The Arrest of Akram Mohamed Shuaib and His Brother-in-Law, Omar Hassan Ibrahim Al-Amin, in Khartoum Amid Growing Concerns over Arbitrary Arrests and Prosecutions Based on Suspicion and Ethnic Discrimination
Areas under the control of the Sudanese Armed Forces and their allies have witnessed increasing patterns of arbitrary arrest, incommunicado detention, enforced disappearance, and the targeting of civilians on the basis of their geographic, tribal or ethnic affiliations. Reports have also emerged of death sentences, home demolitions and forced evictions. These practices raise serious concerns regarding respect for the rights to liberty and security of person, fair trial guarantees, the prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and the protection of civilians against collective punishment and discrimination.
In this context, the Darfur Victims Support Organization documents the arrest of Akram Mohamed Shuaib and his brother-in-law, Omar Hassan Ibrahim Al-Amin, in the South Al-Hizam area, Block 23, near the Nubian Gas Station in the Al-Azhari neighbourhood of Khartoum, on the morning of 27 April 2025. Information provided by the family indicates that the two men were arrested by an armed force reportedly affiliated with the Sudanese Armed Forces and beaten in front of their family members. Their whereabouts and fate subsequently became unknown, despite attempts to locate them at several police stations, prisons and detention facilities.
This incident occurs against a broader backdrop of human rights reports documenting arbitrary arrests and the targeting of civilians on suspicion of links to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), or on the basis of their geographic origins or presumed identities. It also coincides with reports of death sentences in cases involving allegations of collaboration with the RSF, as well as demolitions and evictions in certain areas under the control of the Sudanese Armed Forces. This broader context does not, in itself, establish that every arrest or demolition is necessarily motivated by ethnic considerations. It does, however, warrant investigations into possible patterns of discrimination or collective targeting, as well as scrutiny of the legal basis for each measure and its compliance with fair trial guarantees and civilian protection obligations.
I. Circumstances of the Arrest of Akram Mohamed Shuaib and His Brother-in-Law, Omar Hassan Ibrahim Al-Amin
According to information received by the Organization from the family, the incident occurred at approximately 9:00 a.m. on 27 April 2025, in the South Al-Hizam area, Block 23, near the Nubian Gas Station in the Al-Azhari neighbourhood of Khartoum. A force comprising six to seven individuals wearing military uniforms arrived at the location in a green pickup truck which, according to the family’s account, bore military registration number 333. The members of the force were carrying weapons and other equipment, including a pistol and batons.
The force arrested Akram Mohamed Shuaib, aged 28, a student at the University of Khartoum who was born in the Sijana area, and his brother-in-law, Omar Hassan Ibrahim Al-Amin, aged 32, an air-conditioning and refrigeration engineer born in Rufaa, who is married and has a young daughter.
The family reports that members of the force beat and kicked both men in front of their relatives, causing fear and panic. Omar’s wife, Hajar Mohamed Ahmed Shuaib, was also subjected to questioning, threats and intimidation concerning her husband’s and her brother Akram’s alleged links to the RSF. According to the family, both men are civilians and have no connection with the forces in question.
These allegations raise concerns about the use of unsubstantiated suspicion as a basis for depriving civilians of their liberty, the use of violence during arrest, and the intimidation and psychological coercion of family members. If it is established that the arrests were based on presumed family connections, identity or geographic origin, without specific individualised evidence, serious questions arise as to their compatibility with legal safeguards prohibiting arbitrary arrest and discrimination.
The gravity of the incident is heightened by the fact that Akram is a university student and Omar works as an air-conditioning and refrigeration engineer. Omar is married, has a young daughter and, according to information provided by the family, suffers from health problems requiring regular medical follow-up. The continued absence of information about their place of detention and medical condition makes it imperative to establish their fate and whereabouts without delay, enable them to communicate with their family and lawyers, and ensure access to the medical care they require.
II. Efforts to Locate the Detainees and Concerns over Enforced Disappearance
Following the arrests, the family began searching for Akram and Omar at several institutions and facilities, including Al-Mansoura Police Station in the Al-Azhari area, Soba Prison, the General Command headquarters, Al-Hajar Prison in Omdurman, Kober Prison and detention facilities in Hatab. According to the family, these efforts did not establish the men’s whereabouts or yield reliable information about their fate.
The family also reported filing a complaint at Al-Azhari Police Station. Despite this step, the information available concerning the men’s place of detention and fate remained insufficient to dispel concerns about their safety.
The failure to disclose the whereabouts of a person deprived of liberty, the refusal to acknowledge their detention, or the withholding of reliable information about their fate may constitute essential elements of enforced disappearance where the other applicable legal requirements are met. A definitive legal characterisation of this incident cannot be made before a full investigation establishes the circumstances of the detention and identifies the authority responsible. Nevertheless, the continued absence of information, despite the family’s efforts to approach multiple institutions, is a serious warning sign requiring urgent intervention.
International human rights law prohibits arbitrary deprivation of liberty and guarantees every detainee the right to know the reasons for their detention, challenge its lawfulness before a competent judicial authority, obtain legal assistance and have their family informed of their whereabouts. It also prohibits torture and other forms of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. All places of detention must be subject to legal oversight, and accurate and reliable records must be maintained identifying detainees, the grounds for their detention, their whereabouts and the authorities responsible for them.
In Omar’s case, the reported health problems give rise to additional concerns about his physical safety and the risk that his condition may deteriorate if he is denied regular medical care. Any authority detaining a person has a responsibility to protect that person’s life and physical integrity and to provide the medical care required by their condition, regardless of the allegations against them or any suspected association with a party to the conflict.
III. Arrests Based on Suspicion and Identity in the Context of the War
The arrest of Akram and his brother-in-law, Omar, forms part of a broader pattern reflected in reports concerning the arrest and prosecution of civilians in areas under the control of the Sudanese Armed Forces on suspicion of collaborating with or providing support to the RSF. Concerns become particularly acute when such suspicions are not supported by specific individualised evidence, or when family ties, geographic background or presumed tribal affiliations become grounds for arrest, threats or discriminatory treatment.
International human rights organisations have documented patterns of arbitrary arrest, torture and enforced disappearance in the context of the war in Sudan, including practices targeting individuals suspected of having links to one of the parties to the conflict. In a report published on 7 April 2026, Human Rights Watch addressed violations associated with arbitrary arrests, torture and enforced disappearance, highlighting the need to investigate the responsibility of those carrying out arrests or operating detention facilities.
These reports underscore the need to examine the cases of Akram and Omar within a broader accountability framework, without assuming that all incidents are identical or that legal responsibility in this particular case has already been established. The essential requirements are to verify the facts, identify the force that carried out the arrest or detained the two men, establish the legal basis for the action, investigate allegations of beatings and threats, and ensure that no one is targeted solely because of their family ties, geographic origin or ethnicity, or on the basis of allegations unsupported by sufficient evidence.
Tribal or ethnic affiliation, or a person’s place of origin, must not be treated as evidence of criminal responsibility. Nor may family members be held responsible for acts allegedly committed by their relatives. The principle of individual criminal responsibility requires that any prosecution be based on specific conduct and evidence capable of judicial scrutiny, while fully respecting the accused person’s rights to a defence and a fair trial.
IV. Death Sentences and the Risks of Trials Involving Allegations of Collaboration with the RSF
Reports of death sentences in cases involving allegations of collaboration with the RSF raise serious concerns about fair trial guarantees, particularly in a conflict environment characterised by polarisation, reciprocal accusations, restricted access to lawyers and difficulties in obtaining independent evidence in certain areas.
Reports issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights have addressed death sentences imposed in Sudan between January and June 2025 in the context of allegations of collaboration with the RSF. The figures and details contained in these reports should be checked against the original publications to verify their scope and legal characterisation before being relied upon in any definitive statistical conclusion.
Regardless of the nature of the allegations, the imposition of a death sentence requires strict compliance with fundamental fair trial guarantees. These include the independence and impartiality of the court, effective legal representation, the accused person’s ability to challenge evidence and question witnesses, the exclusion of confessions obtained through torture or coercion, and the right to appeal before a higher judicial authority. Suspicion of collaboration with a party to the conflict cannot, in itself, constitute sufficient evidence that a criminal offence warranting punishment has been committed.
A distinction must also be maintained between individual criminal responsibility and political positions, family relationships or presumed affiliations. During armed conflict, international humanitarian law and international human rights law remain applicable, including the fundamental judicial guarantees afforded to persons accused of acts connected with the conflict.
The Organization calls for an independent review of cases in which credible allegations of violations of the right to a fair trial have been raised, the suspension of executions where the integrity of the proceedings is subject to serious doubt, and guarantees that defendants can present their cases before independent and impartial courts.
V. Home Demolitions, Forced Evictions and the Risk of Collective Targeting
In addition to arrests, reports of home demolitions and evictions in parts of Khartoum and its surrounding areas raise concerns regarding the rights to adequate housing, property and privacy, as well as protection against forced eviction. Reports issued by research and human rights organisations have addressed demolitions in parts of East Nile, including the Al-Khairat neighbourhood, in July 2025, and the concerns surrounding the circumstances of these evictions and their impact on residents.
These incidents require a legal distinction between removals carried out on a legitimate legal basis and in compliance with the necessary procedures and safeguards, and arbitrary demolitions or evictions undertaken without adequate notice, legal review, effective remedies or due regard for the rights of affected residents. Any indications that demolitions or evictions targeted particular groups because of their ethnicity, tribal affiliation, geographic background or suspected association with a party to the conflict must also be investigated.
The destruction of homes or eviction of residents without a clear legal necessity and appropriate safeguards may lead to displacement, loss of property and worsening humanitarian conditions. Depending on the circumstances and available evidence, such actions may also give rise to legal responsibility. In the context of armed conflict, civilian objects and civilian populations must be protected against attacks and unlawful acts, and the relevant rules of international humanitarian law and international human rights law must be respected.
The Organization stresses that any allegations of collective targeting or ethnic discrimination in demolition operations must be subject to an independent and transparent investigation based on residents’ testimonies, documents, photographs and other available evidence. Such investigations should identify the authorities that ordered the demolitions, those who carried them out and the stated legal basis for each operation.
VI. Legal Responsibility and the Obligations of the Authorities
The arrest and beating of civilians, denial of access to their families and lawyers, and failure to disclose their places of detention, if established, raise serious legal concerns under international human rights law and the relevant rules of international humanitarian law.
The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights protects the rights to liberty and security of person, prohibits arbitrary arrest and detention, and guarantees every detainee the right to challenge the lawfulness of their detention before a court. It also prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment and guarantees the right to a fair hearing before a competent, independent and impartial tribunal.
The Convention against Torture prohibits the commission of torture, as well as its authorisation or acquiescence, and requires States to take effective measures to prevent torture and investigate allegations of its occurrence. Relevant rules of international humanitarian law also require the protection and humane treatment of persons who are not directly participating in hostilities, including civilians.
Enforced disappearance may give rise to legal responsibility where the elements established under the applicable law are met, particularly when deprivation of liberty is followed by a refusal to acknowledge the detention or concealment of the person’s fate or whereabouts, thereby placing them outside the protection of the law. Individual criminal responsibility cannot be determined in this case without an adequate investigation. Nevertheless, the continued lack of information about Akram and his brother-in-law, Omar, requires urgent action to establish their fate.
The authorities exercising effective control over detention facilities have a responsibility to take the necessary measures to prevent torture and ill-treatment, ensure that detainees are registered, enable them to communicate with their families and lawyers, subject detention to judicial oversight, and investigate credible allegations of violations. The existence of armed conflict or security-related allegations does not exempt these authorities from their legal obligations.
VII. Recommendations
The Darfur Victims Support Organization calls for the immediate disclosure of the fate of Akram Mohamed Shuaib and his brother-in-law, Omar Hassan Ibrahim Al-Amin, the identification of their whereabouts and the authority responsible for their detention, and the provision of reliable information to their family and lawyers regarding their legal and medical status. The Organization further calls for guarantees of their physical and psychological safety and access to the necessary medical care, particularly in light of the health problems reportedly affecting Omar.
The Organization calls for their immediate release if there is no lawful basis for their continued detention, or, alternatively, for their prompt appearance before a competent, independent and impartial judicial authority. They must be allowed access to legal counsel, the opportunity to challenge the lawfulness of their detention, and the ability to contest any allegations or evidence presented against them. The Organization also calls for an independent and effective investigation into the circumstances of the arrests, the alleged beatings and the threats made against the family, with a view to establishing responsibility and holding accountable, in accordance with the law, anyone found responsible.
The Organization urges the relevant authorities to disclose the detention records relating to the two men, ensure that detainees are not transferred or concealed from their families and lawyers, and cooperate with the competent judicial and oversight bodies. It also calls for practical measures to prevent arrests based on arbitrary suspicion or tribal, ethnic or geographic affiliation, and to ensure that family relationships or social backgrounds are never used as substitutes for individualised evidence.
The Organization calls for an independent review of cases in which death sentences have been imposed in the context of allegations of collaboration with the RSF, with particular attention to compliance with fair trial guarantees. It further calls for the suspension of executions in cases where credible allegations of serious violations have been raised, pending an effective judicial review. The Organization also urges investigations into home demolitions and forced evictions, clarification of the legal basis for each operation, and guarantees that affected persons have access to effective remedies and reparation in accordance with the law.
Finally, the Organization urges the United Nations, African human rights mechanisms and international human rights organisations to monitor reported cases of arbitrary arrest and enforced disappearance in Sudan, seek reliable information concerning the fate of detainees, document potential violations, and exert the necessary pressure to protect civilians and prevent impunity.
