The authors
The SOAS Centre for Human Rights Law, ACCESS, and REDRESS collaborated to submit the report to the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan (Sudan FFM) with the objective of drawing attention to the recurring violations that occur in the country. This addresses the points contained in the Call for Submissions and resolution A/HRC/RES/54/2 (2023). The most significant condemnations pertain to the armed conflict between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), being the conflict the reason for human rights abuses and atrocities committed in Sudan regions such as the Darfur.
Historical background
The history of Sudan has been marked by conflict and severe human rights violations, largely due to the challenges posed by its colonial relations. Therefore, the military coup of June 1989, headed by Omar al-Bashir, is just one of the roots of the ongoing conflict. The coup undoubtedly contributed to the establishment of a regime that systematically suppressed dissent and perpetrated atrocities. Omar al-Bashir’s regime was characterized by a systematic pattern of human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, torture and arbitrary detentions. These abuses can be understood as manifestations of a "culture" of direct and structural violence and a direct consequence of al-Bashir's interpretation of Islamic law.Despite Bashir's removal from power in 2019, the transition to democracy has been marked by significant challenges. For three decades, Sudanese politics was dominated by a culture of violence, with human rights violations carried out by the State largely met with impunity. The transition, which started in July 2019, culminated in the current conflict that erupted on April 15, 2023. The violations that have been perpetrated since October 2021 exhibit striking similarities and, moreover, have become connected with impunity. In normal circumstances, this would be regarded as a clear failure of the state. The conflict has resulted in a significant number of deaths, extensive displacement of civilians, and ongoing human rights violations, which have been further exacerbated by the actions of regional and international actors.
Currently, Sudan has ratified several international conventions, including the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment and the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance. However, the transitional government was unable to implement the requisite changes to the system. This report provides an analysis of the role of accountability in Sudan, identifying a lack thereof as a primary problem. According to the report, equality before the law is the primary problem in Sudan.This report asserts that a system of domination exists in Sudan, with roots in structural factors and defined, among other factors, by ethnic, religious-ideological, and gender differences. This system is constituted and maintained through the use of violence.
Methodology
The methodology adopted in the report comprises a series of distinct stages. A comprehensive review of the literature was conducted through the analysis of open-source academic, non-governmental organization (NGO), media, and social media resources.
The research was conducted using sources available up until June 27, 2024. On June 7, 2024, REDRESS convened a hybrid roundtable in which Sudanese legal experts and practitioners assembled to deliberate upon the principal findings and recommendations. The report considers two decades of the authors' and organizations' engagement in law reform advocacy, litigation, and research on human rights violations in the country, thereby affording a more in-depth analysis and thoughtful recommendations. The objective of the report is to elucidate the underlying causes of human rights violations and the culture of impunity in Sudan. It does so by examining the structural issues and historical factors that create the possibility of these ongoing violations.
Root causes of human rights violations and impunity in Sudan
One of the most significant contributing factors is the absence of a robust and reliable legal system and institutional framework. Indeed, Sudan has inherited its legal system, the Westminster mode, from England, its former colonizer. The only change that has proven to be enduring is the adoption of the 1983 September Laws, which introduced Shari'a-based corporal criminal punishments, thereby establishing a precedent for the instrumentalization of religion. This precedent has been further reinforced under al-Bashir. The autocratic period is also evident in the political system, wherein the state relies on security and paramilitary forces to establish their own spheres and networks of power.
The legal system lacks the ability to safeguard individuals against human rights violations and guarantee accountability. For instance, the criminal code does not sufficiently address egregious violations such as torture, rape, and arbitrary detention. The legislative reforms enacted between 2007 and 2009, primarily in response to the International Criminal Court (ICC), criminalized international crimes such as genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes. However, these laws are misaligned with the ICC Rome Statute and customary international law. Consequently, Sudanese lawyers equate immunity with impunity, a concept that is enshrined in the peace agreements that form part of Sudan's constitutional arrangements that still haven’t established effective mechanisms for criminal accountability or transitional justice. These omissions are perceived as intentional, serving to safeguard the interests of the negotiating parties rather than facilitate justice. Since the 2021 coup, Sudan has lacked a fully constituted constitutional framework, resulting in the absence of a legal and institutional system that aligns with international human rights standards.
The social structure and dynamics of this system are characterized by inequality and discrimination. The regime exploited its Islamist ideology to create social divisions based on the dichotomy of a superior and inferior status in society. The dehumanization of non-Arabs is just one of the many forms that racism takes, and it is a significant factor in the perpetration of violence. This is evidenced by the counter violence carried out by the RSF in Darfur and Khartoum. It is also evident that gender is a significant factor. The pervasive macho-militarist culture within both the Sudanese security sector and the RSF has facilitated a systematic pattern of gender-based violations against women, including rape and sexual enslavement as a tool of war.
It is evident that regional and international actors have played a pivotal role in Sudan's conflicts, frequently contributing to instability rather than promoting peace. In pursuing their interests in Sudan, neighboring countries such as Egypt and Ethiopia have provided support to various factions. Such external involvement has served only to exacerbate the conflict and gain influence. International organizations, including the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU), have tried to facilitate peace and support democratic transitions, playing an instrumental role in the documentation and monitoring of human rights violations, establishing mechanisms to ensure accountability. However, their efforts have often been inconsistent and limited. For example, the UN International Commission of Inquiry on Darfur published a report in 2005 that identified those responsible for violations of international human rights and humanitarian law and international crimes in Darfur. Nevertheless, the subsequent referral of the Darfur situation to the ICC Prosecutor by the UN Security Council through Resolution 1593 (2005) was not pursued.
The international community's response to human rights abuses in Sudan has been the subject of criticism for its reactive rather than proactive nature. Rather than addressing the underlying issues, the focus has been on immediate crisis management. One proposal is to implement targeted sanctions, which would include limitations on financial assistance and acknowledgement of the atrocities, enabling states to take action against perpetrators.
Recommendations
In order to interrupt the cycle of violence and impunity and to promote accountability, recommendations are made that emphasize the necessity for comprehensive legal and institutional reforms. Among the most significant is the proposal to establish a hybrid tribunal with the mandate of prosecuting those responsible for the most egregious crimes. This approach is designed to ensure that both national and international legal standards on human rights are met, and that truth is implemented in accordance with the principles set forth in Article 24(2) of the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, to which Sudan is a party. Additionally, it aims to facilitate reconciliation processes that provide victims with a platform to share their experiences and seek reparations and it will address the underlying causes of impunity.
Secondly, a robust transitional justice framework must be established to dismantle the structures that perpetuate inequality and impunity. This framework must ensure that justice processes are victim-centered, inclusive, and transparent, with a focus on long-term societal transformation. One potential way to achieve this is the implementation of suitable accountability mechanisms, such as the removal of perpetrators from office in instances where human rights violations have occurred. Participatory approaches to the development of justice and accountability mechanisms have the potential to be a transformative force in the country, as they serve a dual purpose: they foster accountability and solidarity with victims.
Thirdly, the document calls for greater international responsibility. The UN, AU, and other international bodies must augment their assistance for Sudan's transition, stressing greater emphasis on human rights monitoring and justice and accountability measures, with a particular focus on the perspectives of victims. Additionally, they must facilitate the ICC's fulfillment of its mandate and exercise universal jurisdiction. It will be essential to cooperate in order to promote human rights and equality, and to safeguard the rights of asylum seekers and refugees from Sudan. This will entail providing financial and logistical assistance.
The situation in Sudan requires a comprehensive approach that addresses both the immediate human rights violations and the underlying causes of conflict. The international community must assume a pivotal role in facilitating Sudan's transition towards a peaceful, just, and democratic society. Achieving this objective will require a firm commitment to accountability, the protection of human rights, and the pursuit of transformative justice.
To read more visit:
- https://redress.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Submission-to-Sudan-FFM-June-2024.pdf
- About SOAS | SOAS
- Our Roots | ACCESS (accesscommunity.org)
- History of REDRESS | Redress
- Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for the Sudan | OHCHR
- g2321250.pdf (un.org)
- UN commission finds Sudanese Government responsible for crimes in Darfur | UN News
- Microsoft Word - Document1 (ohchr.org)
