Overview of Local Court System in South Sudan:
It is still a very ‘new nation’, but there are formal legal systems installed in the Court of Laws in South Sudan from federal levels down to the pariah of Payams and Boma courts. Supreme Court as a highest court established on the orbiting and rotating earth is already there and they have appointed nine (9) justices with their chief justice to oversight and review juridical systems of the lands. It must be striking and stunning to most people that South Sudan already established a formal legal system during the last those six(6) years fold for succession in 2011.
Yet there is not any statutory laws established, however they have adopted inheriting customary and traditional laws from the British colonial powers and from the localties. Most cases have been tried, only few cases like property cases have been tried and null, however they did not have ‘fit and proper’ clauses to produce verdicts until ‘statutory law’ are made.
Scripts are described as such:
Warring Clan of Awulian case: Chol Maduor (From Pan-Diing Section) vs. Majok Atem Majok(From Pan-Akeech Section),(Nov. 20th, 2010)
Court Clerk Bol Ayiik tells a brief of case:
“These two gentlemen fought in ‘wut’ in Dinka language meaning cattle camp in Pawuoi livestock camp due to ‘zhien’ meaning livestock internal boundaries previously put in place by elders of the land and Chol Maduor accused Majok Atem of trespassing to his ‘zhien’ internal boundaries. Within no timeelapse, Chol Maduor rushed into fight and hit Majok Atem Majok in a head with a ‘shepherd stick’. Other people came in and took Chol Maduor away from the fighting ground. In meantime, Chol Maduor was taken and Majok Atem on one hand, ran and grasped a working livestock guarding machine gun and his fighting opponent was nowhere to be found: probably hid himself.”
“Majok Atem also grasped a ‘sheperd’ spear and intentionally injured a calf of Chol Maduor, in the thigh instead since Chol Maduor has hurt him in the head and he did not get a hold of Majok Atem. Awulian sections split themselves into sections----Pan-Diing against Pan-Akeech and fought each other until Police forces came in to stop them from fighting. Majority of sections that were caught fighting, were put into jail cells.”
Decision:
Court Clerk described a ruling as such:
“Good thing was that Chol Maduor’s calf did not die of wound and therefore compensation was not entailed during the rulings and only elders, Chiefs of Awulian sectarian clan: Manyok Deng Biar, and Yoro Gak Angok, and Police Department Representative were called to be present and to listen to the victims and other groups’ reconciliation hearings so that they do not fight again or resume a bloody shed fight one more time”
Cattle Robbery Case: Bol Achijang Duot vs. Gatkuoth Nyok Bol, (September 3rd, 2010)
It was not easy to get a hold of Court Clerk Bol Ayiik Bul, however I waited for him for few minute-folds and there He came. Of course, this is coming from his memoir and from court records as He wrote it in the time of proceedings and therefore everything doesn’t have to be the way it was said.
Court Clerk Bol Ayiik gives a briefing of case as such:
“Bol Achijang, an accuser, recognized a cow in a market and both Gatkuoth and Mayar, the potential dependent, on behalf of Gatkuoth asserted that it was their cow and wanted to sell it. This cattle, which was recognized in the market, described as it was among a thirty heads of livestock raided between the 2006 and 2007. Mayar, the person who was caught selling a livestock of someone else as accuser referred it to, went home and told Gatkuoth what happened in the Panyagor Town market, sponsored by the South Sudan World Food Programme(WFP) and the Twic East County combined. Both Mayar and Gatkuoth persisted that they brought this cattle from Pibor County, the Murle residential areas, and rejected the way an accuser, Bol Achijang Duot explained it to the court panel”
Decision:
Court Clerk Bol Ayiik described a ruling as such:
‘Sitting judge from ‘Wangaru-e-ya’ Town Court rejected a case to settle it since it was beyond their juridictions, but they ended up referring it to the State High Court in Bor Town or Court of Appeal and also there was not any appropriate ‘penal code law’to execute or to draw a final ruling from. It was tried, however this case of cow recognition is hard to give a verdict since there is not any written customary law and traditional law as well. So Judges decided it to refer this case to Jonglei State Court in Bor Town so that they can make their minds on what to do and State Governor can do his work combined. There is not any written statutory law or property law inherited from England or from Northern Government of Khortuom regime (known as the ‘Old Sudan’ from the South Sudan utopian jargon). Jonglei State Court of Appeal can look if recognized cows can be returned back to the owner with compensation it was stolen and returned.”
Another Roberry Case: Aleu Kuek Aleu vs. Majok Luk Mabil ,(Dec.14th, 2010)
Court Clerk Bol Ayiik gives a summary of case as such:
“A cow or a grown-up calf was also recognized in the market here in Panyagor town, Twic East County when it was about to be sold. Aleu Kuek, an accuser, said it is his calf which disappeared in 2009 of August in Wernyol Town raiding in Lith Payam. A dependent, Majok Luk told Aleu Kuek that he bought this calf from unanimous person. Of course, they both had brought in their witnesses to the court.”
Decision:
Court Clerk Bol Ayiik said:
“Sitting judges did not grant a verdict, but decided to refer it back to the Jonglei State High Court in Bor Town since this case is ‘beyond their jurisdiction’ and need a High court to give a verdict on what to do with this case. Clerk persisted that there is not any statutory law or property law inherited to execute this case of cow recognition, but only Jonglei State Court can decide what to do with it with advisory from both Jonglei State Governor and Jonglei State Attorney General since the South Sudan history narrative trajectory can not be told without the Old Sudan.”
Livestock Rustling Incident in Pajoma village of Kongor Payam:
It was evening of of November 10th, 2010 when this incident of cattle robbing happened and only three (3) gentlemen or herdsmen were looking after them that day. Of course, these three (3) herdsmen were the same people who saved these cattle from nine (9) households. According to Deng Biowei Deng, three (3) herdsmen did not see livestock raiders at all whatsoever and did not know. They magically vanished and stealthily maneuvered when they heard gunshot of three (3) herdsmen. This incident of Pajomba livestock raiding happened in November 10th, 2010 and number of people ran after them to save livestock from robbers and unfortunately community people did not get livestock robbers. Raided livestocks just were taken closer to Atedaan livestock camp and Paduon livestock camp and these livestock were afterward saved from the enemythrough foot-print on the grounds,” added Ameer Chol Duop and Aluel Deng Kudior. It was evening when cattle of Pajomba village were taken from 9 households and 3 herdsmen were after the livestock,” augmented Khot Atem Dut and Agau Atem Lueth.
These livestock according to Deng Biowei Deng, were taken closer to Atedaan and Padon, the once time cattle camp for Kongor Payam. Cattle were returned before taking them pass the previous cattle camps: Piomyom, Atedaan and Padoon, the once time livestock camp,” stressed Khot Atem Dut and Agau Atem Lueth. Of course, cattle raiders did not take livestock pass the GTZ dam, however were about to reach it.
Deng Biowei voiced that cattle rustlers did not kill any person like in the first incident back in summer of 2010 when cattle raiders shot down 2 herdsmen.
As I asked them about kind of defense arrangement used, Ameer Chol Duop, Deng Biowei and Aluel Deng Kudior said that they did not know what type of defense mechanism used, probably they might have borrowed machine guns from concerned patrol department.
Reactions:
It would be better if people run after them immediately when they hear incident of raiding to protect livestock from robbers.
Twic East County Court:
I spoke to both Clerks: Garang Deng and Ajang Nyuop if they have a record of Aluel Chol v. Diing Garang. We all checked, but we find no record, probably this case did not make it to County court since it is not to be found.
I also found a divorce and thought I should record for you so that you can see how verdict was given. This civil case of divorce was between Malou Gak Bul and Awut Biar Ajak, the daughter of Biar Ajak Yool. Malou Gak Bul was recorded in demand of 31 cows and 3200 Sudanese Pounds in return from Awut Biar Yool since he no longer wanted to keep her as a wife. Only to get his own wealth from father-in-law, Biar Ajak Yool,” said County Court clerk Ajang Nyuop Bol.
Judgement/Decision
Section 62/63, the Code of evidence Act 2006
Order:
Judge Francis Amum Awin ruled in favor of Malou Gak Bul to divorce Awut Biar Ajak and had to get back the wealth he offered in full per evidence provided and according to Dinka Bor Custom. This wealth was scheduled to be returned to him on 20th of April 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment