Archive for March 29, 2015


By James Okuk, PhD, Juba.

Dr. James Okuk

Dr. James Okuk

March 29, 2015 (SSB)  —-   When faced with choice between two evils, choose none even if one of the choices is a lesser evil in a utilitarian term of “principle of double effects”. This is the bottom line of postulates of Christian morality. Hence, the Democratisation and Human Rights independent journalist, Mr. Peter Gai Manyuon, is advised to note this about Dr. James Okuk because the biography he provided is purely propagandist and out of anger against for no any substantiated apparent justification.

Mr. Peter would have not looked nonsensical had he remained general without getting specific about the personality and academic qualifications of Dr. Okuk, which he is ignorant about. Also it would have been less stupid had he consulted the Library of University of Nairobi to get the correct title and content of the thesis and be informed whether it was given to South Sudanese intellectuals globally to critique. University of Nairobi is a no-joke academic institution. If it awards a student a PhD degree it means it.

Dr. Okuk was ranked one of the best and youngest of his batch, supervised for four years by Prof. Joseph Nyasani and Associate Prof. Dr. Karori Mbugua who are well known for their intellectual keenness in the area of political philosophy. Three of his colleagues failed to make it in time as they stumbled in defending their theses in front of tough external examiners.

Regarding my relationship with Dr. Lam Akol, I don’t need to waste time on it because it is a blood and lineage link that no human being can take away. Dr. Lam is my paternal uncle from Doleib Hill (Katum Ted as called by Nuer) in Panyikango County of the Royal Shilluk Kingdom in Upper Nile State, and with pride of what he is, both intellectually and politically. Dr. Lam is an honest and genius hardworking astute politician who doesn’t entertain lies in order to cover the truths that need to be known with time.

However, what I write is my own intellectual property with copyright, and what Dr. Lam writes is his. If our writings happen to converge at some instances then you need to treat them as incidents of truth coincidences worth noting. Dr. Lam cannot accept to write an article, leave alone a thesis, for another person. Get this well from me if you have not got the chance to know him very closely.

Any way let me get back to what is at the stake without unnecessary distractions as it is said that small minds find consolation in discussing people while big minds find delight in discussing ideas.

First,  Mr. Peter Gai, should know that shame is the destiny of liars and evil-promoting propagandists, not those who have the courage to revere and say the truth even while in the lion mouth.

Secondly, any human life matters because it is a sanctity matter; no laughing and no celebration. That is why lies shouldn’t be tolerated on loss lives of people in South Sudan whether they are Nuer members or non-Nuer ethnicities. The lie on above 20,000 Nuer members killed ‘genocidedly’ in Juba on 15, 16, 17 and 18 December 2013 shouldn’t continue to be tolerated because this is not a laughing matter.

We should be accurate on death counts and know what constitutes ‘genocide’ strictly as defined in ICC Rome Statute and in the UN ocuments.  If there are people who thrive or want to gain power on dead bodies in South Sudan, I think it is time to tell them ‘enough is enough’ against this evil tactical practice.

Thirdly, we don’t need to crack our heads on this matter because we can come up with some basic understanding based on simple logical calculus. It could go like this:

1) Check the Number of Nuer Population in Juba before 15 December 2013.

2) Check the number of Nuer members who took refuge in UNMISS camps (Jebel and Airport) on 16, 17 and 18 December 2013 in Juba but don’t include the non-Nuer members who took refuge there as well.

3) Subtract the latter (2) numbers from the former population (1).

4) Subtract the number of the Nuer members who managed to escape from Juba via UNMISS camps or through other routes.

5) Add the number of the Nuer members who are still camping in UNMISS at Jebel in Juba now to those who went back to their homes and to those who have managed to escape from Juba to other safer places inside or abroad.

6) Subtract the comprehensive addition (5) from the Nuer population in Juba before 15 December 2013 (1) and you can get to a conclusion that the actual number of Nuer members who targetedly got killed in Juba will not be above 20,000 as it has been propagated by SPLM/A-IO and their sympathisers.

Fourthly, what is known, though not presently said, is that the biggest death in Nuer tribe came from the very Nuer politicians and liars (i.e., politikach in Nuer Language) themselves who mobilised the White Army and other Nuer sectors to die in masses in front lines  of the current senseless war of power greed between the cursed SPLM leaders?

The Nuer tremendous loss to young men in front lines in and around, Bor, Malakal, Poktap, Nasir, Ayod, Bentiu, etc, is very painful but it is the consequence of taking up arms against a constitutional government. The same goes to the Dinka, Shilluk and other Sudanese who were killed by the Nuer members in the course of the current war.

That is is why the bashing of both sides (government and rebels) in the current war in South Sudan is correctly justifiable.

Yes, any war criminal on humanity whether he hails from Dinka, Nuer, Shilluk or any tribe in South Sudan should face the force of criminal law (nationally or internationally) in reparation to the innocent victims but not soldiers or armed groups in front lines. That is, rebels and other war inciters and violence pursuers should never be treated as victims because they are equally the selfish perpetrators who have harmed the Republic of South Sudan in the situation it is today.

Regarding the fact of who have been occupying lands of other people in South Sudan, we don’t need lectures but practical examples on this matter. It was the Nuer who have been occupying Tonga Nyijwad (Pangak as they renamed it), Doleib Hill, Obel, Ashabinil, Wic Liel (Wic Mabor as they renamed it), Adhithiang, Warjwok, etc of the Shilluk Kingdom since the time the Nuer militias allied themselves with Jellaba.

Thy even wrote to Upper Nile Governor without any shame to allow them to have their county names and chiefs stationed within the Shilluk Kingdom. On the other hand, the Dinka tried to annex Atar, Obang, Wic Pig, Anakdiar, Wic Uluth, Nyigiir (Bilthiang as they renamed it), Thangrial, Melut, etc but didn’t occupy most of the claimed annexes as the Nuer did.

Bur thanks to Kiir-Riek current war of power that has flashed the Nuer out of the Shilluk lands. It will not be an easy matter for them to reoccupy those lands again. The Dinkas of Upper Nile have been good neighbours of Shilluk and they will dialogue it out in a peaceful manner to resolve the conflicts on the claimed lands. There will not be any intention of genocide between them. The Nuer needs to learn the value of dialogue in the civilised world. Violence will not help them!

Finally, you would have better left the response to Mr. Stephen Par Kuol because we know each others. But for your information, he has not been an Ambassador yet, perhaps in future if things went well with him. The fact that he kept quiet is an indicator that he got cornered on not telling the truth as it should have been told. He know his bias and it is understandable to some of us.

Dear Mr. Peter Gai, know that I don’t claim to be a lecturer in Juba University. I have been lecturing there actually and graduated two batches, so far so good. Take time to go around and you will be amazed of my students in the real world who will tell you how they appreciate my nationalistic contribution in teaching them in an excellent manner. Some of the finalists whose research projects I supervised hail from Nuer tribe and they will admit to you how I directed them to write objective research papers using academic methodology.

This is enough to tell you that I am already working and contributing concretely and positively for the well being of the Republic of South Sudan. Why should a worker be under pressure of seeking for a work? Illogical, isn’t it? Some of us respect law because it is safer to do so. That is why we cannot join Dr. Riek’s rebellion or form one even when the SPLM leadership behaves badly. We believe in non-violence approach in resolving conflicts. You will one day come back to where we stand and you will then understand it better.

Neurologists have no use to truth-tellers and sincere intellectuals. It will be waste of money to see them, but if you think you need to because of the anger and lies that came out in your thoughts against my article, you may try. Perhaps some of us who are the willing are doing the impossible for the ungrateful. After all, stay well!

Dr. James Okuk is lecturer and public analyst in the area of politics. He lives in Juba and can be reached at okukjimy@hotmail.com

The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made are the responsibility of the author, not PaanLuel Wël: South Sudanese Bloggers (SSB) website. If you want to submit an opinion article or news analysis, please email it to paanluel2011@gmail.com. SSB do reserve the right to edit material before publication. Please include your full name, email address and the country you are writing from.

By Bol Madut Ayii, Juba, South Sudan

addistalksAn open letter to African Union

CC: Embassy of United States of America, Juba

CC: United Nations Mission in South Sudan.

March 29, 2015 (SSB)  —   The leaked report and proposal made by AUCISS prompt me to react and question its legality under the principle of international law, with this regards, the functions and powers of the AUCISS were not extended to call for the exclusion of the constitutionally elected president in the proposed transitional government of national unity but rather to investigate the atrocities committed during the crisis and the persons responsible.

Under the principle of international law, it is violation of the state sovereignty and peoples’ rights to meddle into the internal affairs of sovereign state. The proposal made by African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan (AUCISS) is beyond its mandate and therefore amounts to ultra vires.

My legal argument is based on the followings;

Part A: powers and mandate of AUCISS:

The mandate of the African Union Commission of Inquiry on South Sudan were the following:

To investigate the human rights violations and other abuses.

To investigate the causes underlying the violations.

To make recommendations on the best ways and means to ensure accountability, reconciliation and healings among South Sudanese communities with view to deterring and preventing the occurrence of the violations in the future.

To make recommendations on how to move the country forward in terms of unity, cooperation and sustainable development.

Having spelt out the mandates of African Union Commission of inquiry above, the leaked report by AUCISS which recommended the exclusion of the constitutionally elected president from the transitional government of national unity is a clear demonstration that the AUCISS acted beyond its mandate and therefore amounts to ultra vires.

What the AUCISS did to South Sudan is the same cause that led Morocco withdrew its membership from African Union and up to date, Morocco is not a member of Africa Union. Morocco withdrew from African Union due to the following reasons:

The AU recognition of Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic which is a portion of Western Sahara that shows the bias of African Union.

The African Union is undoubtedly a corrupt and weak institution and includes countries of even worse human rights record

Part B: UN trusteeship

Trusteeship Council, one of the principal organs of the United Nations (UN), designed to supervise the government of trust territories and to lead them to self-government or independence. With the independence of Palau in 1994, the council suspended operations.

The Charter does not specify the actual territories to be placed under UN trusteeship. Article 77 merely states that the system shall apply to three categories: (1) territories still under mandate,(2) territories “detached from enemy states as a result of the Second World War,” and (3) territories voluntarily placed under the system by states responsible for their administration.

South Sudan doesn’t fall within the category of UN trusteeship,Article 76(b) of the Un Charter provides; to promote the political, economic, social, and educational advancement of the inhabitants of the trust territories, and their progressive development towards self-government or independence as may be appropriate to the particular circumstances of each territory and its peoples and the freely expressed wishes of the peoples concerned, and as may be provided by the terms of each trusteeship agreement; as the definition signifies, South Sudan is an independent state and has its elected government, South Sudan is not under the mandate of any colony and therefore it doesn’t fall in trust territory.

South Sudan did not declare its inability to administer and run its administration and therefore, there was no voluntarily placement of UN trusteeship, lastly South Sudan gained independent as the outcome of the internationally recognized referendum and thus it was not just a detach from an enemy state.

With the above detailed conditions of placing country under the UN trusteeship, there are no legal grounds that qualify south Sudan to be placed under the trusteeship.

Again, the Charter is equally nonspecific on designating the administrators of trust territories,. It states simply that the individual trusteeship agreements shall designate the authority in each case, which may be “one or more states or the Organization itself.”

Therefore, it will give UN and its influential members such as United States of America a chance to nominate a person of their choice which might not be in the interest of the said trust country as well as international law norms.

During the World War 1, there were 11 trust territories placed under UN trusteeship, and seven countries were designated as administering authorities. These figures exclude the former German colony of South West Africa, which after World War I had been mandated to the Union of South Africa, because South Africa refused to place the territory under UN trusteeship.

Among those place under the UN trusteeship and their administers are;

In East Africa: Ruanda-Urundi administered by Belgium, Somaliland by Italy, and Tanganyika by the UK;

In West Africa: Cameroons administered by the UK, Came-roons by France, Togoland by the UK, and Togoland by France;

In the Pacific: Nauru, administered by Australia and on behalf of New Zealand and the UK, New Guinea by Australia, Western Samoa by New Zealand, and the Pacific islands of the Marianas, Marshalls, and Carolines by the US.

In September 1975, when New Guinea acceded to independence, the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands became the only Territory on the agenda of the Trusteeship Council.

All these countries were placed under UN trusteeship because they were not independent and the objects of Article 83 of the UN charter apply to their territories.

Article 83 in its entirety doesn’t apply to south Sudan and therefore any unilateral attempt by AU and its counterpart to place south Sudan under UN trusteeship is of no legal base under the principle of customary international law.

Part c: Sanctions framework and United States of America resolution

The draft resolution of United States of America was unanimously adopted by UN Security Council without deliberations and was swiftly voted for, this make the writers to ask the distinction between UN and US? The interest of U.S as a member of UN is not the interest of the whole world, no doubt that U.S is the world super power but that does not imply impunity.

We are pessimistic that peace and reconciliation cannot be achieve by imposition of sanctions, moreover sanctions will hinder the search for peace and increase the suffering of the people of south Sudan, under international law, we are not aware of the country that attain peace by sanctions imposition and that sanctions is not the practical solution to south Sudan problem

Relatedly, US as a member of UN is at a right truck to raise a motion before the UNSC expressing its position and opinion about South Sudan but its opinion is not absolute rather than subject to debate on its merits.

As I have stated above that there is no different between US and UN, the facts of violation of South Sudan Sovereignty by AU,US and UNSC is of no doubt to what US did to Nacaragua where US supported the rebellion in Nacaragua by passing the budget in the Congress to back the rebellion.

In this case, Nacaragua brought a suit in the International Court of Justice ICJ and the court found US guilty, so in relation to this there is clear evidence that US and UN are supporting the rebellion in South Sudan directly and indirectly Example, the arrest of weapons in Lake state Rumbek in 2014.

To find the full text of the above cited case see Nacaragua v. United States of America(1984).

Travel Ban, Paragraph 9. Of the sanction draft resolution states; decides that. For an initial period of one year from the date of adoption

Of this resolution, all Member States shall take the necessary measures to prevent

The entry into or transit through their territories of any individuals who may be

Designated by the Committee, provided that nothing in this paragraph shall oblige a

State to refuse its own nationals entry into its territory;

My question is, how will travel ban bring inclusive and sustainable peace in South Sudan? Of course the answer will be definitely NO because the denial of entry and transit of some individuals cannot be durable solution to South Sudan problem.

In conclusion I do hereby recommend the followings:

AU must refrain from South Sudan internal affairs otherwise we will have no option than what Morocco did.

US must revive its resolutions and make sure that there is different between it (US) and UN

UNSC must not sit idly waiting for US proposals to endorse without studying its effectiveness.

Removal of elected president through illegal means due to foreign interest will deteriorate the situation in South Sudan.

Thanks

Drawn and Filed by Law Student from University of Juba and he can be reached through the following address; Bol Madut Ayii.  bolayii93@gmail.com  or  0956252721

Finance Minister on the Economy: No Gain Without Pain

Posted: March 29, 2015 by PaanLuel Wël Media Ltd. in Malith Alier

By Malith Alier, Juba, South Sudan

Newly re-appointed minister of finance and economic planning, David Deng Athorbei

Newly re-appointed minister of finance and economic planning, David Deng Athorbei

March 29, 2015 (SSB)  —-   Deng Athorbei is now a little over three months after reappointment as minister of finances and economy. It is his second stint at the portfolio, which has prompted some analysts to refer to his appointment as that of the old-guard.

The finance ministry has seen more downs than ups ever since the interim period with various ill-suited ministers beginning with Arthur Akuen Chol. The other ministers were Kuol Athian, Deng Athorbei, Kosti Manibe and Aggrey Tisa Sabuni and now Deng Athorbei once again.

Their tenures have witnessed mega financial scandals like infamous Dura saga at the time of Kuol Athian, illegal transfer of eight million US Dollars at the time of Kosti Manibe. It looked like one scandal was replaced with another. Even Deng Athorbei’s period was not spared of irregularities.

Many commentators already heaved praises on the newly appointed minister in contrast, he is more aware of the herculean task before him. It is not going to be a plain sailing and therefore, it is too early to sing undue praises because the minister has not even settled in and began to chart a new course of action to put this vital docket on the right path to success.

This author can’t start by praising the incoming minister but would like to caution those who are overzealous about the prospects of achieving economic success to be prepared for possible shocks as a result. Although not economic experts but we know what sound economic management entails.

It is always a popular demand here in Juba and over the country that the Pound must remain strong against the Dollar. This is not supported by facts on the ground. The Pound now exchanges at 7.20 per Dollar in the parallel or black market as opposed to the official rate fixed at 2.9623 per Dollar.

Conversely, it is encouraging that the incoming minister is set to address this issue along with other pertinent matters to stimulate the dormant economy.

In a meeting last week with donors, the minister offered two bowls on his hand; the donor and the loan bowls. The learnt minister will have an audience if this is in return to fix the ailing economy. The donors had poured large sums and the creditors did the same in the past with little results. Now the minister learnt through experience therefore, is ready to address workforce issues like retirement of senior civil servants, long overdue.

He is ready to address exchange rate regime from fixed to flexible regime. Deng Athorbei is ready to retrench the excess workforce. A particular mess is in the armed forces like the SPLA, Police, Prisons, wildlife and Fire Brigade. A chunk of the budget goes to the salaries of these forces.

MISINFORMATION

The minister realises that the government overspend the monthly budget in the wake of declining oil revenues. The oil revenues are the mainstay of the economy. In words of the one South Sudanese MP, we have to seal our leaking basket before the exchange rate deregulation. The time to do so is overdue.

In summary, it is encouraging that the incoming national Minister of Finance and Economic Planning has immediately embarked on the revival of the economy before total collapse. This task can’t be done by the country alone. It needs involvement of international donors and credit institutions to fill the widening gap. A true stimulation of the economy needs development of a meaningful private sector.

Therefore, the country must get prepared to face the components of the restructuring exercise. Retirement, retrenchment and exchange rate regime (the three Rs) must be the consequences of economic recovery.

The opinion expressed here is solely the view of the writer. The veracity of any claim made are the responsibility of the author, not PaanLuel Wël: South Sudanese Bloggers (SSB) website. If you want to submit an opinion article or news analysis, please email it to paanluel2011@gmail.com. SSB do reserve the right to edit material before publication. Please include your full name, email address and the country you are writing from.