An Egyptian Expert in International Law to “Sudanhorizon”: “The Sudanese Government has the Right to Reject the Recommendations of the Fact-Finding Committee

Cairo – Sudanhorizon – Sabah Mousa

Dr. Ayman Salama, an Egyptian expert in international humanitarian law, confirmed that Sudan is an independent sovereign state and that the Sudanese government has the right to reject the recommendations of the fact-finding committee, which recently recommended deploying neutral, independent forces with a mandate to protect civilians in Sudan.

In an exclusive statement to Sudanhorizon, Salama explained that there is only one situation where the host state’s acceptance is not required: if the United Nations Security Council issues a decision under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. He added that the Security Council is the only body responsible for this, not the Human Rights Council, the United Nations General Assembly, or the International Court of Justice. Salama clarified that the Security Council is the exclusive executive body of the United Nations and can deploy international forces, known as “peace enforcement forces,” to any region without the host state’s consent. In this case, Sudan’s approval is unnecessary, but for the Security Council to issue a decision under Chapter VII requires the unanimous agreement of the five permanent members.

Salama further explained that in order for the Sudanese government to avoid certain sanctions on individuals or entities within Sudan, it must conduct independent investigations through a neutral and independent committee formed by law, not through an executive administrative order. He added, “This committee should investigate the same individuals accused by the fact-finding committee and refer them to Sudanese national courts to ensure accountability.” He emphasized that this process serves as a deterrent to prevent further crimes against civilians in Sudan.

The Egyptian expert clarified that the fact-finding mission’s goal is to protect innocent, unarmed Sudanese civilians not involved in the ongoing armed conflict in Sudan. He added that when the mission drafted its report and recommendations, it considered that international humanitarian law, violated by both sides, applies without discrimination to all parties in any conflict. He noted that the principle of reciprocity does not apply to international humanitarian law, and all warring parties must adhere to its principles, including the distinction between civilians and combatants and between civilian and military objects, as well as the principle of military necessity and avoiding unnecessary harm to civilians and combatants alike.

Salama continued that the Security Council and the Human Rights Council, especially in recent decades, have been sending fact-finding committees to investigate serious violations of international humanitarian law in non-international armed conflicts and civil wars. He pointed out that these are not international criminal investigation committees but rather fact-finding missions to uncover serious violations of international humanitarian law, such as war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by parties involved in non-international armed conflicts, as in Sudan. He added, “We all understand that the Rapid Support Forces have rebelled against legitimacy in Sudan and are separatist, but violations of international humanitarian law are committed by parties in armed conflicts all over the world.