Sudan and genocide genocide genocide accuses Genocide with the help of rapid support forces. Photo: Reuters / Goran Tomasevic
Sudan from 6 March 2025 Starting proceedings For the violation of the International Justice Court (ICJ) Genocide Convention in front of the International Arab Emirates (UAE).
Sudan and the rapid support forces accused of making atrocities in Sudan (RSF), voices the UAE of the supported genocide in Western Darfur. Political motifs are likely that one of the parties to the conflict, which manages the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF), emphasizes the risk of arms transfers and violations of human rights.
As seen by the UAE due to the reservation, such a lawsuit could lead to a distant consequences for the countries that exporters of weapons not only for water and UAE, but also for water and UAE.
Sudan V Bee: Can this work advance?
South Africa is like a lawsuit against Israel, Sudan and the UAE require temporary measures against the potential violations of the Genocide Convention. Sudan’s appeal, since at least 2023, claims that a genocide was opened in the West Darfur region.
Sudan claims that the United Arab Emirates are in the United Arab Emirates, and the Government of the United Arab Emirates has committed the government of the United Arab Emirates. Many of the United Arab Emirates are managed by the United Arab Emirates, including political communication and operations in the United Arab Emirates … Sent weapons, weapons and military equipment including combat drones. “
Some of the Sudan’s allegations are aligned with reports of various civil society organizations working on the conflict in the Sudan, the court may not appreciate the issuance of any temporary measures.
Icj has to decide whether it’s originally First facie Jurisdiction. The main obstacle is up to Article 9 of the UAE Reservation of the Genocide Convention. Article 9 “Disputes of this Convention on the responsibility of a state for the genocide, including disputes between the disputes related to the application, and the responsibility of the genocide …
According to international law, states can reserve contracts such as certain conditions and genocide.
Sudan claims that such a booking is contrary to the purpose and goal of the Genocide Convention, and the court is seen to find the jurisdiction to make a decision on this issue. However, regardless of this issue, the questions that contribute to the violation of the genocide convention of the genocide and the third countries such as South Africa, the third countries include the responsibility of the countries that support the third countries with weapons.
As always
The role of South Africa is relevant due to arms exports to the UAE. In 2023, UAE, armored fights, ammunition, ammunition, light weapons, bombs, rockets, rockets, missiles and drones, missiles and drones, missiles and drones, missiles and drones, missiles, missiles and drones for missiles and drones, missiles, missiles and drones 2023 Annual Report Presented in the Assembly. The main concern from this exports is that such weapons are in the hands of RSF.
The South African law has weakened the “End User Certificates” (EUE Certificates “(EUC), the absence of such weapons, the lack of execution and control over the euc. Therefore, the screenplay of South African arms, which ended in the conflict, cannot be excluded.
The experience of exporting weapons to countries that systematically violates human rights or violating international law is the repetitive theme of South African weapons exports. It is prohibited by the permission of or issuing or issuing such exports under the law of South Africa. This character Southern Africa’s weapons exports from Myanmar to Myanmar last year, the South African Court (SALC) confirmed such a ban. In this matter, Pretoria High Court Put Permissions aside Myanmar made arms exports and clarified the United Nations owners, a state of weapons from international crimes from South Africa to cancel or suspend such permits.
Reliability of South Africa’s risk
The humanitarian situation in Sudan is bad. Civil society organizations informed about numerous events on international law, human rights violations and violations of the commission of international crimes.
Again, South Africa did not prevent or cancel the arms transfer to countries that support and support one of the parties to the parties and supporting one of the parties in this matter.
The export of weapons has an effect on the true intentions of one country and commitment to international law. This will not be the first time that South Africa has been exported to a country accused of violations of international crimes or serious human rights. Like the SALC, in South Africa, South Africa, in 2021 in 2022 in 2022, after the military coup in 2022 in February 2021, hit his weapons after the genocide and a military coup.
This is the first time in violation of the potential of international law by the UAE of South Africa. UN Mandate Owners accused the UAE to violate human rights and prosecute the potential crimes in Yemen and South Africa export A loyal customer weapons, UAE
South Africa’s reliability as a country to comply with human rights and international law and comply with international law has surely benefited from the latest actions related to the Palestinian situation. However, it is harmful to a situation and close the eyes of other situations such as Yemen or Myanmar and gives you a nutritional ground for arguments of hypocrisy and double standards.
If South Africa is really serious about the protection of international law and human rights, the experience of arms exports must dramatically change. There is no place for double standards. Economic gain or benefits cannot substantiate man’s suffering.
Dr. Atilla Kisla is an international justice group facility in the South African Court.
