The transitional government has shifted its approach to resolving disagreements with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army-In Opposition (SPLM/A-IO), opting for legal proceedings over further dialogue.
Government spokesperson Michael Makuei, said on Saturday, April 26, that this decision follows a series of unsuccessful dialogues which led to the recent clashes in Nasir and Ulang counties of Upper Nile State.
“We are not against the dialogue with the SPLM/A –IO,” he said. “We have been dialoguing with them all these years. But these dialogues have led to misunderstandings, and every time there is disagreement, people are killed, we dialogue with them, forgetting and ignoring the lives,” Makuei said.
“This time, we have decided the other way around, we have decided not to dialogue because dialogue proves to be insufficient. So, we have decided to consult the law. We have decided to try the law because they said that if dialogue cannot help, try the law. This is why we are subjecting these people to the law,” he added.
Makuei clarified that this legal approach will target those who he said are in conflict with the law, while the government remains open to dialogue with individuals and groups not implicated in the conflicts.
“We will address those who conflict with the law in court, but those who are not in conflict with the law will always continue to dialogue with us,” he said. “Those who are under arrest will continue under investigation, and those who are not in conflict with the law will continue to dialogue with us.”
This shift comes in the wake of recent hostilities in Nasir and Ulang counties, Upper Nile state involving the South Sudan People’s Defense Forces (SSPDF) and the “White Army,” a local militia that the government alleges is affiliated with the SPLM/A –IO, led by First Vice President Dr. Riek Machar.
In response, the government arrested several SPLM/A –IO officials, including the First Vice President, Dr. Riek Machar, accusing them of inciting the violence.
This approach has triggered concern among civil society activists who are advocating for dialogue among political leaders to bridge the widening divide.
Civil society activist Edmund Yakani urged parties to the agreement to prioritize dialogue as a means to resolve the prevailing political differences.
“My appeal as a civil society member is: dialogue, dialogue now, not tomorrow to fix the political gaps we are witnessing,” Yakani appealed.
