individual sharing information with UNMISS teamCases
- Case status
- Location of case in SG report
- Relevant SG report
- Year of the report
- From Country
- Country Geolocation
- Country Geolocation (linked Cases)
- South Sudan
- From Region
- Type of record
- Unnamed individual/group/organization
- Was the victim a foreign national?
- Was the victim a minor?
- Individual's/organization's activity
one individual sharing information with UNMISS team in Juba
- Type of rights defended
- Unclear in SG Report
- Was the victim a civil servant, member of the security forces or of the judiciary?
- Reported trigger of reprisal
shared info with UNMISS
- Engagement with UN body
- UN Peace Operation / Political mission
- Type of attempted engagement
- Meeting with UN officials during country visit / with locally present UN officials
- Dates of mentioned reprisals
- 29 March 2022
- Location of mentioned reprisals
- Juba, South Sudan
- Reprisal information
- A fourth incident involved the physical assault and threats to one individual after sharing information with UNMISS team in Juba, on 29 March 2022. Following a brief meeting with UNMISS, the victim was reportedly followed by SSPDF Military Intelligence agents who stopped him, ordered him to surrender his phone, and held him in custody for a few hours. Allegedly, after searching his phone, the victim was severely beaten and his mobile phone and money confiscated. Following UNMISS advocacy, the victim was released.
- Types of reprisals suffered
- Detention/Imprisonment: Detention/Imprisonment - General
- Physical attack: Physical attack - General
- Property damage/raid/search/confiscation
- Alleged/likely perpetrators
- State actors
- Was the reprisal based on new legislation?
- Does the report make general comment about country’s environment for engagement with UN?
- Was the case raised by a State at the UN?
- Is the country cited for a "pattern of reprisal" in the context of this case?
- Is a pattern of reprisals mentioned otherwise in the context of this case?
- Does the report cite "self-censorship" as an issue in the context of this case?
3 relationships, 3 entities