In a statement issued by the alliance’s Secretary for Information and Official Spokesperson, Bor Gatwech Kuany on Tuesday, the alliance said it does not recognize what it called a government-orchestrated dialogue in Juba, arguing that the current administration forfeited its legitimacy through alleged violations of the 2018 Revitalized Agreement on the Resolution of the Conflict in South Sudan (R-ARCSS).
The alliance cited the detention and prosecution of the First Vice President and other SPLM-IO leaders, alongside the removal of representatives from the South Sudan Opposition Alliance (SSOA) and the Former Detainees (FDs), as actions that have undermined the spirit of the peace agreement and eroded trust in the transitional process.
According to the UPA, the planned inter-party dialogue is not a genuine platform for consensus-building but a “restricted charade” intended to pave the way for elections that fall short of basic democratic standards. The group warned that rushing into elections without foundational reforms risks deepening instability.
“The current attempt by the government to rush into an electoral process without establishing fundamental democratic benchmarks is not only reckless but a recipe for national disaster,” the statement read.
The alliance further argued that any dialogue confined to parties aligned with the ruling establishment would exclude key stakeholders, including opposition groups outside the peace framework, civil society organisations, faith-based institutions, youth and women’s groups, traditional leaders, and other political actors.
UPA, a composition of holdout groups to the peace agreement, instead called for an inclusive national dialogue that would bring all South Sudanese stakeholders to the table, stressing that such a process should be held in a neutral venue outside Juba to ensure fairness, freedom of expression, and protection from political pressure.
The coalition maintained that dialogue held under the current political environment in Juba would be compromised by what it described as state dominance over the process.
The UPA also reiterated its rejection of elections under prevailing conditions, arguing that key benchmarks—including the unification of forces, security sector reforms, adoption of a permanent constitution, establishment of an independent electoral commission, and completion of a national census—remain unfulfilled.
Without these reforms, the alliance warned, elections could undermine peace rather than consolidate it.
Beyond its rejection of the proposed dialogue, the UPA outlined its vision for a neutral caretaker transitional government composed of respected national figures and technocrats. It said such an arrangement should replace elite-driven power-sharing models that have failed to deliver sustainable peace.
The proposed caretaker authority, the statement said, should prioritise national reconciliation, security sector reform, restoration of the rule of law, expansion of civic space, anti-corruption efforts, equitable resource management, and the resolution of communal conflicts. It would also oversee transitional justice processes and complete the drafting and adoption of a permanent constitution.
The alliance stressed that the completion of a permanent constitution should mark the end of the transitional period and lay the foundation for a democratic order in which political authority derives from the will of the people through credible elections.
“The ultimate goal is not another cycle of transition, but the establishment of a peaceful, democratic, just and united South Sudan where legitimacy flows from citizens through regular, free elections,” the statement added.
UPA called on regional and international partners, including the East African Community (EAC), the Intergovernmental Authority on Development (IGAD), the African Union (AU), and the wider international community, to support an inclusive national dialogue convened in a neutral venue.
The statement comes amid ongoing political tensions over the future of South Sudan’s transitional process and renewed debate on preparations for long-delayed national elections.
