A prominent human rights lawyer has challenged a recent order by Bor County Commissioner James Gai Makor dismissing traditional chiefs, calling the move a legal overreach and a threat to local governance.
On Tuesday, Gai summarily dismissed three traditional community chiefs in Goi Boma after they opposed their inclusion in the newly established Chueikeer Payam. The chiefs, Mariar Maluil, Aguto Chol, and Angeth Noon, were removed from their positions following a letter they wrote earlier on Tuesday rejecting Goi Boma’s integration into the new administrative unit.
Now, Bol Gabriel Diing, an opinion writer and lawyer, says the commissioner’s dismissal of chiefs in Goi Boma is procedurally flawed and violates the very law he cited to justify it. The commissioner’s office claimed the dismissals were based on the Local Government Act, 2009.
Diing, however, argues that the Act gives the power to discipline and remove chiefs to the Customary Law Council, with the commissioner’s role being limited to approving the decision.
“I respectfully request the commissioner and his legal advisor to address their mind to Section 106 (2) of the LGA,” Diing wrote in a legal opinion.
The lawyer asserts the commissioner acted as both accuser and judge, violating the legal principle of Nemo Judex In Sua Causa (no one should be a judge in his/her own cause). He also points out that the law requires a recommendation from the Customary Law Council and specifies that chiefs can only be removed for gross misconduct, incompetence, or incapacitation—none of which were cited in the commissioner’s order.
The dismissals came amid community protests over the creation of the new Chuei-Keer Payam. Diing argues that the commissioner should have focused on reconciliation between the Gol and Nyara communities before making administrative changes. The Transitional Constitution of 2011 “encourages the involvement of communities…in the matters of local government.”
Diing said the dismissed chiefs, who were elected by their communities, have a right to seek legal recourse and could file a civil suit for “unprocedural and unfair dismissal.”
“The chiefs shall enjoy autonomy within the county when performing their responsibilities and duties,” Diing wrote. “Chiefs are protected by law and enjoy the immunity afforded to all officials in this country.”
In his conclusion, Diing called on the commissioner to reconsider the decision, stating that public offices are held in trust for the people and that officials must be held accountable for their actions. He maintains that the chiefs were reasonably asking for a roadmap to peace before the new Payam was created, and their dismissal only escalates tensions.