Not Kiir and Machar as Persons but Assumptions, Myths and Ideologists.

By Edward Laboke, USA.

For over five decades the people of South Sudan relentlessly fought for either a fair participatory and beneficiary share within the then largest African country the Sudan; or take her freedom destiny on her own hands. The 2005 Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) provisions offered both alternatives; but the former vainly worked within the prescribed time period, thus giving room to the latter to materialize on July 9^th 2011.

Like any hard earned achievement, the independence of South Sudan as the 193^rd country of the global nations, was welcomed with jubilations not only by the South Sudanese themselves but also by various stakeholders who because of vested interests worked so hard to achieve this. In the background meanwhile lie a series of impending huddles: Sudan’s staunch interests, efforts and ideology to keep the country put; their campaign that independent South Sudan is ungovernable (which now proved true) and of course our resources; continue to be major destabilizing factors of the new nation.

For the sake of preciseness I would dwell mostly on the truth of independent South Sudan ungovernability. No wonder most if not all educated and sane South Sudanese knew and accepted this reality but continued to fight with the hopes and beliefs that solutions to such conditions would be much feasible than with the precarious north-south conflicts. Well, perhaps those optimists were wrong: conflicts are conflicts in that their results depend on their massive impulses at the time of impacts. Example one-day bomb in the city of Tokyo, Japan could have higher numerical casualties and property destruction than a week of similar bombing say in Juba, South Sudan. By this I mean the longer we drag this conflicts by targeting highly populated cities, the sooner we will find it hard to differentiate the casualties and property destructions from impacts of the 2o+ years with the north.

Our ungovernability shouldn’t be locked on the now Kiir-Machar or then Garang-Machar or even more Garang-Kiir as persons as many seem to think, but some keener looks should be sought from the ideologically existing assumptions and myths. The “born to rule” assumptions is no secret among South Sudanese especially those who lived the old 1972-1983 regional government. The “Ngun Deng mythical prophecy” is another that isn’t a secret too. These two are good ideological rivals personifying themselves in some leaders we see not only destroying the well being of our country today but did so also in the liberation movement (no need to elaborate). Whether Salva and Riek accept to stay away from the government, as many seem to call for now, the ideologies will live on and continue to haunt leaders subscribing to them. It’s though a gross mistake to generically assume that since these myths emanates from certain tribes then all the tribe subscribe to it. It’s also worth mentioning that the two rivaling ideologists gave birth to yet a recent one: who fought (contributed) the most in the liberation effort. This one whoever, is the stupidest assumption that doesn’t pay heed to the voice of scientific reasoning. It doesn’t recognize that 2 is 50% of 4 just as 500 is 50% of 1000. It tends to assign an alienable rights only by population might rather than citizenry. This as a brainchild of the two is equally dangerous for the wellbeing of South Sudan.

Another issue we tend to ignore is that there are miniature community conflicts all over the country that have the potential to threaten the stability of the nation, but the Nuer-Dinka one surpasses simply because the leaders involved represent the upper echelon of our government.  Whether the two major tribes in the country have some historical hatred among them rather than what I stated above, it’s high time the people of South Sudan rise above all these. We need dignity for our people and ourselves. We want to identify with the norms of civilized societies and abhor barbarism. There are real Moses among us who can help bring this to bear: a Nuer, a Dinka, a Toposa, a Bari, an Avukaya etc who does not subscribe to the mythical world that’s destroying the country. However, to fight the ideologies that have prevailed for decades if not centuries is an uphill battle that requires a total overhaul of our political system. Reforming all institutions and formulations and upholding of the national permanent constitution are key to this.

Conflict has erupted, lives and properties have been lost and destroyed and above all; crimes have been committed as per the UN reports. As usual justice shall prevail or have to be served. Dr. Machar and President Kiir should have sought peaceful political avenues to settle their differences than allowing un-lawful track perpetrated by their supporters take lead in the conflict. Whatever defense arsenal they have to walk free from this remains to be seen, otherwise somebody or some people must account for these. For these leaders, choosing to fight to the last breathe of their lives is worse than coming to terms with the reality, apologize to the people and allow them to learn from the mistakes as they choose a peaceful path for their country.

Finally, there is still time for both leaders to salvage South Sudan and themselves out of this quagmire.

1. Commit to serious political dialogue with the rebels and those detained persons for allegedly participating in destabilizing the country. Admitting faulty steps along the way and forming a broad-base inclusive government tasked with formulation of the permanent constitution, other reforms and elections amenities. This inclusive broad-base government should be regionally represented rather than tribally or party represented. By this I mean the 3 former regional provinces of South Sudan. Within the regional cohort there must be fair tribal balance.
2. As already called for by many (although I personally don’t subscribe to this), Kiir and Machar step aside and leave room for again broad-base interim government to take care of the country’s affairs. It would even make more sense if the Nuer and Dinka could accept to stay away from the presidency for the next 15-20 years. Leave the presidency to non Nuer or Dinka but serve other executive, legislative and judiciary capacities. We need genuine tangible reforms to avoid continuous deadly conflicts.

The Mighty G4 are Freed at Last!!!!!

By Mama Junub

Pagan Amum, former SG of the SPLM

NOW YOU CAN GO AND HANG OR FIRE SQUAQ AT YOUR OWN DICK INSTEAD: The Mighty G4 are freed at last.

The million dollar news was drop in a blink of an eye. After all the emotions from top to the bottom, it was the day some eagerly been waiting to see; some didn’t wish to live to see it. There was mix feelings all over the places.

But the feelings of shame and embarrassment were the saddest. Men in military uniform, youth in a plain shirt were calling for the death sentence of the G4 before the court trial. Some write terrible comments and some spoke nonsense to the media. At last there was absolutely nothing found for the G4 to be dismembered. They call for G4 death sentence. I call for them to hang their Dicks instead. The Mighty G4 are freed at last.

I remember the day when Mr DISHOUNARABLE minister of information rush to the media. His eyes were like a shape of a ball, childishly speaking about the coined up coup. Mr Dishonourable was in high emotion throwing words like filthy clothes. It was shocking to watch him on TV speaking with his thick Khartoum English.

All in vain, G4 are not going to be hang as he wished nor being sentenced to death as his supporters wish. What is next for them to call for? They can all go to hell or shut up now. The Mighty G4 are free at last!!

Mamajunub@ 2014.

EXPLAINING THE CORRECT LEGAL TERM FOR THE RELEASE OF FOUR DETAINEES

By Gordon Buay Malek

Dear all,

The release of Pagan Amum, Oyai Deng, Majak Agot and Lol Gatkuoth has been misunderstood by so many people. Some misundeertood what the prosecution did and concluded that “they were acquitted”. However,there is something you need to know when people talk about “acquitting”. The four detainees were NOT acquitted. That word is not applicable here because they were not released by the decision of the judge after the conclusion of the adversarial presentations.

I want to make it clear to the people of South Sudan that what happened, to use correct legal term, is that the charges are STAYED. This is different from WITHDRAW. I explain the difference between the two below.

In most legal jurisdictions, the decision of the prosecutor to STAY or WITHDRAW charges means the government discontinues the prosecution. In both situations, once your charges are withdrawn or stayed by the prosecution, you don’t have to go back to court. HOWEVER, there is one important difference between charges which are STAYED and charges which are WITHDRAWN.

Stayed charges can be BROUGHT BACK TO LIFE within one year of the day they are stayed. You should know that if you are charged with new offences during the one year period after you have had charges stayed, the stayed charges could be brought back and the prosecutor can prosecute you on those same charges again.

If charges are WITHDRAWN, the prosecution of those charges is FINISHED and those same charges can never be brought back.

Coming back to the case of the four criminals, their charges were STAYED because of peace and international pressure. If they join the rebellion of Riek Machar, their charges will be REACTIVATED and they will be tried in absentia and sentence to death if found guilty.

I hope my explanation is clear to you guys.

Gen. G.B.

————————-

By Vigilio Wani (In Response to Gordon Buay

Nobody knows what type of legal system Cde Buay is talking about sound like Banana Republic legal system. There is NO such thing in legal system as STAYED charges, but there is stay execution and a stay of proceedings in the court system and they are granted by a court not PROSECUTOR in civil court not in criminal court. A stay of execution postpones the enforcement of a judgment against a defendant who has lost a case. In other words, if the defendant wins money damages or some other form of relief, he may not collect the damages or receive the relief if the court issues a stay. For example if you are delinquent in your rant and landlord brought eviction notice against you, you can go to court and file MOTION to stay by law judge will grant you motion to stay at most three months. Every other civil judgment is stayed for ten days after it is rendered. An additional stay of execution lasts only for a limited period, but a court may grant a stay of execution in any case in which the court feels the stay is necessary to secure or protect the rights of the defendant. I had an internship with court in accounting department I know this stuff.

A second type is stay of proceedings basically is the stoppage of an entire case or a specific proceeding within a case. This type of stay is issued to postpone a case until a party complies with a court procedure. For example, if a party is required to deposit collateral with the court before a case begins, the court may order the proceedings stayed for a certain period of time or until the money or property is delivered to the court. Also, a court may stay a proceeding for a number of reasons. One common reason is that another action is under way that may affect the case or the rights of the parties in the case. For instance, assume that a defendant faces lawsuits from the same plaintiffs in two separate cases involving closely related facts kind like army’s length. Say one case is filed in South Sudan Supreme court, and the other case is filed in Kator (B-court) in Juba assumed CES established its own judicial system. In this situation one of the courts may issue a stay in deference to the other court. The stay enables the defendant to concentrate on one case at a time.

With regard to withdrawal however, a lawyer or prosecution can withdraw evidence from the court if she or he is facing difficulty in proving it due to lack or substantiations of evidence or when witness refused to appear in court in this situation the party can withdraw evidence per judge permission. Basically when defendant left court she or he can not be prosecuted again on same charges due to status of limitation which protect defendant from prosecution from same case in the future in event new evidence emerged.

As things stand now the four (4) detainees are free men now they are in their liberty to do whatever they want in their life like any citizen with full rights granted to them by constitution. Cde Buay should stop misleading public with convoluted legal lexicon in other countries he could be charge by harassment and civil disorder.

Stay blessed

Vigilio