Transitional justice in the post-revolution Sudan 1-4

Dr. Sami Abdul Halim Said
Introduction:
Since the beginning of 2018, Sudan has witnessed many political, social and security transformations. In the context of those transformations, the relationship between citizens and the governing authorities was marked Public anger continues to deteriorate, and incompatibility has increased. Civil society organizations have declared civil disobedience and a political strike through peaceful resistance, it led to the overthrow of the repressive political system on the 11th of April 2019.

The most prominent slogans called for by the revolutionaries and demanded their realization were the slogan "Freedom - Peace - Justice". In the field of justice, there were many discussions on the prosecution of dictatorship, corruption, terrorism, human rights violations and so forth. In response, talk of transitional justice found a valuable space and considerable discussions, including anatomy of African and Arab experiences similar to the Sudanese situation.

This paper tries to avoid repeating what has been said, by trying to apply the concepts of transitional justice to the Sudanese situation, by highlighting Sudanese topics, legal and institutional conditions, while using similar experiences.

First: Why transitional justice in Sudan:
According to international documents considered, including United Nations documents on the right to justice, it is clear that legislative and institutional reforms have been promoted in States in a state of political transition - From dictatorship to democracy - important principles of justice and its role in peacebuilding have also been developed, including the promotion of the role of local means, mechanisms and curricula in the administration of justice, so that it can be said that transitional justice may be based on formal, informal, judicial and non-judicial justice.

To answer the question: Why transitional justice in the Sudan, we are trying below to set out some principles related to the Sudanese context:

1. Right to justice
It is natural for people to rise up against injustice, violence and corruption, and revolts to be based on dictatorship and human rights violations. It was therefore envisaged that the popular and institutional action to end the era of dictatorship in the Sudan, having managed their lives, freedoms and resources, would continue. It is well established that all civilized peoples, after beginning to see their way towards human dignity and democracy, set themselves a system of justice to deal with violations committed by the dictatorship in violation of the law, a deviation from public authority, and corruption in employing the States capabilities to empower the dictatorship, its institutions and its natural people. In the event of a transition from such justice, States aim to promote social peace, by insulting criminals who have violated the countrys laws, human values and established customs, and by pursuing a justice approach to violations committed by the dictatorship, citizens feel that the right to justice is recognized, gross violations are recognized and thus condemned for crimes committed and victims and the oppressed are rehabilitated through reparation. The importance of justice against human rights violations lies, above all, in its right and its social impact is peacebuilding and social coexistence.

In the context of the political transition from dictatorship to democracy, justice must accommodate political and security conditions and respond to the objectives of peacebuilding and justice as mutually beneficial synergies. Justice is indispensable for peacebuilding and the absence of peace hampers the application of justice. Such justice is in some ways called "transitional justice".

In the Sudanese situation, according to official governmental and international reports, grave violations continued to be perpetrated on the human rights front, including what has been monitored periodically by the reports of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the human rights situation in the Sudan each year, as well as what has sometimes been published by government institutions in different formats and ways. Consequently, violations have become agreed.

There are countless corruption files, which were made public on numerous occasions by government institutions, dealt with extensively by the local media, and published in numerous international reports, hence corruption cases are necessarily known to public and non-governmental institutions.

Among this, we see great concern among citizens about the fate of Sudans resources smuggled out of the Sudan, in the form of cash deposited in foreign banks in the names of persons belonging to the governing institutions. or national institutions sold to private sector persons and companies without respect for financial and accounting standards or regulations on the disposal of public funds, in the sense that they were disposed of under personal considerations and without taking into account the requirements of the law and the procedures for the disposal of public funds.

If these are near-agreed facts, official government institutions may have issued declarations confirming such abuses. The justice system, which had continued to prevail during the dictatorship, could no longer administer justice in the face of such violations in a fair and correct manner, since the laws in force had been drafted to serve and protect the interests of the implementing class, and because those working in justice enforcement institutions, including judges, had been selected according to certain criteria that were commensurate with the aspirations of the countrys governing class. These criteria have long been characterized as "empowerment", and a large number of former competent employees have been dismissed under the "public interest" policy due to their lack of those standards required by the countrys holding class.

2. Justice and democratization:
It is now clear that corruption is one of the major obstacles to peace, justice, sustainable development, democracy and human rights around the world, including the post-dictatorship Sudan.

Achieving the requirements of growth, stability and well-being lies in an integrated approach to development aimed at quality growth, including the environment, education, health and governance. Good governance, by its inclusive nature, is the common factor and the way in which all those elements of inclusive development pass. It requires, inter alia, trust between the State and the people, integrity, transparency, the rule of law, checks and balances, inter-agency coordination and increased participation of key stakeholders.

Under the dictatorship, the justice system is unable (due to the nature of laws and immunities from accountability) or unwilling to apply justice (due to the politicization of justice organs and corruption). The post-dictatorship national justice system may not be able to deliver the required justice, because the justice system remains subject to the dictatorships laws and institutions, and there has been insufficient opportunity to reorganize and restructure the justice system. Under the Sudans last 30 years, police institutions, the Public Prosecutors Office and the judiciary have experienced systematic bulldozing under the notorious policy of empowerment.

Justice in periods of democratization or transition always depends on the political will of the new group that took office in the transition. Political will and willingness to undertake legislative and institutional reforms and to set up commissions of inquiry, as well as to allocate resources to justice institutions, are all important political issues in the context of the establishment of justice.