Sudan’s Detention Crisis: Abuses, Torture & Due Process Violations

 

Sudan’s Detention Crisis: Allegations of Abuse, Torture and Denial of Due Process

Sudan's army chief Abdel Fattah al-Burhan attends the Sudanese Premier League's opening football match between Al Merrikh and Ahli Madani at the Kober Stadium in Khartoum North, on May 15, 2026. /CFP 

As the protracted conflict in Sudan continues to exact a devastating human toll, emerging documentation from international human rights organizations and monitoring bodies reveals a deeply alarming pattern of violations. Beyond active battlefields and widespread displacement, a parallel crisis is unfolding within detention and interrogation facilities managed by or affiliated with the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF). Based on extensive findings by Human Rights Watch (HRW) and reports from the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR), civilians particularly those accused of collaboration or perceived political affiliations are facing systematic arbitrary detention, severe torture, and lethal conditions. This investigation examines the nature of these alleged violations, the breakdown of due process, the specific impact in regions like Al Jazirah State, and the international legal frameworks governing these actions.

What are the primary allegations of grave violations against detainees in SAF-controlled areas?

Human rights investigations into detention sites across SAF-controlled territories including parts of Omdurman, River Nile State, Northern State, Gedaref State, Red Sea State, and recaptured parts of Al Jazirah State have uncovered horrific physical conditions. Former detainees, lawyers, and activists have reported severe emaciation and extreme muscle wasting among inmates, pointing to prolonged deprivation of food that amounts to the weaponization of starvation.

Detainees are routinely held in overcrowded, unhygienic environments, forced to sleep on concrete floors and broken tiles in rooms entirely unfit for human habitation. Furthermore, accounts highlight a total absence of basic medical care. Severe, untreated wounds covered in rudimentary bandages and improvised intravenous (IV) fluid setups hanging above critically ill inmates lying on bare floors illustrate an environment of deliberate medical neglect. According to UN OHCHR reporting, at least 10 deaths in custody were confirmed between January and June 2025 alone, involving individuals detained by various factions including the SAF, volunteer medics, and local humanitarian workers.

How do security cells and ad hoc detention facilities undermine due process?

A central pillar of the abuses involves the evasion of formal legal frameworks through the establishment of specialized "security cells". Since 2024, state governors in military-controlled areas have formed these cells, comprising elements from the police, General Intelligence Service, Military Intelligence, and allied auxiliary groups like the Al-Baraa Ibn Malik Brigade. Operating under broad state-of-the-art emergency decrees, these cells conduct sweeping raids and arrests based frequently on mere suspicion or perceived local collaboration with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

Detainees are routinely held incommunicado in unacknowledged, ad hoc detention facilities such as converted residential properties rather than official, regulated prisons. This practice deliberately obfuscates inmates' whereabouts, cutting them off from legal counsel, judicial oversight, and family communication, thereby violating fundamental fair-trial guarantees and constituting arbitrary detention under international law.

What is the specific context of detention and abuses in Al Jazirah State?

Al Jazirah State has been a primary focal point for intense conflict and shifting territorial control. Following military offensives by the SAF and allied groups such as the Sudan Shield Forces led by Abu Aqla Keikel to reclaim areas previously held by the RSF, civilians have faced severe retaliatory abuses.

Documentation from human rights monitors highlights that individuals in Gezira have been subjected to arbitrary roundups, summary violence, and violent targeting based on perceived community affiliations. While state authorities and military leadership have occasionally pledged to investigate criminal acts or punish rogue elements, the scale of abuses during and after military retaking underscores a systemic failure to protect civilian populations from retaliatory violence.

How do these practices undermine the Sudanese Armed Forces' moral narrative?

The leadership under General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan has consistently projected the SAF internationally and regionally as a legitimate national institution dedicated to protecting civilians and restoring constitutional order. However, the accumulation of documented evidence regarding extrajudicial killings, deaths in custody, starvation tactics, and indiscriminate violence against populations suspected of dissent or collaboration severely undermines this narrative. When state-backed security cells and allied militias commit abuses with practical impunity, it erodes institutional credibility and deepens the domestic and international dimensions of the crisis.

What are the international legal ramifications of unlawful detention and torture?

Under international human rights law and international humanitarian law (the Geneva Conventions), warring parties are strictly bound to treat all detainees humanely, prohibit torture or cruel treatment, and guarantee due process. Unlawful deprivation of liberty, systematic ill-treatment, and willful denial of food and medical care in the context of an armed conflict are not merely domestic infractions; depending on the evidentiary scale and systemic nature, they can constitute war crimes or crimes against humanity. Independent monitoring bodies, including the UN Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan and Human Rights Watch, continue to emphasize the urgent necessity of independent investigations, asset freezes, targeted sanctions, and international accountability mechanisms to address these grave breaches.

FAQs

• What constitutes arbitrary detention under international human rights standards? 

Arbitrary detention occurs when an individual is arrested and deprived of liberty without a proper legal basis, without being informed of specific charges, or without prompt access to judicial review, legal counsel, and family notification. In Sudan, mass arrests conducted by emergency security cells based purely on suspicion violate these protections.

• What legal rights does a detainee possess during an armed conflict? 

Even during active civil conflict, Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions and international human rights treaties mandate that all detainees must be treated humanely, protected against violence, torture, and degrading treatment, and provided adequate food, water, and medical care.

• Why is access to legal counsel critical for detainees in Sudan? 

Access to independent lawyers ensures that detentions are documented, prevents individuals from disappearing into clandestine ad hoc facilities, and provides a crucial check against systemic torture, coercion, and forced false confessions.

• How has the international community responded to SAF detention abuses? 

Bodies like the UN Human Rights Council, the UN Fact-Finding Mission on Sudan, and Human Rights Watch have published extensive findings demanding transparent investigations, accountability for abusive commanders, and targeted international sanctions.

• What distinguishes documented findings from disputed claims in Gezira State? 

Documented findings rely on verified medical records, satellite imagery, forensic geolocation, and direct testimonies from survivors and former detainees, whereas disputed claims often involve blanket denials from military spokespersons or contested official statements regarding the nature of ad hoc holding sites.