The Hybrid Court for South Sudan, intended to hold accountable those responsible for serious crimes since 2013, faces delays due to legal and financial challenges. Government officials, including Michael Makuei, stress the AU’s role in providing necessary frameworks. Prof. Biswaro points to broader transitional justice mechanisms, but warns that slow progress affects public trust and future elections. Victims demand justice, as delays foster a culture of impunity amidst ongoing advocacy for accountability.
The establishment of the Hybrid Court for South Sudan (HCSS) remains stagnant despite the pressing demands for justice from victims of conflict. This AU-led court, designed to hold accountable those responsible for serious crimes since December 15, 2013, was outlined in the 2015 peace agreement and reaffirmed in the revitalized peace agreement of 2018. Reasons for the delay have been attributed to legal, procedural, and financial obstacles.
Michael Makuei, South Sudan’s Minister of Information, emphasized that the pace of establishing the court hinges on the African Union’s (AU) provision of necessary legal frameworks. He stated, “It is taking long because the formation of the Hybrid Court is not in our hands. It is the AU that is supposed to give us the terms and conditions for the enactment of the law.” He urged the public to exercise patience during this challenging period.
Prof. Joram Mukama Biswaro, the AU envoy to South Sudan, contextualized the HCSS within a broader transitional justice framework, mentioning that the peace agreement includes mechanisms like the Commission for Truth, Reconciliation, and Healing (CTRH). He noted that progress has been made in establishing the CTRH and the Compensation and Reparation Authority (CPRA), which are prerequisites to the court’s formation, stating, “The fact that the CTRH and CPRA have been passed into law paves the way for the Hybrid Court.”
Despite the advancement in transitional justice mechanisms, financial and logistical challenges persist. Prof. Biswaro remarked, “This is a process. It has huge financial implications. But it will be established, and it will reflect the interests of South Sudanese themselves.” The slow implementation of the overall peace agreement has resulted in postponed elections, heightening concerns over the credibility of future electoral processes without a functional judicial system.
The conflict victims continue to express their frustrations over the inadequate justice system. Prof. Biswaro acknowledged this sentiment, stating, “There is a legal dictum that justice delayed is justice denied. But history shows that justice, even if delayed, will eventually be realized.” He highlighted the need for alternative mechanisms to complement the court, such as customary justice practices seen in other nations.
Making a commitment to transitional justice, the South Sudanese government maintains that pressure from external forces is unwarranted. Mr. Makuei reaffirmed this stance by stating, “We must implement the peace agreement in our own way and in our own time.” Him and Prof. Biswaro assured that the AU continues to work with South Sudanese authorities towards establishing the court, calling on all stakeholders to advocate for accountability in the process.
James Bidal, coordinator for the South Sudan Human Rights Defenders Network, raised urgent concerns on the impact of delays on victims. He emphasized that prolonged inaction fosters a culture of impunity, erodes public trust, and leaves victims feeling abandoned. He stated, “Justice is not about punishing perpetrators. It is about recognition, healing, and ensuring non-recurrence.” This situation directly correlates to the need for the government and AU to expedite the necessary steps for establishing the Hybrid Court.
The Hybrid Court for South Sudan was conceptualized as a vital accountability mechanism within the framework of the peace agreements signed after years of conflict. It aims to investigate and prosecute serious crimes, including violence against civilians. However, ongoing delays in its establishment, attributed to various obstacles, continue to hinder the pursuit of justice for many victims, raising significant concerns regarding governance and human rights adherence in South Sudan.
In summary, the establishment of the Hybrid Court for South Sudan is critical for addressing accountability and justice following years of conflict. Delays rooted in legal frameworks, financial challenges, and the need for additional transitional justice mechanisms underscore the complexity of implementing the peace agreement. While progress has been noted, especially with the establishment of other transitional justice systems, the need for immediate action remains paramount to restore public trust and ensure victims’ rights are recognized.
Original Source: www.radiotamazuj.org
