UN condemns escalating violence and civilian suffering in Sudan amid armed conflict – JURIST


The UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) condemned Thursday the rising death toll on civilians in Sudan. The statement follows the intensified fighting between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in Khartoum and beyond.

The statement indicated that both parties disregarded international humanitarian law in and around Khartoum, the capital of Sudan. The agency suggested that both RSF fighters and SAF-affiliated fighters looted civilian supplies, and committed arbitrary detentions and summary executions during the conflict. 

The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) also reported that a drone strike in East Khartoum’s Imtedaad Nasir area on Tuesday killed five women and injured several others. One day earlier, artillery shelling in Karari, north of Omdurman, killed multiple people and left over 40 injured, including children. Residential areas are being increasingly targeted, further compounding the humanitarian crisis.

Outside the capital, conditions in North Darfur have become catastrophic. Armed clashes in and around El Fasher have displaced thousands, forcing many to flee to Zamzam camp. OCHA reported that checkpoints surrounding the camp are blocking civilian movement, and cutting off access to food, water, and medical supplies. Aid agencies are overwhelmed, and without immediate intervention, the crisis seems to deepen. The UN warned of the famine crisis in North Darfur in February 2025, after a recent attack launched by RSF fighters against White Nile state villages. 

The principle of distinction is one of the most fundamental doctrines in international humanitarian law. The doctrine requires all conflicting parties to distinguish between civilians and combatants and that military operations can only be directed to combatants and military infrastructure. Serious violations of the principle can amount to a war crime according to the Rome Statute.

Relatedly, the UN warned of the deteriorating humanitarian crisis in Sudan on March 11. The intense conflict has forced the UN World Food Programme to suspend its humanitarian assistance temporarily. The African Union described Sudan as facing one of the worst crises in the world.



Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


Parker Molloy interviewed Wired global editorial director Katie Drummond for The Long Lead about its strategy covering the intersection of technology and government.

How has Wired‘s approach to covering tech power players such as Musk and other Silicon Valley names evolved as they’ve become more directly involved in politics?

You just can’t have a conversation with any of these guys — any of the big tech CEOs or Silicon Valley players — without asking them about politics and policy or interrogating that in your reporting. The tech industry and D.C. are so interconnected, and between the two of them you’re basically looking at the power base that’s driving the entire country… not to mention the world. So you ask the hard questions, not just about the business of Meta or Amazon or Tesla, but about how that business interacts with and thinks about what’s happening in the administration and with policy. I’m not saying they’ll answer the questions (and trust me, by and large they are currently not), but it is imperative that Wired journalists ask the questions — over, and over, and over.

When reporting draws legal threats from powerful figures, how do you balance journalist safety with the public’s right to know?

I think it’s really this: Do the reporting well, do your diligence, get it right, be responsible, and then come what may. There are plenty of tools at our disposal to safeguard our journalists, and we’ll go to the ends of the earth to make sure they can do their jobs as safely as possible. We have, of course, had a lot of those conversations since Trump was elected and taken a lot of steps to enhance how we protect our reporters, editors, fact-checkers, and so on. Ultimately, accurate reporting in the public interest is the primary consideration. If it’s accurate and of news value, we’ll figure out a way to publish it.





Source link