Sudan’s Legal Challenge Against the UAE Over Genocide Allegations and South Africa’s Arms Exports

Sudan has filed a case against the UAE at the ICJ, alleging that it supports genocide in West Darfur through the RSF. This has implications for countries like South Africa that export arms to the UAE. With allegations including military support to the RSF, the situation raises concerns about South Africa’s adherence to international human rights laws and its arms export practices.

On March 6, 2025, Sudan commenced legal proceedings against the United Arab Emirates (UAE) at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for purported violations of the Genocide Convention. Sudan asserts that the UAE has allegedly supported genocide in West Darfur by providing assistance to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group implicated in severe human rights violations. This allegation underscores the potential ramifications of arms transfers that could exacerbate conflicts and promote human rights abuses.

Sudan’s case bears similarities to South Africa’s earlier legal measures against Israel, as it seeks provisional protective measures from the ICJ regarding the situation in West Darfur. The Sudanese government contends that since 2023, genocide has been perpetrated in this region and claims that the UAE has been instrumental in exacerbating the crisis. Sudan’s allegations include essential points such as the UAE allegedly sending agents to lead the RSF and providing significant quantities of military equipment.

The validity of Sudan’s claims finds some corroboration in reports from civil society organizations monitoring the Sudan conflict. However, the ICJ’s capacity to rule on the matter remains uncertain; it must first establish its jurisdiction, which is complicated by the UAE’s reservation to Article 9 of the Genocide Convention. This Article addresses the jurisdictional issues related to disputes concerning the Convention’s application, and Sudan’s challenge to the UAE’s reservation emphasizes the complexity surrounding the court’s authority to preside over the case.

South Africa’s involvement arises from its significant arms exports to the UAE, totaling about R88 million in 2023. This includes arms that may potentially equip the RSF, raising critical concerns regarding the export practices under South African law, which demands that recipients uphold “End-User Certificates” (EUC) to mitigate misuse. However, the enforcement of these regulations has faced considerable weaknesses, leaving room for potential misuse of South African arms in conflict zones, including Sudan.

Despite stringent regulations, South Africa continues to export arms to countries with documented human rights violations, as illustrated by a recent case involving arms sales to Myanmar. The Pretoria High Court found that permits for such exports must be revoked if there are credible accusations of international crimes against the importing country. This precedent raises troubling questions about South Africa’s commitment to international law, particularly in cases where arms could facilitate ongoing atrocities.

The humanitarian crisis in Sudan is critical, with continuous reports of international law breaches and gross human rights violations. Despite the urgency, South Africa has not acted to suspend arms permits to the UAE, a country implicated in supporting factions involved in these conflicts. Historical context shows that South Africa has previously engaged in arms exports to nations accused of committing severe violations, undermining its credibility in advocating for human rights.

While South Africa has gained some recognition for its recent human rights-related actions concerning Palestine, it is imperative that it adopts a consistent approach that addresses all concerning situations. By selectively engaging with specific issues, South Africa risks accusations of hypocrisy while ignoring other urgent human rights crises. If South Africa aspires to reinforce its reputation for upholding international legal standards, it must reform its arms export practices decisively to eliminate contradictions in its foreign policies.

The legal challenges Sudan presents against the UAE regarding alleged genocide invoke significant implications for international law and the responsibilities of states involved in arms trading. South Africa’s continued arms exports to the UAE amid serious human rights allegations highlights potential contradictions in its foreign policy. For South Africa to maintain credibility in its human rights advocacy, it must strictly adhere to international law and reassess its arms export practices, ensuring alignment with its proclaimed values of supporting human rights.

Original Source: mg.co.za