Darfur Victims support Organization
Report on the Human Rights Council Session and the Fact-Finding Mission Report on Sudan
12 September 2024
On 9 September 2024, the Human Rights Council concluded its interactive dialogue session on the Fact-Finding Mission’s report on Sudan, held as part of the 57th regular session. The session drew significant attention from member states and non-governmental organizations, addressing the ongoing humanitarian crisis and human rights violations in Sudan that have escalated since the outbreak of armed conflict on 15 April 2023.
Key Findings of the Fact-Finding Mission’s Report:
The Fact-Finding Mission revealed widespread human rights violations in Sudan, documenting cases of murder, torture, arbitrary detention, and enforced disappearance against civilians. It also reported horrendous instances of sexual violence and gender-based violence. The Mission held both the Sudanese Armed Forces and the Rapid Support Forces responsible for these violations, citing serious breaches of international humanitarian law and human rights law. Essential infrastructure, such as hospitals and schools, was destroyed, leading to further deterioration of humanitarian conditions and increased suffering for civilians. Millions were displaced, and thousands faced severe shortages of food, water, and healthcare services. The Mission called for urgent international humanitarian aid and recommended extending its mandate for another year to continue its monitoring and investigation efforts.
Legal Analysis of Sudan’s Commitment to International Treaties:
An examination of the Fact-Finding Mission’s report shows that Sudan has violated its obligations under international human rights treaties, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and the Geneva Conventions. Despite Sudan’s membership in these agreements, the government has shown blatant refusal to cooperate with the Mission. This conduct reflects Sudan’s failure to fulfill its duties to protect human rights and hold violators accountable.
From a legal standpoint, the appointment of Sudan’s Attorney General by the Army Commander raises serious concerns about the independence and impartiality of the Sudanese judiciary. The Attorney General, who heads the National Investigation Committee into the violations, is a biased party, as he is aligned with the military regime, which bears significant responsibility for the violations. Under international law, it is unacceptable for a party involved in the conflict to act as a judge in the matter, contradicting the principle of judicial independence. The National Investigation Committee, established under the Attorney General’s supervision, lacks legal legitimacy, as it was formed by entities representing the military regime. Consequently, its decisions are legally void and non-binding.
A review of the Committee’s rulings shows a clear lack of independence, as no military personnel responsible for the crimes have been indicted. Instead, the accusations were directed at opposition political forces, such as “Taqaddum,” reflecting the Committee’s politically motivated actions rather than legal ones. This confirms that the Committee lacks the integrity and credibility needed to deliver justice, violating principles of transparency and accountability.
Sudan’s Position at the Human Rights Council Session:
During the session, the Sudanese Attorney General, representing the National Investigation Committee, delivered a speech that was notably hostile towards the Fact-Finding Mission and non-governmental organizations. His remarks were unconvincing, as he focused on exonerating the Sudanese military from the charges, raising doubts among attendees about the Committee’s impartiality and independence. Furthermore, the Attorney General threatened legal action against NGOs that criticized the Sudanese government, reinforcing the perception that the authorities are attempting to suppress dissenting voices and evade genuine accountability.
Future Outlook:
The upcoming phase is expected to see intense discussions among member states on the issue of extending the Fact-Finding Mission’s mandate for an additional year, given the ongoing violations and Sudan’s lack of cooperation with international mechanisms. Despite strong opposition from some African and Arab states, the support of European countries and global human rights organizations for the renewal of the mandate will be a critical factor in the Human Rights Council’s efforts to monitor and document the continuing violations in Sudan.
