Sudan has taken legal action against the United Arab Emirates at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), accusing it of supporting acts of genocide in Sudan. The case, filed on March 6, 2025, alleges that the UAE has provided financial, political, and military support to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and allied militias, enabling them to commit atrocities against the Masalit ethnic group, particularly in West Darfur. Sudan claims these acts amount to genocide and that the UAE is complicit in these crimes.
According to Sudan, the RSF and its allied militias have carried out widespread violence, including murder, rape, forced displacement, and the destruction of property. Sudan argues that these actions have been encouraged and enabled by direct UAE support, making the Gulf nation responsible under international law. The legal action is based on the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, which both Sudan and the UAE have signed. Sudan contends that since at least 2023, the UAE has played a key role in aiding the RSF, allowing them to conduct systematic attacks against the Masalit people.
As part of its legal proceedings, Sudan has also submitted a request for emergency provisional measures. These are urgent steps that the ICJ can take while the case is ongoing to prevent further harm. Sudan is asking the court to order the UAE to take immediate action to stop all acts of genocide. This includes stopping killings, preventing physical and mental harm, and ensuring that conditions designed to destroy the Masalit group are not created. Additionally, Sudan wants the ICJ to order the UAE to stop supporting any armed groups that are involved in genocide or related crimes. Sudan argues that without these urgent measures, the Masalit people will continue to suffer, and the situation could worsen before the court reaches a final decision.
The ICJ will now review Sudan’s request and decide whether to issue provisional measures before proceeding with the full case. According to the court’s rules, requests for emergency action take priority over all other cases. This means the ICJ will likely issue a decision on Sudan’s request in the coming weeks. If the court grants the request, the UAE would be legally required to follow its orders. Failure to comply could lead to further legal consequences and increased international pressure.
This case comes at a time of growing concern over the humanitarian crisis in Sudan. The ongoing conflict between the Sudanese army and the RSF has caused massive displacement, with thousands of civilians fleeing their homes. Reports of mass killings and targeted attacks against ethnic groups, including the Masalit, have drawn international condemnation. Sudan’s decision to take the UAE to the ICJ highlights the complex geopolitical factors at play in the region. The UAE has been accused of supporting the RSF in its fight against Sudan’s army, a claim that the Gulf country has denied in the past. This legal action could strain diplomatic relations between Sudan and the UAE, as well as impact broader international efforts to bring peace to Sudan.
The UAE has not yet responded to Sudan’s allegations. However, the case could put pressure on the country to justify its actions and defend itself against the accusations. If the ICJ rules in Sudan’s favor, it could set a significant precedent for holding external actors accountable for their involvement in conflicts. It could also encourage other countries to take legal action against states accused of supporting armed groups that commit mass atrocities.
The outcome of this case will be closely watched by governments, human rights organizations, and legal experts around the world. If the ICJ rules that the UAE has violated the Genocide Convention, it could lead to serious consequences, including sanctions and further legal action by other international bodies. On the other hand, if the UAE successfully defends itself, it could challenge the way international law is applied in cases involving indirect support for armed groups.
Sudan’s move to bring the case before the ICJ reflects its efforts to seek justice for the victims of violence in Darfur. The Masalit people have faced repeated attacks over the years, and this case represents an attempt to hold those responsible accountable. While legal proceedings at the ICJ can take years, the request for provisional measures could provide some immediate relief if granted. For now, the world will be watching as the ICJ begins its review of the case, and the UAE prepares its defense against these serious allegations.
