Showing posts with label ICC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ICC. Show all posts

Wednesday, July 16, 2025

Sudan: ICC believes war crimes & crimes against humanity are taking place now in Darfur. 5 killed in aid convoy attack. Fighting intensifies in Kordofan

ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan told the Security Council in January that there were grounds to believe both government forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Force, may be committing war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide in Darfur. 

Deputy prosecutor Shameem Khan, who is not related, said the ICC has closely tracked reports in recent weeks of the dire situation in North Darfur, whose capital El Fasher is besieged by RSF and their affiliates.


The RSF, which controls the capitals of all other states in Darfur, has also attacked famine-hit Zamzam and other camps for displaced Sudanese in North Darfur.


“On the basis of our independent investigations, the position of our office is clear, we have reasonable grounds to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity have been and are continuing to be committed in Darfur,” Khan told the council.


This conclusion, she said, is based on documentary, testimonial and digital evidence collected by ICC investigators during the past six months, including at refugee camps in neighboring Chad. Over 7,000 items of evidence have been collected to date, she said.


Khan emphasized to the council and to victims that the ICC considers the situation in Darfur “of the utmost importance” and will not be deterred until justice is delivered to the perpetrators.


Khan said those in Darfur now “inflicting unimaginable atrocities on its population” should know that while they may feel a sense of impunity, Janjaweed leader Ali Kushayb is currently on trial and the ICC hopes it will be the first of many.


“However, we also have a duty of confidentiality to the court,” Khan said. “I am not able to share more details of the nature of our progress or of specific outcomes hoped for. I can only assure you that the progress we have made is concrete, positive and significant.”


Read more in this report from The Associated Press
BY EDITH M. LEDERER
Dated 11 July 2025; 12:22 AM BST - full copy:

ICC believes war crimes and crimes against humanity are taking place now in Sudan’s Darfur region

The United Nations flag flies on a stormy day at the U.N. during the United Nations General Assembly, Sept. 22, 2022. (AP Photo/Ted Shaffrey, File)

This June 2023 photo provided by the World Food Program shows internally displaced persons at the Wad Almajzoub farm camp in Wad Medani, Gezira state, Sudan. (Ala Kheir/U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs via AP)


UNITED NATIONS (AP) — The International Criminal Court believes war crimes and crimes against humanity are continuing to take place in Sudan’s vast western Darfur region where civil war has raged for more than two years, the tribunal’s deputy prosecutor said Thursday.


Nazhat Shameem Khan told the U.N. Security Council that the depth of suffering and the humanitarian crisis in Darfur “has reached an intolerable state,” with famine escalating and hospitals, humanitarian convoys and other civilian infrastructure being targeted.


“People are being deprived of water and food,” she said. “Rape and sexual violence are being weaponized. Abductions for ransom or to bolster the ranks of armed groups have become common practice.”


“And yet we should not be under any illusion,” Shameem Khan warned the U.N.’s most powerful body. “Things can still get worse.”


Sudan plunged into conflict in mid-April 2023, when long-simmering tensions between its military and paramilitary leaders broke out in the capital, Khartoum, and spread to other regions, including Darfur. Some 40,000 people have been killed and nearly 13 million displaced, including to other countries, according to U.N. agencies.


ICC chief prosecutor Karim Khan told the Security Council in January that there were grounds to believe both government forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Force, may be committing war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide in Darfur.


The Biden administration, just before it left office in January, determined that the RSF and its proxies were committing genocide.


Karim Khan has stepped down temporarily as the ICC chief prosecutor pending the outcome of an investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct, which he categorically denies.


Deputy prosecutor Shameem Khan, who is not related, said the ICC has closely tracked reports in recent weeks of the dire situation in North Darfur, whose capital El Fasher is besieged by RSF and their affiliates.


The RSF, which controls the capitals of all other states in Darfur, has also attacked famine-hit Zamzam and other camps for displaced Sudanese in North Darfur.


“On the basis of our independent investigations, the position of our office is clear, we have reasonable grounds to believe that war crimes and crimes against humanity have been and are continuing to be committed in Darfur,” Khan told the council.


This conclusion, she said, is based on documentary, testimonial and digital evidence collected by ICC investigators during the past six months, including at refugee camps in neighboring Chad. Over 7,000 items of evidence have been collected to date, she said.


Khan emphasized to the council and to victims that the ICC considers the situation in Darfur “of the utmost importance” and will not be deterred until justice is delivered to the perpetrators.


Two decades ago, Darfur became synonymous with genocide and war crimes, particularly by the notorious Janjaweed Arab militias, against populations that identify as Central or East African. Up to 300,000 people were killed and 2.7 million were driven from their homes.


Khan said those in Darfur now “inflicting unimaginable atrocities on its population” should know that while they may feel a sense of impunity, Janjaweed leader Ali Kushayb is currently on trial and the ICC hopes it will be the first of many.


“However, we also have a duty of confidentiality to the court,” Khan said. “I am not able to share more details of the nature of our progress or of specific outcomes hoped for. I can only assure you that the progress we have made is concrete, positive and significant.”


Related reports

Fighting intensifies in Sudan's Kordofan region

Full story: https://apnews.com/article/sudan-kordofan-rapid-support-forces-humanitarian-crisis-574e767ae69562ab05d6a9d2e5bee1b5

__________


An attack on an aid convoy in Sudan's Darfur region kills 5, UN says

Full story: https://apnews.com/article/sudan-war-military-rsf-darfur-3403f58cde929bea2cc0a0036985da05

__________


Sudanese fleeing war are at risk of worsening hunger, UN warns

Full story: https://apnews.com/article/sudan-famine-hunger-refugees-un-darfur-conflict-bc3cc8260e92191078506849796f4072

__________


View original: https://apnews.com/article/sudan-darfur-icc-war-crimes-humanity-khan-e54744adc5b0a06eb6a44fe94d72683d


End

Thursday, March 13, 2025

UK statement at UNSC: In April, UK's Foreign Secretary will convene FM's in London to help end Sudan conflict and improve humanitarian response

HERE is a speech by UK's Lord Collins of Highbury, Minister for Africa and the UN, at the UN Security Council meeting on Sudan held 13 March 2025.

Note, fighting in Sudan has displaced approximately 12.8 million people, roughly 3.7 million of whom have sought refuge in Sudan’s neighbouring countries—the Central African Republic (CAR), Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, South Sudan, and Uganda. Read more in report from What's in Blue below.

In April, the UK’s Foreign Secretary will convene Foreign Ministers in London to help end the conflict and to improve the humanitarian response.
______________________________

Published: Thursday 13 March 2025
Speech location: United Nations, New York
Delivered on 13 March 2025 (Transcript of the speech, exactly as it was delivered) - full copy:

Greater international action is needed to tackle widespread sexual violence in Sudan: UK statement at the UN Security Council


Statement by Lord Collins of Highbury, Minister for Africa and the UN, at the UN Security Council meeting on Sudan.

Thank you to our briefers UNICEF and MSF. 


As you have made clear, women and girls in Sudan continue to face the worst horrors of this conflict.


Almost two years since the fighting began, more than 12 million people are now at risk of sexual and gender-based violence, according to UNICEF reports. 


And Sudan’s healthcare system has been decimated by the conflict, making it even harder for survivors to access support.


The UK’s Foreign Secretary travelled to the Sudan-Chad border in January and met survivors of sexual violence who shared their harrowing stories of rape and torture.


And the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission for Sudan has reported that rape and gang rape is widespread in the context of the conflict in Sudan.


Acts of sexual violence constitute crimes under international law. 


And it is the responsibility of this Council to act.


President, it is clear that greater international action is needed to tackle widespread sexual violence in Sudan. The United Kingdom is committed to playing its part.


This week I joined a meeting of the International Alliance on Preventing Sexual Violence in Conflict, convened by Ukraine, to discuss the urgent need for joined-up, survivor-centred responses.


Through the UK-funded Women’s Integrated Sexual Health programme, we are providing sexual and reproductive services to women and children in Sudan.


We are also working with UN and NGO partners to provide safe spaces, mobile clinic treatment, dignity kits and psycho-social services for survivors.


But to have most impact, it is important that the international community comes together to address sexual violence in Sudan by taking 4 key steps.


First, by continuing to press the warring parties to comply with the commitments they made to protect civilians in the Jeddah Declaration.


Second, by giving support to civil society organisations on the ground who are playing a crucial role in assisting survivors of sexual violence.


Third, by supporting the International Criminal Court and the UN Fact-Finding Mission to carry out impartial investigations.


And fourth, by ensuring that the protection of civilians remains at the top of this Council’s agenda.


President, looking ahead, in April, the UK’s Foreign Secretary will convene Foreign Ministers in London to help end the conflict and to improve the humanitarian response.


Bringing an end to the conflict will be a critical step towards ending sexual and gender-based violence in Sudan.


Colleagues, we must continue working together closely until we achieve that goal.


View original: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/greater-international-action-is-needed-to-tackle-widespread-sexual-violence-in-sudan-uk-statement-at-the-un-security-council

______________________________


Related


Report from What's In Blue 

Dated Wednesday 12 March 2025

Sudan: Briefing


Nearly two years into the war, which started on 15 April 2023, Sudan has witnessed a devastating humanitarian crisis, resulting in significant civilian casualties, mass displacement, and acute food and water shortages. 


The crisis has also been marked by a collapse of healthcare and essential services and grave violations of international humanitarian law, including widespread incidents of CRSV.


The fighting has displaced approximately 12.8 million people, roughly 3.7 million of whom have sought refuge in Sudan’s neighbouring countries—the Central African Republic (CAR), Chad, Egypt, Ethiopia, Libya, South Sudan, and Uganda.


Full story: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2025/03/sudan-briefing-5.php


End

Sunday, February 09, 2025

UK joins 78 nations in denouncing US sanctioning ICC

From the Government of the Netherlands

Diplomatic statement

Dated Friday, 7 February 2025 - full copy:


Joint Statement - Sanctions International Criminal Court (ICC)


This statement in support of the International Criminal Court is endorsed by the following States:


Afghanistan, Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Austria, Bangladesh, Belgium, Belize, Bolivia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cabo Verde, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Comoros, Costa Rica, Croatia, Cyprus, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Gambia, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Grenada, Guatemala, Honduras, Iceland, Ireland, Jordan, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Maldives, Malta, Mexico, Mongolia, Montenegro, Namibia, Netherlands, Nigeria, North Macedonia, Norway, Panama, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Republic of Moldova, Romania, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, San Marino, Senegal, Seychelles, Sierra Leone, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, State of Palestine, Sweden, Switzerland, Timor-Leste, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Uganda, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Vanuatu.


We, the undersigned States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (ICC), reaffirm our continued and unwavering support for the independence, impartiality, and integrity of the ICC. The Court serves as a vital pillar of the international justice system by ensuring accountability for the most serious international crimes, and justice for victims.


Today, the Court is facing unprecedented challenges. Measures sanctioning the Court, its officials and staff, and those cooperating with it have been adopted in response to the Court carrying out its mandate in accordance with the Rome Statute.


Such measures increase the risk of impunity for the most serious crimes and threaten to erode the international rule of law, which is crucial for promoting global order and security. Moreover, sanctions could jeopardize the confidentiality of sensitive information and the safety of those involved—including victims, witnesses, and Court officials, many of whom are our nationals.


Sanctions would severely undermine all situations currently under investigation as the Court may have to close its field offices. Advancing the ICC’s vital work serves our common interest in promoting accountability, as evidenced by the support provided to the Court by both States Parties and non-States Parties.


As strong supporters of the ICC, we regret any attempts to undermine the Court’s independence, integrity and impartiality.  We are committed to ensuring the ICC’s business continuity so that the Court can continue to carry out its functions effectively and independently.


As we collectively strive to uphold international justice, we underscore the ICC’s indispensable role in ending impunity, promoting the rule of law, and fostering lasting respect for international law and human rights.


View original: https://www.government.nl/documents/diplomatic-statements/2025/02/07/joint-statement---sanctions-international-criminal-court-icc

_______________________________


Related report


From The National, Scotland, UK

Dated Friday, 7 February 2025

UK joins 78 other nations in denouncing Donald Trump's ICC sanctions

“As for the UK, we support the independence of the ICC. Therefore, we’ve got no plans to sanction individual court officials.” Now, the UK has added its name to a list of 79 countries defending the ICC against Trump’s sanctions. 

Full story: https://www.thenational.scot/news/24920081.uk-joins-78-nations-denouncing-donald-trumps-icc-sanctions/


End

Monday, November 18, 2024

Sudan: Vote on a Draft Resolution to Protect Civilians. VIDEO: 14 in favour, 1 against (Russia), 0 abstentions

TODAY (18 November), the UN Security Council is "expected to vote on a draft resolution aimed at advancing measures to protect civilians in Sudan. It demands that the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) honour and fully implement their commitments in the Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan, which was signed by both sides in Jeddah on 11 May 2023. The draft text was co-authored by the UK (the penholder on the Sudan file) and Sierra Leone.

Some Council members, including Russia, have argued that the Sudanese government remains responsible for protecting civilians and that the Council should not impede its ability to do so. In line with this position, during the negotiations Russia contended that any possible steps on the ground, including humanitarian assistance and measures to advance the protection of civilians, must be preliminarily discussed and agreed upon with the Sudanese government." Read more.

From Security Council Report 

What's In Blue 

Dated Sunday 17 Nov 2024 - full copy:

Sudan: Vote on a Draft Resolution

Tomorrow morning (18 November), the Security Council is expected to vote on a draft resolution aimed at advancing measures to protect civilians in Sudan. It demands that the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) honour and fully implement their commitments in the Declaration of Commitment to Protect the Civilians of Sudan, which was signed by both sides in Jeddah on 11 May 2023. The draft text was co-authored by the UK (the penholder on the Sudan file) and Sierra Leone.

(For background and more information on the situation in Sudan, see the brief on Sudan in our November 2024 Monthly Forecast and 27 October and 11 November What’s in Blue stories.)


It appears that the negotiations were contentious, but the co-penholders were keen to finalise deliberations on the text expeditiously, given the pressing situation on the ground. The UK apparently invited the “A3 plus” members (Algeria, Mozambique, Sierra Leone, and Guyana) to be co-authors on the draft resolution. However, the “A3 plus” members were unable to reach a unified position on taking this on as a group. 


This led to only Sierra Leone choosing to co-pen the resolution. After preliminary discussions with the Council’s permanent members, the co-penholders circulated the initial draft of the resolution to all Council members on 8 November. Following an expert-level discussion (which was held at Russia’s request), three revised drafts, and two silence breaks, the penholder placed a fourth revised draft in blue without a further silence procedure on 15 November, to be voted on tomorrow morning.


The draft resolution in blue condemns the continued assault by the RSF, a paramilitary group, in El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur state, and demands that the RSF immediately halt all its attacks against civilians in Darfur, Al Jazirah, and Sennar states and elsewhere in Sudan. It also calls on the parties to the conflict to immediately cease hostilities and engage in dialogue in good faith to agree to steps to de-escalate the conflict with the aim of urgently agreeing to a national ceasefire.


During the negotiations, Russia suggested strengthening the language by highlighting specific actions by the RSF, such as bombings and shelling, and wanted to broaden the scope of the term “attacks” from targeting civilians to encompassing “any hostile actions”. Russia’s suggestions were not incorporated, but the co-penholders sought to address this issue by adding the term “all” when referring to the RSF’s attacks against civilians in the draft resolution in blue. It seems that France suggested that the resolution should call on both parties to the conflict to halt their offensives and asked to include Khartoum in the listed regions where attacks are occurring. It also argued that calling on both sides to agree to a ceasefire would be inconsistent with singling out one party to halt hostilities. This suggestion was not incorporated in the draft resolution in blue, however.


Several delegations, including Switzerland and the US, also emphasised the importance of addressing both parties in the context of protecting civilians and upholding commitments in line with international humanitarian law (IHL). It seems that some members—including Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and Switzerland—supported language specifying IHL violations and other atrocities as one of the listing criteria under the 1591 Sudan sanctions regime. However, given strong objections from some members, such as Russia, this language was not incorporated in the draft resolution in blue.


Some Council members, including Russia, have argued that the Sudanese government remains responsible for protecting civilians and that the Council should not impede its ability to do so. In line with this position, during the negotiations Russia contended that any possible steps on the ground, including humanitarian assistance and measures to advance the protection of civilians, must be preliminarily discussed and agreed upon with the Sudanese government.


It seems that one of the difficult aspects of the negotiations related to language that the co-penholders had proposed pertaining to the monitoring and verification of a potential ceasefire agreement between the warring parties. The initial draft text encouraged the Secretary-General to step up planning to support a ceasefire agreement, including through monitoring and verification, and to utilise a range of regional mechanisms, including stabilisation and peacebuilding. The text also encouraged the Secretary-General to engage on this issue with international stakeholders, especially the African Union (AU). This language apparently went through some revision, including amending it to encourage cooperation with the AU on “regional mechanisms to help sustain peace, including delivery of stabilization and peacebuilding”.


While several Council members supported this proposal, underlining the imperative of preparing for the eventuality of a ceasefire agreement, others—including Algeria, China, and Russia—expressed reservations. China and Russia suggested deleting this language, apparently arguing that it is premature to discuss monitoring and verification mechanisms in the absence of a ceasefire agreement, as this could undermine the Council’s authority and credibility. These members were also apparently concerned that this language might pave the way for the deployment of forces on the ground. During the comments period, at least one Council member apparently suggested including the term “peacekeeping” in the range of mechanisms; this suggestion was not incorporated in the draft text, however.


As a compromise, it appears that Algeria and China suggested deleting the language on regional mechanisms. China also highlighted the need to obtain the consent of the parties concerned before the UN or other partners take action. To address these issues, the co-penholders amended the text, deleting the reference to regional mechanisms, while retaining the language encouraging the Secretary-General to step up planning for support to sustain any ceasefire agreement, including through monitoring and verification and to engage with the AU. Language was also added to the draft text in blue requesting the Secretary-General to engage with the parties to the conflict in this regard.


It appears that members also diverged on whether to include language from the Secretary-General’s 21 October report, which presented recommendations for the protection of civilians in Sudan, pursuant to resolution 2736 of 13 June. The report acknowledged that “at present, the conditions do not exist for the successful deployment of a UN force to protect civilians” in Sudan. Some members—including Algeria, China, Mozambique, and Russia—apparently advocated for including this language verbatim in the preambular paragraphs. Other members—including the US—rejected this proposal. The US apparently argued that the text should send a strong message to the parties about fulfilling their commitments, rather than reflecting on the conditions for a force, particularly when the resolution does not address the deployment of such a force. The draft resolution in blue incorporates compromise language in the preambular paragraphs, taking note of the conclusions contained in the Secretary-General’s report and his assessment of the conditions on the ground.


A recurring topic of discussion in Sudan-related resolutions has been the terminology used to refer to the central authorities. Some members, such as France and the ROK, supported the term “Sudanese authorities”, whereas others, including China and Russia, preferred using the term “government” or “Sudanese Transitional Sovereign Council (STC)”. (The STC was established in 2019 as the governing body following the ouster of former President Omar al-Bashir. The body is headed by SAF leader General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan.)


In the draft resolution in blue, the co-penholders removed the term “authorities” and retained references to the STC. At the same time, the draft resolution in blue also contains several references to “parties to the conflict”, in the context of humanitarian assistance, cessation of hostilities, adherence to IHL, avoiding attacks on civilian objects, and preventing incidents of conflict-related sexual violence. (For background on Council dynamics on the matter, see the brief on Sudan in our October 2024 Monthly Forecast.)


The draft resolution in blue requests the Secretary-General, following consultations with the STC and other parties to the conflict, as well as the AU, to develop a proposal for a compliance mechanism to facilitate implementation of the Jeddah Declaration commitments. It calls on the parties to the conflict to engage fully in this effort.


Council members also had diverging views about proposed reporting requirements. The initial draft text suggested two reporting provisions: the first requested an update from the Secretary-General within 60 days of adoption of the draft resolution, and the second requested him to provide a written report ahead of the regular 120-day briefing on Sudan, outlining practical options to support mediation efforts, including on the implementation of the Jeddah Declaration and the compliance mechanism referred to in the draft resolution.


While several members apparently supported the reporting requirements, Algeria, China, and Russia opposed them. These members apparently advocated for incorporating additional elements of reporting within the regular 120-day briefing on the situation in Sudan, foregoing the 60-day update and thereby avoiding multiplication of reporting requirements. China also apparently argued that requesting the Secretary-General to prepare a compliance mechanism and submit a report assessing its effectiveness simultaneously is untenable, as potential disagreements on the details of that proposal by concerned parties could undermine or delay the report.


In an apparent compromise, the draft resolution in blue omits the proposed 60-day reporting requirement but requests the Secretary-General to provide a written “update”, instead of a “report”, ahead of the next 120-day Sudan briefing, prescribing practical steps to support mediation efforts, including local-level cessation of hostilities and de-escalation measures, implementation of the Jeddah Declaration, and the development of the compliance mechanism.


Another topic of discussion related to language addressing accountability for violations and abuses of human rights law and IHL violations. Several Council members—including France, Malta, Slovenia, Switzerland, and the US—supported broader accountability measures that extend beyond domestic mechanisms. Russia, however, preferred language focusing on domestic measures by the STC. Switzerland apparently proposed language referencing cooperation with regional and international courts and tribunals in accordance with respective obligations, while recalling resolution 1593 of 31 March 2005, which referred the situation in Darfur to the International Criminal Court (ICC); however, this suggestion was not incorporated in the draft resolution in blue. The draft resolution in blue urges concrete steps to ensure perpetrators are held accountable, including through adequate, transparent, independent, and credible accountability mechanisms, “including” domestic mechanisms.


View original: 

https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/whatsinblue/2024/11/103323.php


Video of full meeting:

Sudan and South Sudan - Security Council, 9786th meeting

Result of voting: 14 in favour, 1 against (Russia), 0 abstentions

See live broadcast courtesy of UN Media 18 Nov 2024 2:30PM GMT UK

http://webtv.un.org/en/asset/k1u/k1ujdmywhg


End