Sudan Accuses UAE of Complicity in Genocide in Darfur
The Hague
Sudan has dragged the United Arab Emirates (UAE) before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing it of complicity in genocide against the Masalit community through its alleged support for the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) that have been battling the Sudanese army since 2023.
Sudan’s Case
Sudan’s acting justice minister, Muawia Osman, told the court that the "ongoing genocide would not be possible without the complicity of the UAE, including the shipment of arms to the RSF". He stated that the direct logistical and other support provided by the UAE to the RSF has been and continues to be the primary driving force behind the genocide, including killing, rape, forced displacement, and looting.
UAE’s Denial
The UAE denies supporting the rebels and has dismissed Sudan’s case as "political theatre" distracting from efforts to end the war that has killed tens of thousands. Reem Ketait, a top UAE official, described Sudan’s case as a "blatant misuse of a respected international institution" and "entirely without legal or factual merit".
Jurisdictional Issues
Legal experts say Sudan’s case may founder on jurisdictional issues. When the UAE signed up to the Genocide Convention, it entered a "reservation" to a key clause enabling countries to drag each other before the ICJ over disputes. Sudan’s claims raise "important questions", according to Michael Becker, an international law expert from Trinity College Dublin.
Consequences of the Ruling
The ICJ’s rulings are final and binding, but the court has no means to ensure compliance. Judges ordered Russia to halt its invasion of Ukraine, but to no avail. If the ICJ rules in Sudan’s favor, it could lead to the UAE being forced to stop its alleged support for the RSF and make "full reparations", including compensation to victims of the war.
Conclusion
The case highlights the complex and often contentious issues surrounding international law and state responsibility. The outcome of the case will depend on the ICJ’s interpretation of the Genocide Convention and its jurisdiction over the dispute.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q: What is the dispute about?
A: Sudan has accused the UAE of complicity in genocide against the Masalit community through its alleged support for the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
Q: How did the UAE respond to the accusations?
A: The UAE has denied supporting the rebels and has dismissed Sudan’s case as "political theatre" distracting from efforts to end the war.
Q: What are the jurisdictional issues at play?
A: The UAE entered a "reservation" to a key clause enabling countries to drag each other before the ICJ over disputes, which could affect the court’s jurisdiction over the dispute.
Q: What are the potential consequences of the ruling?
A: If the ICJ rules in Sudan’s favor, it could lead to the UAE being forced to stop its alleged support for the RSF and make "full reparations", including compensation to victims of the war.