Appeals & Response Plans
- South Sudan: Floods - Sep 2017
- East Africa: Armyworm Infestation - Mar 2017
- South Sudan: Cholera Outbreak - Jul 2016
- South Sudan: Food Insecurity - 2015-2018
- South Sudan: Cholera Outbreak - Jun 2015
- Sudan/South Sudan: Measles Outbreak - Mar 2015
- South Sudan: Kala-azar Outbreak - Sep 2014
- South Sudan: Floods - Aug 2014
- South Sudan: Cholera Outbreak - May 2014
- South Sudan: Measles Outbreak - Sep 2013
Most read (last 30 days)
- South Sudan Regional Refugee Response Plan, January - December 2018
- UN considering new base on western bank of Nile to give South Sudanese refugees confidence to return
- South Sudan declares the end of its longest cholera outbreak
- South Sudan: Warring Parties Break Promises on Child Soldiers
- Aid appeals seek over $3 billion as South Sudan set to become Africa’s largest refugee and humanitarian crisis
Is the National Dialogue in South Sudan turning out to be a nice surprise to those who wanted it but feared that it would not succeed, or a disappointment to those who opposed it or predicted its failure?
This policy paper frames the National Dialogue around a number of critical issues that provide a clear conceptual framework that is both comprehensive and simple enough to be easily understood by the public. The themes of the paper are outlined in a series of introductory questions.
Authors: Nhial Tiitmamer, Augustino Ting Mayai, Nyathon Hoth Mai
Dates : March 1, 2017
Land tenure systems have implications for food security, access to water, natural resources, pastures and settlement during droughts and flood disasters. Although the South Sudanese Land Act 2009 recognizes both formal and customary land tenure systems, little is known in practice about the extent to which these systems promote climate change resilience in the country. Drawing upon prior work and primary data, we found the following:
Author: Dr. Jok Madut Jok
Chairman Corker, Ranking members, and members of the Committee, thank you very much for inviting me here today. I also want to thank this Committee for its steadfast support and focus on keeping discussions going within the American government about the crises facing South Sudan. The views I express here are my own and not those of the Sudd Institute, where I am the Executive Director.
Author/s: Jok Madut Jok
Organization: The Sudd Institute
Type: Weekly Reviews
By Jok Madut Jok
Although South Sudan publicly commits to a culture of human rights protection, whether through the bill of rights in the national constitution or by creating a cabinet level human rights commission or the establishment of a parliamentary committee on human rights or other public pronouncements to this effect, human rights violations have remained a constant feature in the brief history of the country’s sovereignty.
Zacharia Diing Akol | 23 February 2016
Augustino Ting Mayai
Augustino Ting Mayai
Leben Nelson Moro
Summary The events of December 2013 have created a very divisive environment in South Sudan and so there is need for the country to start anew. The new beginning can only be realized when all the political forces in the country reach a common understanding on what binds the nation together.
This paper assesses the mediation process looking at both the Addis-based IGAD peace process and the intra-SPLM dialogue based in Arusha, Tanzania.
It makes the point that part of the reason the parties wasted a lot of time from signing a final agreement had to do with the preference of the parties for one process over the other.
The paper outlines the major weaknesses of the mediation process, which may have inadvertently delayed or complicated the peace process.
Much of the commentary in the media and the news reporting in South Sudan tends to be partisan either supporting the government or the opposition. It also tends to take a regional or ethnic line. Consequently, such stances have negatively affected the objectivity of the reporting and weakened the media’s role as a vital instrument for democracy, justice, and accountability.
Media coverage of the on-going violent conflict is, therefore, a double-edged sword, and its ability to incite more violence is indisputable.