Special Court Decision Puts Fragile Peace at Risk

(OPINION/Batali Gabriel Modi) – The recent ruling by the Special Court in Juba is less a legal decision and more a political shockwave. By declaring the protections guaranteed under the Revitalised Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R ARCSS) as invalid, the court has struck at the very foundation of the current transitional government.

The R ARCSS was not just a peace arrangement. It was the framework that enabled power sharing, troop cantonment and the creation of a hybrid tribunal under African Union oversight.

By disregarding its guarantees towards Dr Riek Machar and other SPLM IO leaders, the court has created a new question: if the state no longer recognises the peace agreement, why are the current institutions still in place?

This is no longer a legal debate. It is a political test. Whether the ruling coalition that helped silence the guns since 2018 can continue to function now depends on trust. If the state applies the law selectively, it risks breaking the fragile confidence that peace is built upon.

Concerns have further been raised by the selective focus of the court. While allegations of SPLM-IO involvement in attacks are being investigated, there is silence on civilian casualties from events such as the Nasir airstrike.

International humanitarian law clearly protects civilians and cantonments. Failing to act on violations from one side while prosecuting the other sets a dangerous double standard.

Justice cannot be selective. When it is, it becomes a weapon of the powerful. In a country where alliances shift easily, such a perception could quickly fuel new tensions.

The existence of the Special Court itself is also in question. The peace agreement did not call for a domestic tribunal. It called for a hybrid court established with international participation to guarantee neutrality.

By bypassing that framework, South Sudan risks undermining both the peace deal and its commitments to the African Union and the United Nations.

Repeated delays in court proceedings have only deepened suspicion. If there is evidence of coordinated attacks, why has it not been presented? In weak systems, delays often signal political intent rather than legal process.

South Sudan now stands at a decisive moment. It must choose to honour the promised hybrid court or risk losing the peace it has worked so hard to maintain. Abandoning the R ARCSS in favour of quick political gains may return the country to conflict.

What must be done:

The Special Court ruling is more than a legal issue. It is a test of South Sudan’s future. If the spirit and promises of the peace agreement are ignored, the country risks repeating history. Peace must not be sacrificed for political convenience.

---

Batali Gabriel Modi (Mondurute) is a South Sudanese citizen, commentator and advocate for peace, justice and national unity. He writes as a concerned son of South Sudan.

---

Disclaimer

The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Access Radio® or its editorial team. Access Radio® publishes opinion pieces to encourage public debate. Publication does not imply endorsement. All facts and claims in this article are the responsibility of the author. Access Radio® reserves the right to review submissions at its discretion. We welcome diverse perspectives. To contribute an opinion, email news[at]radioyei.org. Have something to say? Send your opinion to: news@radioyei.org