G-10: THE ONLY INNOCENT SOUTH SUDANESE THAT CAN BE INNOCENT!
FORMER POLITICAL DETAINEES (G-10 PLUS): THE ONLY INNOCENT SOUTH SUDANESE THAT CAN BE INNOCENT!
By Dut-machine De Mabior, Nairobi, Kenya
January 16, 2015 (SSB) — Dear readers, it makes no sense when unscrupulous sources tell us off to hell when the real truth is inevitable. I am therefore going to explain in this writing why all the members of G-10 plus (Former Political Detainees FPD) are the only members of our Greater South Sudan who are innocent.
Since the hell got loose in Juba, dating back to the 15th of December, 2013, a number of highly profiled members of the Ruling SPLM were arrested in connection to the ‘coup’ as claimed by the Juba administration. Whether there was coup or no coup is not the question being addressed by my writing.
This has been answered by so many bodies, U.S.A, EU, A.U, some South Sudanese and president Museveni as the Juba happening was just but a mere mutiny, an idea which I buy. But why it resulted into an armed rebellion must be a question to be answered by the rebelling body. I will justify myself here below that the G-10 are not in anyway connected to the rebellion that is taking hell on in the country.
The big speculation dates back to the press conference of the December 6 held in the SPLM house, Juba. This conference was attended by all the FPD and other government officials like Michael Makuei (Minister for information), David Athorbei (minister for finance ), Nhial William Deng (Head of government delegates to IGAD) and others who were not arrested like Paul Mayom Akech. This was an evidence in the court when the remaining four were being taken through trials that they had attended the said conference.
This is too an evidence to so many of us who pronounce the G-10 rebels by association. Just indeed they had attended the same political conference with the rebel leader Riek Machar, then they qualify as rebels by the virtue of association. I must say that the Rebel leader is a South Sudanese and it’s not specified anywhere in the constitution that any association with him amounts to rebellion. If attending the conference is rebellion, then my good ministers are too rebels!
If they are thought to have different ideas with the rebels upon declaration of rebellion, then why not the G-10? Ladies and gentleman, my fellow citizens, voicing the same concerns as members of a political group and then thereafter someone implements their own ideas does not make the ideology one anymore. To my judgment, the SPLM members whether in government, G-10 or rebels had the same ideas on December 6 in press, their ideas turned different upon declaration of rebellion and there is no correlation whatsoever between the three groups as at now.
G-10 did not follow Riek Machar as their leader. No! Riek was the highest ranking member of the SPLM at the time, indeed, the party’s vice chair, and because this was a meeting of the SPLM in the absence of the chair, Riek, the vice chair was the leader automatically. It doesn’t have to be confused that anyone was following anybody. It was just the SPLM hierarchy left by Dr. John De Mabior that made Riek the one reading out the press.
This hierarchy has been there for years. You and I have been members of the party, did you ever think that you were following Riek when indeed he presided over some state functions in that capacity, for me it’s a no! I was following the hierarchy of SPLM and he was the vice chair whether I likes him or not. The same case applies to the G-10. This therefore means that G-10 had nothing hidden for Riek other than the party line up that automated him to be at the top of all.
Hence, the G-10 are not for any other idea that is contrary to the party reforms which was meant to be achieved through dialogue. We the Facebook, Twitter and websites judges indict the G-10 as rebels and true enemies of the state. I beg to differ, the government of the republic through the courts of law found them not guilty. They were indeed exonerated from the charges.
Mach Paul Kuol Awar, an honourable Man of our society, the then director of Military intelligence of the country said categorically before the law that nothing in his disposal connects the G-10 to the crises in the country. This means they have nothing in common with the rebels and hence not even rebels sympathizers. Who else purports in our midst to know more than Gen. Mach can tell? Accept the truth just like I did, the G-10 are not rebels, whether in reality or disguise. How do I call them then, my name for them is that they are “political dissidents” period!
The word rebel is gaining a different meaning in our country and I wonder why our linguists have kept silent this far, they should introduce us to how to use the Oxford dictionary to find the true meaning of the same. Are we being fare to ourselves? Maybe no, perhaps we don’t understand the G-10 well. These are menwhom we know their struggling profiles well.
I must say that they are not cowards. Indeed if they are not, and their idea was to be rebels, what changed the stand after being released from detention? They would have joined the rebellion without prior permission from anybody. The facts that they denounced the rebellion prove to any reasonable mind that they had not thought of it before the December 15th. And if that stand to be a convincing reason, then I must not call them rebels because they are not.
Nobody can pretend to be a better decision maker than the G-10, they have decided not to be a party of any belligerent group, let’s not decide for them to call them a name they have opted not to be called. Perhaps others think I write this because the words rebel is bad. No! I would still write this piece if you were calling G-10 a government ally.
Other members of the cabinet have gone far to instruct their cohorts not to meet the G-10 because they are rebels and anyone meeting them would be perceived as rebels too. They have forgotten that the G-10 meets H. E Salva Kiir, the president and nobody perceives him a rebel, why me then? Let’s not be cheated because we have the right to be informed. I will in person seek for that information from anybody, Yes any free citizen of our country. we are blinded by the sycophantic nature to the extend of neglecting our own rights.
As I conclude my Dear country men and women, the evidences anyone give to nail the G-10 to any side of the conflict are not inherent. I am patiently waiting for the Obasanjo reports to tell me who exactly messed up the country. A report which I am totally convinced that no member of the G-10 plus is indicted. it makes no sense if you talk a lot yet your political favourite will be recommended to the Hague for trials. I therefore conclude G-10 are political dissidents, not rebels!
–
The author is a student of electrical and electronics engineering at Kenyatta University, Nairobi Kenya
About Post Author
