In recent years, Juba and its outskirts have witnessed a troubling practice that continues to sow confusion and conflict.
Groups of people from other counties and states arrive in large numbers, nominate their own chiefs locally referred to as Sultan and begin selling land. They often claim to work in collaboration with host community leaders, even sharing a portion of the proceeds with them.
Yet, beneath this veneer of cooperation lies a deeper problem: the absence of consultation with lawful administrative authorities and the disregard for established land ownership rights.
This practice has already sparked disputes. When rightful landowners return to claim their legally registered plots, they are met with resistance, sometimes escalating into violent conflict. The question is not only about land; it is about governance, legitimacy, and the rule of law.
At the heart of the matter lies a series of unanswered questions. What is the legal procedure for becoming a chief or Sultan? Who has the authority to recognize such leaders? What guidelines exist to regulate their role in land administration?
And most importantly, why has the government remained largely silent while these practices undermine both community trust and state authority?
The troubling reality is that many of these self-appointed chiefs operate with documents that appear legitimate. Whether forged or obtained through loopholes, these papers give them an air of credibility that misleads unsuspecting buyers and emboldens their operations.
This raises serious concerns about corruption, weak oversight, and the exploitation of vulnerable communities.
The government’s inaction is particularly alarming. Land is not just property; it is identity, livelihood, and heritage. Allowing parallel systems of authority to flourish erodes confidence in formal institutions and risks fueling intercommunal tensions.
If unchecked, this trend could destabilize not only Juba but also surrounding counties, as disputes over land ownership intensify.
The way forward requires decisive measures. First, the Ministry of Housing, Lands and Public utilities and local administrative offices must assert their authority by clarifying the legal process of land acquisition and leadership recognition.
Second, community leaders must resist the temptation of short-term financial gain at the expense of long-term peace. Third, law enforcement must investigate the source of these “legitimate-looking” documents and hold accountable those who issue or use them fraudulently.
Land is too precious to be traded in confusion. The government must act now to restore order, protect rightful owners, and reaffirm the principle that authority cannot be self-declared; it must be lawfully recognized. Only then can Juba and its outskirts move toward stability, fairness, and peace.