Ahead of Its Monday Session: An Open Letter to the ICJ from International Legal Experts

Sudanhorizon – Reports
In a major legal development, a number of prominent international legal experts—including former judges and prosecutors from international tribunals and representatives of leading human rights organizations—have sent an open letter to the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The letter presents an independent legal opinion affirming the invalidity of sweeping reservations to Article IX of the “Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide”, known as the Genocide Convention.
According to a study prepared by the Kora Center for Studies and Development, Article IX is considered the cornerstone that enables the Court to examine disputes related to the interpretation and application of the Convention.
This article is a crucial legal mechanism for holding states accountable for genocide, granting the ICJ jurisdiction to adjudicate such cases.
The legal experts argue that sweeping reservations to this article strip the Convention of its essence, undermining its effectiveness in preventing and punishing genocide—especially in the absence of any alternative enforcement mechanism within the Convention’s framework.
Sudan at the Heart of the Case
This legal opinion comes at a time when international attention is focused on Sudan, where the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) continue to commit atrocities and violations that independent and UN reports, as well as the United States government, have described as amounting to genocide. These forces are reportedly being consistently armed and supported by the United Arab Emirates (UAE)—a matter that has prompted the Sudanese government to initiate legal action against the UAE at the ICJ, accusing it of violating its obligations under the Genocide Convention and aiding genocide perpetrated by its proxy, the RSF.
The legal opinion outlined in the open letter also highlights the international community’s failure to prevent genocide in Darfur over the past two decades and the continued pattern of impunity.
Prominent Signatories
Among the leading figures who signed the letter are:
Richard J. Goldstone, former judge and chief prosecutor of the international tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and the first prosecutor of an international criminal court, is regarded as a key architect of modern international justice for war crimes, crimes against humanity, and genocide.
David M. Crane, founding prosecutor of the Special Court for Sierra Leone, who issued the first indictment against a sitting head of state, President Charles Taylor of Liberia—a landmark in international law.
Irwin Cotler, head of the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights, and former Justice Minister and Attorney General of Canada.
Hans Corell, former UN Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and Legal Counsel of the United Nations.
Gerald Gahima, former Prosecutor General of Rwanda post-genocide (1999–2003).
Frédéric Mégret, Professor of International Law at McGill University in Canada.
Dr. Melanie O’Brien, Professor of International Law at the University of Western Australia and President of the International Association of Genocide Scholars.
Kristin Rosella, Co-Executive Director of LexCollective, a legal advocacy organization.
Yonah Diamond, Legal Counsel at the Raoul Wallenberg Centre.
Mutasim Ali, a Sudanese legal scholar.
The signatories argue that reservations to Article IX deprive victims—such as those in Sudan—of access to international justice, at a time when the ICJ remains the only legal mechanism capable of holding states accountable for genocide.
Sudan v. UAE: A Turning Point in International Justice
According to the letter, Sudan’s case against the UAE at the ICJ represents a critical moment in the trajectory of international justice. The independent legal opinion takes on even greater weight as the Court is expected to issue a preliminary decision in the case on Monday, May 5, 2025. The case accuses Abu Dhabi of violating international obligations by supporting militias (RSF) that are allegedly committing genocidal acts, particularly in the Darfur region.
The UAE has entered a reservation to Article IX, disputing the ICJ’s jurisdiction over the matter and aiming to use that reservation to obstruct the course of justice and avoid legal accountability.
The forthcoming ruling is expected to set a legal precedent that could redefine state responsibility for the actions of their proxies or allies in conflicts with international dimensions. It will also test the international community’s commitment—especially the ICJ’s—to enforcing the Genocide Convention independently of political influence or procedural reservations.
The legal opinion notes that only 16 out of 153 state parties to the Convention still maintain broad reservations to Article IX—a number that is steadily declining, bolstering calls to consider such reservations invalid as they contradict the Convention’s core aim: “to liberate humanity from the scourge of genocide.”
Amid escalating crises in regions such as Sudan, Gaza, and others, the signatories warn that continued vulnerability of Article IX to reservations will keep the door to impunity wide open, allowing perpetrators to hide behind sovereign immunity. Former ICJ Judge Abdou Koroma previously described this as “procedural injustice.”

Shortlink: https://sudanhorizon.com/?p=5403