(JUBA) – The criminal trial of South Sudan’s suspended vice president, Dr Riek Machar, began in the capital on Monday. The former first vice president faces treason and other serious charges, amid growing concerns over media freedom and transparency.
Machar has been under house arrest since March. His public appearance in court marks the first time he has been seen since then. Earlier this month, President Salva Kiir suspended Machar after authorities formalised criminal charges, including accusations of planning or directing an attack on a government troops’ garrison.
In addition to treason, Machar and seven co-accused are charged with murder, conspiracy, terrorism, destruction of public and military assets, and crimes against humanity. The trial is being held by a special court in Juba and is being broadcast on national television.
Machar’s defence has challenged the competence of the court, saying it lacks legal jurisdiction. The defence also argues that prosecuting Machar under these charges violates the 2018 peace agreement between him and President Kiir, which ended South Sudan’s civil war that caused around 400,000 deaths.
Political analysts say that even though Machar and Kiir are formally partners under the peace deal, their rivalry remains strong. Ethnic divisions — Machar being Nuer and Kiir Dinka — deepen those tensions. Repeated postponements of presidential elections have raised fears that the unity government formed under the peace agreement is under strain. Civil society groups and political observers warn that trials like this one may heighten fragility in South Sudan’s political climate.
UJOSS Statement on Press Access
The Union of Journalists of South Sudan (UJOSS) issued a statement strongly condemning what it described as an unlawful denial of media access to the trial’s opening session. According to UJOSS, journalists who arrived to cover the trial were told only those from the state-run South Sudan Broadcasting Corporation (SSBC) would be allowed to enter the courtroom.
UJOSS said this action violates press freedom as guaranteed under Articles 24 and 32 of the Transitional Constitution of South Sudan, 2011 (as amended). The union called the denial of access “a direct violation of open justice,” and criticised the involvement of the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs in enforcing the restriction.
At the start of the trial, Presiding Judge James Alala affirmed that the courtroom is open to the public and to all media houses, under the constitution and relevant laws, including the Media Authority Act, Access to Information Act, National Communication Act, Penal Code Act, and the National Security Act.
Business and Governance Implications
The restriction on media access has drawn concern from both national and international observers. Transparent court proceedings are seen as essential for upholding rule of law, investor confidence, and legitimacy of government institutions. In a country recovering from war and reliant on international aid and investment, perceived violations of legal norms can undermine economic prospects.
The outcome of this trial may have direct and indirect consequences for business in South Sudan. Contracts, foreign investment decisions, donor support, and economic reforms often depend on political stability and the perception that legal processes are fair and predictable.
The trial also tests the strength of the 2018 peace agreement. If political and legal processes are viewed as partisan, that could weaken confidence in the agreement, possibly increasing the risk of renewed conflict.
