The trial of First Vice President Dr. Riek Machar Teny-Dhurgon and seven SPLM/A-IO officials grew increasingly contentious on Monday, as defense lawyers and state prosecutors clashed over conflicting testimonies and inconsistencies in the investigation of the Nasir incident.
The 27th session at Freedom Hall centered on the defense’s grilling of the prosecution’s first witness, Major Peter Malual Deng, a senior SSPDF investigator.
The defense wasted no time pressing Major Malual on the central claims underpinning the government’s case, including the identity of the soldiers involved in the March 7 evacuation of General David Majur, the authenticity of video evidence, and the conduct of the SSPDF itself during the lead-up to the clashes.
Malual confirmed that the eight men who carried and evacuated General Majur were all members of the SPLA-IO. Seven of them, Kak Chuol Lew, Major Reath Lual Nyang, Wanding Ruach Nyadeng, Doluoth Kueth Jock, Deng Lual Tut, Guek Kuon Nam, and Chuol Yien were killed in the subsequent fighting.
The eighth survived due to a bulletproof vest. Though he maintained that opposition elements were responsible for the killings, the defense seized on the fact that Malual offered no direct evidence linking Dr. Machar or the other accused to the deaths.
The prosecution witness also conceded that the SSPDF never notified the Ceasefire and Transitional Security Arrangements Monitoring Mechanism (CTSAMM) before deploying forces to Nasir an obligation under the Revitalized Peace Agreement.
When the defense pushed him on whether ceasefire violations must be reported to CTSAMM, Malual initially claimed the dispute had been with “Armed Youth,” not the SPLA-IO.
Under further questioning, however, he alleged that SSPDF findings showed SPLA-IO commanders were involved in the attack, despite the lack of a formal ceasefire report.
The defense questioned why this incident merited a criminal trial while past clashes involving SSPDF forces and armed youth were handled administratively.
Malual responded that the “armed youth refused to cooperate” and attacked SSPDF convoys, prompting a heightened response.
One of the tensest exchanges centered on SSPDF intelligence. Malual acknowledged that the SSPDF possessed advance intelligence regarding an attack on Wech-Yar-Adiu but that no preventive action was taken.
He further claimed that Lt. Gen. Yiey Dak of the National Security Service and Maj. Gen. Dhiling Keak, SPLA-IO Chief of Military Intelligence, had prior knowledge of the impending attack yet admitted that neither general was ever questioned by the investigation committee.
The defense then confronted Malual with recordings, public statements, and social media videos cited in the SSPDF report.
Under pressure, he admitted that footage the prosecution claimed showed armed youth preparing for the Nasir attack was actually taken from social media, and he could not confirm its origin.
When told by the defense that the video was two years old and from Ayod in Jonglei State, Malual conceded that the defense “might be correct.”
Another video cited by the prosecution, allegedly showing armed youth executing a wounded soldier at Wech-Yar-Adiu was dismissed by the defense as footage filmed in Unity State based on the accent of the speakers.
Malual insisted he did not know the source, again acknowledging it was taken from social media.
The court also revisited political statements surrounding the incident.
Malual confirmed that MP Gatwech Lam Puoch had publicly opposed the deployment of non-integrated Aguelek and Abushok forces to Nasir and had called for a committee to investigate the deployment, but had never urged armed youth often called the White Army, to rise against the SSPDF.
This admission undercut the prosecution’s argument that Puoch encouraged violence.
On one of the most politically sensitive questions, Malual maintained his earlier claim that the armed youth burned the national flag on March 2 under Dr. Machar’s direction.
But when asked to produce tangible evidence, he replied that none existed and said the prosecution would bring additional witnesses later.
The defense followed by reminding the court that Dr. Machar designed the national flag in 1985 something Malual said he had never heard.
As the session drew to a close, the courtroom atmosphere remained tense. Disputed evidence, unanswered questions, and contradictory testimony continued to define the proceedings, deepening public uncertainty about the trajectory and transparency of the trial.
Presiding Judge James Alala Deng adjourned the hearing to Friday, December 5, when the defense will resume its cross-examination of Major Malual.
