The President of the High Court in Eastern Equatoria State, Judge Obac Denyong Anyong, has said Judges work under deplorable conditions, are poorly remunerated, and lack security which affects their work and the dispensation of justice.

In an interview with Radio Tamazuj, Judge Denyong also revealed that there are few judges across the country and that this had led to a backlog of cases awaiting trial.

Below are abridged excerpts:

Q: Thank you for speaking to Radio Tamazuj. How is the Judiciary performing in Torit?

A: The work is going on well even though there are challenges we face but we are going ahead.

Q: What are the main challenges? Can you share some of them with our audience?

A: Our courts do not have enough judges and we also lack some of the facilities such as mobility. These challenges are not faced by judges in Eastern Equatoria State alone, but all over South Sudan. The environment of the work for judges is not conducive, courtroom facilities are not good. Sometimes judges don’t have stationery to work in the courtrooms. There are no vehicles for judges, some are moving on foot or using Bodaboda. Some even fail to report to their offices.

We also do not have a van that is supposed to transport prisoners to the courts. Judges are facing a very critical situation.

Q: What about salaries, are you earning befitting salaries and is it paid on time?

A: Our salaries are very little and yet we do not get it on time. Judges who used to work in Sudan were better off compared to the current situation. We know that this is the situation in general across the country but when we compare it with our situation previously in Sudan, we found this one very difficult.

Q: As judges who handle sensitive cases in a region where murders are rife, what protection and safety precautions do you have in place?

A: We do not feel safe at all. We do not have proper security in the courtrooms, outside the courtroom, or even when we walk along the streets. There are no judges in the world who walk on foot to the office or back like our South Sudanese judges. Our houses are not even secure at all. Even if you look at our judges in the region, Kenya, Uganda, etc. their judges are not suffering like ours.

The list is endless. Judges who continue to work now are convinced that they have to serve their community. Many of our colleagues have abandoned their profession and joined organizations or became lawyers to earn a living.

Q: It is said there a very few judges all over the country and that this has contributed to delayed justice. What do you have to say about this? 

A: The number of judges across South Sudan at the moment does not reach a hundred. That is why we are hearing a lot of complaints about delaying the cases. Yes, cases should be delayed because we do not have enough judges to deal with all cases. Many of them left their profession because nobody is taking care of them. Everyone is free to look for what is good for him.

Q: How are you dealing with the backlog of cases in court? 

A: The duration of each case is different because many things are involved in the process. For example, I told you earlier that sometimes we don’t have a car to transport prisoners to court. Judges need to arrive on time in court but they do not have mobility. Sometimes, we find it difficult to get all the witnesses of the case and parties of each case at times do not come to the court because they are living far away from the town. All these reasons can delay a case.

People come to the court and yet there is no paper for judges to work, yet they are paying fees for their case.

Q: How many cases are there now in the court which have accumulated due to the shortage of judges?

A: I do not know because this needs statistics and there is a department dealing with that.

Q: How far has the court in Torit gone in handling the case of 29 suspects who were arrested and accused of ambushing, killing people, and burning commercial trucks in Kapoeta East County?

A: Yes, these individuals were brought to the court, and 7 of them were freed after being proved innocent. The other 22 have been convicted and I was the presiding judge who passed the verdict.

Q: Can you break down the details? How were they convicted?

A: I convicted them under section 297 of the Criminal Act, stolen property. The incident happened in Kapoeta East County. They killed 4 people and wounded 7 people and 4 commercial trucks were looted. After the investigations, these properties were found in their possession. So there is no evidence that they participated in the robbery but there is sufficient evidence that they have received stolen property because the stolen property was found in their possession. That is why we charged them.

Q: What jail terms did you sentence them to?

A: Some of them were convicted for five years, some for three years, and the minors were only fined.

Q: How many were convicted for five years and three years?

A: The court convicted 2 for five years, 15 for three years each, and five were fined.

Q: Does it imply that the court failed to identify the real perpetrators of the ambush and subsequent killing and looting? 

A: We did not have enough evidence to prove to the court that they were the robbers. We have to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt but we convicted them because they were in possession of the stolen assets. No one was found robbing the vehicles.

Q: Did the accused have defense lawyers? 

A: We did not see a lawyer and in the law of South Sudan it is not important in any case to have a defense lawyer. We only ask them if they would like to bring a defense lawyer to defend them. If the accused does not want to bring a lawyer, the case does not stop. At the end of the day, the court does not have an interest in the defendant or the accused.

Q: But the law also says if the accused doesn’t have a defense lawyer, the government is supposed to provide one to defend them. Do you have such a practice in South Sudan?

A: Yes, it is there. This is the work of the Ministry of Justice under the department of legal aid but the court has nothing to do with this. If the lawyer is there it is good, but if there is no lawyer the court case will proceed.

Q: But you did not allow them to look for a lawyer to defend them? Is this not unjust?

A: The court has no interest in any side. We do not use injustice in the courtroom. The court is aimed at achieving justice under the law. And the law is above all. The court cannot concentrate on the accused because they did not bring a defense lawyer and the other side has brought. Yes, it is their right to have defense lawyers but if any side fails to bring a lawyer, this will not stop the court procedures. It is not a condition during a trial that someone must bring a lawyer.

Q: Do you have any final message? 

A: The challenges that I have just mentioned are not new to our government. We have said them several times and to the extent that judges went on strike but up to now there is no result. All South Sudanese know what challenges the judiciary is facing in the country.

I will still appeal to those in charge of the country to consider and address these challenges. The judiciary is one of the three pillars of governance in the country. If you can support the executive and legislature, you should be able to support the judiciary as well.