The politics of displacement-related land conflict in Yei River County, South Sudan

Abstract

Drawing on empirical evidence from Yei River County in South Sudan, this paper argues that, rather than a temporary phenomenon, displacement may lead to a drastic reorganisation of land occupation and governance. Such reorganisation may become strongly connected to broader political contention. In the case of Yei, existing legal frameworks and institutions are inadequate to deal with land conflicts resulting from massive displacement and return. Crucially, historical grievances result in the displaced no longer being perceived as powerless victims, but as agents of a Dinka agenda to (re)occupy territories in Equatoria, and as perpetrators in land conflict. Such politics of land-control and identity may turn land disputes between displaced people and returnees into a major source of instability. At the same time, those displaced people who are not well-connected politically may lose their land rights.

Governing Unclear Lines: Local Boundaries as a (Re)source of Conflict in South Sudan

“…This often results in contested landownership claims based on indigeneity, majority status, or forced resettlement, inter alia (e.g. Justin and van Leeuwen 2016). Secondly, the lack of clearly marked borders between chieftaincies that were upgraded to local government territories has triggered border disputes.…”

Land Reform and Conflict in South Sudan: Evidence from Yei River County

“…Within Yei Town, for example, Dinka chiefs are constantly accused of allocating land belonging to local communities to their displaced people, resulting in conflicts. These chiefs justify their actions on the basis of the wording in the Land Act, which states that "all land in South Sudan is owned by the people of South Sudan and its usage shall be regulated by the government" (Justin and van Leeuwen 2016). The focus on strengthening institutions at the national level and the subsequent failure to achieve results is not limited to land reform in South Sudan, but also occurs in other sectors.…”

“…Small-scale conflicts escalated into wider conflicts, and conflicts rooted in contestations among political elites trickled down to cause friction between local communities (De Vries and Justin 2014). Though the causes of those conflicts are multifaceted, land has come to play a central role as a trigger for conflicts or a platform for expressing other grievances (Justin and van Leeuwen 2016). It seems as though efforts to build a state through land reform have generated conflicts, civil wars, forceful displacements, and human suffering.…”

“…Conflicts that are rooted in contestations among political elites also trickled down to cause tensions between communities, often along ethnic lines (De Vries and Justin 2014). In most cases, land is either the immediate cause of or a platform for expressing other grievances(Justin and van Leeuwen 2016). So, (1) how does the current approach to state building influence land reform?…”

Improving local land governance? Exploring the linkages between land governance reforms, institutional pluralism and tenure security in Burundi

“…Actually, land governance reforms may often fail to reach the expected outcomes of regulating and enforcing land management and mitigating land disputes, or increasing localised and participatory decision-making processes (McCallin 2012;Unruh 2005). They may fuel the proliferation of new rules and institutions, and induce competition among land-governing actors, and even (re-) activate questions of identity and ethnic belonging (Justin and van Leeuwen 2016;Kobusingye, van Leeuwen, and van Dijk 2016).…”