TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN.

INCLUSIVITY OF THE TOPOSA PEOPLE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE 11 KM ROAD

23rd July 2025 

As I write this opinion letter, I feel compelled to share my concerns about the Nadapal annexation, a long-standing cross-border issue. On 1 October 2021, a communiqué was issued following a meeting between Gov. Louis Lobong of Eastern Equatoria State (EES) and the Turkana County government of Kenya regarding the upgrade of an 11-kilometre section of road in Nadapal along the A1 river road, which lies 11 kilometres inside South Sudan. However, the agreement was signed solely by Gov. Louis Lobong, although six signatories from Turkana County were present. 

Although the intention to develop the road is positive, the agreement did not meet the standard requirements for bilateral understanding. As a result, the Toposa community resisted, leading to the loss of lives and halting of the project. The details of what transpired between then and now remain unclear. 

Recently, another communication has been issued, dated July 16, 2025, involving the National Minister of Roads, Dr. Lam Akol, and the Kenyan government, insisting on resuming the road upgrades. While this is a positive development, questions arise about whether the local population was consulted and why the state Ministry of Roads and Transport was not included in the agreement. 

It is essential to consider the following reasons:

1. - Inclusivity: Developments are beneficial when the local population is included and feels a sense of ownership. The Toposa community should be involved in the project through their parliamentarians or local leaders to ensure their support and understanding.
2. - Sensitisation and benefits: A clear impact assessment and benefit allocation plan should be established to ensure the local population benefits from the project. Transparency and accountability are crucial to avoid the project being seen as an annexation of Toposalands.
3. - State protocols: The governor cannot sign an international business deal alone if his counterparts have included several signatories. The Minister of Roads and Transport should play a key role in mediating the agreement, and disobedience of state protocol can be seen as business tyranny.
4. Cultural preservation: The project should ensure that the cultural heritage and traditions of the Toposa community are preserved and respected. Any development should be done in a way that does not compromise the community's way of life.
5. - Environmental impact: The project should undergo a thorough environmental impact assessment to ensure that it does not harm the environment or the community's livelihood. Measures should be put in place to mitigate any potential negative impacts.
6. - Economic benefits: The project should provide economic benefits to the local population, such as job opportunities and access to markets. This will help to improve the livelihoods of the community and ensure that they benefit from the project.
7. - Security concerns: The project should ensure that the security concerns of the local population are addressed. Measures should be put in place to prevent any potential security threats and to protect the community's interests.

By considering these factors, the road upgrade project can be a positive development that benefits both the local population and the country as a whole. The government must prioritise inclusivity, transparency, and accountability in the project's implementation. 

In conclusion, while the intention to develop the road is commendable, it's essential to ensure that the project is implemented in a manner that respects the rights and interests of the local population. The government should prioritise consultation, transparency, and accountability to avoid any further conflicts and ensure the project's success. 

Sincerely,

Ayella John Bosco

EES