ICJ dismisses Sudan's case accusing UAE of complicity in genocide

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) has dismissed Sudan's case accusing the United Arab Emirates of complicity in genocide, citing a lack of jurisdiction to rule on the matter. 

Sudan launched a case alleging that genocide against the Masalit community in Darfur by the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) would not have been possible without the support of the UAE.

Khartoum laid out its oral argument last month, accusing the Gulf state of violating its obligations under the Genocide Convention. 

The UAE has repeatedly denied supporting the RSF, and labelled the case as a "cynical and baseless PR stunt".

In its oral defence last month, it also said that the ICJ did not have jurisdiction to rule in the case due to the UAE having made a reservation to Article Nine of the Genocide Convention when it acceded to it in 2005. 

Article Nine of the convention allows dispute settlement before the ICJ when a state party violates the treaty. States are allowed to opt out of the provision in advance of signing the treaty.

The Hague-based court on Monday agreed with the UAE's arguments, rejecting Sudan's request for emergency measures and ordering the case be removed from its docket.

"In light of the reservation made by the UAE to the compromissory clause contained in Article IX of the Genocide Convention and in the absence of any other basis of jurisdiction, the Court manifestly lacks jurisdiction to entertain Sudan’s Application," Yuji Iwasawa, the ICJ's president, said. 

"The present case will therefore be removed from the General List."

The court threw out Sudan's case by a vote of 14-to-two.

Sudan's government, whose army has been at war with the RSF since April 2023, accuses the paramilitary group and allied militias of perpetrating genocide, murder, theft, rape and forcible displacement. It said that these crimes were enabled by direct support from the UAE.

Middle East Eye has reported on the network of supply lines that exist to funnel arms and other goods from the UAE to the RSF, via allied groups and governments in Libya, Chad and the Central African Republic.

Abu Dhabi has, throughout the war, denied supporting the RSF. 

But on 18 December, Brett McGurk, an official in the outgoing US administration of President Joe Biden, wrote to Senator Chris Van Hollen that “the UAE has informed the Administration that it is not now transferring any weapons to the RSF and will not do so going forward”. 

This was seen by multiple diplomatic sources as a tacit admission that the UAE had been supporting the RSF up to that point. Just over a month after receiving the letter, Van Hollen confirmed that the UAE “is providing weapons” to the RSF. 

UAE says case was 'utterly baseless'

Khartoum requested the World Court to implement several provisional measures, including ordering the UAE to take measures to prevent: the killing and causing serious harm towards the Masalit, deliberately inflicting conditions to bring about the physical destruction of the group, and the imposition of measures that are intended to prevent births within the group. 

It also called for provisional measures ordering the UAE to ensure that any armed units supported by it do not directly or publicly incite to commit genocide. 

Reacting to the case's dismissal, Reem Ketait, a senior official at the UAE's foreign ministry, said: "This decision is a clear and decisive affirmation of the fact that this case was utterly baseless. The court’s finding that it is without jurisdiction confirms that this case should never have been brought.

"The facts speak for themselves: the UAE bears no responsibility for the conflict in Sudan. On the contrary, the atrocities committed by the warring parties are well-documented."

Last week, a group of prominent judges and legal experts had urged the ICJ not to throw out Sudan’s case on a “technicality”.

The signatories included South African judge Richard Goldstone, who was the UN’s chief prosecutor at the tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda, and Hans Corell, formerly the UN legal counsel.

Yonah Diamond, the legal counsel of the Raoul Wallenberg Centre for Human Rights and an author of the opinion, told MEE the ICJ “has authority over state conduct for violations of international law”.

He said that upholding reservations like the UAE’s “is like allowing a perpetrator of genocide to evade legal accountability as long as they say, ‘I guarantee I won’t commit acts of genocide, but cannot be brought to a court of law if I do’.” 

The ICJ is the only court in the world with the power to investigate and bring cases against states accused of breaking the Genocide Convention, which has been effective since 1951 and which the UAE acceded to in 2005. 

The court has the power to issue emergency measures, including halting weapons transfers and the laying down of arms.