![South Sudan has struggled with lawlessness and violence which have killed hundrends of thousands of people [Getty]](https://classicfm924.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/guns.jpeg)
By Dedi Esbon Samuel.
October 16, 2024
The Green-book, a set of legislations that was once seen as a tool for settling cases of insecurity caused by cattle raiding, child abduction, and revenge killings in South Sudan’s Warrap state, has now come under spotlight and viewed as an obstacle to human rights.
Joseph Kuol Amet Kuol, Paramount Chief of Kuac Community, in Warrap State, was removed from his position by the state government for being critical to the implementation of the legislation, which he viewed as wrong.
According to Kuol, the people of Warrap state including the traditional leaders accepted the law (Green book) because it has provisions that granted fair trial to individuals suspected of any of the crimes and if found guilty, the mobile court could pass the judgment. He however says that what is happening now is different.
“We were a good number of people who agreed to this law. The green book which we are signatories to, allows people to be tried by a mobile court. But it’s not implemented the way it’s written. So, if this provision is followed, we have no problem with it,” Kuol says.
The green book for conflicts resolution and sustainable development under the theme: “together for peace, unity and development, was passed by Lake state in 2022 (known as Customary and Public order), and was copied and signed into law by the Government of Warrap State on February 21st, 2024. It outlines punishment for different crimes. For example, crimes such as cattle raiding, revenge killings, forced marriage, rape, kidnapping, hate speech, and bribery all carry penalty of a firing squad.
While these issues are acknowledged as significant challenges in the region, the concern lies in the use of the death penalty for offenses that may not meet the criteria of “extremely serious crimes” as outlined in the national constitution.
Warrap state, has been severally accused of carrying out extrajudicial killings for perpetrators of various crimes without being tried in any court, with the recent incident in June this year where the government was accused of killing one Mr. Lual Ngong Thor.
According to Human rights in South Sudan Amnesty International, a total of 25 extrajudicial executions took place between January and November 2023 and of these, 17 people, including one woman were executed in Warrap state and eight in Lake state.
Paramount Chief Kuol says that “This person (Lual) was killed without the knowledge of the chiefs, parents, children and his three wives. I was even informed after he had been killed. I was told to go and take the body and I rejected.” He retaliates that he still demands an explanation from Warrap state governor as to why the late Lual was killed and for what crime.
Advocate Gabriel Kuot Akok, a Juba based lawyer, accuses Kuol Muor Muor, governor of Warrap state of committing human rights violations and failing to explain the extrajudicial killings.
Akok, who is currently handling the case of late Lual, says he filed an intent to sue the Warrap state government after being hired by the family of the late to pursue the case.
“My notice of intent to sue the governor of Warrap state came as a result of the extra judicial killing of Lual Ngong Thor. That’s why my client instructed me to file a lawsuit against the government of our state to question the legality of the green book that led to the killing of many” he elaborates.
The Lawyer maintains that killing people through firing squads is a violation of the Constitution of South Sudan – the supreme law of the land.
He calls upon the government of South Sudan to look at the issue and ensure the legality of the green book is questioned. “I’m expecting the minister to issue a legal opinion about the questioning of the so-called legal health support. Whether it is legal or not. If it is illegal, then the governor must be held accountable”
Is the Green book an alternative for restoring peace and stability?
Despite many human rights experts including the United Nations mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) condemning the legislation, to some cross section of people, the green book is a tool to restore peace in a state where the rate of inter-communal conflicts is on the rise, and there’s little government presence to curb the crimes.
The revitalized agreement on the resolution of the conflict in the republic of south Sudan (R-ARCSS), signed in the Ethiopian Capital Addis Ababa between the government under the leadership of President Salva Kiir Mayardit and the Opposition led by Dr. Riek Machar, called for unification of forces to protect the citizens. However, up to date, few forces are deployed while other parts of the country experience persistent insecurity.
This has pushed the government of Warrap to adopt a law that gives death sentences through firing squads.
Juol Nhomngek, a member of parliament representing Cueibet County of Lake states in South Sudan’s Transitional National Legislative assembly (TNLA), acknowledges that the laws passed by the two states (Lakes and Warrap) contravene the Constitution of the Country.
“The question is how legal are these two laws? The one from Warrap (Green book), and from Lake state (Public order). How are they in line with our transitional constitution, especially Article 19 which says every person is presumed innocent, and there must be a fair trial” Nhomngek asks.
The Lawmaker notes that apart from receiving condemnation in the Country, the legislation also got a lot of criticism from international human rights institutions.
Nhomngek however observes that the decision to have these laws in the two states came after so many lives were lost as a result of intercommunal conflicts, cattle raiding, and revenge attacks, which the government wasn’t able to stop.
“This issue of green book or public order laws that were passed by Warrap and Lake States arose from a crisis that led to massive violations of human rights in the two states as people from the two communities were in disputes” he explains, adding that stakeholders of the two states decided to find a way to control cattle raiding, revenge attacks and intercommunal conflicts.
He believes such laws can only be abandoned once the government is able to provide security to its people as currently citizens are in desperate need for peace across the Country. “This is the only way the citizens and communities can be protected,” he emphasizes.
However, Wol Mayom, the information minister of Warrap state defends the green book describing it as the people’s will. According to Mayom, the legislation was proposed and signed by the representatives of the people including the local chiefs, youth, and other groups.
“This law has stopped revenge killing and taking law into people’s hands. And this green book was a people’s will. They proposed it and made it and it was actually passed through the legal means from the Council of Ministers to the State Assembly before it was assented into law by the governor of our state,” he further explains.
“This is clearly stipulated in our South Sudan national laws that each state or Community has a right to draw an Act or a bylaw based on the will of the people. So I don’t know what is the cause of concern and intervention from the national minister of Justice in Juba,” Mayom says.
The question is how legal are these two laws? The one from Warrap (Green book), and from Lake state (Public order). How are they in line with our transitional constitution, especially Article 19 which says every person is presumed innocent, and there must be a fair trial.
According to Mayom, the formation of these local laws (The green book) shows a pure decentralized system adding that the law is rightly serving its purpose as the state has registered a tremendous decrease in crime rate. “As we speak, we have a 70 percent reduction in crime incidences since the law came into place,” Mayom states, adding that even the Chiefs that are complaining now have signed the law into effect and they are challenging the state government, executive and the judiciary for not implementing any laws that they passed.