The Joint Force Abuses Against Civilians… Will it spark a popular uprising?
Recently, the assault on an elderly man in Al-Wadi Street in Omdurman has sparked widespread rage and resentment after a video circulated showing members of the Joint Force publicly flogging him. The incident has since reignited growing concerns about the abuses innocent civilians suffer to withstand in conflict zones and areas of heightened security tensions in Sudan.
Whilst no official statement or clarification has been issued regarding the incident, activists and human rights advocates believe the video is a typical example of what they describe as repeated abuses attributed to armed elements operating within complex security arrangements imposed by the ongoing war and the military divisions in the country.
Observers believe that the incident cannot be contemplated in isolation from the broader context noted across the country following the outbreak of the accursed war, during which complaints of grave human rights violations and attacks on defenseless civilians by various armed groups have significantly escalated. Critics of the Joint Force believe that several practices attributed to some of its members have invoked increasing fears amongst the citizens, particularly in areas with a heavy presence of armed groups.
The Joint Force comprises groups belonging to Armed Struggle Movements that have engaged in various security as well as military arrangements over the past years. Nevertheless, the existence of these formations outside the framework of a unified national army has been the subject of widespread debate amongst political and human rights groups, for they believe that the proliferation of armed power centers contributes to weakening the rule of law and creates an environment conducive to abuses for which perpetrators are difficult to hold accountable.
Activists point out that citizens’ complaints are not limited to incidents of physical assault, but also includes accusations of other violations in some areas, including abuses against innocent civilians, interference in economic activities, and the imposition of measures outside established legal frameworks. The aforementioned accusations-naturally- require independent and transparent investigations to determine responsibility and hold those involved accountable if the allegations are proven to be true.
In recent months, calls have grown significantly louder, demanding to subject all armed formations to strict institutional oversight, and to put an end to the state of impunity enjoyed by some groups due to the circumstances imposed by the war.
For their part, human rights advocates believe that the continued exercise of security functions or the implementation of field punishments outside the judicial system by any armed force represents a direct threat to citizens’ rights and the foundations of the modern State.
Furthermore, observers warn that repeated attacks on civilians could serve to widen the trust gap between the population and the forces deployed on the ground, especially given the dire humanitarian conditions faced by millions of Sudanese as a result of the ongoing war, displacement, and economic collapse. They emphasize that citizens suffering the effects of conflict need protection and the rule of law, not practices that exacerbate their sense of vulnerability and insecurity.
Conversely, security analysts believe that addressing these phenomena requires expediting the implementation of long-delayed security arrangements, including the integration of various forces into a unified national military institution under central command, clear laws, and effective accountability mechanisms. They stress that the continued proliferation of armed groups poses significant challenges to building a stable State capable of enforcing the law equally for all.
The incident in question, which took place in Omdurman raises pressing questions about the future of the relationship between citizens and the various armed forces, inciting one to question the State Institutions’ ability to protect fundamental rights and prevent violations. Moreover, it underscores the need for independent investigations into all incidents involving allegations of abuses against civilians, regardless of which party is riddled with accusations.
Amidst growing public discontent, observers fear that the recurrence of such incidents could potentially fuel the escalating public anger, especially if accountability remains absent and complaints of violations continue without a clear official response. They emphasize that restoring trust requires practical measures, beginning with investigation and transparency, and culminating in subjecting all armed individuals to the rule of law.
Nevertheless, the pressing question remains: Will these repeated incidents become the spark that Ignites widespread public anger demanding an end to the violations and the rebuilding of the security system on professional and legal foundations..!? Or will the security scene remain hostage to the state of fluidity imposed by the ongoing war and its grave repercussions..!? The answer will depend to a large extent on the active forces’ ability to provide valuable solutions that guarantee the protection of civilians and establish the principle of accountability as well as the rule of law.
