The police leadership confirmed on Monday this week that Kon was among several senior officers whose promotions were approved by President Salva Kiir as part of efforts to “strengthen leadership and professionalism” in the force. He is one of the five officers elevated from Major General to Lieutenant General.
The statement praised Mr Akot for his “dedication, leadership, and outstanding service.” Yet for many South Sudanese—particularly motorists, civil servants, and observers of security sector governance—the promotion sits uneasily with Akot’s controversial public record.
A career defined by controversy
Lt. Gen. Akot is one of the most visible police commanders in the country, largely due to his outspoken and often confrontational approach to public administration. As Director of Traffic Police, he has repeatedly courted controversy through unilateral decisions, abrasive public remarks, and actions that critics say undermine institutional discipline.
One of the most cited episodes was his reported refusal to be transferred to Northern Bahr el Ghazal State, a move that, under normal circumstances, would be considered routine within a disciplined security service. The refusal was widely interpreted as an act of insubordination, raising questions about whether senior officers are subject to the same rules that govern the rest of the force.
Rather than facing disciplinary action, Akot remained in his post—his boss, Gen. Abraham Manyuat Peter, the then Inspector General of Police, was fired by Kiir, fueling perceptions that defiance, when backed by proximity to power, carries little administrative consequence.
Unilateral traffic orders and public backlash
Akot’s tenure at the Traffic Police Directorate has also been marked by a series of controversial directives issued without clear legal backing or broad stakeholder consultation. These include abrupt changes to traffic regulations, sudden enforcement drives, and public threats against motorists, boda-boda riders, and transport operators.
Several of these orders triggered confusion on the roads of Juba and other urban centres, with drivers complaining of harassment, inconsistent enforcement, and arbitrary fines. Civil society actors and legal experts have, on multiple occasions, questioned the legality of some of these directives, arguing that they bypass established procedures and ministerial oversight.
Instead of adopting a conciliatory tone, Akot often doubled down—defending his decisions in combative language that further polarised public opinion.
Promotion amid unresolved questions
Despite this track record, the police statement credits Akot’s promotion to “dedication” and “outstanding service.” He was officially decorated alongside other promoted officers during a ceremony attended by the Acting Minister of Interior, Mangar Buong, and the Inspector General of Police, Gen. Said Chawul Lom.
For critics, the promotion sends a troubling signal: that assertiveness bordering on arrogance, and insubordination framed as “bold leadership,” may be rewarded rather than corrected.
What message does it send?
This is not just about one officer. It is about what the state chooses to incentivise within its security institutions. When controversial behaviour goes unaddressed and is followed by promotion, it weakens professionalism and morale and emboldens the precedent of institutional indiscipline.
In a country striving to reform its security sector and rebuild public trust, promotions are not merely ceremonial—they are political and moral statements.
