![UAP insurance company office. [Photo courtesy]](https://i0.wp.com/www.sudanspost.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/uap-data.jpg?resize=890%2C445&ssl=1)
The presiding judge adjourned the case, which was scheduled for the submission of an amended defense statement, to December 2. The defense lawyer, Gabriel Anyar, has reportedly missed multiple sessions over the past three weeks, citing illness.
Speaking to reporters outside the court, Marko Reech, the attorney representing the former UAP staff, criticized the repeated delays by the defense team but emphasized the importance of allowing the legal process to continue.
“The session was fixed today for the defense’s reply, but unfortunately, the defense team turned it down, citing the lawyer’s absence. They requested the session be postponed to December 2,” Reech said.
He added that the plaintiffs agreed to the new date to ensure justice is served.
“We want to give justice a space. That’s why we’ve accepted their request, but this is becoming a pattern. They have repeatedly used excuses to avoid attending court,” Reech stated.
The labor dispute stems from a conflict that began in October last year when national staff accused UAP Insurance South Sudan of unequal treatment, including disparities in wages between local employees and foreign expatriates.
The grievances led to a sit-in strike involving about 70 national staff, which disrupted UAP’s operations.
In response, the company dismissed at least ten employees, a decision that was in direct violation of a Ministry of Labor order mandating the reinstatement of the affected workers.
The dismissals prompted the UAP National Staff Association (UNSA) to file a lawsuit against the company, alleging unfair treatment and wrongful termination.
Earlier in the proceedings, the High Court rejected UAP’s preliminary objection to dismiss the case, citing insufficient evidence in the company’s legal arguments.
Presiding Judge Francis Amum ruled that the trial would continue and instructed both sides to present their evidence.
Last month, Judge Amum ordered the plaintiffs to provide additional employment details for the terminated staff.
While the plaintiffs complied by submitting an amended petition, the defense has yet to submit its amended statement.
“The judge will evaluate the amended statements from both sides before framing charges,” Reech said.
The case’s adjournment marks the fifth delay, leaving the plaintiffs increasingly frustrated.
However, Judge Amum has reiterated the importance of both parties presenting their evidence to ensure a fair resolution.
