Stoning in Wartime: The rise of extremist influence in Sudan

Recently, two women were sentenced to death by stoning for committing adultery in Sudan. The aforementioned cases -naturally- sparked widespread criticism both domestically and internationally. Moreover, such rulings served to invoke valid concerns about a resurgence of religious extremism as hardliners seemed to have managed to regain prominence in the political and judicial spheres following the April 25th, 2021 coup. This particular coup plunged the country into a turbulent political process that culminated in a devastating war that continues raging to this very day.

Details of the Cases

On December 16th, 2025, the Criminal Court in Haj Yousef, East of the Nile (SharqAlneel), Khartoum state, sentenced a woman to death by stoning following a conviction under Article 146 of the 1991 Penal Code -for committing adultery.

According to the case details, the husband filed the lawsuit, accusing his wife of giving birth to a child that is not his.

Human rights reports indicate that the woman was pressured into making a confession and was not informed of her legal rights. The same sources stated that the verdict was based solely on her confession as the only evidence in the case.

In a separate case, a court in Ar-Rusayris, Blue Nile state, issued a similar stoning sentence against another woman, a mother of an 8-year-old girl, after convicting her of the same charge. The case was brought by her husband, who had abandoned her in 2019.

In both cases, the male “perpetrator,” the second defendant, was sentenced to (100 lashes) before being released.

Human Rights Criticism

The African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS) shared in a statement that such sentences highlight “persistent deficiencies in the Sudanese justice system,” citing summary trials, confessions extracted under duress, and a lack of due process guarantees.

The statement added that while Sudan ratified the UN Convention against Torture in (2021), the 1991 Criminal Code has yet to be amended to explicitly prohibit punishments such as stoning, which, in turn, creates a gap between international obligations and national legislation.

Furthermore, the (ACJPS) considered the continued application of punishments such as stoning and flogging to raise serious questions about Sudan’s commitment to international human rights standards.

The European Position

For his part, the head of the European Union delegation to Sudan, Ambassador Wolfram Vetter, expressed shock at the issuance of death sentences by stoning against two women in Khartoum and the Blue Nile states.

In a tweet on the (X) platform, he stated: “If these sentences are confirmed, this reflects the return of extremism and intolerance to the judiciary and indicates the failure of the Sudanese legal system to protect the rights and dignity of women and girls,” stressing the importance of respecting fundamental rights as well as ensuring justice in accordance with international law.

Broader Political Context

Nevertheless, the aforementioned developments come in the midst of a complex political reality -the country has been witnessing since General Abdel Fattah Al-Burhan’s coup on April 25th, 2021, against the civilian transitional government headed by Abdullah Hamdok. This coup brought back figures of the former regime to the scene, rearranged the balance of power within State institutions, and, according to observers, paved the way for the return of hardline elements to influential positions of power based in Port Sudan.

Sudanese human rights activist Saleh Osman believes that the recent stoning sentences “clearly reflect the return of the Islamic Movement to the forefront of power and an attempt to reproduce the policies of the former regime, which were based on using the law to impose a rigid ideological vision.”

He added that the events taking place at the moment “bring to mind the experiences of countries like Afghanistan under the rule of extremist groups, and Somalia under the control of Al-Shabaab, where harsh physical punishments were used as a tool to impose political and social hegemony, especially over women.”

The human rights activist concluded his remarks by sharing that “Sudan needs a civil State governed by the rule of law, a State that respects pluralism and human dignity, not a recycling of exclusionary policies, harsh punishments, and the use of religion to oppress society.”

Concerns About Further Repercussions

Observers warn that the continued issuance and implementation of such sentences could serve to exacerbate Sudan’s international isolation and further complicate the political and human rights landscape in a country exhausted by war and divisions.

Whilst no comprehensive official clarifications have been issued regarding the two cases so far, the debate continues about the Sudanese Judiciary’s choices as well as the balance between domestic legislation and the State’s international obligations at such a pivotal stage in the country’s history.