Sudan: Women Face Death Penalty For Alleged RSF Collaboration

• Dozens of Sudanese women, including Sahar*, face death sentences or lengthy prison terms for alleged collaboration with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) under Articles 50 and 51 of the 1991 Penal Code.
• Many accused women, such as doctors, nurses, and vendors, were reportedly forced by war conditions to provide services in RSF-controlled areas, with Human Rights Watch documenting at least 25 death sentences by April.
• Legal experts criticize the vague wording of Articles 50 and 51, which allows for broad interpretation and use against civilians, often based on mere presence in RSF-controlled territories.
• Over 10% of the 600 women in Omdurman Women's Prison are charged with RSF collaboration, with 83 children living alongside their mothers.
• Accusations against women, numbering over 1,000 in one state, are frequently rooted in personal disputes or retaliatory motives, yet authorities treat suspicion as certainty, aiming for deterrent punishments.

The broad and often arbitrary application of these statutes raises significant concerns regarding due process and human rights, particularly for vulnerable populations caught in conflict zones.

A harrowing account from Sahar*, who spent nine months in a security cell, underscores the severe human rights abuses faced by women accused of collaborating with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Sudan. Sahar* reported being beaten, abused, and losing three teeth due to torture, in addition to experiencing sexual assault. She was pressured under duress to confess to collaboration, an accusation she denies, stating she was merely working as a translator to support her three children. The Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) subsequently sentenced her to death under Article 50 of the 1991 Sudanese Penal Code, which criminalizes "undermining the constitutional order."

This individual case is indicative of a broader crisis. Human Rights Watch (HRW) documented at least 25 women sentenced to death for alleged RSF collaboration in April alone. Across Sudanese prisons, dozens of women are languishing, having been convicted or tried for similar accusations during the ongoing conflict. Many of these women, according to Adila Abu Bakr, head of the protection unit at the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa (SIHA), did not bear arms. Instead, they were often doctors, nurses, or tea and food vendors, compelled by wartime circumstances to continue providing essential services in areas controlled by the RSF. They are now facing the dire consequences of these actions.

The scale of the issue is particularly evident in facilities like Omdurman Women's Prison, also known as Dar al-Ta'ibat. An investigation by Madania News revealed that approximately 600 women are detained there, with over 10% facing charges of RSF collaboration. The majority of these women are undergoing trials or serving sentences under Articles 50 and 51 of the Penal Code. Disturbingly, 83 children are also living within the prison alongside their mothers, highlighting the profound impact of these prosecutions on families.

The legal framework underpinning these charges, specifically Articles 50 and 51 of the 1991 Sudanese Penal Code, allows for extremely harsh penalties, including the death penalty or lengthy prison sentences. Article 50, titled "Undermining the Constitutional Order," permits punishments ranging from lesser penalties to life imprisonment or death, while Article 51, "Inciting War Against the State," also carries the death penalty or significant prison terms. Lawyers and human rights advocates have voiced serious concerns about the broad and potentially arbitrary application of these statutes.

Abdel-Baset Al-Hajj, a lawyer, points out that the loose wording of these articles enables their wide interpretation, often used against civilians and political opponents. He notes that the term "collaborators" does not even exist in Sudanese law, and the phrase "assistance in any way" can be stretched to include acts related to basic survival rather than direct participation in hostilities. Al-Hajj further emphasizes that civilians who remained in RSF-controlled areas were living under duress, a critical factor that should be considered under the principles of international humanitarian law. Othman al-Basri, another lawyer and human rights defender, who is currently handling nine such cases, corroborates this, stating that about 90% of the women he has represented are tea or food vendors. He observes that simply being present in an area under RSF control has become sufficient grounds for suspicion.

The arbitrary nature of these accusations is further compounded by reports from four lawyers in the Khartoum and Omdurman areas, who indicated that more than 100 reports against women for alleged cooperation with the RSF stemmed from personal disputes or general accusations. In some instances, Articles 50 and 51 were reportedly weaponized against women who were primary breadwinners or those embroiled in marriage or personal relationship disputes. This suggests a pattern where legal provisions intended for national security are being misused to settle personal grievances, leading to severe and disproportionate consequences for Sudanese women.

A deputy prosecutor assigned to these collaboration cases acknowledged the vast scale of the issue, stating that charges of RSF cooperation had been filed against over 1,000 women in just one state. While expressing a hope for justice and a commitment to work towards it, the same source conceded that some accusations might be linked to personal, retaliatory motives. However, this acknowledgment does not prevent authorities from treating such factors as sufficient grounds for suspicion. The deputy prosecutor's stance underscores a troubling judicial approach: "Even if the report was retaliatory, that is a suspicion, and for us, suspicion of collaboration is a certainty. The punishments are always deterrent, so that they serve as an example." The broad and often arbitrary application of these statutes raises significant concerns regarding due process and human rights, particularly for vulnerable populations caught in conflict zones.

Lawyers advising clients with operations or personnel in Sudan must be aware of the broad and potentially arbitrary application of Articles 50 and 51 of the 1991 Penal Code, which are being used to prosecute civilians for alleged RSF collaboration, carrying severe penalties including death. This situation demands extreme caution regarding any activities in conflict zones that could be misinterpreted as 'assistance' to a warring party, and highlights significant human rights and due process concerns.

Source: Original reporting via Ayin Network