Summary

Non-signatory South Sudan has expressed interest in the Convention on Cluster Munitions since 2011, but has not completed the internal steps necessary to accede. South Sudan last participated in a meeting of the convention in May 2022. It voted in favor of the key annual United Nations (UN) resolution promoting the convention in December 2021.

South Sudan has provided annual voluntary Article 7 transparency reports for the convention since 2020, which state that it has not used, produced, or stockpiled cluster munitions.

Policy

The Republic of South Sudan has expressed interest in joining the convention since it became an independent state on 9 July 2011, but has yet to complete the internal process required to accede.

In 2017, the executive Council of Ministers unanimously approved a proposal that South Sudan accede to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.[1] In 2020 and 2021, South Sudan reported that a legislative proposal to approve its accession was still before the National Assembly.[2]

South Sudan has participated as an observer at formal meetings of the convention since 2011, most recently attending the Second Review Conference in September 2021.[3] South Sudan also attended the convention’s intersessional meetings held in May 2022.

South Sudan voted in favor of a key United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution in December 2021 that urged states outside the Convention on Cluster Munitions to “join as soon as possible.”[4]

South Sudan joined the Mine Ban Treaty on 11 November 2011, through the rarely used process of “succession.”[5] South Sudan is not party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).

Production, transfer, and stockpiling

South Sudan provided voluntary transparency reports for the convention in 2020 and 2021, which state that “South Sudan does not have any cluster munitions and explosive sub munitions stockpiled under [its] jurisdiction and control.”[6] Previously, in 2014, South Sudan stated that it “does not produce nor possess any cluster munitions” and declared, “we do not intend to acquire or use cluster bombs.”[7] South Sudan stated in 2011 that it does not stockpile cluster munitions.[8]

The Monitor has seen no evidence to indicate past use, production, export, or stockpiling of cluster munitions by the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) prior to South Sudan becoming an independent state.

Use

There have been no reports or allegations of South Sudanese government forces using cluster munitions.

Previous use

Uganda denied using cluster bombs near Bor, the capital of South Sudan’s Jonglei state, in early 2014, when it was providing air support to the government of South Sudan during an operation against opposition forces.[9] Remnants of Soviet-era RBK 250-275 AO-1SCh cluster bombs, including intact unexploded submunitions, were found near a major road, 16km south of Bor.[10]

South Sudan denied using cluster munitions during the conflict, and also denied any Ugandan use of the weapons.[11] South Sudan has also described the use as an “unfortunate incident” and pledged not to use cluster munitions.[12]

No other use has been documented in South Sudan, although its voluntary Article 7 transparency report submitted in April 2020 alleged that the government of Sudan used cluster munitions in 2012.[13]

The Article 7 report also listed areas contaminated by cluster munition remnants and identified unexploded submunitions that had been cleared, including air-dropped (Chilean-made PM-1 and PM-2, Soviet-made AO-1SCh, and United States (US)-made Mk-118 Rockeye) and ground-launched (M42, M85, M20G, and Type-81) dual-purpose improved conventional munitions (DPICM).[14] Prior to independence in 2011, cluster munition remnants, including unexploded submunitions, were documented in what is now South Sudan.[15]

Policy

Less than six months after becoming an independent state on 9 July 2011, the Republic of South Sudan joined the Mine Ban Treaty on 11 November 2011 through the rarely used process of “succession.” According to the UN Office of Legal Affairs, the Mine Ban Treaty took effect for South Sudan on 9 July 2011, the date of state independence and succession.[1]

In December 2012, South Sudan reported that it was aware of its obligations under Article 9 of the Mine Ban Treaty to “take all appropriate legal, administrative and other measures, including the imposition of penal sanctions, to prevent and suppress” any prohibited activity.[2] Since 2012, it has reported in its transparency reports that it has not taken any additional measures.

South Sudan has participated in every Mine Ban Treaty Meeting of States Parties, including the Seventeenth Meeting of States Parties in Geneva in November 2018, where it provided information on a new domestic initiative, “A National Strategy for Mine Action” for the period 2018–2021 that highlights South Sudan’s commitment to three areas of work:

1) Advocacy and communication of South Sudan’s mine problem though adoption and implementation of international instruments.

2) Clarifying and confirming the size of mine contamination and addressing the problem through appropriate land release methods.

3) Promoting safe behavior to reduce mine accidents.[3]

It also attended the intersessional meetings in Geneva in May 2019.

South Sudan is not party to the Convention on Conventional Weapons, nor is it party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Use

In August 2014, the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) accused the South Sudanese government of emplacing landmines along routes used by civilians fleeing to Sudan in the Greater Upper Nile Region.[4] The SPLM also accused government forces of placing landmines near villages in Jonglei, Unity, and Upper Nile states. In response, spokesperson for the South Sudanese armed forces, Joseph Marier, stated that the South Sudanese army had destroyed all stocks of landmines they had previously possessed.[5]

In March 2015, a report released by the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD) claimed that an officer in the South Sudanese army confirmed the use of antipersonnel landmines around Nassir during a meeting the same month. The report called on the Special Envoys from South Sudan to IGAD to “take urgent and robust action” to address these allegations, and that the government swiftly remove the landmines in Nassir and take appropriate action against the implicated officers. The ICBL condemned the alleged use in a letter to Salva Kiir Mayardit, President of South Sudan, and called on the government to confirm or deny the allegations.[6] A spokesperson for the South Sudanese army denied claims of use, stating, “we are using barbed wire to make fences, not landmines.”[7]

In March 2015, Riek Machar, former South Sudanese Vice President and leader of opposition forces, sent a letter to the UN requesting a field survey of the Upper Nile State due to the claims of use by government forces of landmines, cluster munitions, and booby traps throughout the region.[8] In the same month, Sudan People’s Liberation Army in Opposition (SPLA-IO) spokesperson Col. Lony T. Ngunden, claimed that the South Sudanese government imported landmines from Uganda and placed them near several towns in northern South Sudan.[9]

Non-state armed groups

In April 2015, the government’s South Sudanese Demining Commission accused the SPLM of landmine use. Simon Jundi Both, acting Executive Director for the Sudan People's Liberation Movement in Opposition (SPLM-IO) Mine Action Program called these allegations unsubstantiated.[10]

In June 2015, Aweil West County Commissioner Garang Kuac Ariath, testified to the Northern Bahr al Ghazal State’s Legislative Assembly on security concerns in his county. In his testimony, he accused rebel forces of deploying landmines in the Achana and Nyinbouli areas.[11]

Production and transfer

South Sudan has declared that “There are not and never have been anti-personnel mine production facilities in South Sudan.”[12] It has also reported that it “does not have capability or an amenity for the production of the anti-personnel mine and has no intension [sic] whatsoever to produce them in the future.”[13]

There is no information available on past transfers.

Stockpiling and destruction

In accordance with the provisions of Article 4 of the Mine Ban Treaty, the deadline for South Sudan to destroy any stockpiles of antipersonnel mines was 9 July 2015.

Before independence, the southern-based rebel movement the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army (SPLM/A) stockpiled and used antipersonnel mines.[14]

In December 2012, South Sudan reported that it had destroyed 10,566 stockpiled antipersonnel mines and also reported the discovery of previously unknown stocks of antipersonnel mines in former camps of the Sudan Armed Forces, stating that it had discovered four PMN antipersonnel mines that would be destroyed. It listed 30 different types of antipersonnel mines that have been destroyed in the course of mine clearance operations.[15]

In April 2013, South Sudan declared that the government destroyed 6,000 stockpiled antipersonnel mines in March 2008 and no longer had a stockpile.[16] The National Mine Action Authority (NMAA) issued a letter confirming that the previously reported statement made by the Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs at the Eleventh Meeting of the State Parties in 2012, regarding discovery of new stockpiles of antipersonnel mines, was made in error.[17]

In April 2014, South Sudan again reported that 6,000 antipersonnel mines have been destroyed from stocks and said “South Sudan does not have any stockpiles of antipersonnel mine, all identified or discovered Antipersonnel Mine stockpiles have been destroyed by the competent authority in March 2008.”[18]

South Sudan is not retaining any antipersonnel mines for training.[19] This has been confirmed in its Article 7 reports. South Sudan has also stated that “it has no intention to retain some anti-personnel landmines for the purpose of training and research development.”[20]

Notes: CHA = confirmed hazardous area; SHA = suspected hazardousarea; EOD = explosive ordnance disposal; ERW = explosive remnants of war; BAC = battle area clearance.

Contamination

At the end of 2017, the Republic of South Sudan had a total of 143 areas suspected and confirmed to contain cluster munition remnants, with a total size estimated at just over 4.5km².[3] This is a small reduction on the total of 142 areas that remained at the end of 2016 over nearly 4.6km².[4] Areas of cluster munition contamination resulting from decades of pre-independence conflict continued to be identified in 2017, and the threat was compounded by ongoing fighting which broke out in December 2013.[5] In March 2018, UNMAS stated that the actual size of cluster munition contamination is likely to be greater than recorded estimates, as in many of the strike areas multiple cluster munition canisters are found with the consequence that the overall contaminated area extends well beyond an expected standard footprint.[6]

Despite the signature of the Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in the Republic of South Sudan in August 2015, UNMAS reported that sporadic fighting continued across the country in 2017, which it said,“continues to litter vast swathes of land, roads and buildings with explosive hazards.”[7] Ongoing insecurity, particularly in the Greater Upper Nile region (Jonglei, Unity, and Upper Nile states), persisted in preventing access to confirm or address cluster munition contamination.[8]

Seven of South Sudan’s former 10states have areas suspected to contain cluster munition remnants (see table below), with Central, Eastern, and Western Equatoria remaining the most heavily contaminated.[9] Clearance of the last known remaining cluster munition-contaminated area in Lakes state (with a size of 525m²) was completed in 2017.[10]

From 1995 to 2000, prior to South Sudan’s independence, Sudanese government forces are believed to have used air-dropped cluster munitions sporadically in southern Sudan. Many types of submunitions have been found, including Spanish-manufactured HESPIN 21, United States-manufactured M42 and Mk118 (Rockeyes), Chilean-made PM-1, and Soviet-manufactured PTAB-1.5 and AO-1SCh submunitions.[11]

In February 2014, evidence of new cluster munition contamination was discovered south of Bor, in Jonglei state.[12] Evidence indicated the cluster munitions had been used in previous weeks during the conflict between opposition forces supporting South Sudan’s former Vice President Riek Machar and the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA) government forces, which received air support from Uganda.In September 2014, South Sudan reported that a joint government-UNMAS team had investigated and established that cluster munitions had been used, but could not determine the user.[13]

Cluster munition contamination by Sudanese state (as ofend 2017)[14]

In 2017, 14 cluster munition-contaminated areas were newly identified, of which five were cleared during the year.[15]

Cluster munition remnants have been found in residential areas, farmland, pastures, rivers,and streams, on hillsides, in desert areas, in and around former military barracks, on roads, in minefields, and in ammunition storage areas.[16] Cluster munition contamination in South Sudan continues to pose a physical threat to local populations, curtails freedom of movement, and significantly impedes development.[17] In 2017, due to the ongoing violence, internally displaced populations remained particularly vulnerable to cluster munition remnants and other ERW as they moved across unfamiliar territory.

Mines Advisory Group (MAG), reported that in its areas of operations in Central Equatoria state, cluster munition contamination continued to have a humanitarian as well as socio-economic impact, but clearance in and around Tindalo, Terekeka, and Yei counties during the year allowed food aid to be delivered by agencies such as the World Food Programme and released land was used for growing crops and by cattle farmers.[18]

Other explosive remnants of war and landmines

South Sudan has a significant problem with mines and especially ERW, resulting from large-scale use of explosive weapons during armed conflicts in 1955–1972 and 1983–2005 (see the 2017 South Sudan Mine Action profile for details).

At the start of 2018, almost six million people in South Sudan were living with the threat of ERW, including more than 1.8 million South Sudanese internally displaced since the outbreak of fighting in 2013. According to UNMAS, surveys of internally displaced persons identified a fear of ERW as among the most significant reasons for their inability to return home.[19] UNMAS has claimed that the socio-economic cost of mines and ERW in South Sudan in terms of interrupted agricultural production, food insecurity, halted commerce, and the lack of freedom of movement is “incalculable.”[20] In 2017, agricultural production in South Sudan dropped compared with the previous year, attributed in large part to the mass migration of populations and inability to access safe land to cultivate crops.[21]

Program Management

The National Mine Action Authority (NMAA) is responsible for coordination, planning, and monitoring of mine action in South Sudan.[22]

The UN Security Council Resolution 1996 of 2011 tasked UNMAS with supporting South Sudan in demining and strengthening the capacity of the NMAA. UNMAS (with the NMAA) has been overseeing mine action across the country through its main office in Juba, and sub-offices in Bentiu, Bor, Malakal, and Wau.[23] UNMAS is responsible for accrediting mine action organizations, drafting national mine action standards, establishing a quality management system, managing the national database, and tasking operators.[24] The NMAA takes the lead on victim assistance and risk education.[25]

While it is planned that eventually the NMAA will assume full responsibility for all mine action activities, according to UNMAS, the NMAA continued to face serious financial and technical limitations preventing it from managing mine action operations effectively in 2017. It requires substantial resources and capacity-building assistance if it is to operate effectively.[26]

UN Security Council Resolution 1996 authorized UNMISS to support mine action through assessed peacekeeping funds.[27] In May 2014, UN Security Council 
Resolution 2155, adopted in response to the conflict that brokeout in December 2013, effectively ended the mission’s mandate to support capacity development of government institutions. In 2018, UNMAS reported that reversing this change in the mission mandate to support the capacity-building of government institutions would greatly enhance UNMAS’ ability to support the NMAA.[28]

Strategic planning

In 2017, the NMAA, with support from the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD) and funding from Japan, developed the South Sudan National Mine Action Strategy 2018–2022. As ofMarch 2018, it had been finalized but not yet published.[29] According to UNMAS, the strategy, which does not contain significant provisions relating to cluster munition contamination, has three primary objectives and related targets:[30]

• Strategic Goal 1: Advocacy and communication of South Sudan’s mine/ERW problem continues through national and international awareness-raising and adoption and implementation of international conventions to facilitate a mine/ERW-free South Sudan.
• Strategic Goal 2: The size of the mine/ERW contamination area is clarified and confirmed and the problem is addressed through appropriate survey and clearance methods; ensuring safe land is handed back to affected communities for use.
• Strategic Goal 3: Safe behavior is promoted among women, girls, boys, and men to reduce mine/ERW accidents and promote safe livelihoods activities.

The strategy includes a section on gender and diversity, focusing on how different gender and age groups are affected by mines and ERW and have specific and varying needs and priorities. Guidelines on mainstreaming gender considerations in mine action planning and operations in South Sudan were also incorporated in the strategy.[31]

Standards

According to UNMAS, the National Technical Standards and Guidelines (NTSGs) for mine action in South Sudan are organic documents subject to constant review. In 2017, the medical and quality management chapters were revised.[32] The NTSGs, which contain provisions specific to cluster munition remnants survey and clearance, are monitored by UNMAS and the NMAA.[33]

Quality management

Due to constraints on the movement of UN staff due to increasing security concerns, at the end of 2016 UNMAS contracted a private company, Janus Global Operations, to conduct external quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC)on behalf of UNMAS in South Sudan.[34] In 2017, external QA continued to be conducted by Janus as a subcontractor to UNMAS, though QA/QC procedures were updated towards the end of the year.[35]

Operators

Three international demining NGOs operated in South Sudan in 2017: DanChurchAid (DCA), Danish Demining Group (DDG), and MAG. Three commercial companies also conducted demining: G4S Ordnance Management (G4S), Mechem, and The Development Initiative (TDI). No national demining organizations were involved in clearance in 2017.[36]

According to UNMAS, almost 1,000 people were working in mine action operations in South Sudan in 2017. Mine action capacity deployed included two road assessment and clearance teams with four mine detection dogs (MDDs) each; five mechanical clearance teams with integrated manual deminer support (deploying two MineWolf 240, one MineWolf 330; one Bozena, and one PT300 demining machine); 16 eight-person multi-task teams (MTTs); eight nine-person quick reaction teams; four 15-person mine action teams; and 12 EOD/survey teams. According to UNMAS, all teams are equipped to conduct cluster munition clearance, but teams are primarily tasked on a geographical basis, and as such, their deployment to clear cluster munition strikes is determined by local prioritization.[37]

UNMAS reported that conflict and ongoing insecurity in 2017 undermined the ability of all operators to conduct sustained clearance operations in many parts of the country. This restricted the deployment of mine clearance teams leading to a reconfiguration of resources to field more mobile and smaller teams. Focus shifted to the prioritization of reactive EOD spot tasks over area clearance and re-survey of previously suspected areas thought to have overstated estimates of contamination.[38]

UNMAS assigns cluster munition tasks to operators. In 2017, only three operators, MAG, G4S, and TDI, carried out cluster munition-related tasks, in contrast to 2016, when cluster munition survey and clearance activities were undertaken by eight operators (DCA, DDG, MAG, Norwegian People’s Aid (NPA), G4S, Mechem, Dynasafe MineTech International (DML), and TDI).

Land Release

Less than 1.1km² of cluster munition-contaminated area was released in 2017, a huge decrease from the nearly 3.5km² of cluster munition-contaminated area released in 2016.[39] This was due in large part to the shift in overall mine action activities from area clearance tasks to reactive EOD spot tasks due to security constraints.[40] In contrast, in 2016, the bulk of mine action capacity was redeployed to address cluster munition tasks in response to humanitarian priorities and UN-mission directed activities.[41]

Survey in 2017

The UNMAS database indicates that one cluster munition-contaminated SHA of just under 61,000m² was cancelled by survey in 2017, while 14 SHAs with a total size of 0.7km² were confirmed as contaminated with cluster munition remnants (see table below).[42] This compares to 2016, when 55 SHAs of nearly 0.92km² of land were confirmed as contaminated with cluster munition remnants.[43]

Cluster munition survey in 2017[44]

Clearance in 2017

Just over 1km² of cluster munition-contaminated area was cleared in 2017, with the destruction of 629 submunitions, as shown in the table below.[45] As noted above, this is a significant decrease from 2016, when close to 3.5km² of cluster munition-contaminated area was cleared, with the destruction of more than 3,000 submunitions.[46]

Clearance of cluster munition-contaminated areas in 2017[47]

Note: AP mine = antipersonnel mine; AV mine = antivehicle mine.

In addition, in 2017, five operators (DCA, DDG, MAG, G4S, and TDI) conducted battle area clearance (BAC) of just over 8.2km² and closed 1,295 spot tasks, and destroyed a total of 34,600 items of UXO.[48] This is an increase compared to an output of almost 8km² of BAC and 1,947 EOD spot tasks carried out in 2016, and the destruction of close to 20,200 items of UXO.[49]

Deminer safety

Mine action operators continued to face serious threats to the security of their operations and personnel due to the ongoing conflict. In 2017, there was an ambush on a demining contractor in which four personnel were seriously injured. In June 2018, UNMAS reported that an investigation into the incident found it to have been ethnically motivated. There were also several instances of criminality in which teams were robbed by armed groups during the year.[50]

Progress towards completion of cluster munition clearance

Due to the ongoing conflict, it is not possible to predict when South Sudan might complete clearance of cluster munition remnants on its territory, nor estimate the true extent of contamination.[51] According to UNMAS, in 2018 the national mine action program would prioritize re-survey of large SHAs thatremained in the database, recorded as far back as 2003, for which there was little evidence to support the recording, in order to better define the extent of contamination. It expected that significant cancellation of previously recorded SHAs would occur as a result, with the effectiveness of the re-survey process dependent on access restrictions posed by ongoing fighting.[52]

The Monitor acknowledges the contributions of the Mine Action Review (www.mineactionreview.org), which has conducted the primary mine action research in 2018 and shared all its country-level landmine reports (from “Clearing the Mines 2018”) and country-level cluster munition reports (from “Clearing Cluster Munition Remnants 2018”) with the Monitor. The Monitor is responsible for the findings presented online and in its print publications.

In 2019, seven donors contributed US$8.8 million for mine action activities in the Republic of South Sudan.[1]

The largest contributions came from Germany and the United States (US), which provided around $2 million each. Both contributions represented almost half of all support in 2019.

South Sudan also received in-kind assistance from Switzerland valued at CHF430,000 ($432,726) for clearance activities.[2]

International contributions: 2019[3]

Note: N/A=not applicable.

In 2015–2019, international assistance toward mine action activities in South Sudan totaled some $43 million. Since 2015, annual contributions fluctuated from $6 million to more than $11 million.

Summary of contributions: 2015–2019[4]

Casualties in 2017—details

The UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) reported that there is no formal data collection system in place in the Republic of South Sudan and such a system is unlikely to be developed due to the considerable humanitarian problems faced in the country. The mine/ERW casualty figures, particularly those in more recent years, are substantially unreliable and most likely significantly underestimate the problem.[2]

Since 1964, a total of 4,977landmine mine and unexploded remnants of war (ERW) casualties have been recorded: 1,368 killed and 3,609 injured were reported in South Sudan.[3]

Cluster munition casualties

At least 91 cluster munition casualties have been reported in South Sudan. No unexploded cluster submunition casualties were reported in 2017. In 2016, three unexploded cluster submunition casualties were reported by UNMAS. As of December 2016, 75 casualties caused by unexploded submunitions (23 killed and 52 injured), were reported, the majority occurring in 2009 or before.[4] A further 16 casualties that occurred during cluster munition strikes in South Sudan have been reported.[5]

Summary action points based on findings

• Expand programs in line with significant unmet needs.
• Improve economic inclusion opportunities for mine/explosive remnants of war (ERW) survivors and other persons with disabilities, which have remained low since 2012.
• Adopt and implement the proposed national disability policy.

Victim assistance commitments

The Republic of South Sudan is responsible for a significant number of landmine survivors, cluster munition victims, and survivors of other ERW who are in need. South Sudan has made commitments to provide victim assistance through the Mine Ban Treaty.

Victim Assistance

As of the end of 2016, 3,557 mine/ERW survivors had been identified in South Sudan.[1] In 2011, the Ministry of Gender, Child and Social Welfare (MGCSW) estimated that there were a total of some 50,000 mine/ERW victims, including survivors, their families, and the immediate family members of people killed.[2]

Victim assistance since 2015

As a result of decades of conflict, mine/ERW survivors in South Sudan have lacked basic services of all kinds. The limited services available have been almost entirely provided by international organizations. Emergency medical care has been inadequate to address the needs of mine/ERW survivors and others wounded as a result of the armed conflict, a situation worsened by the high number of casualties caused by the outbreak of violence at the end of 2013. Continuing medical care reaches just a fraction of the population. Despite the very challenging security situation, there have been some improvements in the availability of physical rehabilitation for mine/ERW survivors.

Economic inclusion initiatives for mine/ERW survivors implemented by national organizations, including survivor associations and disabled people’s organizations (DPOs) fell away in mid-2012 when international funding through the UN Mine Action Service (UNMAS) ended. Psychological support for mine/ERW survivors is entirely absent in South Sudan. This significantly reduced, among other things, economic inclusion opportunities for mine/ERW survivors. The South Sudan Landmine Victims Association (SSLMVA) reported a decline in availability of services across all pillars of victim assistance.

The South Sudan National Mine Action Strategic Plan 2012–2016 included victim assistance . The Victim Assistance Coordination Group changed its name to the Victim Assistance and Disability Working Group, expressing closer ties with disability rights frameworks, while steps were taken to integrate victim assistance and disability into the work of all relevant government ministries.

In December 2013, a violent conflict began, and continued through 2016, causing a protracted crisis and disrupting victim assistance efforts. Nearly 2 million people have been displaced by the current conflict, and previous conflicts; many reside in UN “protection-of-civilians” sites. Another million people fled to neighboring countries. Basic commodities are unavailable and security concerns have limited the ability of humanitarian organizations to provide goods and services.[3] Rural areas with poor roads and little infrastructure as well as NGOs restricted in compounds and other accessibility restrictions, such as some sites only accessible by World Food Programme (WFP) planes, further impeded service delivery.[4]

South Sudan is characterized by a continuum between emergency and development with regular chronic crises, periods of stability, and periods of massive emergency.

Victim assistance in 2016

In 2016, the ongoing conflict caused widespread displacement and hindered the provision of services to survivors. The government of South Sudan reports a lack of funding for victim assistance programming and services for persons with disabilities. In addition, UNMAS did not have victim assistance included in its mandate for South Sudan.[5] However, incremental increases have been seen in several areas that need to be built upon.

Assessing victim assistance needs

No assessments of the needs of survivors were carried out by the government of South Sudan or other actors in 2016. Before the current outbreak of violence, several needs assessment projects were conducted.

Victim assistance coordination[6]

The Coordination Forum for Victim Assistance, co-chaired by the MGCSW and the National Mine Action Authority, had a monthly meeting scheduled for 2016, but only seven meetings were formally held due to time constraints for the participants. The meetings provided an opportunity to share information among stakeholders and identify tasks in the case that funding became available.[7] Other meetings were held by stakeholders for the planning of specific events, such as the 3 December celebration of the International Day of Persons with Disability.[8]

In 2016, no progress was made toward the first victim assistance objectives of the Mine Action Strategic Plan 2012–2016.[9] The three victim assistance objectives were:

• Establish an information system for persons with disabilities to provide reliable, systematic, and comprehensive information on persons with disabilities, including landmine and ERW victims;
• Accede to the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD) by the end of 2013[10] and adopt the necessary national laws to protect the rights of landmine/ERW survivors and persons with disabilities; and
• Ensure equal access to rehabilitation, psychosocial (including peer support), and socio-economic inclusion services for all landmine and ERW victims, as well as women, girls, boys, and men with disabilities.[11]

South Sudan did not make victim assistance-related statements at the Mine Ban Treaty Fifteenth Meeting of States Parties in Santiago, Chile, or at the June 2017 intersessional meetings. South Sudan’s Article 7 report included some information on victim assistance in Form J, but did not report on activities related to the Maputo Action Plan as expected.[12]

Inclusion and participation in victim assistance

Representatives of DPOs were included in the meetings of the Coordination Forum on Victim Assistance. Landmine survivors and persons with disabilities also participate in the National Commission for Widows, War-Wounded and Orphans, and are members of local development committees and DPOs. There is no federation of DPOs or national disability council.[13] A person with a disability was appointed to the National Constitutional Review Commission, but the individual has not seen any proposed interventions accepted by the commission.[14]

Service accessibility and effectiveness

Victim assistance activities[15]

Emergency and continuing medical care

The International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) continued to be a key provider of emergency medical care and surgical services in South Sudan. The ICRC supports several clinics that provide primary health services; the ICRC runs three hospital-based surgical teams and two “roving” surgical teams.[16] The ICRC also provided supplies and logistical support to hospitals and health centers. It also specifically tracks and reports on weapon-wounded patients, including landmine and ERW casualties who are treated at ICRC-supported facilities.[17]

Physical rehabilitation including prosthetics

The ICRC provided free services to persons with disabilities at three rehabilitation centers, which in 2016, collectively served more persons with disabilities than in 2015. The ICRC also established an orthopedic referral center at a health clinic it supports in Waat. At the Juba and Rumbek centers, infrastructure improvements mean they are now physically accessible. The Juba clinic hired more staff to increase production. In Wau, the ICRC rehabilitation center added a center for orthopedic production.[18]

HI improved access to basic rehabilitation services and provided training to health, rehabilitation, and social professionals. HI also established a rehabilitation room at Bor Hospital and distributed mobility devices at the hospital, as well as in remote communities. Beneficiaries also receive livelihood support. HI trained health workers in Yei town on physical rehabilitation and continued to support rehabilitation activities at Yei hospital and two health clinics. HI also provided support for some persons to receive rehabilitation services in Juba from the ICRC-supported facilities.[19]

Light for the World continued to run its CBR program in South Sudan benefiting thousands of people.[20]

Economic inclusion

HI, with support from UNMAS, provided training to hundreds of mine/ERW survivors and persons with disabilities on small business management. Trainees also received micro-grants to launch their enterprises.[21] While working jointly with local organizations, HI used the personalized social support approach to individually case-manage assistance to each beneficiary. HI increased skills training and small grants’ distribution for persons with disabilities and mine/ERW survivors to strengthen the livelihoods component of the project in response to needs identified during the implementation stage.[22]

The MGCSW reported increases in vocational training programs for survivors and persons with disabilities as well as work placement activities and small grants for income generation.[23]

Psychological support and social inclusion

The MGCSW supports the deployment of psychosocial counselors via a CBR program.[24]

In Juba, HI worked on the structure of the national level mental health policy and to the capacities of professionals through training courses and guidance. This project included assistance through the provision of technical resources to the psychiatric unit of Juba Teaching Hospital, under the supervision of the Ministry of Health and detention authorities of Juba prison.[25] HI also hosted awareness-raising sessions to combat stigma and encourage the inclusion of persons with disabilities. HI also support the construction of ramps and adapted toilets in to make five service providers in Yei town physically accessible.[26]

The ICRC supported a wheelchair basketball team that promoted the rights of persons with disabilities. In partnership with the South Sudan Wheelchair Basketball Association, the ICRC hosts weekly basketball games and the ICRC sponsored a coaching session from a US-based wheelchair basketball coach, who had previously supported wheelchair basketball programs in Afghanistan.[27]

Light for the World started an inclusive football team for women and girls with and without disabilities at the Mahad POC camp as part of its CBR program.[28]

Laws and policies

As of 1 September 2017, South Sudan had not signed the CRPD. In 2016, South Sudan launched the National Disability and Inclusion Policy,[29] which had been in development since 2011.[30] The policy has yet to be funded and in August 2017, the MGCSW was drafting the national plan through which it will implement the policy.[31]