Ahmad 
Death sentences issued by Sudanese courts against a number of people on charges of collaborating with the Rapid Support Forces sparked a wave of controversy in the country’s legal and political circles.
Last Thursday, the Gedaref Court issued a death sentence against a person on charges of providing intelligence information to the Rapid Support Forces, which included military details about the cities of eastern Sudan. The Sudanese News Agency reported that the ruling comes in the context of several similar rulings issued by the same court.
These rulings were accompanied by a widespread arrest campaign that included activists and journalists, which sparked international criticism from the European Union, the United States, and France, as they were considered part of a security and legal escalation aimed at suppressing the opposition and ensuring that the current regime remains in power.
Lawyer Rehab Mubarak, one of the “Emergency Lawyers in Sudan,” pointed out that these rulings are repeatedly issued against activists and volunteers who participated in the revolution against the regime of former President Omar al-Bashir.
Mubarak explained that many of these rulings target individuals based on their tribal affiliation, adding that the judges who issue these rulings are those who were returned to their positions after the army’s coup against the civilian government led by Abdullah Hamdok in October 2021.
For his part, legal expert Muhammad Al-Hassan Al-Amin believes that the trials are being conducted within a legal framework and are targeting people involved in cooperation with the Rapid Support militia. He stressed that the rulings are based on compelling evidence and proof and are not related to ethnic or political affiliations.
On the other hand, legal expert Moez Hadra warned that these trials threaten the social fabric in Sudan and are being used to settle political and tribal scores, which exacerbates the divisions in society.
Arab League: Sudan’s crisis is unprecedented