In South Sudan, there is mounting resistance against a recently passed security bill, primarily from opponents of President Salva Kiir. They are urging him to send the bill back to parliament, citing concerns that it grants excessive powers to state security agents. Critics argue that the bill, if enacted, would enable the National Security Service to arrest and detain suspects without a warrant, potentially stifling dissent among opposition groups and civil rights activists.
The SPLM-IO, the main opposition party in South Sudan, has joined forces with various civil rights activists in unified opposition to the security bill. Oyet Nathaniel, the deputy chairperson of the party, expressed dismay over the rushed approval of the bill despite earlier calls for revisions.
“We appeal to President Salva Kiir to respect the recommendations of senior leaders, the Council of Ministers’ resolution, and legal advice from the Justice and Constitutional Affairs ministers to remove Sections 54 and 55 from the legislation,” Nathaniel emphasized. “We strongly advise against endorsing this contentious National Security Service bill.”
Nathaniel also criticized past instances of abuse of power by the National Security Service, citing cases where individuals were detained without being brought before a court, as required by law.
He argued that granting security agents the power to arrest would exacerbate constitutional breaches and human rights violations.
“Their mandate is specifically to gather and analyze information and provide advice to relevant authorities,” he emphasized. “Nowhere in the constitution does it authorize them to engage in armed conflict, make arrests or detentions without a warrant, or intimidate and harass.”
Ter Manyang Gatwech, the executive director of the Center for Peace and Advocacy in South Sudan, argued that the bill’s provisions threaten all citizens, regardless of their political affiliation.
“Those who passed it might perceive it as targeting civil society, ordinary citizens, and human rights defenders, but that’s not the intention,” he remarked. “I urge the president to return this bill to parliament for review.”
However, some South Sudanese lawmakers supporting the measure argue it is necessary to protect the country from lawbreakers.
John Agany, a lawmaker and former spokesperson for the National Assembly, defended the bill, stating that the controversial sections do not violate the constitution. He emphasized the importance of responsible implementation.
“Our National Security Service consists of highly responsible and well-trained individuals,” he stated. “Their effectiveness was evident during the 2013 crisis when they maintained order and saved lives. We must recognize the dedication of these men and women who tirelessly work to secure our nation.”
Daniel Ali, a lawmaker from the ruling SPLM Party, supported the bill’s provisions for arrest without a warrant in cases involving threats to national security.
“The bill does not allow for arbitrary arrests, such as those arising from domestic disputes,” he clarified. “It pertains to serious matters like coup attempts where swift action is necessary. I urge the assembly to pass this law promptly.”
Several foreign embassies have expressed opposition to the bill, warning that its implementation would further curtail civic and political freedoms in South Sudan, particularly during this critical period.
“Enacting this bill would be regrettable under any circumstances, but especially now, as it undermines the transitional government’s efforts to promote political and civic space,” stated Michael Adler, the U.S. ambassador to Juba.
As the debate continues, stakeholders within South Sudan and internationally emphasize the importance of preserving civic freedoms and upholding human rights.
They urge President Kiir to reconsider the bill and address its controversial provisions through constructive dialogue and legal revisions.
