105 - Sudan - Approaches to Armed Groups Kuol ... - The ICHRP

76. The SPLA considers all organisations operating in its areas as humanitarian and not human rights
organisations. Though there is no clear policy to keep out human rights organisations none of them
has actual presence in SPLA areas. A number of individuals representing various human rights
organisations have been permitted, sometimes repeatedly, to SPLA areas for short visits. Generally,
occasional NGOs’ public reaction to human rights committed by government agents in their areas of
operation are commended by the movement. But their going public about specific acts of SPLA
members is likely to be misconstrued or even put the continuation of their humanitarian activities at
risk. Most of the NGOs therefore ignore human rights violations which do not relate to the Ground
Rules, discuss them privately at times, with appropriate authorities or leak them secretly to prominent
human rights organisations.
77. In 1997 a French NGO by the name of Acion Contre La Faim ( ACF) was ordered by the SPLA to
terminate its activities and leave the SPLA areas. As ACF was a member of OLS consortium, the
latter demanded an explanation for the act through SRRA. It was clear at a later stage that the SPLA
suspected ACF of complicity with the government agents. The SPLA seemed to have used the
Ground Rules provision that reads: A NGOs and UN agencies must not act or divulge information
in a manner that will jeopardise the security of the area. The OLS unconvinced by the reason for
expelling ACF and unable to reverse the decision deliberately discouraged its members from
replacing ACF in the areas it had evacuated.
78. Such extreme actions have not hindered OLS from co-operating with SPLA institutions to achieve
the mission it has identified in southern Sudan. Sometimes, OLS has found different avenues for
presenting its views on the condition that SPLA institutions respond to their duties. When the
challenges faced all parties in southern Sudan during the 1998 famine in Bahr ElGhazal a joint
Committee was formed to make recommendations on how best each party could rise to their
responsibilities. The resulting SPLM/SRRA-OLS Joint Targeting and Vulnerabilities Task Force
included in its subsequent recommendations point out to SPLA that:
79. The SPLM/A must increase the amount of attention and resources given to issues of law and order
in areas where OLS and independent NGOs are operating.
80. SRRA must invest resources to build the capacity of their County secretaries Y 17 The
recommendations also included measures to be observed by humanitarian organisations to fulfil their
commitments under the Ground Rules agreement.
Neutrality In Context
81. The Ground rules Agreement has laid down, beside other basic principles, the fact that: “The guiding
principle of OLS and SRRA is that of humanitarian neutrality_ an independent status for
humanitarian work beyond political or military considerations.” The agreement emphasised the need
for SPLA to observe this vital aspect by undertaking that: “The SPLM/A recognises and respects
the humanitarian and impartial nature of UN agencies and those NGOs which have signed a letter of
understanding with UNICEF/OLS and SRRA.” The assertion of the principle of neutrality has
definitely served its purpose without restraining the parties to the agreement from co-operating in
some programmes that benefit sections of civilian populations. In collaboration with OLS, for
instance, the SPLA department of Education embarked on a programme which had the objective of
“elimination of use of the child soldier and reintegration of unaccompanied minors with their
families.” 18 This programme was supported by Child organisations of Radda Barnen, SCF-UK, and
17 SPLM/SRRA-OLS Joint Targeting and Vulnerabilities Task Force (27 August 1998) Final Report, p.4.
18 See Samson L. Kwaje (26 Nov. 1997) “SPLA Secretary for Education, Youth, Women and Child Welfare”, Press
16