surely, the Kampala meeting was not by any stretch of the imagination staged. Perhaps nobody has told you that one of the reasons the Sudanese people give for their reluctance to remove the NIF regime in an Intifadha is that they shudder at the prospects of some “dead weight” of history returning to power. Ironically, the Sudanese people blame us for giving shelter in the NDA to known historical liabilities.

You also veered in your letter to my Washington visit and drew your own propagandist conclusions. The insinuation carried in your reference to this visit is that the SPLM/SPLA is working with or for Washington. This is of course a false and malicious allegation intended to malign the Movement in circles known to you. Surprisingly, you saw it expedient to give a copy of the letter you wrote to me to the same Washington, from which you tried to distance yourself in your accusations of us. Mr. Former Prime Minister, the Sudanese people know our track record over the years, as an independent and patriotic Movement that has stood against all odds. The SPLM has been consistent in its political stances on the main issues; conditions for unity, religion and state, and respect of Sudan’s multiple diversity. It has never been we, who changed their positions on those issues. So, whether in Washington, Cairo, or Tripoli, or in Ruritania, we always stood firm by our principled positions. However, if Washington, or any other

Capital, shares our positions on those issues that is the more reassuring.

You further accuse the SPLM/SPLA of disapproving of NDA participation in IGAD and of repeating what you called “the unacceptable non-paper of Mr. Johnston’s delegation”. Both accusations are unfounded and unfair. The SPLM/SPLA supported the March 1998 NDA resolution to this effect, and in Kampala we came out openly to welcome NDA participation in IGAD. What was not resolved was the mode of that participation, pending endorsement of NDA participation in IGAD by the mediators and the NIF Government. As to the arrangement I proposed for including the NDA within the technical committees of the SPLM that was meant as an interim arrangement till the parties concerned agree to the inclusion of the NDA in its own right as peace negotiator. For our hurry to find ways and means to include the NDA in the process, we expect to be thanked not reproached. Since the Kampala meeting there was one session of negotiations with the NIF government under the auspices of IGAD. If our call was heeded we could have not only assured NDA’s participation inthe process, but also tested the seriousness of your new friends in

Khartoum in accepting that participation. As to the divergence of views between Washington and other capitals on peace initiatives, that is of no concern to us; our position is clear on the Joint Libyan-Egyptian Initiative, but on which you tried to score points to mobilise those countries against us. We accept whole-heartedly the Joint Egyptian Libyan Initiative on the basis of the principles enunciated above, which are consistent with the letter and spirit of the Tripoli Declaration, and in the interests of the unity of our country (the New Sudan). On the mode of participation of the Joint Egyptian-Libyan initiative, we suggested formation of an “African IGAD Partners Forum (AIPF)”, which would include Egypt and Libya and seven other African countries. Now in heaven’s name what is the relation between this SPLM/SPLA position and the non-paper of Mr. Johnston’s delegation, which you alleged we repeated in Kampala? Strangely, it is your good self who borrowed from our position of the AIPF, when you said that your so-called “All Party Conference” will have for its mediation mechanism what you called “a two plus five representing our North African and Horn of African neighbours, backed up by an extended IPF” (emphasis mine).

You referred to my Kampala speech as “scathing, unfair and distorted”. Indeed, it was scathing in its objectivity, but neither unfair nor distorted. I commenced that statement by quoting Dr. Francis Deng that “in the Sudan what divides is what is unsaid”. I believe that it is time to stop burying our heads in the sand, or our differences under the rug. We owe it to the Sudanese people to tell the truth, enough for the white wash of smudge. Your letter proved us right, when you insinuated that you and your party are beyond reproach since you “represent majority opinion” in the Sudan. You also made a bizarre claim that in the leadership of the country the Umma Party had “made the greatest input, among Northern Parties, in the making of new policies towards the causes of the marginalized Sudanese groups”. Those are indeed very mighty claims. They expose all that is rotten in the old Sudan; the belief by some that they historically and perpetually own the Sudan, if not have a divine right to it. But thanks anyway for the admission. Indeed, if there are “marginalized groups”, there must be “marginalizers”, i.e., those who marginalize these groups. And one of the “marginalizers”, your good self, has finally identified himself, via your claim that you have made the greatest “output towards the causes of marginalized groups”. Need I say more?

Your letter describes the language I used in my Kampala speech as containing “a political language, which represents a complete adoption of the political rhetoric of some Northern ‘lost causes’ elites who would dearly like to recruit the SPLA to fight for their lost causes”. The SPLM/SPLA, Mr. Former Prime Minister, is not in the cattle or slave market, and you should be the first to realize this. How many times have we resisted your calls for a bilateral alignment that would exclude others? Though I do not know who those “lost cause elites” are, I very well know that nobody can use the SPLM/SPLA to fight their causes, lost or otherwise. This is actually part of the problem, that some political forces have the audacity to think that they can broker their way into power using others.

Moreover, there is an even more sinister insinuation in your accusation, which is the allegation that Northerners in the SPLM/SPLA are the ones who think for and therefore misdirect the Movement. This fallacy is not new nor confined to you, as it is entertained by those Northern political forces that become frustrated in their attempts to use the SPLM/A to broker their way to power. But what are the facts on this issue. The SPLM/A articulated its vision of the New Sudan in its Manifesto, published in July 1983. At that time there was not a single Northern Sudanese in the SPLM/A. It is therefore the vision of the Movement (initially articulated without Northern input) that brought Northerners into the SPLM/A. It is a gross misinterpretation of history, if not biased chauvinism, for anybody to think that it is Northerners in the SPLM/A who do the thinking for the Movement.

Finally, I make reference to your alleged strategic drive for a just peace, democratisation, regional stability and the restoration of Sudan’s status in the community of nations. This is meaningless rhetoric in the light of the dismal history we have just enumerated. A new, peaceful, democratic and internationally respected Sudan cannot be midwifed by those whose main concern is to repackage the same old stale wine in a new bottle, however beautiful that bottle may look. However, all evidence points to that your so-called Comprehensive Political Settlement is a euphemism for reconciliation with the NIF regime, and from the position in which you are in today, reconciliation with the NIF regime, unlike your reconciliation with Numeiri’s Socialist Union in 1977, would be tantamount to surrender. I warned you of this dismal prospect last June 1999 in my address to the meeting of the NDA Leadership Council in Asmara, Eritrea. Take my advice for what it is worth; you and the Umma Party are better off in the NDA than in the sinking ship of the NIF. In Kampala the Movement was satisfied with the censure, and as you know we did not press for the expulsion of the Umma Party from the NDA, and that still remains our position.

In closing, reference is made to your anxieties about the changing international and regional environments. In our search for peace, justice and equality we have never, since 1983, lost sight of our main objectives despite the shifting sands of regional and international politics. We struggle for justice, equality of all nationalities and cultures, fair play, an even political ground, and equality of opportunity for all irrespective of religion, race or gender. It is only in such an environment that unity and the New Sudan are possible. It is only in the context of the New Sudan that democracy can ever be meaningful in the Sudan. Those are basic values that are invariable, and are not conditional to regional or international changes. However, your gleeful remarks about these changes in favour of the NIF were very revealing. In our view, the dividend of being principled is much more valuable than what you called in your letter the “NIF-Intransigence dividend”.

Our record on the search for peace is unblemished. Since the days of Numeiri, we have talked with all governments that have come and gone in Khartoum, including yours and the NIF’s. So no one can accuse us of being “eradicationalist”, a buzzword that keeps, together with “internationalization of the conflict”, emerging in all your utterances of late. With the present NIF regime alone we have had more than 10 different negotiating sessions; so we know more than anybody else, the nature of the beast. Certainly we are not going to accept your belaboured speculations, particularly when they are based on an image of a reformed NIF seen through the distorting prism of those in a hurry to recapture an illusory power.

Mr. Former Prime Minister, please accept the highest of my regards.

Dr. John Garang de Mabior SPLM/SPLA, Chairman and Commander-in-Chief, SPLM/SPLA.

January 21, 2000: Yei and New Cush New Sudan

Below is the open letter from Sadiq al-Mahdi that Dr. John  Garang responded to.

Dr. John Garang De Mabior, Chairman SPLM and C-in-C SPLA22 December 1999Dear brotherAs far back as 1964, the Umma Party leadership recognised the politico-cultural and economic aspect of Sudan’s national crisis as reflected in the civil war. It was an uphill task to convert Northern political opinion on the matter. Since then, you are ware, I am sure, Umma had, within Northern opinion pioneered all the new ideas which formed the nexus of understanding between the old and the new thinking, namely, the recognition of cultural plurality, the founding of constitutional rights upon citizenship, the endorsement of universal Human Rights to form an integral part of the country’s future constitution, the move to make peace agreements between the borderline tribes to deprive the NIF regime from lining them up in their Holy War, the initiative to secure SPLM membership of NDA, and the introduction of SPLM to Arab opinion in the face of mutual suspicions. Right from the inception of our decision to co-operate in the interests of peace, democracy and a restructured Sudan, we have had an honourable relationship in terms of the agreements we have reached, and the means to realise our resolutions in the satisfaction of the legitimate aspirations of the Peoples of Sudan. Recently, we have failed to see eye to eye on certain matters: Ã 1 We insisted on an IGAD update to broaden it to involve uncatered for aspects. You were not equally enthusiastic for this revision. Ã 2 We encouraged the Joint Egyptian-Libyan initiative as a necessary means to rectify the IGAD drawbacks and to compliment it. Initially you have welcomed the joint initiative and then had second thoughts about it. The IGAD revision, which you suggested as a substitute, was so unfair that our rejection of it should have caused no surprise. Ã 3 Towards the end of 1998 we became increasingly anxious about the possibility of international resolutions being implemented over the heads of the Sudanese peoples, and the creeping Balkanisation of the Sudan. You may not have similar anxieties. However, our discussions with important players in the international community left us in no doubt that the SPLM/A is regarded along with the government as responsible for Human Rights abuses, and perpetuation of the war. The feared Balkanisation of Sudan is not viewed in North/South terms but would be a pervasive retrogressive phenomenon. You are not the cause of these anxieties but one of its expected victims. However, the most important two causes of disparity in our views are the Pace of search for a Comprehensive Political Agreement in Sudan, and the margin of party activity within the NDA umbrella. 1. Starting from May 1998 and the events, which led to the Horn of Africa war and the Great Lakes war, we in Umma have seen our geopolitical region in for a new political map with all kinds of unexpected alliances. That heralded as far as we analysed, the diminishing of our hitherto considerable, military and logistical space. 2. Beginning with 1997, we detected a change of political language in Khartoum which manifested itself in the regime’s belated acceptance of the DOP of IGAD, the acceptance of citizenship as the basis of constitutional rights, the endorsement of some Asmara 1995 resolutions, particularly the principle of self-determination for the South, and the appointment of a “National” constitutional commission charged with drafting a constitution guaranteeing political plurality. Widening margins for internal dissident political activity, diminishing military spring boards, anxiety about misguided internationalist agendas, and the possibility of creeping Balkanisation, have persuaded us to move very fast indeed in the search for a Comprehensive Political Agreement made possible by new circumstances. The internal and external events which we saw coming and so expected were a complete surprise to most of our NDA allies. This accounts for the different speeds and explains some of the consequent suspicions. 3. You were in the NDA, but not of the NDA. You maintained a relative organisational and political distance. We tried to lift the NDA from its No body Does Anything lethargy. In March 1997 we suggested a ten-point crash program to accompany the military accomplishments, and suggested a task force to implement it. The crash program was accepted, but the task force rejected. Consequently Nobody Did Anything. In February 1998 the Umma party’s fourth external conference criticised the NDA structures and total inactivity. We wrote an elaborate memorandum outlining past achievements and present disabilities. We suggested a reform program to rehabilitate its structures, to broaden the organisation and to activate it. To no avail. After several unsuccessful attempts to reform and activate the NDA, we decided to free ourselves from the NDA deadwood, to pursue our party activity abiding by the reference resolutions. After this practice became a well-known NDA tradition, we sought to legalise it by proposing a resolution in June 1999 to that effect. We declared that we shall meet anyone in pursuit of the Comprehensive Political Agreement. The last NDA Leadership Council in Cairo called for the formulation of a position paper. The Umma party presented a position paper based on all previous reference resolutions. Our Djibouti meeting with Albashir was expected to be an ordinary meeting exchanging views about how to activate the Egyptian Libyan initiative, and balancing the Geneva meeting with Alturabi, and providing an opportunity for us to explain the necessity for the confidence building measures. Instead of such a simple exchange we found that Albashir was ready for a further deal. He was prepared to sign on a summary of our position paper. Small wonder we accepted. Those who considered the accord on its merits appreciated it. We were not surprised by the negative reaction of the Cairo rally because we know exactly how “staged” it was. Although we noticed that after your last Washington visit your views about IGAD update and the Joint Initiative rallied to the USA position on the matter, we were shocked by the vehemence of your negative reaction to Djibouti. Your Kampala 8th December 1999 speech was a scathing, unfair, and distorted attack on a party which represents majority opinion in the Sudan, and in terms of our direct experience had the greatest input, amongst Northern parties, in the making of new policies towards the causes of the marginalized Sudanese groups. It contained a political language, which represents a complete adoption of the political rhetoric of some Northern “lost cause” elites who would dearly like to recruit SPLA to fight for their lost causes for which they have neither the will to fight, nor the masses to struggle. You know how much for the sake of larger considerations we have tolerated your digressions. Ã 1 On more than one occasion you presented the Government of Sudan (GOS) with a plan to establish two Confederate States, to divide central power between SPLM/SPLA and the NIF regime. You mapped new boundaries for the two states. A position in direct contravention of the Asmara resolutions and all previous NDA agreements. Ã 2 You were party to an NDA resolution in March 1998 to represent the NDA In the IGAD process and to enlarge it in other ways. It was always assumed that it was the Khartoum regime, which disapproved of IGAD update. It emerged that the SPLM/A disapproves of NDA participation in IGAD and when you suggested NDA involvement you simply repeated the unacceptable non-paper of Mr. Johntson’s delegation. Ã 3 You publicly endorsed the Egyptian-Libyan Initiative and the SPLM/A signed the Tripoli Declaration of August 1999. Later in the year you revised your position and came close to rejecting the Joint Initiative all together. So by the standards of abiding by the reference resolutions of NDA, the SPLM/A track record is very poor. A similar scrutiny of Umma activities, particularly the Djibouti accord will vindicate Umma’s position as consistent with NDA reference resolutions. Ã 4 The SPLA’s record on Human Rights, in the eyes of many neutral observers has blunted if not altogether arrested the opposition campaign against the Human Rights record of the NIF regime. The 55th session of the UN Commission on Human Rights in 1999, the US state Department report of Human Rights abuses in 1998, the NGO’s operating in Sudan particularly the big four who addressed their observations to the UN Secretary General in November 1998, the American based Human Rights Watch in December 1999, and numerous articles in the US press have equated SPLA abuse of Human Rights to that of the NIF. However, much we resent the unfairness and vehemence of your attack on Umma, and uphold the correctness of our position, we will not allow reaction to derail our strategic drive for Just Peace, Democratisation, Regional Stability and the restoration of Sudan’s status in the Community of the Nations. 1. The NIF Islamicist Agenda has failed to vitalise the economy. Failed to win the civil war failed to uproot the opposition, failed to expand regionally, and failed to establish a viable state and society, which could be presented as an Islamic model. 2. On the other hand, the armed resistance, the political opposition, the regional response, and the reaction of the international community have isolated, and all but besieged the Khartoum regime. 3. Under pressure from the steadfastness of the resistance, the regime’s own failures, and the pressure of its internal schism it changed direction allowing a greater margin of freedom inside the country. It changed its regional address towards good neighbourliness. It changed its international agenda. Small wonder that our NIF “intransigence dividend” receded. Our room for military pressure and diplomatic isolation contracted. However, the opportunity for political action multiplied, and the possibility of that action leading to a political resolution of Sudan’s conflicts or failing that providing a springboard for a greater political pressure has become very real. 4. In the circumstances, to expect our regional neighbours to maintain their previous position towards the Sudanese opposition unchanged is wishful thinking. Apart from their positive response to the regime’s changed diplomatic language, their own national agendas have drastically been altered by internal security priorities, and the requirements of the Horn of Africa, and the Great Lakes regional wars. They are honourable neighbours who know that we have a just cause. Therefore it is reasonable to expect them to link their normalisation with Sudan with the resolution of Sudan’s internal conflicts. 5. Our monitor of the internal political situation, the regional position, and the developments within the regime indicates that it is possible to clinch a Peace Agreement, a program for Democratic Transformation, and all the items in our Asmara agenda. All that remains is to decide upon the mechanism to reach it, the measures to ensure compliance and the transition arrangements. This is a viable scenario, which could clinch a political agreement to realise the legitimate aspirations of the peoples of Sudan, and if the regime fails to deliver, create the political dynamic for an irresistible political pressure. There are two possible alternative scenarios to this: A. An eradicationalist scenario to mount a successful challenge to the regime and uproot it. Although this fulfils the dreams of many who have suffered so much at the hands of this regime, the means to do so are not available. All that can be realised is to create a continuous condition of instability in Sudan, which could disintegrate state, and society and “Somalize” the country. B. Perpetuate the war related Humanitarian tragedy in Sudan and so create conditions for possible international Intervention. Intervention, if and when it comes, will not aim at a comprehensive resolution of conflicts in Sudan. It will simply apply a Kosovo or an East Timor pattern. It is a recipe for a very dangerous national and international polarisation. Such polarisation could very well act as a conduit for a revitalised Islmicist come back in league with Islamicist protest and reaction world-wide. High handed foreign initiatives are counter productive. They simply allow the regime to portray its position as an anti-Neocolonial struggle as well as a defence of Islam and National Sovereignty. Both scenarios are enigmatic and totally abhorrent form a patriotic point of views. 6- The developments inside the Sudan especially after 12 December 1999 could lead to one of the four following developments: a. Alturabi succeeds in restoring the status quo ante. b. Albashir’s success tempts him to develop a full-blown military dictatorship. c. The two sides resort to force in a massive way, and in the circumstances, expediting the deterioration towards Somalization. d. Further tragedies making foreign intervention inevitable. The four possibilities are catastrophic to the Sudan and can only be averted by an opposition strategy that is viable, realistic, and relevant. Umma’s own reading of the situation, plus National consultations and discussions with our neighbours, and with members of the International Community argues for the following program: 1st To convene a national All Party Conference to discuss and resolve all national conflicts and usher into a Comprehensive Political Agreement. 2nd The National Conference to be guided by a Declaration of Principles for a Comprehensive Political Agreement (DOPCA). 3rd The mediation mechanism for the conference should decide its time, place, membership, agenda, and through consultations with the parties to conflict issue the DOPCA. It should consist of a two plus five representing our North African and Horn of Africa neighbours, backed up by an extended IPF. 4th Until the conference reaches agreement, the country should be governed by a Transition Constitution. The Transition Constitution should be drafted by a technical committee from the following sources: a) The Constitution drafted by the National Commission. The IGAD DOP. c) The Asmara 1995 resolutions. d) The Nation’s Call. 1st The Transition Constitution to be enacted by a summit of the country’s political leadership acting as a Constituent body. 2nd The appointment of a National Transition Government to govern the country until it holds the plebiscite and the general National Elections as required by the Comprehensive Political Agreement by the All party National Conference. Finally, please accept our best regards. Al-Sadig Al-Mahdi, Umma Party President This Daughter of the South Will Not Come Cheap These days, the most coveted bride from the South is none other than the heavyweight, bold-headed and grey-bearded, Dr. Col. John Garang de Mabior,the long-dreaded enemy of Khartoum-based regimes. Long infamously known in the capital as “the rebel” and “the terrorist”, She (of the capital ‘S’) is now being respectfully addressed as “the leader of the SPLM/SPLA”, the Sudan Peoples Liberation Movement/Army, by the largely government-controlled media in Khartoum. And from left, right and centre they are already falling head over heels for her body – no, I mean the booty they expect She brings! Suitors come from all sorts of backgrounds, achievements, muddles and shapes: some have loads of degrees from some of world’s best-known universities. One is weighed down by military medals, mostly awarded by himself to himself. At least two of them are religious fanatics and close former friends of internationally re-known terrorists like Osama Bin Laden; others are nominally so. But all of them have plenty of cash – loads of it! Three of them are hardened political jailbirds and hard nuts to crack. The fourth one has been their common jailer, who now can’t very well trust any of his former prisoners as a mate or partner in peaceful days to come. They are all probably on the elderly side of middle-aged. The leading contender for the hand of the Daughter of the South has long been the Oxford-educated Mandukuru, a seemingly civilized and gentle fellow, yet an extremely dangerous and unreliable individual in his historically recorded dealings with the South. This atrocity-ridden character is called Mr. Sadiq el Mahadi, a grandson of the Sudanese Mahadi, at one time an ineffectual, twice-failed, Prime Minister of the Sudan. He is the long-time leader of the Umma Party and he thinks himself the natural suitor for our warrior daughter. But when he was Prime Minister in the late 80s, Sadiq made half-hearted attempts to capture the heart of the Black Daughter of the Soil; but She of the capital S had an honest agenda that Sadiq saw as undermining his own barely concealed blurred vision for the Sudan that sees Islam as having “a holy mission in Africa and the Southern Sudan is the beginning of that mission” (SM Oct. 6-19 2003, Sudan’s Media War of Visions). “The failure of Islam in Southern Sudan,” he said, “would be the failure of the Sudanese Muslims to the international Islamic cause.” He then went on to arm a hoard of ill educated, genocide-minded, Arab tribes of Southern Kordofan and Darfur to accomplish this mission. Their repeated and devastating raids into Bhar el Gazal and Upper Nile, even long after Sadiq was deposed, accomplished nothing but a lasting bitterness in those regions. Ask any surviving child or mother of these regions about the Marahaleen and you will hear all about Sadiq’s bloody handiwork. When during the Koka Dam peace talks in 1986, and later in other marriage talks, Sadiq pretended to be working for a fair and peaceful Sudan, the Daughter of the Soil kept remarking that “Others,” meaning the 61% of non-Sudanese Arabs, “get frustrated as they fail to see how they could become Arabs when their Creator thought otherwise.” If there is anything Sadiq fears and detests most, it is a Southerner who appears to outwit him; so he abandoned the idea of marrying our daughter. Good riddance! The second long-time pretender is a rounded figure, a kindly fellow who looks just like anyone’s granddad. His name is Mohammed Uthman al-Mirghani, who leads a similarly aged. Source: Gurtong.org Archive

Open Letter To President Kiir from Aliab-Dinka Diaspora Community on Kur Anyang (Ramciel)

H.E. Gen. Salva Kiir Mayardit
President of the Republic of South Sudan

Subject: The Aliab-Dinka Diaspora Community on Kur Anyang (Ramciel)
Your Excellency President Kiir Mayardit:

The Aliab-Dinka congratulate you your Excellency for successfully leading the people of South Sudan out of bondage and indignity of North Sudan rule to the final destination on July 9th, 2011 marked with peace, freedom and dignity.

However,the Aliab-Dinka Diaspora Community is writing to express its deepest concerns about the lack of consultation and openness surrounding the relocation of the national capital from Juba to Ramciel.your Excellency, the Aliab-Dinka Community want to make you and your administration aware that there are non-Aliab-Dinka members who have lobbied the government in Juba to believe that the “residents of the area agreed” to the relocation of the national capital from Juba to Ramciel. The community has not yet met with the government officials to discuss the relocation of the national capital.

Your Excellency, the Aliab-Dinka has never betrayed the legitimate struggle of the people South Sudan against the self-appointed rulers in Cairo (1899-December 31st, 1955) and Khartoum (January 1st, 1956-July 8th, 2011). History reminds the people of South Sudan that the Aliab-Dinka rebelled against the Mahdist (the Arab-Islamist slave traders) and the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium rule from 1899-1956. The Aliab-Dinka rebellion of 8th November 1919 and 6th May 1920 was led by the paramount Chief Kon Anok against the Anglo-Egyptian forces of Governor Chaucey Stagand in which the Aliab-Dinka warriors killed Governor Stagand demonstrates that the Aliab-Dinka opposes all forms of oppressions and subjugations.

Your Excellency, the Aliab-Dinka members (Roor-thiik or Riny-thii) were mobilized by Captain Alfred Aguet to join the Anya-Nya Movement training camps in the Congo from 1963-1972. In addition to that, the Aliab-Dinka young men were again mobilized and led by Comrade Benjamin Nyakot to join the SPLM/A at its inception in 1983. These examples show that the Aliab-Dinka is a peace-loving community that has championed and supported the dignified struggle of the people of South Sudan against North Sudan and its Arab foreign supporters.

Your Excellency, the recent announcement by the Republic of South Sudan to move or relocate the capital city from Juba to Ramciel has generated many questions from the people of South Sudan. The proponents argue that relocating the national government seat from Juba to Ramciel would make the national capital accessible from all corners of South Sudan. On the other hand, some argue that moving the capital city from Juba is not strategically and economically feasible. They also argue that the matter should not be a priority of the Government of South Sudan (GoSS) when there are many other pressing matters the GoSS can attend to.

The South Sudanese public neither know nor understand the rationale why the GoSS wants to move from Juba to Ramciel. The GoSS officials led by the Minister of Land and Housing Nunu Kumba have visited the Aliab-Dinka land of Ramciel several times to assess and survey without consulting the Aliab-Dinka natives.

These beg many questions, for instance, why didn’t the government consult the natives of the land, but went ahead by identifying the land and naming it as “No Man’s Land?” Sometimes, the government officials claimed that “They have been given the land” by the community. If the government’s first statement hold substance that Ramciel is “No Man’s Land” is correct, then why invoke the second statement that “We have been given the land” by the community? Where was that community in the first place when the government said that the land in question is “No man’s land?”

There is not a single Aliab-Dinka in the GoSS executive, but that does not mean the Aliab-Dinka natives do not exist. By the way, the name Ramciel, was coined by the SPLM/A. The Aliab-Dinka call the area in question Kur Anyang (Ramciel). The GoSS should have consulted the Aliab-Dinka first before initiating this project. This project will have devastating social, economic, spiritual and cultural ramifications beyond anyone’s imagination to the Aliab-Dinka if not executed properly. This letter tackles three main issues of significance in relation to Ramciel. These issues include:

1)Ramciel is not a “No Man’s Land” as the GoSS claims; it belongs to the Aliab-Dinka.
2)No consultation between the Aliab-Dinka and the GoSS.
3)The negative ramifications of the Aliab-Dinka giving its land to the GoSS.

These are not fictional complaints, but legitimate ones by the Aliab-Dinka. If the government fails to consult with the community, but chooses to bulldoze its way, then the community has all the right like the Bari community to say reject or oppose to the construction of Ramciel.

This letter does not advocate that the Republic of South Sudan has no rights to relocate the national capital to wherever the government chooses including the Aliab-Dinka land of Ramciel. However, what this letter advocates is that wherever the government chooses to relocate the national capital it must consult and dialogue with the locals because the locals would be the ones who would be affected because they would lose their land.

1.Ramciel is No Man’s Land
The Aliab-Dinka community is extremely disappointed that the Juba government calls Ramciel “No Man’s Land.” Kur Anyang (Ramciel) is located in Akeer section of Aliab-Dinka, Aweriar County. Your Excellency, the Dinka community is an agro-pastoralist community. Statistically, 99% of the Aliab-Dinka people’s livelihoods depend on land, the Nile water and cattle. The Dinka lifestyle will be negatively affected when there is a change in socio-ecology; where the cows would lose the grazing land and accessibility to the Nile. Ramciel is the grazing land for the Aliab-Dinka’s livestock during the rainy season in the Aliab Valley  when the Nile banks are overflowed.

The former SPLM/A Chairman, Dr. Garang in 2004 came up with the concept of identifying a place as the future potential national capital of South Sudan. Dr. Garang and the SPLM/A leadership did not consult the Aliab-Dinka when a group of the SPLA officers were sent to survey the area. General Oyai Deng Ajak and General Malual Majok Chiengkuach were among the SPLM/A officers. The Aliab-Dinka welcomed the late SPLM/A Chairman when he came to Kur Anyang (Ramciel) in November 2004. The Aliab-Dinka killed bulls as a symbolic Dinka way of welcoming and honoring a legitimate guest. The welcoming of the SPLM/A leadership to Kur Anyang (Ramciel) by the community did not mean that the Aliab-Dinka have surrendered its land to the SPLM/A leadership.

2.The GoSS has not consulted the Aliab-Dinka
The SPLM/A leadership in 2004 and in 2011 the Republic of South Sudan has not consulted the Aliab-Dinka community on the Ramciel issue. The community has only heard about the Ramciel debate from the media. The government has not taken any initiative to consult to gauge the viewpoints of the Aliab-Dinka whether they would relinquish their land to the Republic of South Sudan.
The Juba government did nothing to inform or consult with the Aliab-Dinka. The lack of consultation by the GoSS does not sit well with Aweriar County. Isn’t this the attitude that causes the fallout between the Bari Community and the government over Juba? The Aliab-Dinka Community does not necessarily oppose the move, but would rather dialogue with the government regarding some of its best grazing land.

The government has taken the unilateral decision without consulting the Aliab-Dinka Community. The Aliab-Dinka patiently waited for the government and its delegation to consult or brief the community on Ramciel. The community also waited for the government to contact its representatives in Juba. However, the government chose not to do so since the community in question has no representatives in the national executive; thus its land can be taken without consultation. Again, the government failed to consult the Aliab-Dinka on September 2nd, 2011 when it announced that it would eventually relocate its national capital city from Juba to Ramciel.

The 2011 Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan addresses the land ownership in three folds. Article 170 (2) of the 2011 Transitional Constitution addresses the land ownership in South Sudan reads as follows:
Without prejudice to sub-Article (3) below, the land tenure system in South Sudan shall consist of: (a)  public land, (b)community land; and (c) private land.

This letter cites the 2011 Transitional Constitution of South Sudan as a matter of formality knowing that much of the land in the country is owned by the various ethnic groups and sub-ethnic clans. Again, article 170 (5) of the South Sudanese Transitional Constitution addresses the community land as follow:

Community land shall include all lands traditionally and historically held or used by local communities or  their members. They shall be defined, held, managed and protected by law.

The Ramciel area falls under the community land ownership. The unilateral approach adopted by the government to identify the Aliab-Dinka land of Ramciel to build its national capital without consultation violates article 170 (9) of the Constitution that states:

Customary seasonal access rights to land shall be respected, provided that these access rights shall be  regulated by the respective states taking into account the need to protect the environment, agricultural  production, community peace and harmony, and without unduly interfering with or degrading the primary  ownership interest in the land, in accordance with customary law.

Furthermore, article 170 (9) makes it clear that interfering in traditional or community land without consultation contributes to “unduly” seizing the land. The Aliab-Dinka is not accusing the government of grabbing land, but the manner in which the government has acted toward the community amounts to land grabbing. The only way the government can avoid any future confrontation with the Aliab-Dinka is for it [GoSS] to consult and dialogue with the community so that the community can air out it fears to the government, and for the government to specifically explain the reasons why it wants the Kur Anyang (Ramciel) land.

The government has ignored the community in many ways. On September 20th, 2011, Hon. Kumba of Land and Housing said that “the natives there had assured the government that they would provide the land for free.”  The Aliab-Dinka would like to inform the people of South Sudan that the community has not even met the government officials let alone agree to concede their land to the government. If Hon. Kumba is sure of her statement; thus she has to inform the public about the Aliab-Dinka or Aweriar County officials and local chiefs she has met and discussed the pros and cons of the relocation of the capital. The government unilaterally decided to carve “50 sq miles” of Aliab-Dinka land without consulting the Aliab-Dinka Community.

The recently formed ministerial committee by the government headed by Hon. Kumba did not even consider including the community in the process of survey. One wonders why the Juba government conceptualizes the relocation of the national capital to a new area without consulting. No Aliab-Dinka chief from the Akeer section of Aliab-Dinka or Aliab-Dinka officials who represent the Aliab-Dinka Community in Rumbek or Juba for that matter has met with the government officials and consented to give the land to the GoSS.

3.The Disadvantages of 50 Sq Miles (Ramciel)

The negative ramifications of constructing the national capital in Ramciel, Aweriar County cannot be underestimated. The people who would be affected without any doubt whatsoever are the Aliab-Dinka pastoralists whose lives depend on land for livestock rearing. This scenario must be put into context so that those who would read this letter understand what the Aliab-Dinka Diaspora Community is talking about. First, 99% of the Dinka population practices agro-pastoralist economy. In other words, 99% of the Dinka people reside in rural areas despite the recent rural-urban migration. The education enrollment is very low among South Sudanese let alone among the Dinka.

First and foremost, 99% of Aliab-Dinka people are cattle keepers with 99% illiteracy rates.  Imagine how the construction of a new urban center will negatively affect the Aliab-Dinka natives’ life. There is no community in South Sudan that lacks accessibility to education more than the Aliab-Dinka. The construction of a new city will displace and uproot the people who have not known the city lifestyle to flock into city without skills, experience, and education that are needed.  Thus, there will be proliferation of social ills such as homelessness and frustration; criminal gangsterism and beggary; alcoholism and drugs; prostitution; the prevalence of HIV/Aids and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs), among the Aliab-Dinka people. As the city expands, the indigenous people of the area will gradually not only lose their land, but their culture will be eroded and eventually disappear (ethnocide). Remember that 99% of the Aliab-Dinka population is illiterate so someone can imagine the lives of illiterate people in the city. Their livestock and land would be gone and no educational skills so they cannot find stable jobs to sustain their lives in the city. This would be similar to the relocation of the Nigerian capital from Lagos to Abuja, which negatively affected the social development of the locals around Abuja.

Your Excellency, there will be land grabbing of the natives’ land by the government officials and Multinational Corporations (MNCs). Thus, the Aliab-Dinka land would be gone. And this means the end of the Aliab-Dinka if the grand strategy to build the national capital succeeds.  One ought to remember the rapid expansion and swelling of Juba in the last six years. This rapid expansion causes the rift between the GoSS and the Bari Community, besides other issues. The late SPLM/A leader Dr. Garang knew well that the only way to control the rural-urban migration is to “take town to the people” instead of “bringing the people to town.”

In conclusion, your Excellency, the Aliab-Dinka Diaspora wants to inform the South Sudanese public that Ramciel is not a “No Man’s Land” as the government claims. The Aliab-Dinka Diaspora wants to reiterate to the South Sudanese public that Kur Anyang (Ramciel) is located in Akeer section of Aliab-Dinka (Aweriar County). Ramciel belong to the Aliab-Dinka Community of Aweriar County. We Aliab-Dinka Community Diaspora reject the construction of Ramciel as a new national capital based on the concerns raised in this communiqué.

In brief; therefore, the first concern why the community rejects the construction of the national city in Kur Anyang (Ramciel) is the lack of consultation. The Aliab-Dinka natives have not been consulted by the South Sudanese leadership. There must be consultation and dialogue between the government and the community so that differences and fears of ills of city among the Aliab-Dinka masses are ironed out. It is through consultation and dialogue where the community either consents to give its land to the government or rejects the government proposal altogether. There will be no construction of the national capital in Ramciel without consultation.

Second, any developmental programs the government promises to the Aliab-Dinka must be communicated in consultation. The Aliab-Dinka people cannot be enticed by developmental promises to give up their land. Such developmental promises can be provided by the government without taking their land because the Aliab-Dinka Community is part and parcel of South Sudan.

Third, there will be negative ramifications. First, the Aliab-Dinka will lose their agro-pastoralist land to the government. When land is lost; the Aliab-Dinka’s agro-pastoralist livelihood will disappear. People do not see this thing as the biggest threat to the Aliab-Dinka. If the government can award itself 50 Sq mile radius without the consent of the Aliab-Dinka natives, then there is nothing that can prevent the government from encroaching into the remaining Aliab-Dinka land.

Respectfully,

1. Benjamin Aciek Machar
2. Johnmark Makuach Aluet
3. Nyanpen Tong Kenjok
4. Abraham Mawut Angol
5. Abolich Madol Nyinger
6. Michael Mangol Nyalueth
7. Abraham Maker Achuoth
8. Thuch Deng Thuch
9. Abraham Kuol Makuach
10. Garang Ayang Kuoi
11. Garang Aguto Gong
12. Abraham Achuoth Ngon
13. Simon Aguto Manyiel
14. Peter Kot Nhial
15. William Machar Awur
16. Abraham Mariar Panchol
17. Gakeer Makuach Aneet
18. Abraham Chuti Kuol
19. Daniel Dhur Ajak
20. Barnaba Karkon Machut
21. Jok Ajak Wol
22. Peter Manyang Anyak
23. Peter Abolich Keny
24. Simon Gai Manyiel
25. Abraham Manyiel Machar
26. Daniel Makuei Koch
27. Angelo Mayan Mabor
28. Abraham Makuach Atiop
29. James Aciek Wel
30. Daniel Ring Malou
31. Santino Alier Thongjur
32. Kueric Ayuom Chol
33. Daniel Gai Ayuom
34. Abraham Kuol Makuach
35. Andrew Mel Ayiei
36. John Alier Nyieth
37. Daniel Akech Kuol
38. Simon Mawut Jau
39. Jok Achuoth Deng
40. Peter Majuch Abui
41. Jacob Nyinger Majok
42. Malual Kuot Dechiek
43. Dengic Nyuoth
44. John Kuoi Waat
45. Mareng Jonghoock Chahooch
46. James Akech Manyuonduk
47. Peter Nyangeth Aciek
48. Abraham Aguto Achuoth
49. Abraham Manyiel Nhial
50. Abraham Kuol Nyakot
51. Victor Magot Tong
52. Isaac Kenjok Tong
53. Marathano Angui Makuach
54. Majer Malual
55. Gabriel Mawut Majak
56. Abraham Majok Amoot
57. Daniel Thuch Aciek
58. Peter Aciek Adhum
59. Madit Kuarang Awuok
60. Adol Ayak Kom
61. Makuer Nyieth Panjak
62. Achot Angol Koro
63. Yar Dut Chuei
64. Nyanyieth Chuei Keny
65. Peter Awech Denyjok
66. Riak Wat Bub
67. Kon Malou
68. Ayak Wun Reng
69. Abui Machar Nyayan
70. Puol Ngeth
71. Denyjok Tong Kenjok

The Aliab-Dinka Diaspora Community
CC:Dr. Riek Machar Teny, Vice President of the Republic of South Sudan
CC:Hon. Jema Nunu Kumba, Chairperson of Ministerial Committee for Ramciel Union
CC:Hon. James Wani Igga, Speaker of South Sudan National Assembly
CC:Hon. Daniel Awet Akot, Deputy Speaker of South Sudan National Assembly

Fangak Youth Union expresses its solidarity with the people of Atar in Pigi County .

“Food and medical assistance to Canal and Khorfulus of Pigi County
from World Food Program”. Photo: WFP/Carla Lacerda
.
Press statement – for immediate release!

Quote: “……we live in a single garment of destiny and that what affects
one directly, affects the other indirectly……” (By Martin Luther King
Jr)

November 21, 2011 (SSNA) — Fangak Youth Union would like to seize
this opportunity to express its solidarity with the people of Atar in
Pigi County, Jonglei state, who have been befallen by the pitfall
situation that happened on the 16th of November, 2011. As we’ve heard
and read in the media, Atar and its surrounding villages were attacked
and burned to ashes on Wednesday this week by the rebels claiming to
be fighting the government but are now ending up fighting the innocent
civilians. This fact by its very nature leaves a lot to be desired of
the rebels’ intentions – that is if the rebels took up arms in order
to fight the government of the day but have now ended up turning their
guns against the civilians whom they are supposed to protect and leave
them unharmed!

We in the Fangak Youth Union would like to condemn this act of
violence targeting civilians’ settlements by the rebels, who are using
scare tactics of ‘hit and run’! We would like to assure the people of
Atar in Pigi County that we stand in solidarity with them in this hour
of tragedy as they mourn the death of their loved ones as well as
their destroyed livelihoods/properties. It’s a pity that it had
happened this way! What has befallen the people of Atar this week is
almost similar to what happened to the people of Fangak County in
February early this year, but varies in magnitude as the scale of the
destruction in Fangak was huge – compared to the recent pitfall event
that has taken its toll on the people of Atar in Pigi County!

The purpose of this press statement is not meant to serve a certain
political interest or is not for political reasons as may be construed
by some—— but a genuine solidarity with the people of Atar– the
victims of this circumstance, who share a lot in common with the
people of Fangak County, both historically and geographically. As we’d
mentioned earlier in our press release issued this week condemning the
attack on civilians’ boat in Fangak County, we made it crystal clear
that we do not want any innocent civilian(s) in any part of South
Sudan to be killed for no reason. Contextually, it should not go
without informing the right historical records that Pigi, Ayod and the
mother Fangak County were once under One County called “Fangak
County”(now Greater Fangak) before the decentralization policy that
saw the-one-time one County fragmented into-now -three counties, just
as it’s the case in South Sudan, in order for development to roll out
to its citizens.

Ayod has gone away and is now a County of its own; likewise, Pigi has
gone away and is a county of its own now. But it should not be
overstressed or overstated that the whole fragmentation was an
administrative division, and not people’s division, as maybe conceived
by some people! The three Counties share a lot of things in common.
They share a common border; they have a common language and a shared
common interest for the people that inhabit the Greater Fangak area.

The mother Fangak County has a huge responsibility to ensure that it
keeps and maintains unity of purpose and promote common interest among
the people of Greater Fangak area and beyond. It has always played
this pivotal role. The mother Fangak has always been accommodative
enough and welcome people from the other two sisterly counties with an
open arm and good heart. A good example can be cited of the good
accommodation for the internally displaced persons from Kurway Payam
of Pigi County. And in light of this recent event on Wednesday this
week, the Commissioner of Fangak County, H.E. James Maluit Ruach did a
fantastic job by visiting Atar on Thursday the following day to
acquaint himself and his accompanying delegation of the situation on
the ground after it has been burned down by the rebels. This was a job
well done by H.E. the commissioner and which deserves thumb up! This
was a right visit at the right time, as it showed our sincere
sympathies and genuine solidarity with the people of Atar. Also, the
displaced people from Atar in the recent fighting are now sheltering
in Fangak County.

At this point in time, we would like to appeal to all humanitarian
agencies across the Country in order to provide humanitarian
assistance to the people of Atar at this hour of great need. We also
appeal to the government of the republic of South Sudan and Jonglei
state government to exert necessary efforts in order to protect the
innocent civilians of Greater Fangak area and beyond from the hands
And harm of the rebels. As Dr. King Jr. clearly put it, it’s true, ‘we
live in a single garment of destiny and therefore, what affects one
directly, affects others indirectly’. We are truly saddened and
shocked by this callous act. We fledge our unconditional support in
all forms at this hour of need and tragedy!

God bless the people of South Sudan!

Our sincere and heartfelt condolences to those families who have lost
their loved ones!

Long live the unity of the people of Greater Fangak!

Fangak Youth Union, Information and Publicity department

For contact: email, fangakyouthunion@ymail.com

Naivasha Media Production Celebrates the Release of Ngor Garang and Dengdit Ayok

Juba, November 22, 2011

The staff of suspended Destiny, Al Masir Newspapers, media houses in Juba, friends and relatives celebrated the release of Ngor Garang and Dengdit Ayok who were arrested by National security Service (NSS) – Ngor Garang on November 1^st and Dengdit Ayok on November 5 respectively. Naivasha Media Production organized the welcoming celebration for the release of said journalists. Note: this article is incomplete as the author was called for urgent meeting; he left in the middle of speeches, thus he did not cover all the speakers including the release journalists.

The arrest of the editor-in-chief and his deputy and the closure of Destiny newspaper came right after publication of an opinion article written by Dengdit Ayok criticizing the South Sudan President Salva Kiir Mayadrit for allowing his daughter to marry an Ethiopian migrant.

 The Staff and media houses on Sunday November 20 welcome the return of Editor-in-Chief Garang Ngor, and Deputy Editor-in-Chief Deng Ayok, of Destiny Daily who were released after 18 days in detention.

“We are very happy today to have you among us Ngor Arol and Deng Ayok,” master of ceremony and reporter of Al Masir Arabic daily Mr. Abraham Malek told the conferees who gathered in Al Masir Newspaper headquarters’ Conference hall on Sunday afternoon. As the two of you have seen on Friday afternoon, November 18, all the staff of Al Masir, Destiny daily and the residents of the Munuki, Hai Kuwait where the newspaper office is allocated were very happy to see the two of you released. Residents were disappointed and helpless when Dengdit Ayok was round up on Saturday November 5 on their watch. They are relieved to see you back. It was one of the best days for us and our neighbor residents – welcome Ngor Garang and Dengdit Garang said Abraham Malek.

Dr. Dhieu Mathok, the Chairman of board of directors of the Destiny daily was equally happy with released of Ngor Garang and Dengdit Ayok. Welcome Ngor Garang and Dengdit Ayok! He explained the efforts made by the leadership of Destiny who published apology to the first family, suspended the publication of Destiny for 5 days and Dengdit Ayok for one month. After these processes, he went to the ministry of information and Broadcasting in person to deliver the apology to them and brief the ministry about the action taken by the board. The ministry appreciates and welcomes the board decision.

The Ministry advice Dr. Dhieu to delivers similar copy of the board’s decision to NSS which he did. The Director General of NSS did not honor the board decision, instead he demanded for Deng Ayok to be brought before him which was rejected by Dr. Dhieu on the basis that Ayok is already punished by the newspaper authority. Dr. Dhieu told NSS that any concerns regarding the article written by Dengdit Ayok published on Destiny should be directed to him (Dr. Dhieu) because he is the Chairman of board and not Ayok. After long discussion, the NSS boss requested for a meeting with Editor-in chief of Destiny and Al Masir to discuss security concerns with two newspapers.

Dr. Mathok Comply with request, he called both editors: Ngor Garang of Destiny and Atem Simon of Al Masir came and attend the meeting. According to Dr. Dhieu, the meeting between NSS, editors and him which last for 2 hours was good, because all the concerns between the two parties were discussed and resolved. At the end of the meeting, Dr. Mathok was surprised be served with copy for the suspension of the Destiny and Ngor Garang was detained right away. Dr. Mathok tried to negotiate with them, but it was unsuccessful. Dr. Dhieu left and report what happened to Dr. Marial Benjamin, Minister of Information and Broadcasting and Gen. Uyai Deng, Minister of National Security. Both ministers were not aware about the arrest and suspension of the newspaper.

Dr. Dhieu told the gathering, the release of Ngor Garang would not have been possible without the support and pressure put on NSS by national and international organizations which included and not limited to Sudan Tribune, Reporters without Borders, Association for Media Development in South Sudan (AMDISS), Amnesty International, Committee to Protect Journalists CPJ), Community Empowerment for Progress Organization (CEPO), South Sudan Human Rights Society for Advocacy (SSHURSA), Human Rights Watch and all the media houses in Juba and South Sudanese in Diasporas, all condemned the arrest. Thank you all for your support and firm stand.

Mr. Agok Makur, Advocate of the Destiny Daily expressed concern over the increasing dangers faced by journalists in South Sudan and called for respect for the media freedom, freedom expression and independence media. He expresses the need to pass the media law.

Dr. Hakim Moi stressed the need for the passage of the Media Bill currently in draft and urged that the occasion of the arrest and release of the two journalists should galvanize the effort to have media legislation in place. He buttressed the view that the arrested journalists had not “crossed the (legal) line” because there was no line to cross in the first place because there are no laws to govern the behavior of journalists.

He enumerated the different aspects of the Media Bill which includes right to information, the institution of a regulatory body etc.

He referred to the AMDISS Release defending the release of the detained journalists as a reference for the views of the Association. Dr. Moi promised that AMDISS will organize a large home-coming celebration in days to come for reception Ngor Garang and Dengdit Ayok to be held in Nyakuroun Cultural Center

The author is an independent observer based in juba and he can be reached at tongdeng2001@yahoo.com

De La Rue profit lifted by South Sudan deal: Birth of South Sudan helps put De La Rue back on track

A contract to produce banknotes for the world’s newest country helped put De La Rue back on the path to growth as the currency printer unveiled a 13pc rise in operating profits.

A traditional dancer holds the South Sudanese National flag during the preparations for the celebrations of South Sudan Independence. De La Rue said the contract helped push six-month banknote printing volumes up 12pc to 2.8bn notes, while its currency order book was 14pc stronger. Photo: EPA

By Jonathan Sibun, Deputy editor

The group said it had spent six months designing and manufacturing a new currency for South Sudan ahead of the country’s creation in July this year.

De La Rue said the contract helped push six-month banknote printing volumes up 12pc to 2.8bn notes, while its currency order book was 14pc stronger.

The company was hit last year by staff allegedly falsifying banknote quality certificates and the subsequent suspension of supply to an unnamed customer, known to be Reserve Bank of India.

De La Rue said supply to the customer remained suspended and that discussions continued over any “cost of resolutions or for potential fines from regulatory authorities.”

However, Tim Cobbold, chief executive, said the business had bounced back from its troubles and had seen no contagion to other customers. “De La Rue’s reputation remains absolutely intact,” he claimed. The company said revenues in the six months to September 24 had risen 14.4pc to £238.1m, helping push operating profits to £31.5m.

Mr Cobbold has set a target of delivering annual operating profits of more than £100m by 2013/14 and said the business remained on track to meet that plan.

However, pre-tax profits in the half year fell from £69m to £27m after the company profited from the sale of its stake in lottery operator Camelot in 2010.

Mr Cobbold declined to comment on speculation of a fresh takeover bid from French rival Oberthur, which failed in efforts to acquire the business earlier this year.

De La Rue shares rose 9 to 885p as it said it would pay a 14.1p interim dividend on January 11.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/supportservices/8907868/Birth-of-South-Sudan-helps-put-De-La-Rue-back-on-track.html

De La Rue profit lifted by South Sudan deal

By Rhys Jones and Neil Maidment

LONDON, Nov 22 (Reuters) – British banknote printer De La Rue said its first-half profit was boosted by a deal to supply currency to South Sudan, the world’s newest nation, and said regime-changes and the euro-zone crisis could fuel further growth.

The world’s largest outsourced banknote printer, which produces over 150 national currencies, on Tuesday said its profit before tax and exceptional items rose 22 percent to 29 million pounds ($45.3 million) in the six months to Sept. 24., led by growth at its core currency production business.

“South Sudan is a brand new country and we have done the currency for that,” De La Rue Chief Executive Tim Cobbold told Reuters.

Sudan, Africa’s largest country split in two earlier this year. The Republic of South Sudan achieved independence on July 9, following Africa’s longest-running civil war.

De La Rue, which will supply another currency shipment to cash-starved Libya in December, said first-half revenues grew 14 percent to 209.2 million and held its interim dividend at 14.1 pence per share.

“Regime change has the potential to create opportunities for De La Rue … if you are an existing supplier to the outgoing regime, they may or may not put you in a good position with the incoming regime to be the continuing supplier, but generally change in that sort of way offers potential to De La Rue and we follow those sorts of things closely,” added Cobbold.

Asked whether the euro-zone debt crisis and the possible break-up of the single currency could benefit the company in the long-run, Cobbold said “that (the crisis) can create opportunities for us” but declined to go into specifics on individual countries.

De La Rue, which will be 200 years old in 2013, said the order book at its currency unit was up 14 percent on the year-end and that print volumes rose 12 percent to 2.8 billion notes.

“Our strong order book in the currency business unit underpins our confidence in meeting our expectations for the full year,” said Cobbold

De La Rue is expected to post an average pretax profit of 54 million pounds for the year to the end of March 2012, according to a Thomson Reuters I/B/E/S poll of seven analysts.

The FTSE 250 group, which saw 2011 profit tumble 68 percent after paper production issues, said it was confident that its ongoing turnaround plan would help it deliver an operating profit “in excess of 100 million pounds by 2013/14”.

The group, which also makes passports, driving licenses and cash processing machines, said its other businesses, especially identity solutions and cash processing, had performed well.

Shares in the firm, up 11 percent in the last three months, were down 0.4 percent down at 872.5 pence by 0950 GMT, valuing the business at around 875 million pounds.

Citigroup analyst Ed Steele said the market “continues to underestimate currency demand recovery” and holds a ‘Buy’ rating on the stock.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/11/22/delarue-idUSL5E7MM0KG20111122

US warns South Sudan on support to SPLM-N

US warns South Sudan on support to SPLM-N
Sudan Tribune
November 21, 2011 (KHARTOUM) – South Sudan must cease any support it provides to Sudan People Liberation Movement North (SPLM-N) that is currently engaged in fighting with Khartoum in the border states of Blue Nile and South Kordofan, the United States …

South Sudan: General Education, Higher Education and Diplomatic Consular …
AllAfrica.com
Juba — The South Sudan National Legislative Assembly today in its sitting no. 29/2011 held at the SSNLA Main Hall received the General Education Bill (2011), Higher Education Bill (2011) and the Diplomatic and Consular Services Bill (2011) which were …

De La Rue profit lifted by South Sudan deal
Reuters
By Rhys Jones and Neil Maidment LONDON, Nov 22 (Reuters) – British banknote printer De La Rue said its first-half profit was boosted by a deal to supply currency to South Sudan, the world’s newest nation, and said regime-changes and the euro-zone ..

South Sudan says oil output down 20000 bpd since July
Reuters Africa
JUBA (Reuters) – South Sudan’s daily oil output has fallen by about 5 percent since the country declared independence in July, largely because of logistics issues and a lack of skilled workers, the petroleum and mining minister said on Tuesday. …

South Sudan: Experiences of a Child Soldier Turned Journalist
AllAfrica.com
The war between Sudan and newly independent South Sudan lasted between 1983 and 2005 during which an estimated 1.5 million people were killed. During the war, the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) which fought against the Sudanese government …

South Sudan: Greater Bahr El Ghazal Youth Convention Scheduled for Aweil
AllAfrica.com
Mr. Arthor further explained that the conference will also discuss the challenges facing the youth in South Sudan in general and Greater Bahr el Ghazal in particular. Top on the agenda is also how the youth can embrace unity that is geared towards …

Relentless Use of Landmines in South Sudan Sparks Fear
Voice of America
November 22, 2011 Relentless Use of Landmines in South Sudan Sparks Fear Hannah McNeish | Bentiu, South Sudan In South Sudan’s oil-rich Unity state, aid agencies blame suspected rebel militias for planting new landmines in their fight against the …

South Sudan says oil output down 20000 bpd since July

Reuters
By Hereward Holland JUBA, Nov 22 (Reuters) – South Sudan’s daily oil output has fallen by about five percent since the country declared independence in July, largely because of logistics issues and a lack of skilled workers, the oil minister said on …

South Sudan: Minister Presents Education to Bills Parliament
AllAfrica.com
The bill is intended to fill an existing legislative vacuum in the area of diplomatic and consular services in the Government of South Sudan and to provide for establishment of a ministerial advisory council to co-ordinate between Ministries, …

South Sudan: Union Urges Rights Group to Focus On Media Rights
AllAfrica.com
Juba — The South Sudan Union of Journalists [SSUJ] has appealed to all rights groups, human rights, law society, the humanitarian agencies and other activists to direct their energy by working towards a total press freedom in South Sudan while also …

South Sudan Celebrates World Toilet Day
AllAfrica.com
Juba — On Saturday PSI (Population Services International) South Sudan celebrated the World Toilet Day at Juba Grand Hotel, as a day to acknowledge and appreciate the efforts exerted by the local leaders, the community and the local artisans across …

South Sudan: Chinese Deputy Minister to Visit Juba
AllAfrica.com
Juba — The Chinese deputy minister for Commerce Mr Jiang Yaoping will today pay a one-day official visit to Juba, South Sudan. The delegation will arrive at the Juba International Airport at ten in the morning and leave at five in the evening. ..

South Sudan: Let Us Consume Liquor That Does Not Destroy Our Lives
AllAfrica.com
These spirits had been in the black market in Eastern Equatoria State since 2005, in fact immediately after the CPA which led to opening of the border routes through which these spirits flow into South Sudan. Some of those who embarked on drinking them …

South Sudan: MP Questions Ministers’ Retreat to Kenya
AllAfrica.com
Several Ministers from the National Government traveled to Kenya last week for unclear visits, amid Kiir’s submission of South Sudan admission at Entebbe Uganda to join the East African Community. Juma said that seven Ministers with their deputies have …

Kenya: Kalonzo Urges South Sudan to Build Peace
AllAfrica.com
Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka yesterday urged the government of Southern Sudan to embark on peace building and conflict resolution if accelerated development has to be realized. Kalonzo said the government of South Sudan should take advantage of its …

South Sudan: President Kiir Meets White House Delegation
AllAfrica.com
Among the delegation were the USA President’s Special Assistants and senior Advisor on Africa Mr. Grand Harris, USA special Envoy to South Sudan Mr. Lyman Princeton and Mr. Chris Datta who is the USA Charge De’ Affairs in South Sudan among others. …

Birth of South Sudan helps put De La Rue back on track
Telegraph.co.uk
A traditional dancer holds the South Sudanese National flag during the preparations for the celebrations of South Sudan Independence. De La Rue said the contract helped push six-month banknote printing volumes up 12pc to 2.8bn notes, while its currency …