Former South Sudan First Vice President Riek Machar on Wednesday accused the prosecution and other officials of turning his ongoing trial into a political process intended to settle political differences.
Machar made the accusation during the 120th session of the Special Court in Juba, as he continued presenting his defence in the case involving him and seven co-accused over violence in Nasir, Upper Nile State, in March 2025.
The defendants face charges including treason, murder, conspiracy, terrorism, destruction of public property and crimes against humanity. Prosecutors allege that forces aligned with Machar’s Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army in Opposition (SPLM/A-IO), together with the White Army militia, attacked a government military garrison in Nasir and killed 257 South Sudan People’s Defence Forces (SSPDF) soldiers, including commander General David Majur Dak.
The prosecution has also alleged that military equipment worth about $58 million was destroyed or seized during the fighting. Machar and the other defendants have denied the charges.
Political trial
Machar said his concerns were not primarily about his defence team but about what he described as a series of court rulings that had raised questions about the fairness and independence of the proceedings.
“In actual fact, this proves that this trial is political in nature and is intended to settle political differences. My concern has not been about losing confidence in my defence team. Rather, my concern stems from my disappointment and dismay over the following rulings of this court,” Machar said.
He also questioned the role of private advocates who have been involved in the prosecution, arguing that government prosecutors from the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs had taken a back seat while co-opted advocates had assumed a leading role.
“We have observed that the co-opted advocates have taken over the prosecution from the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs. If there is a particular reason for this, I do not need an answer now,” he said.
“I have noted that the prosecutors from the Ministry of Justice, who represent the State, have taken a back seat, while co-opted private advocates have taken the lead in prosecuting us, the accused persons in this trial.”
Machar asked whether co-opted advocates are members of the National Security Service who had been assigned to prosecute the case on behalf of the complainant, the NSS, or whether the case had been reduced to a private prosecution.
“I am aware that, initially, the then First Vice President, Dr. Riek Machar Teny, was facilitating the prosecution and others. I hope this case remains the State versus the FVP and the co-accused,” he said.
“I do not mind whether the co-opted advocates are NSS personnel taking over the prosecution from the Ministry of Justice prosecutors, as long as this remains a case brought by the State against the FVP and the co-accused.”
The 74-year-old chairman of the SPLM-IO argued that the case should remain a prosecution by the state against him and his co-accused, rather than becoming what he called “a case of private advocates against the FVP and co-accused.”
“It is unfortunate for a private advocate who is a member of a political party — in this case, the SPLM-IG — to lead the government prosecution team in prosecuting members of another political party, in this case myself, as chairperson of the SPLM-IO, and my co-accused persons, who are members of the SPLM-IO,” he said.
Court rulings
Machar also challenged several previous court decisions, including rulings concerning audio-visual recording of proceedings, defence access to accused persons, media coverage, the court’s jurisdiction, presidential immunity and his designation as the fifth accused.
“Ruling of Wednesday, 19 August 2026, Session 108: The court denied the defence request for audio-visual recording of the proceedings. In my view, this ruling was politically motivated because the request was made to ensure parity and equality in the treatment of the defence and the prosecution,” he said.
Machar also referred to a ruling issued on Monday, July 20, 2026, during Session 98, which he said restricted the defence team’s ability to interact freely with the accused while they were in the dock.
“Ruling of Monday, 20 July 2026, Session 98: The court barred the defence from freely interacting with us while we were in the dock, including before the court commenced proceedings or during breaks, except with the court’s permission. This ruling has obstructed our defence team from performing its obligations towards us,” he said.
Machar said the court also issued a ruling on Friday, June 5, 2026, during Session 84, restricting coverage of the trial proceedings and addressing whether journalists or interested persons could report on the case in the media.
He said decisions of the court should not be influenced by what others write on social media.
“Ruling of Monday, 27 April 2026, Session 72: The court denied the live broadcasting of proceedings during the examination and testimonies of the accused persons, despite the prosecution case having been broadcast live when we were being vilified. In my view, this ruling was politically motivated,” he said.
Legal challenges
Machar also challenged the court’s ruling of Monday, Sept. 28, 2026, concerning its jurisdiction in relation to the proposed Hybrid Court for South Sudan and the supremacy of the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS).
“The ruling concerning the jurisdiction of this court in relation to the proposed Hybrid Court for South Sudan, and the supremacy of the R-ARCSS, was, in my view, a violation of the R-ARCSS and the amended Constitution. This ruling was politically motivated,” he said.
The court had previously ruled that it had jurisdiction to hear and try Machar and his seven co-accused after the defence challenged its authority, including on grounds relating to Machar’s immunity as first vice president.
Machar also challenged a ruling concerning the government’s authority to investigate mass violations, arguing that the responsibility should have rested with CTSAMVM, the body he said was mandated to conduct such investigations.
“The ruling that the RTGoNU had the authority to investigate mass violations rather than CTSAMVM, the body mandated to conduct such investigations, was also politically motivated,” he said.
On the ruling concerning the immunity of the First Vice President on Sept. 29, 2025, Machar said the court’s decision was contrary to provisions of the R-ARCSS and the amended Constitution. He also alleged that the ruling was politically influenced.
On the ruling designating the FVP as Accused Number Five on Sept. 22, 2025, Machar argued that his designation and appearance before the court as Accused Number Five violated Article 127(1)(b) of the Constitution, which sets out the powers of the Chief Justice.
He further said the designation differed from an earlier public statement by the former Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Joseph Geng Akech.
On the ruling concerning public and media access to the trial on Sept. 22, 2025, Machar said the court initially recognized the case as a high-profile trial that would be open to members of the public and covered by both national and international media.
However, he said the court later reversed that decision in a ruling issued on Oct. 1, 2025, during Session Five. Machar described the reversal as politically motivated.
Trial environment
Machar described the environment surrounding his ongoing trial as “toxic,” citing what he said was a plot to assassinate the accused persons and members of the defence team.
“The environment of this trial has become toxic following a plot to unlawfully eliminate and assassinate the accused persons and members of the defence team. Thank God that this plot has been uncovered, and I hope justice will prevail,” Machar said.
Machar said the alleged plot had made the court environment unsuitable for a fair trial and called for the matter to be thoroughly investigated and permanently resolved.
“The environment of this trial is no longer conducive unless the alleged plot to assassinate the accused persons and members of the defence team is properly investigated and permanently resolved,” he said.
The court adjourned the session to Wednesday, Oct. 14, 2026, when Machar is expected to continue his testimony.
and then