Sudan Call for Peace: Demands Civilian Oversight in Security Sector Reform

• The Fourth Forum of "Sudan Call for Peace" took place in Khartoum on October 23, 2026.
• Participants urged that citizens be central to the reform of Sudan's security and military sectors.
• A key demand was placing military, police, and security institutions under civilian oversight and the rule of law.
• The forum identified security sector reform as crucial for ending the conflict and protecting civilians in Sudan.
• Past reform failures were attributed to weak implementation, oversight, and limited technical capabilities, rather than a lack of principles.

This initiative specifically advocated for all military, police, and security institutions to be brought under robust civilian oversight and the strict application of the rule of law.

The Fourth Forum of "Sudan Call for Peace" convened in Khartoum on October 23, 2026, where participants issued urgent calls for fundamental changes to the nation's security and military apparatus. A central demand from the forum was the imperative to place Sudanese citizens at the very heart of the security and military sector reform process. This initiative specifically advocated for all military, police, and security institutions to be brought under robust civilian oversight and the strict application of the rule of law.

The forum's discussions underscored that the cessation of hostilities and the effective protection of civilians are inextricably linked to the future structure and governance of the security sector. Key "Sudan Call for Peace recommendations" included establishing arrangements for de-escalation, strategically deploying forces, ensuring the protection of urban areas, and preventing the formation of new armed groups. Furthermore, the participants emphasized the critical need to address the complex issues surrounding the integration and demobilization of various armed forces.

The reform of Sudan's security and military institutions has long been identified as a pivotal issue for resolving the ongoing conflict, particularly given the proliferation of diverse armed formations across the country. Efforts to unify these regular forces under a single, professional command, demonstrably subject to civilian authority, have faced significant setbacks. This challenge is not new; security and military reform proved to be a deeply contentious file during the transitional period that followed the April 2019 overthrow of President Omar al-Bashir's regime.

During that critical post-Bashir era, specific points of contention included the proposed "Sudan military integration armed groups," notably the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), into the national army, a process which ultimately led to the outbreak of the current conflict in April 2023 when disputes over this integration escalated into full-scale war, with the RSF now fighting against the national army, as well as the arrangements for command and control within the military. The extensive role of military institutions in both political and economic life also emerged as a major point of dispute. The forum highlighted that the future of the security sector, encompassing aspects like accountability and "Sudan transitional justice security sector" mechanisms, is directly tied to the ability to end the war and safeguard civilian populations, reinforcing the need for "Sudan rule of law security forces" and genuine "Sudan civilian control military."

A crucial aspect of the discussions at the forum centered on the necessity of distinguishing between the professional rights of individual members of the regular forces—such as fair wages, adequate housing, and job stability—and the self-serving interests of their leadership. Participants pointed out that leaders often prioritize retaining power, securing economic influence, or ensuring impunity for crimes, rather than the welfare of their personnel or the nation. This distinction is vital for fostering a professional and accountable security sector.

The forum's analysis also shed light on why previous agreements aimed at reform had faltered. It was noted that these failures were not primarily due to an absence of agreed-upon principles, which were often present. Instead, the setbacks were attributed to systemic weaknesses in implementation and oversight mechanisms, coupled with limited technical capabilities essential for ensuring the successful execution of reforms. This underscores that achieving effective "Sudan security sector reform civilian oversight" requires not just policy agreement, but robust practical frameworks and sustained commitment to overcome these historical impediments.

Lawyers and compliance officers in Sudan should closely monitor legislative and policy developments stemming from calls for civilian oversight and accountability in security sector reform, as these will shape future legal frameworks for military conduct, transitional justice, and the integration of armed groups, impacting compliance and risk assessments for clients.

Source: Reporting based on Sudan Tribune's coverage.