Dr. Riek Machar, SPLM-IO leader, is currently undergoing trial over Nasir incident. (Courtesy photo)

The Special Court resumed its proceedings on Wednesday morning, October 8, following Monday’s session in the ongoing Nasir incident trial of Suspended Vice President Dr Riek Machar and his co-accused.

This morning, when reporters arrived at the venue were initially told by security officers that they could enter only if they surrendered mobile phones, cameras, and recording devices—a condition several journalists complied with by entering as ordinary citizens.

However, security personnel soon ordered all journalists to leave.

“I was sitting inside with a colleague from Radio Miraya with members of the public, but security came and told us journalists are not allowed to attend,” one ejected reporter said.

While reporters from independent media outlets were barred, those from the state-owned South Sudan Broadcasting Corporation (SSBC) were later permitted to enter the proceedings.

This action stands in stark contradiction to earlier statements from both the presiding judge and the Ministry of Justice, who had assured that the proceedings were open to the public and the press.

The move follows a warning issued during the previous session by Judge James Alala, who cautioned that the special court might resort to closed sessions.

That warning came after an audio recording of the First Vice President’s testimony—which was read by the lead investigator—was leaked, despite the Judge stressing that the sitting was in-camera, meaning no recording or filming was permitted.

Wednesday’s session, the eighth since the trial began, was expected to continue with the prosecution and the investigator presenting further evidence against Dr Machar and his co-accused.

Earlier this week, the court admitted key prosecution evidence, including an autopsy report and death certificates for over 250 soldiers reportedly killed in Nasir.

However, it declined a digital forensic report submitted by the prosecution, citing a lack of legal basis and authorization.

The report, prepared in South Africa, allegedly contained phone recordings and financial links to accused SPLM-IO members, but was dismissed over concerns about privacy, authenticity, and the absence of a legal cooperation agreement between South Sudan and South Africa.

Presiding Judge Justice James Alala ruled that the forensic evidence could only be reconsidered if the expert responsible appeared for cross-examination.