Defense challenges digital forensic report in trial of Dr. Machar

2026-02-25 - 14:48

JUBA, South Sudan (Eye Radio) — The defense team in the ongoing trial of suspended First Vice President Dr. Riek Machar has challenged the admissibility of a key digital forensic report, prompting the court to adjourn proceedings until later this week. During the 54th session on Wednesday, February 25, lawyers representing Dr. Machar and seven co-accused objected to the marking of the prosecution’s digital forensic report as evidence. The objection came after a South African digital forensic expert concluded his testimony before the Special Court. The report, presented as Prosecution Document 9, includes correspondence between several government institutions. These include the Ministry of Defense and Veteran Affairs, the Office of the Chief of Defense Forces, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, and the National Communications Authority. Others are correspondence between South Sudan and South African embassies in Juba and Pretoria. While the court admitted documents 9A to 9G, the defense opposed the admission of Document 9H, the main 28-page forensic report. Defense lawyer Advocate Deng John Deng argued that the report was prepared on 15 August 2025 and received by the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs on 26 August 2025. He said it was forwarded the same day to the Director of Public Prosecution and the Chairperson of the Investigation Committee into the Nasir incident, Counsel General. According to the defense, several authentication certificates were issued after the case had already reached the court. They pointed out that the first authentication certificate was issued in Pretoria, South Africa, on 1 September 2025, the same day the Special Court was established by the Chief Justice. The defense further argued that the certificate verifying signatures was issued by the Registrar of the High Court in Pretoria on 2 September 2025. The defense also stated that the Department of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa authenticated the report on 5 September 2025. He says the Embassy of South Sudan in Pretoria also authenticated it on 5 September 2025, and South Sudan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation authenticated the report on 11 September 2025. They added that the document lacks authentication from the South African Embassy in South Sudan. Based on these concerns, the defense asked the court not to mark Document 9H as part of the prosecution’s evidence. However, they said they have no objection to the expert’s individual testimony and reserved the right to cross-examine him. Presiding Judge Justice Dr. James Alala adjourned the session, saying the prosecution will respond to the defense objection when the trial resumes on Friday, 27 February 2025.