Transitional injustice between the Sudanese reality and global experiences (1-3)

Kamal Aljezouli
I
On January 9, 2005, the defunct regime, as a government "de facto order", was concluded with the Peoples Movement/Army for the Liberation of the Sudan, the CPA, which provided for a six-year transition period and arranged for the enactment of the 2005 Transitional Constitution. Despite the downsides of those documents and the criticisms they have generated, including the methodology for their release away from the national incubator of the political and social movement, even opponents have relied on the fact that, if their parties have sufficient political will, they can establish a smooth path towards their democratic goals: "The two presidents".

But the rosary of that transitional period reeled without moving a single slope towards that hoped-for path. on the contrary, as the South broke with its State, and the fragile Darfur Agreement collapsed in Abuja, The others outpouring in the table reeled, as did the Eastern Accord in Asmara. The National Caucus Agreement in Cairo, then the war situation exploded in Southern Kordofan, Blue Nile and Abyei, and sparks flew along the borders of the North and South!

On May 2nd, 2012, the International Security Council issued, on the basis of proposals and recommendations from the African Union and solidarity from the Arab University, resolution/2046 binding on the two independent nations, and on the peoples movement north, Settlement of their disputes through negotiation, mediated by Tabumbeki, former President of South Africa imposed sanctions under Chapter VII, within certain renewed periods But to no avail, it all passed without the parties reaching the hoped-for settlement.

II
On April 11, 2019, the uprising of December 2018 overthrew the valiant peoples uprising. in which the de facto Government was overturned and power transferred to a three-year transitional Government with specific tasks, including achieving a national form of "Transitional Justice" In preparation for the extension of "democracy" through various political and civil power relations in society, The establishment of sustainable "peace", negotiated with armed margin movements, is now taking place in Juba between the Government and the armed movements. So the only meaning of this is that the dream, abstract, of "democracy" and "peace" cannot be seen, even in a dream, to be realized on the ground, unless the legacy of the past, burdened with violations of the defunct regime, is fully liquidated, and violations of all the countrys monetary regimes are said to have been overwhelmed and remorsed. The intifada charters and their main forces have chosen a "transitional justice" approach to this desired classification. Otherwise, they have only three other options. Each of these options, each of which prevents its application or detracts from its potential, as follows:

First option: to entrust the transitional authority with the liquidation required for the national law machinery and the national courts, i.e. "Traditional justice", which would run into the legislative obstacles derived by that system in order to prevent the accountability of its members, staff and security officials, as well as the legal problem that Darfurs violations required to liquidate are elements of international criminal law. (War crimes, crimes against humanity and the crime of genocide) except in 2010, when the Criminal Code of 1991 was amended, and Title XVIII was added to it to cover, for the first time, the international crimes referred to; Since subsequent legislation does not apply retroactively, the national judicial system is, in this case, "unable" to prosecute such violations The "capacity" and "desire" are among the most important requirements of the national jurisdiction, which obscures "complementary jurisdiction" from the international jurisdiction.

Second option: the transitional authority should have recourse to international criminal justice including the courts of the State, whose judges accept international jurisdiction, This option may provide potential for a limited number of trials ", given its nature, its high cost, while every victim expects justice to extend into his injustice, This option also lacks the possibility of applying the well-established legal principle. and that "justice delivered should be seen as justice to be done is justice to be seen while being done", This is due to the geographic dimension factor and the exorbitant cost of travel, which deprives victims and their families of attending the court hearings in question.

Third option: that the transitional authority facilitate the application of an appropriate form of "hybrid courts", sometimes called "hybrid courts", or "internationalized". These courts, according to their legal nature, are of two kinds. First-type courts are established by agreement between the United Nations, or a regional organization such as the African Union, and the relevant United Nations Member State or African Union, as the case may be, at the request of the same court in which the dispute occurred. The closest example of this type is the court that concluded its agreement, prompted by IGAD, the arch-rivals in the tragic civil war that erupted in the fledgling South Sudan nation, President Salvakir and armed opposition leader Riek Machar, and if it hindered the application of what they agreed to the reality of their existence, and some of their top collaborators, in the Silicon. The courts of this type usually consist of a mix of local judges appointed by the constituency concerned, other foreigners appointed by the United Nations or the African Union, and apply the legal and judicial system of the course in which the violations occurred. The courts of the other species are established by the International Security Council, individually under its powers under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations, and, of course, apply its own statute, independent of the State concerned.

Whatever it is, the lessons learned from the most typical of these two types, By virtue of their applicability during the current transition period in our country, it is the difficulty of subjecting presidents, Leaders, personalities with powers to fight, and still on authority chairs as well as that option, given its nature and its high cost Justice for a limited number of victims, like that, Like international trials, while hundreds, if not thousands of injustices, await justice.