Juba, South Sudan The sudden dismissal of Chief Justice Chan Reec Madut in late May 2025, after more than thirteen years as the head of South Sudan’s judiciary, has sparked debate about the rule of law and the independence of the courts. President Salva Kiir’s decision to remove Madut without following constitutionally mandated procedures has been criticized by legal experts as a direct violation of the nation’s 2011 transitional constitution.
While many citizens and legal practitioners agree that Madut’s tenure was plagued by inefficiency and allegations of corruption, the method of his removal has raised concerns that judges in South Sudan now serve at the pleasure of the president, undermining the separation of powers enshrined in the constitution.
Judiciary Under the Transitional Constitution
South Sudan’s transitional constitution, established in 2011 after the country gained independence, defines the judiciary as one of the three coequal branches of government alongside the executive and legislature. The judiciary’s role is to uphold the rule of law, ensure justice, and act as a check on other branches of government.
To safeguard judicial independence, the constitution requires that judges be appointed or removed by the president only on the recommendation of the Judicial Service Commission. Removal is permissible solely on specific grounds, such as gross misconduct, incompetence, or mental incapacity, and judges are entitled to serve until the age of seventy unless these conditions are met.
The chief justice serves as the head of the judiciary, overseeing court administration, supervising lower courts, and issuing directives to ensure the smooth functioning of the justice system.
Persistent Threats to Judicial Independence
Despite constitutional protections, South Sudan’s judiciary has long struggled with political interference. Reports from rights organizations have documented cases in which members of the executive or military have pressured judges to rule in their favor sometimes with threats of force.
President Kiir’s past actions have heightened these concerns. On several occasions, he has dismissed judges without adhering to required procedures, effectively weakening the judiciary’s ability to hold the government accountable. The removal of Madut is seen by many as the most striking example yet of this trend, eroding the role of the Judicial Service Commission and signaling that judicial tenure depends on presidential discretion.
The Controversial Legacy of Chan Reec Madut
Madut, who served as chief justice since August 2011, began his legal career in Sudan before independence and played a role in the Southern Sudan Referendum Commission. His leadership, however, was marred by corruption scandals and political favoritism. In 2013, he appointed 78 legal assistants including his daughter outside formal recruitment processes.
His involvement in political matters also drew criticism. In 2015, he openly supported President Kiir’s controversial decision to increase the number of states from 10 to 28, a move widely viewed as unconstitutional at the time. The issue eventually came before the Supreme Court, where Madut refused to recuse himself despite clear conflicts of interest. The court ultimately upheld the president’s decision, further fueling perceptions of judicial bias.
Although Kiir did not specify the reasons for Madut’s dismissal, observers believe his removal was the culmination of years of mismanagement, corruption allegations, and political entanglements.
The Arrival of Benjamin Baak Deng
On May 28, 2025, President Kiir appointed Benjamin Baak Deng as the new chief justice. Deng, previously a Supreme Court judge, holds a PhD in international environmental law and has decades of judicial experience in both Sudan and South Sudan. He served on the Judicial Reform Committee established under the 2018 Revitalised Peace Agreement, which was tasked with reviewing the judiciary’s performance and recommending reforms.
Known for his integrity and competence, Deng is widely regarded as a reform-minded figure. However, his ability to implement meaningful change will depend not only on his leadership skills but also on the president’s willingness to respect judicial independence.
Four Urgent Priorities
Legal analysts and civil society groups point to four key challenges Deng must address:
- Clearing the Case Backlog: Years of inefficiency have left courts overwhelmed. Reducing delays and improving case management will be critical to restoring public confidence.
- Improving Judicial Working Conditions: Many judges lack adequate offices, security, and equipment. Providing modern facilities and safe work environments is essential.
- Protecting Judicial Independence: Deng must resist political pressure and ensure that courts remain free from interference by the executive and military.
- Promoting Gender Representation: Out of 117 judges nationwide, only 21 are women just 18%, far below the 35% minimum mandated by the constitution and peace agreement. Recruiting and training qualified women will help address systemic gender imbalances rooted in traditional and cultural barriers.
Will the President Respect His Promise?
During Deng’s swearing-in ceremony, President Kiir publicly pledged to respect the independence of the judiciary. While this statement was welcomed, many remain skeptical given the president’s past disregard for constitutional limits. For Deng’s reforms to succeed, the executive branch must provide not only political space but also the financial resources needed to modernize and strengthen the judiciary.
The Stakes for South Sudan
The judiciary’s credibility is central to the stability of any democratic society. In South Sudan, where political tensions remain high and the rule of law is fragile, an independent and effective judiciary could play a decisive role in preventing abuses of power, protecting human rights, and fostering public trust in government institutions.
If Deng is allowed to carry out his mandate without interference, his tenure could mark the beginning of a new chapter for South Sudan’s courts one in which justice is delivered impartially and efficiently, and where the constitution, not political will, governs the land.
Conclusion
Benjamin Baak Deng steps into office at a pivotal moment for South Sudan’s judiciary. His reputation for integrity and reform offers hope, but his success will hinge on whether the president and political elites are willing to let the courts operate independently. The coming months will reveal whether this appointment is a genuine step toward judicial reform or another chapter in the ongoing erosion of constitutional governance. For the people of South Sudan, the stakes could not be higher the future of justice in their country may well depend on it.
for more news visit our website africaciviclens.com
