The Decision by Aweil community to sue Justice Michael Makuei is wrong?

The decision by Aweil community to sue Justice Michael Makuei over the case of their clan man Arthur Akuien is an utter tribalistic and unwise decision. Nowhere, in the world that a group or individual can take a case against anybody apart from the lawyers of the accused fellows. This shows that our communities are not adequately educated on the system of governance and laws. Aweil community actions against the minister of constitution Michael Makuei confirm the notion of “Gogrial Kitchen cabinet" which has been so far taken for granted.

The appointment of Arthur Akuien as a South Sudan minister for finance can not be misconstrued for Aweil community representative in the government. Rather he represents the entire South Sudan as a citizen and professional person in the field of finance. Aweil has no right to defend him whatsoever when he committed crime in his position of competency. He himself is the one who is supposed to hire his lawyers to follow up his case until he is convicted or acquitted. The title brought forward as "Aweil community against Michael Makuei" is a shameless miscarriage of justice and juridical procedures in the system of rule and law.

My own understanding of Aweil community's intention against the case is to quell the Bor community anger over the recent demotion of Michael Makuei. I learnt that he is demoted under circumstances where no one can understand. It is always a game in politics that a pretext is invented to draw attention away from any mistake made against the victim. Such tactics involve the current baseless and lawless accusation against Michael Makuei by Aweil community.

Another thing which motivate them to take that unnecessary move is the fact that the government is misconnected to be for Bar el gazal and hence anyone feel that he can do any crime and easily get away with it. That is a dangerous game which will bring chaoes and eventual lost of power prematurely.

Concerning the mere sacking or demotion of individual Goss leaders who embezzled public funds this as well encourage looting and cover up of the criminals. Because any leader can loot huge sum of public money and prefer being sacked to enjoy his lootings and may be find another job elsewhere. Thus Arthur Akuien's case must be deal with full law enforcement to serve as an example to others who may be tempted to follow the vicious footstep.

Lastly our government should put more effort on fighting tribalism and its' corruption related defend and looting if our country is to thrive in democracy and economics. In addition we have to treat this issue of Aweil community as an act of some individual group within the community who are carrying out naked tribal policies.

Thanks,
Madit.

Micheal Madit Magot