On Monday, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) rejected Sudan’s allegations against the United Arab Emirates (UAE) for purportedly breaching the Genocide Convention by allegedly providing arms and financial support to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary organization associated with human rights violations during Sudan’s ongoing civil conflict.
The ICJ determined that it did not have the authority to proceed with the case. In his ruling, Judge Yuji Iwasawa, the Court’s President, explained that the jurisdictional basis cited placed limits on the scope of the case presented. The court highlighted that despite the UAE being a party to the Genocide Convention, it had made a reservation concerning Article IX, which pertains to the ICJ’s jurisdiction over disputes regarding the interpretation and application of the convention. This reservation effectively prevented the court from taking on the matter. Additionally, the court noted that even though the alleged genocidal actions against the Masalit people were severe and ongoing, Sudan had not convincingly shown that the UAE had effective control over the RSF or was directly accountable for the accusations of violations. The court emphasized that its ruling did not preclude any future considerations or decisions regarding the case, which remains on the General List.
Sudan had aimed to establish jurisdiction through Article IX, yet legal analysts had anticipated challenges due to the UAE’s prior reservation. The Court’s ruling did not delve into the substance of Sudan’s allegations but rather curtailed the proceedings based on procedural issues.
In response to the judgment, UAE Foreign Ministry official Reem Ketait remarked that the court’s conclusion asserting a lack of jurisdiction signifies that the case should not have been initiated in the first place. Meanwhile, a number of Sudanese protesters expressed their discontent over the dismissal of the case.
The case was filed by Sudan in March 2025, requesting the ICJ to implement provisional measures against the UAE, which included an order to halt support for the RSF and to take preventive actions against further atrocities, particularly those targeting the Masalit ethnic group in West Darfur. Sudan contended that the UAE’s alleged logistical, financial, and military assistance constituted complicity in genocide as defined under the 1948 Genocide Convention, to which both nations are signatories.
The strife in Sudan began in April 2023 when clashes between the Sudanese military and the RSF escalated into widespread violence. Both groups have faced allegations of significant human rights violations.