The al-Bashir regime benefits from better relations with the West after signing deal to stop migration through Sudan into Europe. Yet the President’s own brother is intimately involved in running those very migration routes.

The Government of Sudan announced earlier this week its intention to develop a “national anti-human trafficking” strategy.[1] This is part of a recent pattern whereby Sudan has improved relations with the West by agreeing to stem the flow of migrants from the continent of Africa into the European Union. It also fits a much longer pattern of Sudan making promises to the international community, receiving the benefits of this nominal cooperation, and refusing to actually change its ways.[2]

What’s worse, these deals legitimize the very organs of the Sudanese state most deeply involved in the crimes of the past 20 years. These crimes include war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide, as determined in 2009 by the International Criminal Court, which issued an arrest warrant on these counts against Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir that year.

The group most intimately involved with stemming migrant flows through Sudan is a government-run paramilitary organization called the Rapid Support Forces. This group has its origins in the infamous Janjaweed militias, internationally known for brutalizing the people of Darfur in the early 2000s. The change of name did not bring a change of behavior, and the RSF is still responsible for the bulk of violence against civilians during the recent – and ongoing – government assault on the Jebel Marra region of Darfur during the spring and summer of this year.

Despite this legacy of violence, RSF involvement in migration deals between Sudan and the European Union have emboldened the commander of the RSF to demand international recognition, and to attack the EU for not “thanking” his murderous organization.[3] The trend in Sudanese-EU relations towards normalization suggest that such thanks may not be long in coming. This would be extremely misguided, and a deep disregard of international norms.

Even if Sudan were actually serious about working with the European Union in the field of migration, a soft European policy on Sudan disregards the lives of millions of Darfuri’s and other Sudanese who have been systematically victimized by the al-Bashir regime. However, even the recent warming of EU-Sudanese relations itself is based on lies and fundamental criminality on the part of the Sudanese regime. Indeed, in-depth reports by Refugees Deeply (RD), an “independent digital media project dedicated to covering refugee and migration issues around the globe,” uncovered evidence that Sudanese officials have been aiding illicit migration, including working with human traffickers, all throughout the period of EU-Sudanese deals. RD has reported on the multiple forms that this cooperation takes, detailed below.

The RD reports note that the government of Sudan is intimately involved in funneling migrants through Sudan into Europe, which high-level officials running the show every step of the way. Most recently, RD reported that President al-Bashir’s younger brother is operating as the head of a project to bring migrants through Sudan from Syria into Europe. This hypocrisy is typical of the al-Bashir regime. As with repeated bad faith “deals” with rebel groups in Darfur, and “ceasefires” which don’t keep government forces from shooting, the government of Sudan is willing to sign agreements, just not honor them. Al-Bashir will likely continue to gain better relations with the West, all while personally enriching himself and his family running the very migration flows he is being paid by the European Union to stop.

The mechanics of these routes, and government involvement, is detailed below:

1) Selling Sudanese citizenship to wealthy Syrians.[4]

Refugees Deeply (RD) reported in January of this year that Abdullah al-Bashir, the brother of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir, is personally involved with the sale of Sudanese citizenship for profit. Syrians would pay upwards of $10,000 for a Sudanese passport, issued by the state after delivery of payment to officials linked to al-Bashir. With this passport these newly minted Sudanese citizens could fly to the European Union, where they would destroy the Sudanese passports and apply for asylum as Syrian nationals fleeing the violence. The Sudanese government is not merely complicit in this process, but actively manages it, issuing real passports to paying customers.

2) Cooperation with Human Smuggling Rings from East Africa[1]

A separate RD report followed the path of an Eritrean migrant through Sudan, eventually to Egypt and beyond. Groups of migrants were collected at various points in Eritrea before being moved across the border to the Sudanese city of Kassala, thence through Kassala state to Khartoum. Kassala state is notorious as a hotbed of criminal smuggling activity, where the smuggling economy is inextricably linked to connections with government officials. The map above charts the path described by RD. Government officials are complicit in the transport of migrants through every step of the process detailed above, except for the final transit of migrants across the Mediterranean.

This is precisely the type of migration that the new “strategy” is nominally designed to stop. However, that Sudan has acknowledged the existence of trans-Sudan migration does not mean that the government actually has any real intention of stopping it. This is yet another face-saving pronouncement designed to create the appearance of cooperation with the European Union, without any real policy changes.

The networks transporting migrants from East Africa through Sudan are not mere criminal organizations but are in deep cooperation with government officials. Indeed, one source who has been employed at various times as both a smuggler and a police officer, noted that it was impossible for smugglers to operate without the knowledge and consent of local police. The Eritrean migrant whose path was highlight by RD remarked that he was transported from the Eritrean border to Khartoum in vehicles identical to those used by Sudanese police, and was not stopped once at any of the police checkpoints along the route. This is in contrast to his initial attempt to get to Khartoum by bus, where he was stopped by police officers due to lack of sufficient funds to pay their bribes.

Importantly, the routes from Khartoum to Egypt and Libya operate not only with the cooperation of government officials but are explicitly run by veteran high-ranking soldiers of the Sudanese Army, and are publicly advertised in open air markets within Khartoum. Much like the sale of Sudanese passports to high-paying Syrians, this is big business run by big officials. If the government of Sudan were serious about stemming migration, they would shut down these openly marketed businesses operating right under their nose in the capital city. Alternately, President al-Bashir could force his own brother to stop operating a Syrian migration racket. Instead, the President employs the murderous RSF to terrorize occasional parties of migrants en-route to the Libyan border, gaining recognition and funds from the European Union all along the way.

[1] https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/articles/2018/01/19/sudan-the-e-u-s-partner-in-migration-crime

[1] https://reliefweb.int/report/sudan/sudan-develop-national-anti-human-trafficking-strategy

[2] https://www.irinnews.org/special-report/2018/01/30/inside-eu-s-flawed-200-million-migration-deal-sudan

[3] https://www.dabangasudan.org/en/all-news/article/commander-of-sudan-s-main-militia-wants-international-recognition

[4] https://www.newsdeeply.com/refugees/articles/2018/02/01/passports-for-sale-how-sudan-profits-from-syrians

The United Nations security council is set to vote on renewing the mandate of the United Nations – African Union Hybrid Mission in Darfur tomorrow, on July 12^th. UNAMID has served in Darfur since it was founded in July of 2007. Most recently, UNAMID’s mandate was extended for two weeks at the UN Security Council on June 30.

The international community must not abandon the people of Darfur, especially not now. The notion that conflict in Darfur, and especially the targeting of civilians by government forces and government-aligned armed groups, has ended is patently false. The Armed Conflict Location and Event Data Project has recorded, 215 violent incidents in Darfur in the first six-months of 2018 alone. Violence has heated up this year, especially during a government military campaign in the Jebel Marra region in the center of Darfur. Fatou Bensouda, the Prosecutor for the ICC, noted that this government campaign has created about 30,000 newly internally displaced persons. Other sources hold this to be a low estimate. This is not the legacy of crimes a decade ago, but a political and security reality faced by the people of Darfur today.

Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir was indicted by the International Criminal Court in 2009, after the case if Darfur was referred to this body in 2005. Bashir is still at large, entirely avoiding being held to account for his crimes of that past 15 years. Tomorrow, July 12^th, is the eighth anniversary of the second arrest warrant issued against Bashir by the ICC in 2010. It would be the height of irony if the international community formally abandoned its protection of the Darfuri people through UNAMID on the very anniversary of the day its own legal organ officially declared the conflict genocide.

DWAG Statement on UNSC Vote Regarding Renewal of UNAMID Mandate

On Wednesday, June 20th, Prosecutor for the International Criminal Court Fatou Bensouda briefed the United Nations Security Council regarding the progress of the ICC investigation of Darfur, pursuant to UNSCR 1593. She began her testimony with an admonishment of the international community that the people of Darfur have suffered so long and received so little justice. Noting that 13 years have passed since the case was referred to the ICC by the Security Council, Benouda remarked that all those indicted are still at large, and that conflict is still ongoing. The Prosecutor’s report also noted the recent fighting in Jebel Marra and acknowledged that 80,000 civilians have been displaced in recent months.

Specifically, Bensouda noted the lack of cooperation from the state parties to the Rome Statute in executing the arrest warrants against the perpetrators of genocide in Darfur. Sudanese President al-Bashir was indicted by the ICC in 2009, yet in 2018 alone has visited Jordan, Chad, Uganda, Ethiopia, Turkey, Egypt, Rwanda, and Saudi Arabia without arrest. Jordan, Chad, and Uganda are all three party to the Rome Statute and are therefore failing to uphold their legal obligation to the International Criminal Court.[1]

Several of the state delegates to the Security Council reinforced Madam Bensouda’s concerns and reminded the Council that the violence in Darfur is still ongoing. Madam Bensouda’s report noted particular concern with the safety of Internally Displaced Persons, that sexual violence is common around IDP camps, and that previously displaced persons are often targeted with sexual violence upon returning home. This is particularly concerning given President al-Bashir’s stated policy of closing the IDP camps in Darfur by the end of this year.

Following the Prosecutors address of the council, the state delegates of Council members made statements of their own in response.[2] Several of these responses were strong denunciations of the violence in Darfur and the Government of Sudan which commits it, as well as castigations of the Government of Sudan for its repeated refusal to cooperate with the ICC, UNAMID, and humanitarian organizations which attempt to operate in Darfur to provide services to the affected communities. These states noted especially the ongoing sexual violence prevalent in Darfur, especially carried out by Government forces, the rising level of arbitrary arrests throughout Sudan, and the importance of protecting IDPs. Among those speaking on behalf of the long-suffering people of Darfur were the delegates for the United Kingdom, France, the United States, Peru, Sweden, Bolivia, Poland, and the Netherlands. The United States strong statement regarding Sudanese accountability was noteworthy, and hopefully a harbinger of more responsible American policy towards Sudan, given the Trump administration’s removal of sanctions against Sudan in October 2017.

Several nations’ delegates instead replied to the Prosecutor’s briefing with hostility, lies, accusations, and coldly inhumane illogic. The delegates representing Ethiopia, China, Equatorial Guinea, Kazakhstan, Côte d’Ivoire, and Russia actually praised the Government of Sudan for it’s supposed efforts to achieve peace in Darfur. Such positions are of no surprise considering the human rights records of these governments themselves. The fundamental illogic of praising a genocidal regime for working towards peace was apparently lost on their delegates. These six states, as well as Kuwait and Equatorial Guinea, challenged the ICC jurisdiction and its right to indict a sitting head of state, attempting to discredit a powerful tool of the international justice, used by the international community in response to genocide.

The delegate from Sudan addressed the Council as well, repeating the same spin-doctoring and denials of fact which Sudan has published for years. He claimed that Sudan is a positive force in international relations throughout its geographic region, accused the prosecutor of a secret conspiracy against Sudan, denied that the international community had any right to prosecutor a sitting head of state, and that Sudan was being targeted as part of an international conspiracy against the legitimacy of African rulers. He failed to acknowledge that his government has perpetrated genocide against its own citizens.

To different degrees, many delegates acknowledged statements of fact regarding the level of conflict in Darfur which were at best misleading, and at worst patently false. First, several delegates applauded the government of Sudan for its role in diminishing the level of military conflict in Darfur. This presupposes two claims, (1) military conflict is declining in Darfur, and (2) the government of Sudan is playing a constructive role in making this be so. Second, multiple delegates again applauded the government of Sudan for improving humanitarian conditions on the ground in Sudan. We refute both claims based on available evidence of the reality on the ground in Darfur. This evidence is presented below.

 Claim: Violent conflict is declining in Darfur, and this is tied to government progress.

Fact: This year continues a recent trend of escalated violence as compared to historical averages, and the government of Sudan is in fact conducting significantly more military activity this year than it historically has.

Chart 1 presents data collected by ACLED[3] on armed confrontations by this time each year, over the length of the conflict in Darfur. When put in historical perspective, claims by UN delegates that military violence in Darfur is diminishing are clearly dramatically optimistic understatements of actual conditions. Yes, the 71 battles thus far in 2017 reflect a slight decline from the 77 battles by this time last year. And yes, this is again a decline from the peak of 151 battles by this time in 2016. But in historical context, these numbers still represent an extreme escalation of violence in Darfur in recent years. The peak of 151 battles in 2016 was a massive 200% rise from the previous peak of violence in 2005. The 71 battles thus far in 2018 still represent a 45% rise in violence over the previous peak in 2005.

Not only is the general level of military activity unusually high, but the government share of that activity in 2018 actually represents an increase over recent averages. Chart 2 presents the percentage of all battles in Darfur which involved government forces.[4] Following a massive spike in government military action in 2002 and 2003, government involvement in battles in Darfur hovered around a relatively stable average of 60% since 2004. This year represents a statistically unusual high level of government military action, approaching the peak year of 2003. The government of Sudan has been involved in 86% of all battles thus far in 2018, which is greater than 1.5 standard deviations above the average for this time of the year since 2004.

Claim: The humanitarian situation is improving in Darfur.

Fact: This year continued to reflect a generally diminished security environment for civilians in Darfur, as compared to historical averages over the length of the conflict.

 

Several delegates made the claim that the humanitarian situation on the ground in Darfur is improving. This is an utter contradiction from the available data, so extreme as to constitute an outright lie. This year has indeed seen a decline in incidents of violence against civilians when compared to this time last year. However, much like the level of military action described above, this reflects a decline within the context of extremely high recent levels of violence. The 125 recorded incidents of violence against civilians thus far in 2018 is 29% above the pre-2013 average, and within 13% of the pre-2013 peak of 144 incidents in the first six months of 2004. To put this another way, if the same level of violence against civilians in 2018 occurred in 2013, it would be an unambiguous escalation of violence. It only seems like a decrease, and can be disingenuously presented as such, because it follows the 300% spike in violence against civilians which occurred between 2013 and 2015, as compared to the previous historical average. To claim that the humanitarian situation in Darfur is “improving” because the level of violence against civilians is returning to the unacceptably high pre-2013 level is a fundamentally malevolent distortion of reality.

The UN delegates are cherry-picking historical trends, representing a decline from a massive local maximum as a general decline in violence, even though this still represents a time of heightened violence over the historical peak.

While it is important to highlight actual conditions in Darfur, and especially to point out where such powerful policymakers such as delegates to the UNSC misstate fact, such nitpicking about numbers is actually beyond the point. What is universally acknowledged is that, at whatever level, the Government of Sudan is committed to war against its own civilians. The question is not truly the amount of violence, or the numbers of battles, per year but whether the government of Sudan can be allowed to commit one single act of state violence against its own people in the first place.

In addition to what was explicitly discussed during the briefing, several trends were not mentioned by remain crucial to understanding the context of the ICC’s investigation into the Government of Sudan’s conduct in Darfur. First, it should be noted that Government forces, and their associated militia, are nearly uniformly responsible for all acts of violence, and sexual violence specifically. The notion that Darfur is a warzone in which citizens are at risk from all sides is incorrect and perpetrated to fit the Government of Sudan’s international political agenda. Second, it should be stressed that violence against civilians, and again especially sexual violence, is being used for political purposes by the Government of Sudan. Attacks on civilians, including beatings, extrajudicial killings, and rapes, are often conducted in tandem with purely military activity, and this pattern has existed for the length of the conflict in Darfur since it began over 15 years ago. More detail on both of these points is available here.

---

 

[1] The text of the Prosecutors official report can be found here

[2] Full  summaries of these addresses can be found here, and the full transcript of the briefing here

[3] Armed Conflict Location and Event Data project

[4] Number of battles involving government forces divided by total number of battles in Darfur

It was a serene evening at a crowded market in the village HigairTunu, South Darfur. This place was frequented by families- mothers, fathers, children and the elderly who greeted their neighbors and friends as they exchanged news of the community and purchased their weekly necessities. Suddenly, assailants besieged the market on camelback and opened fire on the unarmed shoppers. The torrent of bullets rained down on the innocent, transforming a peaceful scene to one that was chaotic and tragic.

One can only imagine the anguish of this heartbreaking scene. Mothers holding their crying children, men and women falling from gunfire, people confused and terrified at the commotion.  In the frenzy, the market’s tables overturned spilling the goods and produce like the blood spilled from the market frequenters. Life and lives were lost in the market that night. Among the survivors, the loss changed their lives forever but in terms of the violence, life was unchanged.

It was June 5 when the armed militiamen killed these Darfuri civilians in the market. The crime has not yet been solved. Both major rebel groups have condemned this violent attack on civilians. According to news reports, the governor of South Darfur has downplayed the incident, referring to the attack as a “quarrel” between four men and a female market seller.

A local community leader has pointed out that the government and security community failed to order any of their forces to trail the gunmen. The leader criticized the government, emphasizing that “criminals are still armed, even though the government has made much of its recent disarmament campaign”. Displaced civilians in Darfur have also been unimpressed with the government’s reforms to address the violence and complain that the violence has not ebbed. Particularly, the civilians have charged state-backed militias with attacking them and appropriating their land.

According to U.N. estimates more than 300,000 people were killed in Darfur conflicts over the past 15 years and upwards of 2.7 million became displaced. We must keep alive the memory of this violent act and so many others. A civilization depends on our ethical compass for bringing justice to those afflicted by persecution in Darfur. Our compass must guide our efforts in aiding and empowering the Darfuri women, men, children and elderly because an attack on their human rights is an attack on all of us.

It is incumbent upon the international community to be vigilant in monitoring violent incidents in Darfur and Sudan. Clearly, the right to peacefully assemble at a market is something the world can understand and support.

Attacks of its kind are not new to civilians in Darfur and nor are a single incident, it’s a part of a deliberate policy of the government of Sudan to eliminate the people of Darfur which are well documented over the last 14 years. The international community must meet its responsibility by challenging the regime in Sudan and make it clear that impunity for such horrendous crimes is not an option.  We must demand that of all of our leaders including the US government.

 

Maxfield- Outreach Intern

The Illusion of Democracy in Sudan:

How Elections are Manipulated to Legitimize a Dictator

As Bashir and his party are preparing for their inevitable reelection. The Sudanese Communist Party recently announced that they would be boycotting the upcoming 2020 election.  This announcement comes after that of other members of the National Consensus Forces (NCF), the collation of opposition parties to the ruling National Congress Party (NCP). The NCF also stated their refusal to meet with the ruling party and discuss plans for this election.

The outcome of the 2020 election is already known and is unlikely to change. The Sudanese constitution allows for the formation of multiple different political parties, but their impact on Sudanese elections is minimal at best. The formation of these political parties is to give the illusion of democracy in Sudan and so are Sudanese elections.

The most recent Sudanese election in 2015, saw President al-Bashir win with a whopping  94% of the total vote, and the five-year extension of a then 26-year-old rule. It is important to note a few things from the 2015 election. Firstly, there was a mass boycott by opposing parties. The NCF and the Sudanese Communist Party, as well as many others, refused to take part in this election due to the perceived corruption of the election system. Elections in Sudan are by no means free and fair, but a boycott of these elections can have unintended consequences, such as easing the manipulation of the election, targeting of those who refused to vote and the bias of monitoring committees.

Secondly, this election was monitored but by missions sent by the African Union, the Arab   League, as well as some sent from China, Russia, and Turkey, countries which all face criticism of their own election processes. But the Russia-Sudan relation is of particular interest as it has warmed significantly in recent years. President al-Bashir invited President Putin to Khartoum earlier this year, and President Putin accepted. Russia is one of Sudan’s strongest investment partners and has actively opposed the creation of an independent Darfurian state. Not only that, but some of the weapons employed by the Janjaweed have been bought from Russia. Many recent attacks have been conducted with the use of DShK(Dushka) machine guns. This relation has depended so much that at the end of 2017, President al-Bashir appealed to Putin for his help against US interference.

Nonetheless, these committees reported that the reason President al-Bashir won with such a large percentage of the total vote was that there was no formal opposition, as well as low voter turnout. These are valid reasons, not many people voted, and many parties boycotted the election. However, it’s a sort of self-fulfilling prophecy as the reason people did not vote and parties boycotted the election was because the outcome was already known. Sudanese elections have always been marred by corruption and inequality, and there has always been a general public consensus that these elections are useless.  The public apathy towards elections has contributed to lower voter turnout and is part of a cycle of control. Because people know that their votes do not matter, they do not vote. In addition, the prevalent corruption and rigging of elections also discourage other political parties from running. Election monitoring committees can blame such a large majority vote on these surface level factors, rather than the lack of true democracy.

The 2010 elections only serve to further show the mass scale at which voting rights are denied. A video surfaced from the time showing men, dressed in the Sudanese Armed Forces uniform, stuffing ballot boxes. However, this video has yet to be authenticated. The Sudanese National Elections Committee claimed that this video is fake, but they refused to investigate it despite the cries from civil society. The video has since been deleted. More so, photos of polling sites from the 2015 election show staffers sleeping, as well as mainly police officers voting. Parts of Darfur and South Kordofan excluded from voting in 2015. Officials said that they wanted to protect citizens because of the ongoing conflict. Yet, it is the government using the threats of their ongoing genocide to disenfranchise the regions which they are actively pursuing a genocidal policy against. But the only reason why voting in these areas is a potential safety threat is that the Sudanese Government is actively attacking these regions.

The NCP is dangerous. The NCP was founded out of the National Islamic Front in the late 1990s. The ideologies of these two are not different. The establishment of the NCP was more of a name change than anything else. The NCP based their policies off Pan-Arabism, Anti-Zionism, and Salafism, a radical form of Sunni Islam. Under the rule of President al-Bashir and the NCP, Sudan’s human rights record has deteriorated.

President al-Bashir’s rule has been disastrous. There are the deteriorating human rights conditions, the collapse of banking systems, and the economic collapse of various different sectors including the agricultural, industrial and medical sectors. Worst of all, the situation in Darfur leaving countless dead and displaced. President al-Bashir’s rule saw the succession of South Sudan after a brutal and sustained civil war. President al-Bashir was also the first sitting president to be indicted on counts of genocide and is still actively carrying out a genocide in Darfur as dictated by the NCP ideology. His goal is to drive the native, non-Arab population out of Darfur and resettle the region with a new Arab policy. It is Sudan’s “Final Solution”.

For the last 15 years, the Sudanese Rapid Support Forces, under the direction of President al-Bashir have burned villages, slaughtered innocent civilians, and utilized rape as a weapon of war. In recent years, Amnesty International has brought forth allegations of the use of chemical weapons in Darfur against civilian populations, but these claims have yet to be investigated by the UN. Amnesty International has also brought forth allegations that Sudan is employing what is known as a “Scorched Earth Policy”. This policy in short means that the government is trying to further deprive civilians in Darfur, especially those in the Jebel Marra region, of anything that might be of use to them. It is another way for the Sudanese Government to try and drive people out of their homes. They are doing so by dropping bombs on the region and restricting access to humanitarian aid; cutting Darfur off from the world while they continue to pillage it.

The general consensus that elections in Sudan area sham to give the illusion of democracy seems to hold.  It is understandable why all these political parties are boycotting the upcoming election.  Before the campaigns have officially started, everyone already knows who is going to win the 2020 election. The sad truth of it all is that in Sudan, the voter doesn’t matter, the only thing that matters is how fast the NCP can stuff ballot boxes.

As long as there is an international cover-up of what really happens in Sudanese election, this cycle of control will continue. The stakes are too high for this system to continue. There is not needs to be genuine monitoring committees but a genocidaire should not be allowed to run for election in 2020. This is a small start to tackling a much greater problem. But only when there is formal international recognition of the corruption in these elections cycles can we move forward and work to break Bashir’s methods of control and work to transfer him to The Hague to stand trial for all those he murdered. Next year will mark three decades of Bashir’s rule. It will also mark ten years since the first ICC arrest warrant against time. We need to ensure that the only anniversary Bashir has in the coming years is that of his arrest.

 

Roksana Verahrami

At the age of 19, Noura Hussein has been sentenced to die. A court in Sudan ruled that she was guilty of premeditated murder and thus was given the death penalty, execution by hanging. Of course, this is the end of a story that has been determined by widespread misogyny and mass human rights violations. When Noura was just 16, her father forced her to marry. Noura managed to escape to her Aunt’s house for three years.

 

But in 2017, she was tricked into coming home. Her father had told her that he had canceled the wedding and she was free to return home. Once she came back to her family’s house, Noura realized she had been tricked and was forced to marry. During the four days following this wedding, Noura refused to consummate the marriage until on the fifth day, she was forcibly held down by multiple male relatives, the majority related to her husband, while her husband raped her. The following day, her husband attempted to rape her again, and in a panic-driven act of self-defense, Noura stabbed and killed him. Noura went to her parents’ house for help, but her father turned her into the police for what she did. She was tried with premeditated murder and found guilty. Her husband’s family refused offers for compensation and instead demanded execution by hanging.

 

The verdict of Noura’s case reflects an unjust and misogynistic justice system and demonstrates just how deeply rooted human rights abuse is in Sudan. Also, Sudan has also twisted Sharia law to justify these practices. For example, Article 91 of Sudanese Family Law: “A married woman must obey her husband if he has paid the dowry and provides a suitable home.”  This Article has been used against Noura, saying that it was her duty to consummate the marriage as shown by the law, and through Islam. However, this marriage was not consensual nor was it actually a marriage, and the justification of this marriage is utterly inaccurate according to Islamic law, which prohibits forced marriage. The Sudanese Constitution also prohibits forced marriage, meaning that it was not a case of marital rape, but this marriage cannot be legally recognized.

 

Probably the worst part of Noura’s situation is how common it is. Forced marriage is common, in Sudan, as is marital rape, and Sudan’s inability to hold the preparators of these crimes accountable and to punish the victims is a clear mass affront to human rights norms. The Sudanese Government has been actively carrying out a genocidal campaign in Darfur for over fifteen years, and forces regularly use rape as a weapon of war. The regime of indicted-war-criminal President Omar al-Bashir has been riddled with the systematic abuse of civilians and has been justified using a twisted version of Islamic law.

 

We must take action and demand justice for Noura! And many other women whose stories  of abuse have gone unnoticed. If Noura is executed the continual oppression of women in Sudan will continue and we must ensure that this never happens to another woman. As allegations coming out that right now, the Trump Administration is working on normalizing relations with the Government of Sudan, which will only solidify Sudan’s current human rights abuses. We must raise our voices and ensure that the US does not reward Sudan for their continuing and worsening human rights violations. If the US continues to do warm relations with Sudan, there will never be justice for Noura, only the continual oppression of women in positions similar to her.