Opinion

Cycles of revenge killings have torn apart communities in South Sudan, undermining public safety, disrupting livelihoods and weakening the relationships that hold society together. Beyond each life lost, blood feuds leave families displaced, farms abandoned and generations burdened by fear and grief.

Ending this violence requires more than appeals for reconciliation. It demands credible justice, effective law enforcement and a shared commitment to holding individuals accountable without punishing their relatives or communities.

When vengeance becomes collective punishment

A blood feud develops when relatives or associates of a person who has been killed seek revenge against the alleged perpetrator or that person’s family. Each retaliatory attack can provoke another, turning an individual crime into a prolonged conflict between families or communities.

The most disturbing feature of this violence is the targeting of people who had no involvement in the original offence. A shared surname, family connection or clan affiliation can become grounds for attack. Responsibility is transferred from the individual accused of a crime to an entire group.

Educated professionals, community leaders, public officials, humanitarian workers and businesspeople may also face threats because of their family connections. Their education, employment or public standing offers little protection when retaliation follows kinship rather than evidence.

Although men and boys can face particular pressure to participate in vengeance, the consequences extend across society. Women lose partners and sources of support, children lose parents, and surviving relatives inherit insecurity they did nothing to create.

Conflict, weapons and weakened institutions

Blood feuds persist where confidence in lawful justice is weak. When families believe that police cannot protect them or that courts will not deliver a fair outcome, some turn to retaliation.

South Sudan’s history of conflict provides an important backdrop. Sudan’s civil wars of 1955–1972 and 1983–2005, followed by the crisis that erupted in South Sudan in 2013, damaged institutions and deepened insecurity. The circulation of weapons among civilians has made disputes more dangerous and retaliation more destructive.

However, conflict alone does not explain why a feud continues. Social pressure, fear, impunity and the belief that revenge restores family honour can sustain violence long after the original killing.

Families and community leaders therefore face a critical choice: support lawful accountability or allow loyalty to become a shield for those responsible. Protecting an offender may appear to defend a family in the short term, but it can expose more relatives to retaliation.

Influential people carry a particular responsibility. Their authority should help prevent violence, protect those at risk and support investigations. Encouraging revenge—or remaining silent when it is being organised—can deepen an already dangerous conflict.

The damage to rural livelihoods

The economic consequences of blood feuds reach far beyond the households directly involved.

In rural communities, people threatened by retaliation may stop travelling to farms, markets or grazing areas. Those accused of violence may flee, while innocent relatives may also leave because they fear being targeted.

When people abandon productive land, agricultural activity suffers. Households lose labour, income and access to food. Trading relationships weaken, and families already facing hardship become more vulnerable.

Displacement can take people to neighbouring villages or urban centres, where rebuilding a livelihood may be difficult. Leaving home may provide immediate safety, but it can also mean losing land, community support and the means to earn a living.

The result is a damaging cycle: violence disrupts livelihoods, hardship increases tensions, and unresolved tensions make lasting peace more difficult.

Fear, grief and fractured relationships

Blood feuds also change how people relate to one another. Ordinary journeys become risks. Social gatherings become sources of anxiety. Family connections that once offered belonging can become reasons for suspicion.

Children may grow up hearing that another family or community is their enemy. Without intervention, grief and fear can pass from one generation to the next, alongside an expectation that an old killing must eventually be avenged.

Survivors may experience lasting psychological distress, isolation and uncertainty. Bereaved households must cope with emotional loss while finding ways to replace income, care for children and remain safe.

Reconciliation must address these everyday consequences. A public agreement has limited value if people still cannot cultivate their land, visit relatives or move freely without fear.

Justice that prevents further violence

The government has a central responsibility to protect people from revenge killings and ensure that homicide cases are investigated fairly. Local authorities, police and courts must be accessible, impartial and capable of acting before threats become attacks.

Criminal responsibility must remain individual. Relatives should never be treated as substitutes for an alleged offender, and no family or community should be subjected to collective punishment.

Serious crimes require penalties proportionate to their gravity, imposed through lawful proceedings and with respect for due process. Accountability must also apply to anyone who organises, finances, encourages or conceals retaliatory violence.

The demand for stronger punishment should be accompanied by an equally strong demand for reliable investigations, fair trials and consistent enforcement. Justice cannot build public confidence if it is selective, arbitrary or replaced by extrajudicial killing.

Community dialogue can support this process. Traditional leaders, religious leaders, women’s groups and young people can help challenge the expectation of revenge, identify emerging threats and encourage peaceful dispute resolution. Such efforts should complement criminal justice and protect the rights of victims and survivors.

South Sudan’s path towards peaceful coexistence depends on making lawful justice credible in people’s daily lives. Families need confidence that reporting a crime will lead to protection and a fair hearing.

No family should be expected to avenge a death, and no child should inherit a sentence of retaliation. Breaking the cycle means ensuring that responsibility rests with the person who committed the crime—and that the law protects everyone else.