Global media highlights ICJ's dismissal of SAF's lawsuit; urges end to futile conflict
6 May 2025 18:34
CAPITALS (WAM)International media outlets have described the International Court of Justice's (ICJ) decision to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) against the UAE as a firm rejection of what they see as an attempt to deflect responsibility for the ongoing conflict.Commentators and analysts emphasised that the SAF should have prioritised ending the senseless war, and worked with regional and international partners to restore stability in Sudan.Various international media outlets highlighted in their coverage the dire humanitarian consequences of the ongoing civil war in Sudan.Reports described the situation as one of the world's worst humanitarian crises.CNN reported that the ICJ dismissed Sudan's case alleging that the UAE violated the Genocide Convention. CNN quoted Reem Ketait, Deputy Assistant Minister of Political Affairs in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as saying, "This decision is a clear and decisive affirmation of the fact that this case was utterly baseless."
"The Court's finding that it is without jurisdiction confirms that this case should never have been brought," Ketait has said.
"Quite simply, today's decision represents a resounding rejection of the SAF's attempt to instrumentalise the Court for its campaign of misinformation and to distract from its own responsibility," she added.The Associated Press (AP) reported on the bloody conflict that Sudan descended into in mid-April 2023, referring to the case filed by Sudan against the UAE, which the court decided to dismiss after "judges found that the International Court of Justice lacked the authority to continue the proceedings".The Guardian published an article stating that the ICJ rejected and struck the case entirely its list. The paper quoted Reem Ketait's statement, who said, "The facts speak for themselves: the UAE bears no responsibility for the conflict in Sudan. On the contrary, the atrocities committed by the warring parties are well documented.""The conflict, which has been ongoing since April 2023, has caused one of the world's worst humanitarian crises despite international peace efforts," The Guardian reported.Russia Today reported that the UAE government welcomed the decision, calling it a "categorical rejection of Sudan's false claim." It quoted Reem Ketait's statement: "The decision clearly and unequivocally confirms that the case is without merit… [It] represents a decisive rejection of the Sudanese Armed Forces' attempt to exploit the court to spread misinformation and divert attention from its responsibility in the conflict".In its coverage, Al-Arab newspaper described the ICJ's dismissal of the SAF's lawsuit as a political victory for the UAE, in the face of the SAF's attempts to deflect attention from its role in initiating and prolonging the war, and stalling progress toward a political agreement despite multiple regional and international initiatives.The paper also quoted observers as saying the Sudanese military's legal complaint against the UAE represented a tactic to buy time, and avoid accountability for its failure to achieve stability following the army's coup against the democratic transition and civilian rule, a move that triggered a civil war in April 2023.Several journalists and political observers criticised the legal action filed by General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan's team, stating it reflected a lack of understanding of diplomatic and legal frameworks, and was based on a weak, unsubstantiated file that clearly aimed to divert attention from the military's failures.They stressed that the group behind the lawsuit does not represent Sudan or the will of its people, who continue to suffer the devastating consequences of the war. Meanwhile, this faction, they said, has been pursuing political gains at the expense of the Sudanese people.They reiterated that the SAF should have focused on ending the senseless conflict, and engaged regional and international allies to support Sudan's stability.
They also highlighted that the UAE's diplomatic and humanitarian efforts stand as clear testimony to its active and constructive role in supporting the Sudanese people.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
5 hours ago
- The National
Lebanon cannot rely on resilience alone and must fix state failures, says Prime Minister Salam
Lebanon cannot rely solely on the 'remarkable resilience' of its people and must address corruption, institutional failure and political paralysis, Prime Minister Nawaf Salam said on Tuesday at a conference in Beirut. The reformist leader said Lebanon must transition to a state that inspires confidence in its citizens as well as investors. He criticised historic corruption, nepotism and 'gross mismanagement' that he blamed for the virtual collapse of the country, pledging to build ' Lebanon 3.0". Speaking at an event in downtown Beirut organised by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, Mr Salam said the resilience of Lebanese citizens could not be a substitute for a responsible state. The word 'resilience' has been repeatedly bandied around in Lebanon as both a compliment and a damning sign of hardships afflicting the country, but Mr Salam said 'no society can rely indefinitely on the strength of its people to compensate for institutional failure'. 'It's time for Lebanon to transition from survival through personal resilience, to progress through collective strength … grounded in the rule of law, modern institutions, sustainable economic policies and full respect for national sovereignty,' he said. Mr Salam, a former head judge of the International Court of Justice, came to power earlier this year following the election of President Joseph Aoun in January. Mr Salam has pursued a break from the past and created a reformist government made up of ministers who were not members of Lebanon's political parties – even if they were nominated by them. Coming in the wake of Israel's brutal war on Lebanon, years of economic crises and ineffective governance, many Lebanese hold high hopes that the country's new leaders can bring about a new dawn in national development. Diplomats and humanitarian officials have generally praised practical steps taken by the government so far against the formidable tasks ahead. But with parliamentary elections set for next year, its mandate may be short. In his speech, Mr Salam criticised what he called a culture of impunity and said the deadly 2020 Beirut port explosion was a 'powerful symbol' of the urgent need for accountability. The blast killed more than 200 people and was one of the most powerful non-nuclear explosions ever recorded. Mr Salam said his government was working hard to bring about 'Lebanon 3.0" through its reforms. If Lebanon 1.0 was characterised by the post-independence period, and 2.0 the aftermath of the 1975-1990 civil war, 3.0 'must be defined by the creation of a stable and lasting framework that inspires trust among citizens and investors, empowers all citizens to live with dignity and security, draws strength from our diversity and ensures economic opportunity', he said. Mr Salam said his government was making meaningful progress, pointing to the recent passing of a banking secrecy law that marked a 'decisive shift away from outdated practices'. He also insisted the state must have a monopoly over arms and on its own 'decide matters of war and peace' – one of the most divisive issues in Lebanese political discourse. There is pressure from both abroad and at home for Hezbollah, the Lebanese armed group and political party, to be disarmed following its devastating war with Israel last year. While battered and bruised from the conflict, Hezbollah remains a potent force. Israel also continues to bomb southern Lebanon daily and occupy positions on Lebanese territory, demanding that Hezbollah be fully stripped of its weapons.
Dubai Eye
5 days ago
- Dubai Eye
UAE condemns attack on aid convoy in North Darfur
The attack on the joint UNICEF and World Food Programme (WFP) convoy on Tuesday disrupted the delivery of critical food supplies to starving families. In an official statement, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA) denounced "all acts of violence targeting humanitarian personnel who risk their lives to serve vulnerable populations" and emphasised that it is a clear violation of international humanitarian law. The UAE called on the warring parties in Sudan to fulfill their obligations under international law, adhere to the commitments made in the Jeddah Declaration, and engage with what was proposed by the Advancing Lifesaving and Peace in Sudan (ALPS) Group. The ministry stressed the urgent need for concrete measures to protect civilians and ensure rapid, unhindered access to humanitarian aid through all available channels. Reaffirming its steadfast support for a peaceful resolution to the Sudanese conflict, the UAE underscored the importance of an immediate ceasefire and the protection of civilians. The statement also reiterated the UAE's commitment to working with regional and international partners to bring stability and peace to Sudan. Aid has frequently come under crossfire in the two-year-old war between the Sudanese army and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, which has left more than half the population facing crisis levels of hunger and driven millions from their homes. The attack is the latest of several assaults on aid in recent days. It follows the repeated shelling of UN World Food Programme premises in al-Fashir by the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and an attack on El Obeid hospital in North Kordofan that killed several medics late last month.
Middle East Eye
5 days ago
- Middle East Eye
Israel committing genocide in Gaza, says top legal scholar Melanie O'Brien
The head of the world's largest academic association on genocide has declared Israel's actions in Gaza a genocide. Dr Melanie O'Brien, president of the International Association of Genocide Scholars (IAGS), outlined her legal opinion in an interview with Middle East Eye, ahead of an upcoming episode of the Expert Witness podcast featuring leading genocide experts. "Applying the legal definitions of genocide as found in the Genocide Convention and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, I would determine that what is happening in Gaza constitutes genocide," O'Brien said. "The definition involves acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group. These include killing or imposing conditions meant to bring about physical destruction," she explained, referring to the definition of genocide under the Genocide Convention. "What we are witnessing fits within that legal definition." New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters O'Brien's view carries considerable scholarly authority and reflects the mounting recognition of Israel's war on Gaza as a genocide. She presides over an association of over 700 scholars of genocide, and is the author of From Discrimination to Death: Genocide Process Through a Human Rights Lens. Her case studies include the Armenian genocide, the Holocaust, the Cambodian genocide, the Srebrenica genocide, and the Rohingya genocide. O'Brien, who is also an associate professor of international law at the University of Western Australia Law School, is one of a growing group of intellectuals and public figures who, in recent months, have declared Israel's war on Gaza to be unequivocally a genocide, despite the hesitancy of western governments to use the term. British officials, including Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Foreign Secretary David Lammy, have consistently refused to use the word genocide, saying such a determination should be made by a competent court. The Irish and Spanish governments have been the only western governments so far to call out Israel's actions as genocidal. Former EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell has also recently made the argument that Israel is committing genocide, as has the UN's former aid chief Martin Griffiths. According to O'Brien, "Genocide either has occurred or hasn't - labels don't change the facts." In her view, genocide is not only determined by a court ruling. Other actors can make informed assessments, such as scholars, legal experts, politicians and civil society. "Scholars like myself apply legal definitions to the facts. Politicians play a crucial role in recognition, which historically has been important for mobilising international action." A woman holds the body of a Palestinian child who was killed in Israeli strikes, as mourners gather during the funeral at Al-Shifa hospital, in Gaza City, on 4 June 2025 (Reuters) Leading human rights organisations have reached the conclusion that Israel is committing genocide. In December 2024, Amnesty International became the first major organisation to conclude that Israel had committed genocide during its war on Gaza, while Human Rights Watch concluded that "genocidal acts" had been committed. Francesca Albanese, a lawyer and the UN's special rapporteur on Palestine, authored two reports last year suggesting that genocide was taking place in Gaza. Israel's onslaught on Gaza has so far killed over 54,000 Palestinians, the majority of them women and children. Most of the enclave has been destroyed and almost all the population forcibly displaced several times over the past 20 months of conflict. Israel's siege has brought most of of Gaza's 2.1 million civilians to the brink of famine, with a total blockage imposed between 2 March and 22 May and only limited amounts of aid allowed since the blockade has eased. The International Court of Justice (ICJ) is currently hearing a case brought by South Africa in December 2023, accusing Israel of genocide. A ruling by the ICJ, which is the UN's highest court, is expected to take several years. Scholars and historians of the Holocaust have also labelled the Gaza conflict as a genocide, some as early as October 2023. 'The crime of crimes' The legal framework for the definition and interpretation of the crime of genocide is derived from the 1948 Genocide Convention, as well as the international criminal law jurisprudence that followed, particularly cases before the ICJ and the ad hoc tribunals for Rwanda (ICTR) and the former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It is one of three core international crimes, along with war crimes and crimes against humanity. But genocide is widely recognised as "the crime of all crimes". In Article II, the convention states that "genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group". That might include: Killing members of the group Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group Proving a special intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group is what distinguishes genocide from other international crimes. This part of the legal analysis of genocide is often the most difficult. But according to O'Brien, genocidal intent can be derived from verbal statements by Israeli political or military leaders as well as many other variables. "Since early October 2023, Israeli leaders have made statements about destroying Gaza and starving its population - clear expressions of intent," O'Brien said. 'Importantly, even if self-defence is invoked, that does not justify genocide' - Professor Melanie O'Brien "We also see intent through patterns of conduct, including indiscriminate bombings, mass casualties, the destruction of healthcare and essential infrastructure, and the denial of humanitarian aid, all of which can fall under crimes listed under the Genocide Convention," she told MEE. "The deliberate denial of water, food, medicine, shelter, and healthcare – all essential for life – points to genocidal intent. People are dying not only from bombings but also from starvation, malnutrition and untreated illnesses, particularly in overcrowded areas where disease spreads rapidly." The Convention focuses on prevention, not just the prohibition of the crime of genocide, hence the importance of early warnings that the atrocity might be unfolding. "Genocide is a process, not a single event," said O'Brien. Girls react during the funeral of Palestinians killed in Israeli strikes, at Nasser hospital in Khan Younis, the southern Gaza Strip, 2 June 2025 (Reuters) "We examine patterns over months or even years. In the case of Gaza, we're not only talking about the recent 18 months, but also the long history preceding the October 7 attacks – years of persecution, discrimination, apartheid, and conflict." Israel rejects accusations of genocide, and justifies its military operation in Gaza saying it has a right to self-defence. The Israeli army also claims it is abiding by international humanitarian law (IHL), or the law governing armed conflicts. O'Brien says that Israel is in grave breach of international humanitarian law, and that its response to the deadly Hamas-led attacks of 7 October 2023 has been disproportionate. "While Israel argues self-defence and military necessity, IHL requires that military attacks target only military objectives, be necessary, and be proportionate," she explained. "Indiscriminate bombing, the targeting of refugee camps, hospitals and journalists – many of whom are protected under IHL – are serious violations. Israel's military response has been disproportionate to the October 7 attack, with over 18 months of bombing resulting in mass civilian casualties. "Importantly, even if self-defence is invoked, that does not justify genocide," she said. "There is no legal defence for genocide under international law."
