Genocide Arrest Warrant For Bashir

• ICC Genocide Warrant: What does it mean?
  What the ICC’s new arrest warrant for Omar al-Bashir really means
• ICC Issues Arrest Warrant for Omar al-Bashir on Charge of Genocide
  The International Criminal Court’s Statement
• Reactions from the Sudanese Government
  Government of Sudan’s response
• US says Sudan’s president should go to Hague (AFP)
  U.S. State Department response
• Rights Groups Respond To New “Genocide” Arrest Warrant For President Bashir
  Save Darfur Coalition and partners response
• TAKE ACTION: Protect Civilians and Support Justice
  Tell the Obama Administration to prevent a repeat of last year’s merciless retaliation against civilians by the Khartoum regime

Referendum on Southern Secession

• Opinion: In Sudan, War Is Around the Corner (New York Times)
  Dave Eggers and John Prendergast write about the United States’ responsibility to prevent a return to war in South Sudan
• South Sudan religious leaders back independence (AFP)
  Christian and Muslim leaders in south Sudan call for people to choose independence in January’s referendum
• South Sudan Envoy Calls Talks With Khartoum ‘Peaceful Divorce’ (VOA)
  Voice of America on negotiations between the SPLM and GOS

Other Important Sudan Related News

• PROMISES, PROMISES: US fails to punish Sudan (AP)
  The Obama Administration’s response (or lack thereof) to Khartoum’s bad behavior
• Darfur violence kills 221 in June: peacekeepers (Reuters)
  Another deadly month in Darfur
• US, Britain, Norway ‘deeply concerned’ on Sudan (AFP)
  Sudan Troika express concern over the deteriorating security situation in Darfur and the repressive behavior of the Sudanese Government since April’s rigged elections.
• Sudan’s Army Says It Has Driven Rebels From New Darfur Base (Bloomberg)
  Sudan’s army claims to have driven JEM from their base in western Darfur
• Sudan to close border with Libya (BBC)
  Sudan shuts it’s border to “protect travelers from ‘rebels and outlaws’”
• Escalating Violence In Post-Election Sudan
  The situation in Darfur has rapidly deteriorated since Sudan’s April elections

From the State Department:

Today marks the beginning of the final year of Sudan’s landmark Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA). This year will be a turning point in Sudan’s history. With just six months remaining until the referenda for Abyei and Southern Sudan are due to be held, a tremendous amount of work is required to ensure continued peace and stability in Sudan beyond the expiry of the CPA

The members of the Troika reaffirm our support for credible, peaceful referenda in January 2011, the outcomes of which are respected by all. We congratulate the members of the Southern Sudan Referendum Commission on their appointment and urge them quickly to begin planning this important event, and to take full advantage of the international assistance available.

We are encouraged by discussions between the parties to the CPA on their post-referendum relationship. We welcome the signing of the Mekelle Memorandum of Understanding on June 23 and the expected launch of formal talks on July 10. We urge the parties to accelerate these discussions to ensure a solid foundation for long-term friendly and sustainable relations between North and South no matter the outcome of the referendum.

However, major challenges remain and must be addressed with increased urgency: in particular, appointment of the Abyei Referendum Commission; demarcation of the North/South border; and further progress on popular consultations in Blue Nile and Southern Kordofan states. The Abyei referendum is an essential milestone of the CPA that cannot be overlooked and must be completed on time. It is critical that the parties focus on these vital challenges in order to ensure continued peace and stability.

We are deeply concerned at the actions of the Sudanese Authorities since the election, which have further undermined civil and political rights, including the arrest of opposition politicians, journalists and peaceful protestors. We urge national and local authorities in the north, south, and Abyei area to ensure a conducive political environment in the lead up to the referenda.

In Darfur, the security situation continues to deteriorate, including ceasefire violations by the Government of Sudan and rebel groups and increased inter-tribal fighting and kidnappings. We remain deeply concerned by the Government of Sudan’s use of aerial bombings and local militias. We urge all parties to end violence, commit to a sustained and permanent ceasefire, and engage fully and constructively in the AU-UN led peace talks. Threats to humanitarian organisations and UNAMID personnel, and its impact on delivery of humanitarian assistance in Darfur, are unacceptable. Parties must ensure safe and unhindered access of humanitarian organizations to populations in need.

The next year presents great challenges but also great opportunities for Sudan. Now is the time to look forward, not backward, to achieve a lasting peace and we reiterate our Governments’ commitment to working with the Sudanese people, the African Union High Level Implementation Panel, the United Nations, the Intergovernmental Authority on Development, the Assessment and Evaluation Commission, and other regional and international partners, to do so.

Ambassador Susan Rice

Ambassador Rice began by calling on parties to increase preparations for the referendum and post-referendum period and emphasized many issues that need to be resolved and planned for, such as those surrounding the region of Abyei and the creation of wealth-sharing agreements. She argued that the referendum must be conducted in a more free and fair environment than the recent elections. While the U.S. has declared that the April elections did not live up to international standards, Ambassador Rice’s remarks were more forthright and critical than previous U.S. statements:

“Let me reiterate that the April elections were characterized by serious irregularities, including restrictions on political freedoms, reports of logistical and administrative challenges, harassment and intimidation by security forces, and concerns regarding the tabulation process”.

I applaud Ambassador Rice who did not mince words towards the Sudanese government and their continuation of violent crackdowns and rights violations in Darfur and throughout Sudan. Rice made strong comments directed against the Government of Sudan (GoS) and stated that the U.S. remains “deeply concerned by the atmosphere of increasing political repression in Khartoum by the Government of Sudan and the deplorable environment for civil and political rights in the north.”

Ambassador Rice called on the Sudanese government and parties involved to cooperate with the ICC investigation and her speech came after ICC Prosecutor Moreno-Ocampo briefed the Security Council this past Friday on the ongoing Darfur investigations. She gave a clear indication of the United States’ support of the ICC warrant against al-Bashir by stating that “the United States strongly supports international efforts to bring those responsible for genocide and war crimes in Darfur to justice” and going on to reaffirm the commitment of the U.S. to promoting peace and justice in Sudan.

Ambassador Rice also highlighted the increased violence throughout the country and stated that the U.S. is “gravely concerned by the continuing insecurity and violence faced by the civilian population in Sudan.” A rise in fighting has led to massive civilian displacement throughout Sudan with continued attacks by the Lords Resistance Army in the South and fighting between the Sudanese Government and the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) as well as the Sudan Liberation Front- Abdul Wahid (SLA-AW) in Darfur. These clashes have perpetuated sexual violence in Darfur which led Ambassador Rice to state that “the Government of Sudan, UNAMID, other UN entities, as well as the NGO community must strengthen prevention and tools to respond to sexual and gender-based violence.”

I welcome recent statements by Assistant Secretary of State Philip Crowely and yesterday’s speech by Ambassador Rice which appears to indicate that the United States government may be taking a firmer stance towards Sudan in the future. While these efforts are commendable, the United States must turn these words into action and continue to increasingly pressure government and rebel forces as well as monitor the situation in Sudan to ensure violence in Darfur and widespread political repression of civilians does not continue.

A new military offensive in Darfur, the arrest of political leaders, and the shutting down of newspapers in Khartoum: election season must be over in Sudan. Emboldened by electoral “success,” Sudanese President Omar Al Bashir and his National Congress Party (NCP) are sending troubling signals about their philosophy that will guide post-election governance.

The push last Friday by the Sudanese Armed Forces to regain control over a stronghold of the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) in West Darfur kicked off seven days of violence and repression. The army reported that it killed 108 JEM fighters in the assault. Elsewhere in Darfur, JEM allegedly attacked a tanker truck killing 20 Sudanese police officers. Continued clashes between nomadic tribes and the kidnapping of humanitarian aid workers – including an American – have only heightened tensions throughout Darfur.

Commenting yesterday on these recent developments before the United Nations Security Council, the Joint Special Representative for the United Nations/African Union peacekeeping mission (UNAMID) stated that continued fighting in Darfur has “caused substantial civilian casualties, the displacement of communities, and hampered the delivery of humanitarian assistance.” The U.S. State Department earlier in the week also condemned the “recent offensive actions in Darfur” and “urged both the Government of Sudan and the Darfur rebel movements to refrain from any further actions that would undermine the Darfur peace process or endanger civilians.”

Yet, blithely ignoring the deteriorating conditions in Darfur, an NCP leader told Darfuri students this week that his party was seeking to deepen peace and foster a culture of national unity (article in Arabic). Most people in Darfur instead fear that the faltering peace process, government offensive, and continuing crisis in Jebel Marra proffer a new post-election reality.

Critics and opposition leaders in Khartoum share such concerns. On Saturday, national security forces arrested the leader of the opposition Popular Congress Party, Dr. Hassan Al Turabi, who has spoken out about the fraudulent elections. Security agents also stormed the offices of Turabi’s paper, closed the building, and confiscated materials, and arrested three journalists and the managing editor of the paper. Later in the week, two more newspapers were targeted by security agents and one other opposition leader was detained for three hours of interrogation. The African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies reports that the raids on the newspapers indicated that Sudanese authorities have renewed their use of pre-print censorship to suppress political opinion.

Taken together, the apparent crackdown on opposition leaders and newspapers, along with a military offensive in Darfur, appears to represent a dangerous new course chosen by the Bashir government. With this emboldened mentality, a peace agreement in Darfur will remain elusive and politics in Khartoum will become even more polarized. There is also the question of which face the regime will put forward while implementing the final stages of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement. If Bashir and the NCP approach the upcoming referendum for South Sudan in the same way that they have taken on Darfur and the northern opposition this week, peace for the entire country could be in jeopardy.

It is for this reason that today the Save Darfur Coalition sent a letter to U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice and U.S. Special Envoy for Sudan Scott Gration urging the United States “to issue a forceful statement that these actions are completely unacceptable and that, if they continue, Bashir and the hardliners in his party will face new consequences and only isolate themselves further” (full text here). Highlighting the warnings from UNAMID about the situation in Darfur, this letter also asked “the United States to lead the international community in applying appropriate pressure on both the Sudanese government and the Darfur armed rebel movements” so that UNAMID can carry out its mission to protect civilians robustly and effectively. On this issue, the Save Darfur Coalition sent another letter this week with recommendations on improving security to the United Nations Security Council.

Next week Omar Al Bashir will participate in presidential inaugural festivities. Human Rights Watch has urged governments to boycott the inauguration in light of the International Criminal Court’s arrest warrant against the Sudanese president. This would be a necessary but not sufficient statement from the international community. Those within the regime in Khartoum must understand that political impunity cannot be attained through fraudulent elections and, moreover, that their recent actions undermine any concurrent promises of reform and peace. Unless this message is clearly sent from the United States and other countries, the current political trajectory of Bashir and the NCP will have no reason to change, which would endanger even more innocent lives in Sudan.

Sean P. Brooks is a policy expert at the Save Darfur Coalition. He recently returned from a trip to Sudan during which he spent a week in Darfur.

Does this include the journalists of Sudan, Mr President? Just yesterday the Government of Sudan shut down a newspaper and arrested three journalists after the paper reported an unverified claim that Iran had a weapons-producing plant operating in Sudan.

The above story is just one example of many abuses committed against journalists by the Bashir Regime in recent times — especially during the recent fraudulent elections.

Today you commented:

All around the world there are enormously courageous journalists and bloggers who, at great risk to themselves, are trying to shine a light on the critical issues that the people of their country face; who are the frontlines against tyranny and oppression.

Sounds like Sudan.

Additionally, you said:

What this act does is it sends a strong message from the United States government and from the State Department that we are paying attention to how other governments are operating when it comes to the press.

Will you?

Mr. President, I have to ask, will your Special Envoy, Maj. Gen. Scott Gration, heed your call and protect journalists and condemn those that seek to silence and stymie a free press?

The Senators pressed General Gration on the administration’s plans and available resources to respond effectively to “all possible scenarios.” As Senator John Kerry noted, the international community is in a rare position to have “a map of the fault-lines” of a crisis. While General Gration seemed to be surprisingly comfortable with the current resources at his own disposal within the State Department, he acknowledged the magnitude of the challenge. For example, General Gration agreed with the recent assessment by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair that South Sudan is currently the area of the world most at-risk for mass killing or genocide. He also highlighted the key issues that could be triggers for conflict during the referendum period – most notably the demarcation of borders and oil sharing.

On Darfur, General Gration stressed for the first time in unequivocal language that general insecurity and lawlessness remains his chief concern.  Rather than once again touting gains from the protracted peace talks in Doha or the diplomatic rapprochement between Sudan and Chad, he stated bluntly that such progress on the strategic level “has not changed the lives of people on the ground…[who] don’t have a way out.” Specifically, he noted as unacceptable the continuing offensive in Jebel Marra, the continued aerial bombardments by the Sudanese Armed Forces, and the breakdown in the ceasefire between the Justice and Equality Movement and the Sudanese government.  His frank acknowledgement of the unfilled gaps in services for victims of gender-based violence since the expulsion of 13 humanitarian aid organizations in March 2009 was also particularly noteworthy.

To make progress on comprehensive security in Darfur, General Gration described his efforts to push the United Nations/African Union peacekeeping force to “get out of the [major] towns” and to patrol the roads and the rural areas. This appeal carried the caveat that it is the Government of Sudan that has the ultimate responsibility to provide protection to its citizens and that they continue to fail miserably. In highlighting the unchanged mentality of the regime, he noted that the walis (governors) and local government leaders in Darfur have done very little to put in legal systems to identify those who commit crimes and then to bring them to justice.

With such disturbing realities in Darfur and potential for violence in the South, the Senators wanted to know how the United States could increase its leverage in Sudan. Some, like Senator Roger Wicker, accurately questioned whether Secretary Hillary Clinton or Ambassador Susan Rice should be making this more of a personal priority. He even noted a series of ads by Save Darfur and some of our partners making this case. In response, General Gration felt that the current level of involvement of Clinton and Rice was sufficient. With that said, he also announced that he would be sending a senior level diplomat to Juba next month to lead a diplomatic surge before the referendum.

It was also refreshing to hear General Gration agree with Save Darfur’s position that the international community as a whole is not coordinated, nor doing enough – and that this must change. This point relates to another critical statement by Gration: that continuing to marginalize the regime in Khartoum can be an effective pressure point. This was his response to a question from Senator Russell Feingold on what tools the United States would have available if Omar al-Bashir and his National Congress Party attempted to disrupt the 2011 referendum. General Gration would not reveal specific decisions that could be made by Obama’s National Security Council, but he said the United States would not tolerate any “messing” with the referendum. And then he importantly added that our forms of pressure can be more effective if we can get other nations to go along with them.

This revealing conversation then begs the question of what is the administration doing to make its incentives and pressures on the Sudanese government multilateral. The United States clearly did not attempt to sync closely its response to the fraudulent elections with other countries. So while a State Department spokesperson said the elections would not bestow legitimacy on the Bashir regime, there was not a coordinated message coming from our partners in Europe or important countries in Africa and the Arab world – some of which actually made statements suggesting the elections did meet certain standards of acceptability.

Going forward, if multilateral pressure is the most effective foreign policy tool, what are General Gration and the administration doing to establish a unified international plan on the following sticks and carrots? Here are a few areas that should be explored:

• Non-toleration for a Disrupted Referendum: while General Gration says a disruption will not be tolerated by the United States, it certainly could be by others in the same way the elections were accepted. What standards for success and consequences for failure are being jointly planned with European, African and Arab partners?
• Oil and wealth sharing: a critical issue for the Chinese and Japanese, the largest importers of Sudanese oil. Are the United States, China, and Japan coordinated in pressuring the North and South to reach a deal before the referendum?
• Border demarcation: both the African Union Panel on Darfur and the Intergovernmental Authority on Development are involved in the mediation of this issue. What consequences would other African countries have for either the North or the South if their actions were identified as obstructionist in finalizing the demarcation?
• Debt-relief: a carrot that the Sudanese government wants desperately. What conditions has the United States set and is it working with global partners on this issue?
• International Criminal Court: the non-cooperation of the Sudanese government and the indictment of Bashir will continue to make it a pariah state for many countries. Are the United States and its partners still clearly sending this message?

The African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies (ACJPS) has released a report entitled “Sifting Through Shattered Hopes“, which provides an assessment of Sudan’s electoral process. ACJPS reported regularly during the polls.

The report is based on the Sudanese electoral proces and the elections themselves, held from 11 – 15 April. The electoral period was marred by violations and irregularities, and was accompanied by rights abuses occurring concurrently throughout the country. Patterns began to emerge that document the extent to which the closely-linked National Elections Commission and the National Congress Party undermined opposing voices, and held fundamentally flawed elections with high levels of technical irregularities, intimidation, manipulation, harassment, and arrest. The report has been framed by monitoring conducted by the African Centre during elections and in the months prior, and includes analysis on the census, the NEC’s creation and contradictions in the legal framework, the electoral procedure envisioned by the Comprehensive Peace Agreement and the National Elections Act, delimitation of constituencies, voter registration, and finally the campaigning period and elections.

Former South African President and AUPD Chairman Thabo Mbeki (Getty Images)

When former South African president Thabo Mbeki was appointed to lead the African Union’s High Level Implementation Panel on Darfur (AUPD), many Western governments and rights groups feared his work would undermine efforts to secure a peace agreement that could deliver justice to the people of Darfur and help Sudan on its way toward national reconciliation.

Instead, far from letting Sudan’s government and its indicted leader Omar al-Bashir off the hook for atrocities committed in the country’s war-torn region, the panel’s highly anticipated report—made public last fall—challenged the Sudanese government to take responsibility for war crimes prosecutions, and included a nuanced appeal to address the ongoing political and economic marginalisation of Darfur, cited as the conflict’s key causative factors.

Neither justice nor peace, it makes clear, can be realized without the Sudanese government’s full participation in promoting accountability for atrocities committed in Darfur and in reforming the country’s hitherto centrifugal and divisive political system, including the inequitable distribution of power and wealth in Sudan.

Mbeki in Darfur (SSRC: Making Sense of Sudan)

Mbeki’s report stated clearly that a peace agreement followed by Darfur’s full participation in free and fair national elections should be part of this solution.

But Sudan’s historic nationwide polls have closed. Bashir has declared overwhelming victory as a new chapter in the country’s troubled narrative begins—one that will ultimately determine the nation’s continued existence. Amidst the declarations of triumph and denunciations of a stolen vote, it seems the election process has done little to address the root causes of Darfur’s troubles.

Just the opposite, in fact.

As elections approached—amid voter and opposition boycotts, and as promising peace deals and ceasefires faltered —many sceptics questioned how the region’s beleaguered population, including millions of internally displaced persons, could participate in a free, fair and peaceful electoral process when none of those qualities can describe Darfur itself.

While large-scale battles and daily massacres of civilians may finally be confined to Darfur’s tragic past, the region’s “calm but unpredictable” security environment in reality means it is safe for no one, least of all those trying to alleviate the crisis. Intimidation prevails, and the region remains under a state of emergency. Impunity and insecurity likewise persist—clashes between belligerent parties, deadly attacks against peacekeepers, mass displacements, kidnappings, and banditry occur with disturbing regularity. Restrictions on protection and aid efforts have left the local populations without access to humanitarian assistance or military protection.

In the months leading up to the elections, fighting between the Sudan Armed Forces and multiple rebel groups raged in the central region of Jebel Marra and in Jebel Moon near the Chadian border. Days before voting began, the European Union monitoring team pulled out of Darfur, citing security concerns. And just as the nationwide elections were underway, four South African peacekeepers were abducted at gunpoint as they tried to investigate the ongoing clashes. Two days after the polls closed, the Carter Center determined that it could not endorse the elections in Darfur.

In this context, opposition politics remains a dangerous and nearly impossible pursuit in Darfur. The “legal and security conditions” in Darfur necessary for political activity to be freely conducted – called for in Mbeki’s report – were not realized in advance of the polls, and are now unlikely to be fulfilled, leaving many in fear of what’s next for the troubled region.

To make matters worse, there is no evidence that any of the various armed groups have Darfuri interests in mind as they try to gain leverage amid faltering ceasefires and ongoing peace talks, and the election results will no doubt have implications for their increasingly selfish tactics.

Mbeki and Bashir (Pan African News Wire)

Bashir’s ruling NCP, on the other hand, has made public statements expressing confidence that it has the support of Darfur’s people. Despite decades of war and oppression, it claims it has earned a mandate from the people it governs and the citizens it has oppressed will somehow find salvation in its continuing reign.

It is little wonder, then, why the more than two million displaced people in camps and members of other war-affected communities generally boycotted the registration process.

Even if one accepts that the bloody war and related mass atrocities has devolved into a low intensity conflict, the brutal consequences of the crisis on a daily basis confront the vast majority of Darfur’s citizens. Without the opportunity to choose leadership other than Bashir and his ruling party, Darfuris were understandably hesitant to take part in a sham that sought to legitimise a regime that has directly contributed to their ongoing grievances.

Darfur has been disenfranchised; its people robbed of their participation in this national milestone.

But the African Union – desperate to move on to the next critical stage in Sudan’s transformation – will accept the results. The head of the AU Observer Mission in Sudan and former President of Ghana John Kufuor said he believes the people of Darfur generally appreciate what he refers to as the “institution of election” as a “necessary beginning” for the country’s more positive future.

Whether one accepts this as pragmatic realism or criticises it as criminal opportunism in favour of another African leader, it’s difficult to deny the people of Darfur have been left at the sidelines.

The process has pushed Darfur further to the margins, and amid renewed fears has deprived its people of true leadership. Bashir, having declared overwhelming victory in Sudan, will confidently excuse his ICC indictment, thereby suggesting his new mandate also negates the grave charges implicated in the AUPD investigation.

Mbeki has been praised by respected Sudan expert Alex de Waal for focusing political attention toward “addressing the underlying political malaise in Sudan, that gives rise to [human rights and humanitarian] violations” and putting “the Sudanese people back at the centre of the process.”

But these elections have done nothing of the sort.

Thabo Mbeki (Reuters)

Now, millions of disillusioned Darfuris and Sudanese watch as international leaders, despite whispers of disapproval, will ultimately hold fast to the status quo after a deeply undemocratic vote. And so, the gyre widens; hypocrisy and custom make their minds. Perhaps, though, it’s still fair to hope that Mbeki will be the exception.

For Mbeki, as a recognized leader on both democracy and Darfur, this is his chance to reflect on the panel’s report and prove that he is unwilling to compromise his findings to make excuses for one of the continent’s longest reigning military despots.

As such, it is important intellectually and morally for all interested parties to be clear that these elections were a disaster for efforts to achieve lasting peace, protection and justice in Darfur. How else can you interpret not only Bashir’s victory but that of notorious janjaweed leader Musa Hilal? This poster-child for atrocities in Darfur won a parliamentary seat and, presumably, the constitutional immunities that come with it. So much for Hilal, Bashir, or any other perpetrators being held accountable anytime soon.

Yet, some observers noted a minor success in the fact that there were no major outbreaks of violence in Darfur during the elections. However, this analysis ignores the Sudanese government’s ongoing military offensive in the Jebel Marra region of Darfur, home to an estimated one million people, and for which conveniently not one parliamentary seat was allocated. United Nations/African Union peacekeepers have been denied access to most of the conflict afflicted communities – where gender-based crimes and significant humanitarian gaps have been reported.

Furthermore, the UN Secretary General last month stated that tribal clashes in March alone accounted for at least 182 fatalities – the highest number of casualties in a single month during the UN/AU peacekeeping mission’s presence. In addition to this fighting, rebel commanders in West Darfur reported government aerial bombardments beginning a week after the election process had concluded. So it seems that the seven-year old conflict between the Sudanese government and rebels, with its many facets including the weaponization of most tribes, continues unabated – and prevents millions of displaced people from returning home.

This security situation – both the daily insecurities of Darfur, and the omnipresence of Sudanese security agents – allowed for the complete rigging of elections in Darfur. The Carter Center yesterday reported that its observers were not allowed to monitor the full vote tabulation in West Darfur because of security concerns and, even more alarmingly, that “security personnel were the only people observed counting the ballots.” The Center had similar concerns about tabulation in North and South Darfur.

These facts do not surprise most Sudanese who have long argued that it was patently ridiculous to think that free and fair elections could be held in Darfur at this time. Still, most Darfuris never expected that members of Bashir’s National Congress Party (NCP) would attempt to profit financially from their disenfranchisement. Yet that is what happened when party members in El Fasher (the capital of North Darfur) set up a Ponzi scheme last fall that reportedly bilked Darfuris of million of dollars. Making matters worse, NCP agents in the days before the elections allegedly declared that only those that voted for their party candidates (and Bashir) would be compensated for their losses.

The men ultimately responsible for this swindle of cash and vote buying turned out to be the newly elected members of parliament in the area. In response, protestors took to the streets at the beginning of the month to demand justice and were subsequently fired upon by the Sudanese security forces – an incident that killed up to eight unarmed civilians. This incident demonstrates that the rule of law remains largely absent from Darfur. Instead, the newly elected members of Bashir’s party and a chaotic array of militias, fractured rebel movements, and security agents control the region’s seven million people through the barrel of their guns and their political schemes to control and dominate everyday life.

Over the weekend, the African Union convened a meeting of its members, the United Nations and special envoys to discuss Darfur and Sudan’s other interlocking crises. The resulting communiqué politely stated that after the elections “a new reality has emerged, which should inform and contribute to peacekeeping and peace building efforts in Darfur.” Unfortunately, with most of the limited international attention now being shifted to managing the expected divorce of North and South Sudan, there is a real risk that this dangerous reality in Darfur will not be confronted until next year.

If this is the case, low-level, but apparently acceptable, violence will endure; perpetrators of years of human rights violations will remain impervious to justice; and the peace process – requiring international resources and backing for success – will languish with the millions of Darfuris that remain in camps. In short, the Sudanese regime will go another year without addressing the root causes of conflict in Darfur, as its policies and the irresponsible behavior of the rebels allows the multitude of complex local issues to continue to fester and perhaps explode. Unless the international community finds the wherewithal and capacity to deal with Sudan’s interlocking crises at the same time, this new dangerous reality will likely take hold and make a political resolution and return to normalcy in Darfur that much more difficult in the future.

Call for key reforms ahead of the 2011 referendum

Khartoum, Juba, and Kampala – Three leading Sudanese civil society organizations today issued a public letter to the African Union Peace and Security Council, League of Arab States and special envoys for Sudan from the E6 (China, European Union, France, Russia, United States, United Kingdom) ahead of their important consultations on Sudan in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia this week.

Highlighting a multitude of problems in the recent elections, the organizations called for the international community to “confront this failure” and “address these deficiencies in the process openly and frankly.” It also asks for the international guarantors of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement to push the National Congress Party and Sudan People’s Liberation Movement to “implement a broad range of legislative and policy changes aimed at ensuring that future elections are held in improved conditions.”

The full text below:

5 May 2010

Dear members of the African Peace and Security Council and special envoys,

As you come together this week to discuss promoting a global consensus on the challenges facing Sudan, we, members of independent Sudanese civil society, call on you to ensure an open and critical discussion of the electoral process and the implications of that process for the implementation of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA), the crisis in Darfur, and democratic governance in Sudan.

The elections are both a critical element of the right to participate in the conduct of public affairs as guaranteed by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which Sudan is a party and the national process of transformation envisioned by the CPA. The electoral process which ended on 26 April with the declaration of the victory of President Omar Al Bashir, however, was marred by procedural and legal deficiencies, a climate of repression which inhibited free campaigning, and other irregularities. Our assessment, as independent civil society, is that these elections did not allow for free expression of the will of the people, and as international guarantors of the CPA you must boldly confront this failure and its implications for the future of the peace agreement and the country as a whole.

The election process was monitored by a number of Sudanese civil society voices including the African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies; TAMAM, a civil society group made of 120 member organizations; the Civic Forum, an organization that coordinated the work of 56 organizations, Justice Africa, SuNDE and SUDEMOP. These civil society organizations monitored everything from the adoption of the Elections Act to voter registration and finally the actual balloting. This was done to ensure, as much as possible, free and fair elections as outlined in the Interim Constitution, the Elections Act, and the international standards ratified by the Sudanese government.

Among the problems in the electoral process noted by these groups were:

• Deficiencies in the legislative framework: Failings in the Elections Act allowed for the creation of a National Elections Commission (NEC) which was dominated by the ruling National Congress Party (NCP). In addition, repressive legislation on the media and national security facilitated the repression of open campaigning.

• Manipulation of constituencies: The creation of constituencies and the allocation of parliamentary seats were carried out on the basis of a flawed and controversial census. There were additional allegations of manipulation of constituencies through the deployment of military personnel who were allowed to vote in their place of work.

• Lack of appropriate remedies: The voter register was not published in a timely manner and omitted voters’ residential addresses, making it difficult to audit. Complaints made to the NEC did not receive a timely and clear response.

• Insufficient voter education: The voting process in Sudan was extremely complex and insufficient resources were devoted to ensure that individuals, many of whom had never voted before, to effectively navigate the procedure and express their will.

• Irregularities in voters’ lists and ballot papers: There were a number of errors in materials which impeded the process, including the omission of the names of voters from the voter rolls, failure to deliver materials in a timely fashion, confusion or omission of names and symbols of some parties. Some centres received the wrong register.

• Possibilities for illegitimate voting: The ink used by the NEC to mark those who had voted could easily be removed. Confusion of voting registers made it difficult to monitor whether individuals might be able to vote in more than one constituency. The requirements for identification were inconsistently applied, but generally allowed use of resident certificates issued by the Popular Committees, despite the fact that these bodies are controlled by the government.

• Mishandling of ballot boxes: The NEC and its High Committees failed to ensure that party agents were able to guard the ballot boxes. In addition, there were incidents of improper transportation of and tampering with the boxes.

• Harassment: On a number of occasions, opposition activists, political party representatives and independent monitors were harassed, threatened or arrested when they tried to engage in the election related activities.

These violations were widespread, and taken cumulatively, prevented the voters of Sudan from freely expressing their will and selecting their representatives.

We urge you, as international guarantors of the process, to confront this failure. As guarantors of the process you must address these deficiencies in the process openly and frankly. Failure to do so will undermine your credibility with the Sudanese people and your ability to effectively play your roles as arbiters in the remaining portion of the interim period.

We call on you to push the National Congress Party and the Sudan Peoples’ Liberation Movement to review the elections and implement a broad range of legislative and policy changes aimed at ensuring that future elections are held in improved conditions. In particular, you should emphasise the need for:

• Reform of the electoral law: The electoral law should be reformed in order to ensure greater protections of the independence and credibility of the National Elections Commission. The current Commission must be replaced with a body that can maintain the confidence of the Sudanese people.

• Revision of constituencies and registration: The current electoral process was based on controversial census and registration processes which effectively excluded or undercounted certain segments of the population. These processes must either be repeated with greater professionalism, or at a minimum, revised in those areas where results were most controversial in order to ensure that processes are truly participatory.

• Referendum: The failures of the electoral process show clearly that a process which allows for the free expression of the will of the people requires a long term engagement in the building of fair procedures, registration and monitoring institutions. In order to ensure that the referendum truly expresses the will of Southerners, the international community must comprehensively engage in these preparatory processes – in addition to monitoring of the ballot itself.

• Legal reform: The CPA provided for the revision of a number of laws in Sudan in order to ensure respect for international human rights standards. Although much of the legislation has been revised, the revised legislation fails to meet international standards. In particular, the transformation of the security services in the CPA has not been accomplished. If concerted effort is not expended to ensure that legal and policy frameworks respect international standards then the Sudanese people will continue to be marginalised and excluded from effective political participation – whether in one state or two.

• Peace in Darfur: The democratic transformation and respect for human rights promised by the CPA continues to be subverted by the lack of security and human misery in Darfur. Concerted efforts must be exerted to ensure that this conflict is addressed.

The international community, and in particular the APSC, have a critical role to play in promoting peace and democratic governance in Sudan. Doing so will, however, require bold and sustained engagement. As Sudanese civil society we are calling on you to make a commitment to such engagement at this session.

Signed:

TAMAM, a civil society group made of 120 member organizations

Sudan Domestic Election Monitoring and Observation Programme (SuDEMOP)

African Centre for Justice and Peace Studies