On 1 June 2018, two contrasting events occurred concurrently in Juba, South Sudan, and Nairobi, Kenya. On one side, there was a special gathering where I was sworn in as the leader of the South Sudan Liech Community Association, also known as the Unity State Community in Kenya. On the other side, then Major General Stephen Buay Rolnyang was being transported to Juba, where he was later detained incommunicado for alleged mutiny. During our inauguration, I was cheering and celebrating in the sense that I was being elevated to lead our diaspora community. However, Gen. Buay was in tears in Juba because he was being brought down from power in broad daylight. On that day, the ordinary South Sudanese, who saw Buay, did not like the way he was being torn apart by security institutions, some of which he had strived and struggled to establish when he was still in office.
The case of Gen. Buay was marred by personal and institutional betrayals. This pointed to the fact that South Sudan’s public institutions were not separate from the individual officeholders. At times, when individuals differ with officeholders and bosses, the institution and the system turn against the former. The case and trial of Gen. Buay is a case in point. The way he was being shown on television and on social media platforms made almost everyone in the Unity State Community demoralized. In fact, Buay was manhandled in a manner that appeared as if he did not have people. Those who saw him being pulled and pushed at Juba International Airport felt shaken and threatened. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. said that “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.” Buay was dragged from the plane in Juba with his hands and legs shackled in a way that he could hardly walk, as if his captors thought he was going to escape or run away.
It is indisputable that Gen. Buay is a great man owing to his reform and liberation credentials. Therefore, even if he was accused of committing a grievous offence against the state, he could have been treated and fought with dignity. In the legal aspect, the constitution and laws of South Sudan provide numerous human rights, including the right of an accused person. The manner in which Buay was paraded before cameras was a breach of his right given in Chapter Two of the Constitution 2011, as amended. Article 19 reads, “An accused person is presumed innocent until his or her guilt is proved according to the law.”
The rogue establishment was prejudicial in the sense that the security apparatus was determined to crucify Buay by hook or crook. The brutal conditions to which he was subjected can only be compared to the biblical and proverbial Jesus Christ of Nazareth, who was crucified by the Pontius Pilate regime, regardless of whether he was right or not.
On 31 June 2018, while we were preparing for the swearing-in, I was briefed by the chairperson of our inauguration committee, who happens to hail from Gen. Buay’s home turf. He vividly narrated that Buay was ambushed and attacked in Unity State’s Mayom County. From the way he was narrating the story to me, I became uncertain if Buay was going to survive in the hands of the marauding forces stationed in Mayom, given his unresolved difference with the Unity State administration at the time. By luck, he managed to survive by the grace of God because some of his bodyguards were eliminated during that deadly incident, which was uncalled for largely because it was unprovoked.
However, people often say everything happens for a reason. I told myself there was a reason why the two events took place at the same time. In addition, I took over the leadership with a belief that the primary duty of a leader is to represent and fight for their people anytime and anywhere. From what I learned from a distance, I knew Buay was a freedom fighter, and therefore, I felt obliged to fight by advocating for him to be released unconditionally. I then personalized his case and further made it the community’s case by virtue of my status as a chair. I kept writing and speaking about his case to a point that made the supporters of other political parties feel uneasy.
In 2019, I was attacked on social media by one of our professionals and staunch supporters of one of the main opposition parties in the country. On that particular day, we spent many hours arguing in a WhatsApp group until members intervened after realizing the debate was turning personal. The man was so serious that he was trying to dress me down by using unfounded claims. I was a bit reserved and hesitant due to the respect I held for my position as a chair. However, I did not want to leave the debate because I felt he had a right to get an audience and answer from me. In his lengthy exchanges, he averred that my consistent advocacy against the detention of Stephen Buay amounted to dislike for other political leaders like Dr. Riek Machar. In his strong-worded argument, he opined that Gen. Buay does not deserve my support, and by extension, the support of the community, because when the conflict erupted in Juba on 15 December 2013, Gen. Buay sided with President Salva Kiir, who later persecuted and humiliated him publicly. He continued that Buay turned down a request by Dr. Machar to join SPLM-IO in 2014, forgetting that perhaps Buay rejected with good intentions.
Moreover, Gen. Buay has inalienable rights of association and to make independent decisions based on his interests. Imagine if Gen. Buay had not teamed up with President Kiir at that time, how would they have known whether or not President Kiir was a good leader? On page 107 of his first book titled Trials of Betrayals in South Sudan’s Power Struggle, Gen. Stephen Buay stated that in 2015, when he was serving as the commander of the 1st Infantry Division in Upper Nile State, he was contacted by some SPLM-IO senior officers to join them. However, he declined because he believed that the 2013 crisis was not a tribal war. I also believe the crisis was not a tribal war.
On 26 December 2013, eleven days after the crisis unfolded in Juba, I led a progressive group of thirty South Sudanese youth at a press conference in which we denied that the war was between Nuer and Dinka, as was peddled and propagated by the media. Even if the ongoing war was being pushed to look like a tribal war, the war started as a political wrangle among senior leaders in the ruling SPLM Party. However, the warmongers were using tribal rhetoric as a tool to fight their political agenda.
A few weeks after our virtual discussion, I learned from my close confidants that the man I debated with attempted to mobilize members with a view to ousting me from office because I advocated for Buay’s unconditional release. They, however, dropped and abandoned the move against me after they realized their political plot was going to fail terribly.
On 26 December 2017, one year before Stephen Buay was attacked and arrested, I led more Senior Youth of South Sudan at a press conference where we successfully demanded the release of Dr. Riek Machar from detention in South Africa, where he was confined for two years. So, if they have proceeded to lodge a case against me, they could not succeed for obvious reasons. I knew I was going to defeat them before the crisis management committee. Malcom X, one of the black nationalists and foremost human rights agitators, opined that “I am for justice no matter who it’s for or against.” First, I have a right to speak and advocate for justice as required, not just by our community values, but by our Nuer culture. Further, the fact that I was made the chair of the South Sudan Liech Community does not mean I was gagged from expressing myself on political issues at the time.
Secondly, I advocated for Stephen Buay in the same way I advocated for Dr. Riek Machar Teny when he was under detention in South Africa. In law, there is a maxim which says, “Ten guilty persons should go free rather than convict one innocent person.” I then kept writing and advocating for Buay’s release because I knew I was doing the right thing, which the majority of my members were in agreement with.
In those years of anguish and agitation for the rights of these political detainees, neither Gen. Buay nor Dr. Machar knew me well. I only came to meet and talk one-on-one with Gen. Buay in 2024, after which I joined him in the South Sudan People’s Movement (SSPM). I just knew they were my elders and leaders in the struggle and deserved my leadership services like other South Sudanese, and the Liech Community in particular. At the onset, the community chose me to be their representative at a critical time when they knew I was a peace and human rights crusader. They knew I was the right person to represent them and speak on their behalf. On my part, I was committed to offering the best representation to them. At some point, I could even donate my blood when someone fell sick and required a blood transfusion. With my able executive board, we served with loyalty and without pay.
By status, the South Sudan Liech Community Association in Kenya (SSLCAK) was not just a nonprofit and non-political organization, but it was a non-aligned community organization with clear mandates stipulated in our constitution of 2015, as amended. Legally, SSLCAK was a social welfare organization whose cardinal objectives include inter alia: advocating for peace, justice, and reconciliation. In fact, my advocacies and writings were furthering the above-mentioned objectives.
At one point, I consulted with one of the South Sudanese opposition leaders who was participating in the Rome peace process with an intention to participate in Sant’Egidio Community-led negotiations as a community leader. I then contacted the UDRM/A secretary, Deng Vanang Nyang, who advised me to petition the parties in order for my organization to be added to the National Consensus forum (NCF), which I did. On behalf of my community, I tabled our grievances, which included, among others, land grabbing and environmental pollution in Unity State.
As a Kenyan educated professional, I learned from history that the Kikuyu Central Association (KCA) traveled to London to demand their land, which was taken by colonial authorities. Morally and legally, the South Sudanese communities still have a role in peacebuilding, whereas the regional and international community has a duty to peacekeeping in South Sudan.
On 14 August 2018, I wrote and released our community policy, which was widely published by both Sudan Tribune and Radio Tamazuj under different headlines, namely, “Unity State Community in Kenya Supports Khartoum Peace Agreement” and “Unity State Community in Kenya to back Khartoum Deal.” In the above defense statement, I invoked the famous quote by Aristotle where he argued that “if an individual is not able to live and socially interact with other human beings in society, or has no need because he is self-sufficient, that particular individual is not a human being, and either he must be a beast or God.” My unwavering commitment to my community stemmed from the idea of giving back to the society that we loved and cherished all the time.
In the case of Stephen Buay, I may not have done much, but I believe I did better than those who heard and witnessed his case, but kept silent in the face of injustice and discrimination. I was confident that I played my part by showing and standing in solidarity with him during his low moment. I was not the only community leader from Unity State; there were many inside and outside South Sudan, and if they stood up and spoke in opposition against the injustice that Buay was facing, perhaps he could have been released earlier without his hard-earned military ranks being stripped.
In the wake of the crackdown on South Sudanese opposition leaders in 2025, General Akot Lual was briefly detained by the National Security Service (NSS). His unexpected arrest and subsequent detention in Juba followed an alleged meeting he held in Kampala with Gen. Salim Saleh, the brother of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, which makes him a paternal uncle of Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) Chief of General Staff Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba. In their joint reaction and response, the Warrap State Youth Organization, dubbed Awan Muorkuau Youth Association (AMYA), stood firm by insisting in a live press conference held in Juba that their elder, Gen. Akot Lual, must be released unconditionally because he was innocent. In fact, they pointed fingers at Vice President Benjamin Bol Mel. In a news article published by Radio Tamazuj titled “Ex-Presidential envoy freed after weeks in detention,” Akot became one of the few political detainees to be released through community advocacy similar to my advocacy of 2018. We cannot lie that Akot was released before other detainees simply because he hails from the president’s home state. As we know, Warrap and other Dinka-dominated states have some detainees who are still behind bars due to a lack of consistent community advocacy and support.
Finally, community advocacy and solidarity are still paramount in this critical time when our country is going at speed in the wrong leadership direction, devoid of constitutionalism and the rule of law. The recent public advocacy done by Ayod based Prophet Makuach Tut Khor demanding the immediate and unconditional release of General Gabriel Duop Lam is admirable, save for the fact that he was heard and seen threatening to wage war in the neighboring state of Upper Nile.
I have said time and again that war should be the last option, as happened in other countries like Kenya, where I lived and studied law and politics. If push comes to shove, war can only be used as a mode of putting pressure, but not as our modus operandi. The question to Prophet Makuach Tut Kor is: What has the unlawful arrest and illegal detention of Gen. Gabriel Duop have to do with the innocent residents of Upper Nile State? I hope he knows that the hurdle to peace and social cohesion resides in Juba and not Malakal.
However, if the regime were reactive and responsive to the citizenry, they could have come up with a compromise to prevent the potential loss of innocent lives put at risk by these threats issued by Prophet Makuach. The worry is that any community advocacy or pressure accompanied by threats of war and violence, like that of Prophet Makauch, is akin to “an eye for an eye,” whose aim is to make us blind, as was previously argued by our revered human rights advocate, Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
We can understand the essence of public advocacy and pressure with the knee-jerk reaction of Upper Nile State Governor Gen. James Koang Chuol Ranley, who told Prophet Makuach to change his direction to Bor Town or Ayod if he wants war. From the way he sounds, it is clear that Governor Koang was fidgeting to an extent that he forgot that two wrongs never make one right. Equally, if the move taken by Prophet Makuach was wrong, then his suggestion for Makuach to take his war to Bor or Ayod town was wrong too.
The writer is a lawyer and criminologist, and a former delegate to the High-Level Mediation for South Sudan, alias Tumaini Peace Initiative, where he represented the South Sudan People’s Movement. He can be reached via eligodakb@yahoo.com.
The views expressed in ‘opinion’ articles published by Radio Tamazuj are solely those of the writer. The veracity of any claims made is the responsibility of the author, not Radio Tamazuj.