NEWS
South Sudan on the edge of famine, while the tribunal promised in 2018 remains a dead letter
July 2026
The facts
The IPC report of April 28, 2026 certifies that 7.8 million people in South Sudan are in a state of severe food insecurity, with 73,000 people in Upper Nile and Jonglei states at imminent risk of death from starvation (Human Rights Watch, May 6, 2026). On March 6, the government army ordered the evacuation of Akobo county — an order HRW calls unlawful in its sweeping scope, forcing roughly 270,000 people to flee along with UN and humanitarian staff. The government has also blocked aid access in opposition-controlled areas (SPLA-IO) through coercive administrative measures. The opposition, for its part, has issued at least three similar evacuation orders in areas under its own control. Fighting between government forces and the SPLA-IO, which reignited from 2025, has involved bombardment of civilian infrastructure, including hospitals.
Legal commentary
Deliberately obstructing humanitarian access and using starvation as a method of warfare are prohibited under Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions (Arts. 14 and 18), applicable to non-international armed conflicts like this one. Institutionally, the 2018 Revitalized peace agreement (R-ARCSS) provided, in Chapter V, for the establishment of a Hybrid Court for South Sudan under the African Union, with jurisdiction over war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide committed since 2013. Eight years after signature, the court has never been established: neither Juba nor the African Union have completed the necessary legal steps. It is the textbook case of the 'rule on paper' this site documents elsewhere: the law exists, its application does not. No public response from the South Sudanese government to HRW's specific allegations has been found.
Implications — the symmetry test
The picture here does not pit an aggressor against a victim: HRW documents unlawful killings, sexual violence, and arbitrary evacuation orders on both sides, government and opposition. The condemnation holds up when the actors are swapped — exactly the criterion required before proceeding. The counterweight to the site's over-representation of Israel (Phase 4b) is documented here with the same standard.
Fonti: Human Rights Watch · Al Jazeera · UN News · CFR Global Conflict Tracker