SPLM refutes purported impeachment of Governor Monytuil

By Tereza Jeremiah Chuei

The Sudan People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM) party has refuted a Council of State’ Resolution, purporting a vote of no confidence against Unity State Governor, Dr. Joseph Monytuil citing that the Party needs further investigation before taking any decision.

Few days ago, the Council of States denied casting vote of no Confident against the Governor of Unity State, claiming that the governor was only summoned to answer questions pertaining the insecurities in Unity State.

This came after social the Media was surfaced with reports that the governor of Unity State Dr. Joseph Monytuil was impeached by the Council of States over the recent extrajudicial killing in Mayom County.

Whereas, the Council of States had earlier on disclosed a plan of tasking the head of Security Committee at the august house to visit Unity State and come back with tangible evidence and recommendation which will be passed by the House to the President for his input and action.

Speaking to the Media, the SPLM Secretary of Political Affairs, Kuol Atem Kuol said that the SPLM as a party hasn’t accepted nor rejected the resolution of the Council of States, citing that the Party needs further consultation before taking decision.

Atem added that President Salva Kiir Mayardit who is the Chairperson of the SPLM ruling party has formed an investigative Committee, which is expected to make a report that will determine the final decision over the governor who is a member of the SPLM.

“The stand of the party is what comes next ‘we are going for more consultation’, we have not rejected or excepted it (resolution of council of States), (so far) the President has formed an investigation committee, after that report we will come and meet and come with one decision,” he stated.

However, Atem echoed that the current government is a Political Parties government therefore; the issue should be resolved by the Party, though the resolution that the Council of States has reached is their mandate. 

“The way it was done by the Council of States was not the way, because the members of the SPLM should have withdrawn the motion that was raised there, and come to meet the party, so that the party should follow until it reaches the decision,” Atem argued.

Comments are closed.