Political rhetoric must translate into tangible, genuine results
More than two years after a peace agreement promised it, South Sudan has taken its first formal steps toward confronting the atrocities of its civil war — announcing a hybrid court, a truth commission, and a reparations authority to address crimes that have long gone unanswered. The delay itself has been a form of injustice, allowing perpetrators to move freely while survivors carried their wounds without recognition or remedy. Whether this announcement marks a genuine turning point or another chapter in a long history of deferred accountability remains the defining question for a nation still learning whether its institutions can serve its people.
- Over two years of missed deadlines have let war criminals operate with near-total impunity while torture survivors and the disappeared's families received nothing — not justice, not compensation, not even acknowledgment.
- The absence of any functioning accountability system has emboldened perpetrators and fed the cycle of localized violence, with resource competition and political power struggles continuing to tear communities apart.
- UN commissioners welcomed the announcement but issued sharp warnings: political promises without concrete benchmarks, signed agreements, and legislative action will only deepen the credibility crisis facing the transitional government.
- The government must now sign a memorandum of understanding with the African Union, adopt the hybrid court statute, and launch citizen consultations — tasks that must begin immediately to avoid sliding into yet another indefinite delay.
- For victims of sexual violence, enforced disappearance, and torture, the stakes are not procedural but deeply personal — healing itself has been held hostage to political inaction, and resentment is filling the space where reconciliation might have grown.
South Sudan's government announced it would at last establish three institutions meant to reckon with the violence of its civil war: a hybrid court to prosecute human rights abuses, a truth and reconciliation commission, and an authority to compensate victims. The announcement arrived more than two years behind schedule — a delay that allowed those responsible for torture, forced disappearances, and mass atrocities to act with near-total impunity while the country's underlying conflicts quietly deepened.
The mechanisms were enshrined in the 2018 peace agreement that created South Sudan's transitional unity government, designed to address the systematic brutality of the civil war: extrajudicial killings, sexual violence used as a weapon, the deliberate targeting of civilians. Instead, the government missed deadline after deadline. Legislative reconstitution stalled. Key appointments were never made. The machinery of accountability simply did not turn.
Yasmin Sooka, chair of the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, welcomed the announcement but offered a pointed caveat — words alone would not restore credibility. The commission had given the government specific benchmarks. Now it would have to meet them. Commissioner Andrew Clapham noted that impunity had emboldened perpetrators while resource competition and political rivalry continued fueling localized fighting. Corruption flourished where justice was absent.
For survivors, the delay carried a more intimate weight. Without reparations, victims of torture, disappearance, and sexual violence bore their trauma entirely alone — the physical injuries, the psychological scars, the economic ruin of displacement. Where reconciliation might have taken root, resentment has grown instead.
The government now faces a concrete set of tasks: signing a memorandum of understanding with the African Union, adopting the hybrid court statute, and launching broad public consultations on the truth commission. Commissioner Barney Afako was unambiguous — these steps must begin immediately. In a country where political commitments have repeatedly dissolved, the real test is not the announcement but what follows it. The victims are waiting. The perpetrators are watching.
South Sudan's government announced Friday that it would finally establish three institutions designed to reckon with the violence of its long conflict: a hybrid court to prosecute human rights abuses, a truth and reconciliation commission, and an authority to compensate victims. The announcement came more than two years late—a delay that has allowed those responsible for torture, disappearances, and mass atrocities to operate with near-total impunity while the country's underlying conflicts have only deepened.
The transitional justice mechanisms were supposed to be operational under the 2018 peace agreement that created South Sudan's transitional unity government. They were meant to address the systematic brutality that has marked the country's civil war: extrajudicial killings, sexual violence used as a weapon, forced disappearances, and the deliberate targeting of civilians. Instead, the government missed deadline after deadline. The reconstitution of the legislative assembly stalled. Key appointments were never made. The machinery of accountability simply did not turn.
Yasmin Sooka, who chairs the UN Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan, welcomed the announcement but made clear that words alone would not suffice. "After more than two years of delay, the Government has at last taken the first steps," she said, before adding a sharp caveat: the government would retain no credibility unless political promises became concrete action. The commission had provided the government with specific benchmarks for implementation. Now it would have to meet them.
The cost of the delay has been measured in ongoing violence and deepening injustice. Commissioner Andrew Clapham noted that the absence of accountability has emboldened perpetrators while the underlying drivers of conflict—competition for resources, territorial control, political power—have continued to fuel localized fighting across the country. Rampant corruption and economic crimes have flourished in the absence of any functioning system of justice. Those responsible for war crimes have faced no consequences.
For victims, the delay has meant something more personal and devastating. Without reparations mechanisms in place, survivors of torture, enforced disappearance, and sexual violence have borne the full weight of their trauma alone—the physical injuries, the psychological scars, the economic devastation of displacement and loss. The absence of any official accounting or compensation has poisoned the possibility of healing. Resentment festers where reconciliation might have taken root.
The government now faces a concrete set of tasks. It must sign a memorandum of understanding with the African Union. It must adopt the statute that will establish the hybrid court. It must launch broad consultations with South Sudanese citizens about how the truth commission should function. Commissioner Barney Afako emphasized the urgency: these steps should begin immediately, not drift into another indefinite delay.
What remains to be seen is whether the government will follow through. The announcement itself is a shift—an acknowledgment that accountability cannot be deferred forever. But in a country where political commitments have repeatedly evaporated, where the machinery of state has often served the interests of those in power rather than justice, the real test lies ahead. The victims are waiting. The perpetrators are watching. The country's capacity to heal depends on whether this time, the words translate into action.
Citas Notables
After more than two years of delay, the Government has at last taken the first steps to initiate key transitional justice measures to address the legacy of gross human rights violations in South Sudan. If the Government of South Sudan is to retain any credibility whatsoever, the political rhetoric must translate into tangible, and genuine results.— Yasmin Sooka, Chair of the Commission on Human Rights in South Sudan
Those responsible for war crimes and continuing human rights violations have been emboldened by a system that permits impunity for torture, enforced disappearances, and atrocity crimes.— Commissioner Andrew Clapham
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why did it take more than two years to announce these institutions if they were promised in 2018?
The government never reconstituted its legislative assembly properly, and key officials were never appointed. It's not that they forgot—it's that the political will to move forward wasn't there, or the competing interests within the government made it impossible to agree on how to proceed.
And what happens to the people who committed these crimes in the meantime?
They've operated with almost complete freedom. No prosecution, no investigation, no consequence. That's what impunity means in practice—the perpetrators know they're unlikely to face justice, so the violence continues, and the system that permits it stays intact.
Does establishing these institutions now actually change anything for victims?
It could, but only if the government follows through. Right now it's an announcement. Victims still haven't received compensation. They still haven't had their stories officially recorded or acknowledged. The institutions have to be built, staffed, funded, and given real power—and that's where the real work begins.
What's the role of the African Union in all this?
The hybrid court is an AU mechanism, so the AU has to sign off and provide support. It's a way of internationalizing accountability without making it purely a foreign tribunal, which can breed resentment. But it also means the AU's commitment matters—if they lose interest, the whole thing could stall again.
Is there any reason to believe this time will be different?
The UN commission is watching now, and they've made clear they expect results. There's also international attention. But ultimately, it depends on whether the South Sudanese government actually wants accountability or just wants the appearance of it. The next few months will tell you which it is.