In a significant escalation of Sudan's civil conflict, the government has lodged a complaint with the International Court of Justice, claiming the UAE has played a key role in enabling genocide through funding rebel groups.
Sudan Accuses UAE of Genocide Complicity Amid Civil War
Sudan Accuses UAE of Genocide Complicity Amid Civil War
Sudan takes legal action against the UAE, alleging support for rebel militias fueling violence in the country.
Sudan’s government has filed a formal complaint with the International Court of Justice (ICJ), alleging that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) is complicit in genocidal actions by financially supporting rebel militias amid the ongoing civil war. The Sudanese government accused the UAE of arming groups that are contributing to violence and widespread atrocities against civilians, particularly targeting the non-Arab Masalit tribe in West Darfur.
The UAE dismissed the allegations as a “cynical publicity stunt,” suggesting that Sudan’s government aims to divert attention from its own actions during the civil conflict, which has resulted in enormous human suffering. The ICJ, which deals with disputes between nations and violations of international treaties, can address the case because both countries are parties to the 1948 Genocide Convention.
Since the onset of the civil war in April 2023, nearly one-third of Sudan's 50 million residents have been displaced. With tens of thousands reported dead and over three million fleeing violence, the situation has deteriorated drastically. The United Nations has flagged Sudan as facing one of the worst hunger crises globally, affecting approximately five million individuals.
Both government forces and rebel factions have been implicated in committing heinous acts against civilians according to various reports from the United Nations and human rights organizations. The complaint explicitly references the Rapid Support Forces, a paramilitary organization accused of grave abuses in urban centers like Khartoum.
Sudan’s plea to the ICJ requests urgent restraining orders mandating the UAE to prevent any armed groups under its influence from perpetrating further violence against the Masalit people. While the possibility of the judges granting such an order remains uncertain, historical precedents indicate limitations in enforcement capabilities. Notably, requests for emergency orders often provide a platform for nations to present their cases to the international community, even in the absence of enforceability.
Marlise Simons reports from Paris, specializing in issues surrounding international justice and war crime trials, with notable experience covering Europe and Latin America.
The UAE dismissed the allegations as a “cynical publicity stunt,” suggesting that Sudan’s government aims to divert attention from its own actions during the civil conflict, which has resulted in enormous human suffering. The ICJ, which deals with disputes between nations and violations of international treaties, can address the case because both countries are parties to the 1948 Genocide Convention.
Since the onset of the civil war in April 2023, nearly one-third of Sudan's 50 million residents have been displaced. With tens of thousands reported dead and over three million fleeing violence, the situation has deteriorated drastically. The United Nations has flagged Sudan as facing one of the worst hunger crises globally, affecting approximately five million individuals.
Both government forces and rebel factions have been implicated in committing heinous acts against civilians according to various reports from the United Nations and human rights organizations. The complaint explicitly references the Rapid Support Forces, a paramilitary organization accused of grave abuses in urban centers like Khartoum.
Sudan’s plea to the ICJ requests urgent restraining orders mandating the UAE to prevent any armed groups under its influence from perpetrating further violence against the Masalit people. While the possibility of the judges granting such an order remains uncertain, historical precedents indicate limitations in enforcement capabilities. Notably, requests for emergency orders often provide a platform for nations to present their cases to the international community, even in the absence of enforceability.
Marlise Simons reports from Paris, specializing in issues surrounding international justice and war crime trials, with notable experience covering Europe and Latin America.
