The Face of Truth | Ibrahim Shiglawy
The Trial of Hemedti Between Two Laws
On Sunday, the Terrorism Court in Port Sudan began the trial in absentia of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) commander, Mohamed Hamdan “Dagalo,” his brother Abdel Rahim Dagalo, and others, on charges related to the assassination of the Governor of West Darfur. The Public Prosecution had earlier, before referring the case to the court, summoned Hemedti, his two brothers, Deputy Governor Tijani Taher Kershoum, and others to appear before it, declaring them fugitives. The judge of the Terrorism Court, Al-Mamoun Al-Khawad, decided to proceed with the trial sessions to hear the investigator and the complainant, with witnesses expected to testify in the upcoming sessions.
In these sessions, Attorney General Al-Fateh Tayfour delivered the prosecution’s opening statement in the first court session, pointing out that the case encompasses all the foundations upon which the indictment was built. Tayfour, visibly moved, said the case reveals acts of betrayal by forces that were supposed to protect the country. It began with the fierce attack on Merowe Airport in northern Sudan, followed by the assault on the residence of the Sovereignty Council chairman and army commander, Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan.
The Governor of West Darfur, Khamis Abkar, was assassinated on June 14, 2023, shortly after being arrested by the RSF, who took him to their headquarters in the presence of their commander in the state, Abdul Rahman Jumaa Barakallah. Later, videos emerged documenting the governor’s killing and the mutilation of his body. Earlier, Al-Hadath TV had documented the storming of his residence. The Attorney General stated that the RSF detained the slain governor and his guards, with the involvement of Jumaa Barakallah and Tijani Kershoum, before taking him to their base, where he was executed and his body dragged.
The case, which involves 16 individuals, includes charges of involvement in the assassination of Khamis and violations of 12 articles of the criminal code, including Article 186 on crimes against humanity, in addition to violations of anti-terrorism laws. The RSF commander was named the primary defendant, his brother Abdel Rahim the second, and another brother named Al-Gouni, who serves as the RSF’s procurement officer, the third defendant.
Among the accused are also Abdul Rahman Jumaa Barakallah and Taher Kershoum, who was the deputy to Khamis Abkar. After the governor’s assassination, the militia quickly took control of the state and appointed Kershoum as head of the civil administration, a position he still holds. The penalty upon conviction could be death.
The trial of these high-profile figures represents a crucial test for Sudanese justice and its ability to confront such crimes. Yet, the question remains: will this trial mark the beginning of opening other thorny files, such as violations committed by the RSF against civilians in Sireeha, Hilaliya, Wad Al-Noura, and others? Or will it be just another episode in the series of impunity?
According to international law treaties, including the Geneva Conventions of 1949, grave violations against civilians constitute war crimes and crimes against humanity, warranting individual criminal accountability, including for militia leaders.
Despite these proceedings, a central question persists: Why isn’t Hemedti and his brother being tried under the Sudanese Armed Forces Law instead of the criminal code? At its core, what Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo and the RSF did is a blatant military coup against the state and its constitutional institutions—a power grab through armed force. This aligns precisely with the definition of “high treason” and “armed rebellion” under the Sudanese Armed Forces Law.
However, the failure to prosecute him under this law so far may be due to several intertwined factors. First is the legal status of these forces: Despite their formal subordination to the army under the 2017 RSF Law, they enjoyed a margin of organizational and operational autonomy, leading to legal ambiguities about their true authority. Some parties exploit this to justify not subjecting RSF leaders to the military law.
Also, the constitutional and institutional vacuum: Since the 2019 political shift and the subsequent unrest, Sudan has entered a state of legal and constitutional fluidity, making it difficult to activate traditional coup accountability provisions—especially with the absence of a legitimate parliament and an active Constitutional Court.
There are also regional and international political calculations: Some believe there is international hesitation to label what happened as an official coup, despite the clear facts, in order to avoid political escalation or the opening of legal fronts. Hence, the attempt to contain the crime within a civilian criminal framework is an important step, but it may confine the crime to the realm of “violations” rather than “military treason and coup.”
Trying Hemedti under the Armed Forces Law would not only label his actions as high treason but would also constitute an official acknowledgment that what occurred was a full-fledged armed coup. This requires a decisive political and legal stance from the Sudanese state.
Today, Sudan stands at a critical crossroads: either this trial contributes to restoring confidence in its judicial institutions, or it becomes another chapter in the saga of impunity. And although the Attorney General pledged that “the sword of justice will reach every fugitive,” the Sudanese people—especially the people of Darfur—are not waiting for mere promises, but for the strict application of the law and clear recognition of rights.
The international silence regarding this crime will only be a tacit license for further killings and violations in a war-weary country whose civil and judicial institutions need support to build a different future—one in which human dignity is preserved and the rule of law upheld. As the philosopher Blaise Pascal said, “Justice without force is powerless; force without justice is tyranny.”
As we see it from the #Face_of_Truth, if international charters have enshrined the right to accountability as a fundamental guarantee against the recurrence of crimes, then the reality on the ground in Sudan suggests that justice must be enacted amid the brute force required to redress victims. Between that fair application and outright tyranny, Sudan’s future hangs on a genuine will that puts humanity first and rebuilds the state on foundations of law, justice, and dignity—for lasting peace and the consolidation of justice.
Wishing you wellness and peace.
Wednesday, April 23, 2025
Shglawi55@gmail.com
