Nearly eight years after the signing of the Revitalized Peace Agreement, one of its most important governance commitments remains unfulfilled. The continued failure to fully reconstitute and adequately resource the Anti-Corruption Commission raises serious questions about South Sudan’s commitment to combating corruption, strengthening the rule of law, and promoting accountable governance.
Corruption remains one of the greatest obstacles to peacebuilding, economic development, and democratic governance in South Sudan. It diverts scarce public resources from essential services, weakens state institutions, erodes public confidence, discourages domestic and foreign investment, and undermines the rule of law. No country can achieve sustainable development while corruption continues to flourish unchecked.
Recognizing this challenge, South Sudan established the Anti-Corruption Commission as an independent institution mandated to prevent, investigate, and combat corruption. The Commission was envisioned as one of the country’s principal accountability institutions—a watchdog responsible for safeguarding public resources and promoting transparency and integrity in public administration.
This vision was further reinforced by the Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan (R-ARCSS), signed in Addis Ababa on Sept. 12, 2018. The agreement recognized that sustainable peace requires accountable institutions and therefore included specific provisions aimed at strengthening governance institutions, including the Anti-Corruption Commission.
Among these provisions is Article 4.4.1.7, which requires that, within two months of the commencement of the Transitional Period, the president, in consultation and agreement with the first vice president and the vice presidents, nominate the chairperson of the Anti-Corruption Commission and submit the nomination to the Transitional National Legislative Assembly (TNLA) for approval.
Today, nearly eight years after the signing of the peace agreement, that commitment remains outstanding.
This raises a fundamental question that deserves serious national reflection:
Where is the Anti-Corruption Commission envisaged under the Revitalized Peace Agreement?
This question is not merely about appointing office holders. It is about fulfilling constitutional and political commitments, strengthening public institutions, and demonstrating genuine political will to combat corruption. The delayed implementation of Article 4.4 has left one of South Sudan’s most important governance institutions without the comprehensive reforms envisioned under the peace agreement.
The challenge extends beyond leadership appointments.
Despite being constitutionally and legally mandated to prevent, investigate, and prosecute corruption under the amended Anti-Corruption Commission Act, the Commission has operated for years under severe financial, administrative, and logistical constraints. Reports indicate that more than 90% of its workforce at both its headquarters and state offices has been lost because of prolonged salary arrears, inadequate operational funding, and poor working conditions. Such a significant loss of institutional memory and professional expertise has inevitably weakened the Commission’s effectiveness.
The Commission has also faced persistent operational difficulties. For several years, it has reportedly struggled to secure permanent office accommodation after being forced to vacate rented premises because of inadequate funding. It continues to operate without sufficient operational vehicles, modern investigative equipment, information technology systems, and other logistical resources essential for carrying out investigations, public education programmes, asset recovery initiatives, and corruption prevention activities.
An institution established to protect public resources should not itself be deprived of the minimum resources necessary to function effectively. Without offices, transport, trained personnel, operational funding, and modern investigative tools, even the strongest legal mandate cannot be translated into meaningful action.
Ironically, while many public institutions continue to receive vehicles, equipment, and operational support, the institution specifically established to safeguard public resources remains among the least resourced. This contradiction inevitably raises legitimate public concerns about the priority accorded to the fight against corruption within South Sudan’s governance agenda.
Public concern has become increasingly evident during radio talk shows and public forums across the country. Citizens regularly ask officials of the Anti-Corruption Commission, why Article 4.4 of the R-ARCSS has not been implemented and why the institution appears unable to effectively execute its constitutional mandate. These questions are both understandable and justified.
Nevertheless, amid these enormous challenges, it is important to acknowledge the resilience and dedication of those who have kept the institution alive.
The current leadership of the Anti-Corruption Commission, together with the executive director, commissioners, professional staff, and support staff, deserves sincere appreciation for preserving the institution under exceptionally difficult circumstances. Despite years of financial hardship, inadequate salaries, and limited operational support, they have continued to uphold the Commission’s mandate and maintain one of South Sudan’s most important accountability institutions.
Special recognition is also extended to the World Bank, the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) Rule of Law Section, and other development partners whose technical and financial assistance supported the review and amendment of the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, 2009. Their partnership has significantly strengthened South Sudan’s anti-corruption legal framework and demonstrated the importance of international cooperation in institutional reform.
Equally deserving of recognition is the former leadership of the Transitional National Legislative Assembly (TNLA), which exercised its constitutional responsibility by debating and passing the Anti-Corruption Commission (Amendment) Act. The amendments significantly strengthened the Commission’s legal framework and expanded its authority. However, legislation alone cannot defeat corruption. Laws require institutions capable of implementing them, supported by adequate resources and sustained political commitment.
South Sudan’s civil society organizations also deserve recognition for their consistent advocacy for transparency, accountability, and good governance. Through civic education, policy advocacy, public awareness campaigns, and independent monitoring, they have continued to encourage citizens to demand integrity in public service and accountability in the management of public resources.
The media has equally played a commendable role. Radio Tamazuj, Miraya FM, South Sudan Broadcasting Corporation (SSBC), Eye Radio, Youth Advance Radio, The Dawn newspaper, Al-Hagiga Arabic newspaper, City Review newspaper, and Al-Maugif Arabic newspaper have provided invaluable platforms for public dialogue on corruption and governance. Through investigative journalism, editorials, opinion articles, news reporting, and radio talk shows, these media organizations have educated the public, amplified citizens’ voices, exposed governance challenges, and promoted informed national debate. Their contribution has helped keep corruption high on the national agenda while encouraging greater transparency and accountability.
Together, the Commission’s dedicated staff, Parliament, development partners, civil society organizations, and the media have demonstrated that the fight against corruption is not the responsibility of one institution alone. It is a collective national responsibility requiring cooperation among government institutions, development partners, oversight bodies, journalists, and citizens.
Yet, despite these collective efforts, the Commission continues to face challenges that extend beyond South Sudan’s borders. Its institutional weaknesses now affect the country’s participation in regional and continental anti-corruption initiatives, raising broader questions about South Sudan’s commitment to international cooperation in combating corruption.
The writer, William Sunday D. Tor, is a South Sudanese political analyst, researcher, and columnist specializing in governance, public policy, democracy, migration, and anti-corruption. He has written extensively on state-building, constitutionalism, public administration, and socio-economic development in South Sudan. His commentaries advocate accountable governance, equal citizenship, the rule of law, and inclusive democratic institutions.
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.
and then