MODI LAW Chambers

INCURSION OF UGANDAN TROOPS INTO SOUTH SUDAN’S TERRITORY (KAJO-KEJI COUNTY)
The recent statements made by the Commissioner of Kajo-Keji County, Jackson Wani Mule, regarding the continued incursions of the Ugandan People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) into South Sudanese territory raise serious legal and diplomatic concerns that require urgent attention.
Under international law, the principle of territorial integrity and sovereignty is sacrosanct. Article 2(4) of the Charter of the United Nations (1945) prohibits the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. Likewise, Article 3(b) and (c) of the Constitutive Act of the African Union enshrines the principle of respect for borders existing on achievement of independence (uti possidetis juris). Any unauthorized military presence by one state on the territory of another constitutes a violation of these principles and risks destabilizing bilateral relations.
South Sudan and Uganda, as members of both the United Nations and the African Union, are bound by these provisions. Precedents from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) notably the Case Concerning Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (Democratic Republic of the Congo v. Uganda, 2005) are instructive. In that judgment, the ICJ found Uganda internationally responsible for violations of sovereignty, territorial integrity, and human rights arising from its military presence in the Democratic Republic of Congo without consent. The Court held that even if security concerns are alleged, unilateral incursions cannot justify violations of another state’s sovereignty.
Similarly, the ICJ Judgment in the Burkina Faso/Mali Frontier Dispute (1986) reaffirmed that territorial disputes must be resolved peacefully through negotiations, arbitration, or judicial settlement, not through military occupation.
In the present case, while diplomatic channels between Juba and Kampala remain open, the reported deployment of Ugandan forces in forested areas of Kajo-Keji without coordination or consent undermines good faith negotiations and poses a threat of escalation. It also risks displacement of civilians, in contravention of Article 4(h) of the AU Constitutive Act, which prohibits forceful displacement of populations, and Article 9 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which protects the right to liberty and security of persons.
South Sudan has a duty to protect its citizens and preserve its territorial integrity. However, as a young nation committed to regional peace, it must pursue remedies within the framework of law. I recommend:
1. Activation of the Joint Military Committee already announced by Juba and Kampala, with immediate deployment of joint observers to disputed areas.
2. Formal protest through diplomatic note invoking the principle of peaceful settlement of disputes under Article 33 of the UN Charter.
3. Referral to IGAD and the African Union Border Programme (AUBP) for mediation and technical demarcation of contested boundaries.
4. Preservation of evidence of incursions, in the event that South Sudan must seek adjudication or advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice, following the precedent set in other African border disputes.
Uganda’s reported deployments in Kajo-Keji, are inconsistent with international law, African regional instruments, and the spirit of brotherhood between the two nations. South Sudan must assert its sovereignty through lawful, peaceful, and diplomatic means, while safeguarding the rights and security of its citizens in the affected areas.
By
Stephen Modi Lokiri,
Attorney at Law,
Modi Law Chambers,
Juba – South Sudan