By Bida Elly David
The government of South Sudan has rubbished the comprehensive sentry’s publication on the “under cover activities” inside the national security service’s profitable book and companies demanding its immediate withdrawal from circulation.
Addressing the media yesterday, Lily Adhieu Martin, the press secretary in the Office of the President echoed that government urged the sentry to issue a public apology to each and every individual, company or entity that has been falsely or misleadingly described in the report.
The statement stated that the “sentry” is international agencies such as the United Nations and its satellite organizations based at the United States.
“The Sentry is a US based organization that seeks targeted sanctions, seizure of assets and notice of financial risks amongst many other measures to cause harm to the sustainability and economic development of the Republic of South Sudan,” Lily said.
Moreover, the statement pointed out that the sentry report has misrepresented South Sudan’s laws for companies and misled its readers citing dormant companies as actively trading.
The government noted that a forensic review of the evidence reveals allegations that are based upon incorrect interpreted and out-dated information aimed at tarnishing the reputation of the Country and some individuals.
“The report is based upon flawed methodology, using second-hand hearsay including click-bait and newspaper articles, generic references to document collections, self-referential material and anonymous sources which prevents further proper scrutiny of the serious allegations made against both individuals and the national security service,” Lily stated.
South Sudan Government slammed the Sentry against lack of investigative rigor, recycling of information without independent research and misjudgment in making the most serious allegations against the authority alongside side public figures.
They termed the Sentry’s report as misleading, incomplete and reckless based on the fact that no substantive information was cited to underpin the most serious recommendations.
“In one instance for example, no substantive information was cited to underpin the serious recommendations namely the sanctioning of a named individual, Mr. Jalpan Obyce whose reputation has now been tarnished,” they noted
The gov’t response statement further echoed that “In another instance, the report recycled a so-called well exemplified case cited by the United Nations panel of experts that is flawed and mispresents the true facts concerning Brigadier General Malual Dhal Muorwel and 25 others.”
However, government revealed that they are aware of accused significant number of individuals who issued letters of complaints to the Sentry providing corrective information and appending government’s response.
Finally, they said that the report is nothing less than an exercise bias in confirmation of facts and reality.