If Radio Tamazuj and The New York Times reports are to be believed, both the President, Salva Kiir and the First Vice President, Dr. Riek Machar are boldly reported to have opposed the establishment of the Hybrid Court. A move which rules out and contravenes the implementation of Chapter 5, Article 3 of the Agreement on the Resolution of Conflict in South Sudan (ARCSS). The two leaders who are equally the prime principals to the accord signed in August, 2015 to end the nearly two years South Sudan civil war were quoted to have justified their opposition to the Hybrid Court that, ‘IT WOULD DESTABLIZE EFFORTS TO UNITE OUR NATION BY KEEPING ALIVE ANGER AND HATRED AMONG THE PEOPLE OF SOUTH SUDAN.’ An argument which does not hold water completely.
Up to this moment, I am made to comprehend that President Kiir and FVP Dr. Riek are none other than two sides of the same coin when they agree on self-serving interest and two different coins when they disagree on who should lead the nation. This attracts my reaction to the unwanted proposal being initiated by the two leaders.
As the wise saying goes, make hay while the sun shines. South Sudanese are in excruciating wait to see to it that the Presidency makes the best use of the Hybrid Court as stipulated in the agreement. Unfortunately, the leaders do not want to make it seem like they mean the business given their controversial stance on the matter. Any attempt which is seen to thwart the establishment of the independent court that tries crimes of genocides, crimes against humanity, war crimes and crimes of sexual violence will be honestly construed as fundamental egocentrism.
It stands to reason that our leaders put their interest above that of the troubled citizens. The reported new turn of event which exhibits the culture of violating the ARCSS is a reprehensible act. Shunning justice which brings culprits to book will only fuel more anger and hatred among the victims of the brutally massacred population. Those that the court identifies as perpetrators must lie on the beds they have made.
Our citizens cannot entertain and afford to leave every stone unturned while innocents people were intentionally made to meet their fate. It makes no sense to run away from responsibilities if indeed leadership means its functions. We cannot let quest for power dominate responsibilities coupled to it.
Having a flashback to the initial stages of the Addis Ababa negotiation, identification and addressing of the root cause of the problem was the chief ideal of the agenda although it was later abandoned for the emergence of the new road maps of the compromised talks.
Had it not been what drives today‘s new proposal by the two leaders, the settlement of the problem which would start by addressing the main cause of the war and possibly lead to identifying those responsible for all forms of crimes would not have changed track.
The slogan; JUSTICE, LIBERTY AND PROSPERITY on our Emblem and in National Anthem needs not be misconstrued by any patriotic citizen. It is every South Sudanese’s duty to observe the treaties, legal and moral standards of human right just as other nations in the world do.
Ultimately, no one is above the law and that we cannot evade justice under the false pretense that the court would destabilize efforts to unite our nation by keeping alive anger and hatred among the people of South Sudan. Let us give justice a chance so that those culprits are held responsible for their brutalities. Consequently, we must say that they have answered and born the results of what they intentionally committed.
If we do not put justice in place, there will stand a vicious cycle of massacre in the Republic of South Sudan.
For Justice, Liberty and Prosperity I articulate this opinion.