12/08/2026
M/S PAN AFRICAN LAW CHAMBERS LLP
PRESS RELEASE
CLARIFICATION ON HOPE FOR HUMANITY AFRICA V. ATTORNEY GENERAL: LEGAL TEAM REFUTES FALSE CLAIMS AND REAFFIRMS PROFESSIONAL ETHICS
I. FIRM COMMITMENT AND PROFESSIONAL STANDING
M/S Pan African Law Chambers LLP is an international law firm comprised of highly experienced and ethically grounded advocates of demonstrated integrity. We remain steadfastly committed to the interests of our client, HOPE FOR HUMANITY AFRICA, and to the pursuit of justice for the affected communities whose rights have been violated.
We shall bring to the attention of the public and court any matters pertinent to the credibility and conduct of witnesses in this matter, particularly when such conduct demonstrates hostility toward the proceedings or the integrity of the case.
We respectfully urge the public to disregard hostile media campaigns that misrepresent the facts of this case and the role of our legal team. Such campaigns serve only to obstruct the pursuit of justice for vulnerable populations.
II. IDENTIFICATION OF THE SOURCE OF INTERFERENCE AND THREATS
The hostile media campaign and threats referenced in this statement originate from an individual known as BOJO DAVID. Mr. David has published defamatory statements and misleading narratives on his personal page, accompanied by recorded video, falsely suggesting that our legal team has misappropriated compensation funds meant for oil pollution victims.
These allegations are categorically false. No compensation funds have been received, managed, or disbursed by our firm. The role of compensation determination and distribution rests exclusively with the court, not with counsel. Mr. David's repeated public accusations constitute defamation of the firm legal team, our client, and the integrity of the judicial process.
Furthermore, Mr. David has issued ultimatums to our firm, demanded disclosure of confidential legal information, and threatened to lodge complaints with the Bar Council and the court actions that far exceed his standing as a witness and violate basic principles of legal procedure.
III. MULTIPLE WITNESSES AND THE VOLUNTARY NATURE OF TESTIMONY
It must be categorically stated: Bojo David is not the only witness in this matter. Multiple additional witnesses have come forward and have already filed sworn affidavits with the court in support of HOPE FOR HUMANITY AFRICA's petition. The identities of these witnesses are appropriately protected under professional confidentiality obligations, but their participation demonstrates the strength and credibility of our client's case.
All witness testimony in this matter, including that of Mr. David, was undertaken on a strictly voluntary basis. There exists no written agreement, formal contract, or understanding between Mr. David and HOPE FOR HUMANITY AFRICA regarding payment, compensation, or remuneration for his testimony. His participation was entirely voluntary, motivated by the pursuit of justice for affected communities.
The insinuation by Mr. David that payment was promised or provided is false and serves only to undermine his own credibility as a witness.
IV. PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND CLIENT CONFIDENTIALITY
A fundamental obligation of every advocate is to maintain client confidentiality and to refrain from disclosing privileged information at the demand of any third party, including witnesses. Our firm discloses case information exclusively to our client (HOPE FOR HUMANITY AFRICA), the court, or as explicitly directed by judicial order.
Mr. David has repeatedly demanded disclosure of confidential information regarding strategy, evidence, and the identities of other witnesses. Such demands violate the professional ethics codes that govern advocates throughout the East African region. We have appropriately declined these demands and shall continue to do so.
V. THE CRITICAL DISTINCTION: PETITIONER, WITNESS, AND LEGAL COUNSEL
The petitioner in this matter is HOPE FOR HUMANITY AFRICA. Mr. Bojo David is a witness not the petitioner, not co-counsel, and certainly not an authority empowered to direct the conduct of litigation or issue ultimatums to our firm.
A witness, however valuable their testimony may be, does not acquire standing to determine disclosure of confidential information, direct legal strategy, or issue demands to counsel. Mr. David's assumption of such authority is without legal basis and reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of legal procedure.
Furthermore, Mr. David has no standing to communicate with the Bar Council or the court as if he were the petitioner or counsel of record. Any such communications would constitute a material misrepresentation of authority and standing and we shall bring the same to the attention of the court.
VI. CASE STATUS AND REPRESENTATION
This matter is being handled by M/S Pan African Law Chambers LLP as a pro bono representative class action suit on behalf of the affected oil pollution victims in South Sudan. The case is currently pending before the competent court, and we will provide updates as the proceedings advance.
No compensation whatsoever has been disbursed to any party. The question of compensation and remediation is exclusively within the jurisdiction and determination of the court. Should the court find sufficient evidence of breach of treaty obligations and violation of the rights of affected communities, the court will both identify the beneficiaries and supervise the distribution of remedies.
VII. HOSTILE CONDUCT AND ESCALATION TO THE COURT
Given that Mr. Bojo David has escalated this matter through hostile media campaigns, public defamation, threats to lodge complaints with the Bar Council, and demands that exceed his standing, we shall now formally bring these matters to the attention of the court.
Mr. David's conduct including his public allegations, threats, and attempts to compel disclosure of confidential information has transformed him from a cooperative witness into a hostile witness. The court must be apprised of this shift in order to properly assess his credibility and to issue appropriate directives regarding his participation in these proceedings.
We shall request that the court provide guidance and orders regarding the manner in which Mr. David's testimony may be presented, cross-examined, and evaluated in light of his demonstrated hostility toward the case and his attempts to interfere with the legal process.
VIII. PROCEEDING THROUGH PROPER LEGAL CHANNELS
This case will proceed according to due legal process, with full adherence to the rules of court and professional ethics. We welcome legitimate scrutiny from professional bodies and the courts. However, such scrutiny must be based on truthful representation of facts and must come from parties with genuine standing to bring concerns.
We remain steadfast in our commitment to justice, rule of law and to the protection of the rights of vulnerable oil pollution victims in South Sudan.
For further inquiries, please contact:
M/S PAN AFRICAN LAW CHAMBERS LLP
Juba, Republic of South Sudan
Email: [email protected] | www.palcllp.com
May God bless the Republic of South Sudan and the families of South Sudanese people
