It is 13 years down the road, South Sudan is still an extremely dangerous place for journalists to practice their profession freely without state interference.
It is highly risky for journalists to move in public with their cameras or conduct interviews even in the marketplace, a similar horrendous ordeal the CGTN journalist, Patrick Oyet harshly went through in January this year while reporting in the street of Juba, the national capital city of South Sudan.
Oyet Patrick later retrieved his media accreditation documents from the security personnel after media support organizations intervened.
Several journalists were killed and some were exiled or switched the profession over safety concerns since the onset of the 2013 bloody power wrangle civil war between the forces loyal to President Kiir and those supporting Riek Machar Teny—the main opposition leader, in Juba. The fighting killed over 400,000 people and displaced millions to neighboring countries.
The American-British journalist Christopher Allen tops the list of journalists killed by the state while reporting on the political crisis in South Sudan.
Weeks ago, the government released a one-sided report explaining the circumstances that were believed to have led to the death of Christopher Allen.
However, the civil rights activists questioned the credibility and objectivity of the probe committee formed by the Minister of Cabinet Affairs Martin Elia Lomuro and tasked to bring the case of the late Christopher Allen to rest.
“The committee formed to investigate the death of Christopher Allen is not inclusive and their objectivity is in question,” the activist, who is the co-founder of an independent civil society organization exclusively said in an interview with Golden Times.
The government shuts down the civic and political space making it difficult for political critics and civil society activists to speak freely to the media about the state of affairs unfolding in the country.
On Sunday, the government’s security agents arrested the former Mayor of Juba City Council Kalisto Ladu for speaking out against injustice, killings, syndicated land grabbing, and displacement of indigenous people from their villages by some soldiers and armed individuals supported by powerful politicians who are part of the transitional government of national unity.
As the country prepares for its first-ever general elections, the state security agency—National Security Service—intensifies its spy web activities on private and independent media institutions with a motive to clamp down on critics and human rights defenders while fastening measures to shrink further media, civic, and political spaces in the country.
Besides attacking journalists, civil rights activists, and political critics, the state security agency deployed security agents to the main printing press facilities in the national capital, Juba to censor articles deemed critical of the prominent personalities in the country.
Station managers of private, independent, and community-based radio stations and editors of daily newspapers often face the wrath of the security personnel and supporters of prominent politicians if they allow critical stories to go on air or be published in newspapers.
The security units deployed at the printing facilities act as final editors. They approve what should be printed and what shouldn’t appear in the newspapers, mirroring Sudan’s security style of controlling the media and suppressing press freedom to protect the political interests of the ruling elites who are part of President Kiir’s inner circle.
Talking of consequences, Jackson Baptist [not his real name/pseudonym], who works with the popular printing press in Juba, disclosed that the security always orders them to read the news line-up for him to censor whatever story sounds critical to him.
“Some officers could not read well,” Baptist said. “We are told to read and explain the contents of every story every day. Some of the stories are removed because they make mention of an individual the officers are not happy with. We comply because we have no other option,” he said.
“The censorship often comes with warning and threats,” an editor whose name could not be mentioned for security reasons told Golden Times on Saturday. “Sometimes, we are called on the phone in the middle of the night by a security person informing us that the article so and so must be removed or else, the paper will not be printed. In most cases, they inform us even after ordering the graphic designer at the printing press to remove the article and replace the space with just any soft article,” he said.
Information Minister Michael Makuei Lueth admitted to having censored the media and removing articles it deemed to incite hatred.
Makuei stated this while responding to the U.N.-backed inquiry detailed “pervasive” restrictions on free press in the troubled country.
He said the government censorship was a protective measure because allowing certain articles to go to print would cause insecurity [and] the government prefers taking such articles out.
“We don’t want to take that author to court,” he added.
Late last year, the UN human rights commissioners accused South Sudanese security agencies and government officials of human rights abuses, torture, repression, rendition, and interference in the work of media, civil society, and political groups.
The 57-page UN Human Rights Commission report titled “Entrenched Repression: Systematic Curtailment of the Democratic and Civic Space in South Sudan, states that the government doesn’t allow civil society to speak freely, for journalists to pass information, and for ordinary citizens to speak on radio or television.
The report includes accounts of nearly 100 state-sponsored human rights violations including intimidation, harassment, violence, arbitrary detentions and torture, as well as sexual violence against female reporters. The commission says the reports were corroborated by its independent investigations.
The First Deputy Speaker of the National Parliament Oyet Nathaniel in a statement to Golden Times decried the restrictions imposed by the security agency on civic and political space at the time the country prepares for its first general elections.
“You cannot hold your birthday party without getting permission from the national security; and worst of all, the National Security Amendment Bill has stalled in the parliament because some want to retain two sections: Section 54 and Section 55 so that they can use excessive force to clamp down on the civil liberties and the political space in the Republic of South Sudan,” Oyet said.
Media Authority [media regulatory body] also restricts media activities in the country. According to a founder of a media support organization whose name could not be mentioned in this report due to fear of reprisal, disclosed to Golden Times that the National Security desk in the Media Authority, demands media houses obtain security clearance before conducting any media workshop.
“We are not free to conduct even a workshop whether in Juba or the states without seeking approval from the security office at the Media Authority. The security has to approve the topics of the workshop first before it is conducted. Unfortunately, this is the situation imposed on us,” the founder of an independent media support organization said.
Media houses are required to seek security clearance to celebrate all the international days of action such as World Radio Day, World Press Freedom Day, International Day to End Impunity for Crimes against Journalists, and Access to Information Day.
Security often vets through the list of participants, topics of discussion, national advocacy themes, and panelists and invited dignitaries before the clearance letter is issued.
Besides the government’s media suppression, the declining economic situation in South Sudan affects the performance of some private and community media houses as they could not raise enough revenues to pay the journalists and other media staff.
A journalist who previously worked for Eye Radio, Emmanuel Taban Noah wrote an open letter to the media houses requesting that the salaries of the journalists be increased to meet the hyperinflation despairs in the country.
“As a former journalist, I have witnessed first-hand the dedication, hard work, and sacrifices journalists make to deliver accurate and timely news to the public. However, it is disheartening that many media organizations prioritize allocating large sums of money toward supporting staff rather than adequately compensating their journalists,” Noah said.
“Investing in journalists by paying them fair wages is a matter of ethical responsibility and a strategic decision that can yield long-term benefits for media organizations. Fair compensation can attract top talent, enhance retention rates, foster creativity and innovation, and ultimately lead to higher-quality journalism that resonates with audiences,” he added.
Mr. Noah further urged the media houses and managers to re-evaluate their compensation structures and prioritize fair pay for journalists. “By valuing the contributions of journalists and compensating them accordingly, media organizations can uphold journalistic integrity, promote diversity in storytelling, and ensure the sustainability of quality journalism in an ever-evolving media landscape,” he argued.
The few operating independent media houses struggle to address operational costs, paying taxes, and annual frequency and operational license renewal costs.
