Customary protection? Chiefs' courts as public authority in UN protection of civilian sites in South Sudan

Justice and security depend upon community action in South Sudan, even where civilians are under international protection. In this paper, we look inside the United Nations Mission in South Sudan (UNMISS) Protection of Civilians (PoC) sites at the functioning of customary courts in this unique context. We find that the courts are more than a mechanism for community dispute resolution, they are also integral to the invigoration of local norms and structures for protection. This self-reliance is understandable, given that UNMISS has failed to protect people outside and inside the PoCs, and is mired in a legal and administrative quagmire within the sites. In South Sudan, chiefs’ courts have generally been associated with the pursuit of legitimate authority and accessible justice, but they are also the purveyors of norms that reproduce gender and generational inequalities and license certain abuses. Based on qualitative research and 395 court observations in the Juba and Bentiu POCs between July 2015 and July 2016,1 we find that this duality persists even amid displacement and under humanitarian governance. The courts punish criminality, violence and breaches of custom, often in ways that oppress women and youth, yet their judgements, whether mediation or punishment, are concerned with making social and moral order, as illustrated by our detailed descriptions of a sample of cases. In interaction with UNMISS, new forums, actors and practices of justice are emerging; chiefly authority and ideas about the customary are adapting and thriving. We conclude that the regeneration of the courts in the sites is a response to a practical need for justice forums, but is fundamentally associated with the constitution of public authority and community among people affected by atrocity, conflict and profound uncertainty

Seeking justice in Nimule, South Sudan

‘There is no law in South Sudan’, a resident of the town of Nimule, Eastern Equatoria, explained: ‘You see the police cell there is for those who are very poor. You will never see a rich person in that prison for the rest of your life. Trust me, this is true.

Ending impunity in South Sudan

Rachel Ibreck and Alex de Waal argue that, despite the ongoing violence, South Sudan is not a lawless society and courts can contribute to ending the conflict

Justice in practice: South Sudan

There is no question that the administration of justice in South Sudan can and must be improved. Indeed there are ongoing efforts by government, practitioners, civil society groups and international agencies to promote access to justice. But in this evolving and plural legal environment, we also need better information about everyday experiences of justice

Chiefs’ courts: protecting civilians in South Sudan?

In this blog Alex de Waal and Rachel Ibreck explore the provision of justice and security within the ‘Protection of Civilians’ sites in South Sudan, drawing on extensive research in the Juba and Bentiu sites. A new JSRP paper by Rachel Ibreck and Naomi Pendle provides fuller details of this research

Negotiating Justice: Courts as local civil authority during the conflict in South Sudan

South Sudan’s courts have continued to function despite the extreme pressures of civil war, atrocities, and economic crisis. They constitute a resilient form of civil authority and an instrument to deal with everyday criminality. The courts also hold the potential to prevent violence and improve protection, not least because both men and women turn to the courts to resolve all manner of disputes, from minor arguments within families to violent disputes and abuses, including by local authorities. People also publicly show compliance during court proceedings, despite uncertainty over when and how judgements will be implemented. However, all are not equal under the law in South Sudan. Instead justice reproduces social and economic inequalities, and is subject to local improvisations. Court decisions are sometimes complicit in human rights violations, especially of women and youth. And military, political and economic elites have opportunities to circumvent or manipulate the system

South Sudan: for every corrupt general, there are thousands who wish only for peace

Following the recent outbreak of violence in Juba, South Sudan, JSRP researchers Rachel Ibreck, Naomi Pendle and Alex de Waal examine the background to the resurgent civil war in a topical blogpost for African Arguments, ‘South Sudan: For every corrupt general, there are thousands who wish only for peace’, and highlight the need for processes of justice to be part of the peace agenda

Protecting Women from Violence in the United Nations Protection of Civilians Sites, South Sudan?

This article explores the everyday politics of protecting women from war and atrocities, based on ethnographic work within the United Nations Protection of Civilians sites, South Sudan. It examines the heterogenous ways that peacekeepers and displaced people conceptualised and enacted women's rights and protection inside the sites. Protection and gender were variously interpreted, resisted, and transformed. But sexual and gender-based violence remained rife in these makeshift ‘safe havens’. These experiences demonstrate that international peacebuilders cannot impose gendered protection. They must engage with local authorities and activists to promote women, peace and security in warzones

The ‘UNFAIR’ refugee agency: UNHCR accountability after protests and violence

Urban refugees increasingly resort to sit-ins outside United Nations Refugee Agency (UNHCR) offices because they lack avenues for accountability. Our fieldwork reveals their experiences of neglect, mistreatment, and violence and the ways that these are compounded by UNHCR’s responses to protests, generating deep mistrust. Drawing on interviews with refugees in three protest sites and a workshop with legal practitioners, we document disturbing accusations, implicating UNHCR in human rights violations. We reflect on these findings and explore the possibility of transforming the agency’s accountability relations in the context of declining budgets and influence. We argue that the agency must abandon its securitized response to refugee-led protests and adopt a ‘networked accountability’ approach, engaging with the plural authorities that hold legitimacy in refugee protection. Although UNHCR is currently structurally dependent upon major donors and host states, it must embed accountability relations with refugee-led organizations (RLOs), NGOs, and legal practitioners to fulfil its mandate and protect refugees

Civicness in exile: The solidarities and struggles of South Sudanese refugees in Cairo

We explore refugee solidarities and struggles under conditions of extreme political exclusion and violence, based on collaborative ethnography with South Sudanese refugees in Cairo. From the perspective of the refugees, the city is hostile and precarious. They are routinely subject to racism, deprivation, and arbitrary applications of law. At the same time, South Sudanese people have historical roots in Cairo and have generated forms of moral and political order there, shaped by fluctuating relations with each other, the city, and their homeland. We argue that these inconspicuous socio-political structures provide community citizenship at the urban margins. Additionally, we show how refugees strive for legitimate authority, social welfare, and rights in exile, within and beyond these local realms. We label these endeavours ‘civicness’ to capture their situated politics. The refugees’ relations and contentions are distinctive in that they are mostly oriented towards customary and humanitarian authorities, rather than the state; they rely on and encourage quotidian solidarities; and they blend notions of custom with references to human rights and constitutional norms. In this harsh context, South Sudanese refugees deploy civicness to promote survival with dignity and to counteract dehumanizing modes of humanitarian governance