18 November 2004

The Commission of Inquiry is working on addressing the ongoing situation in Darfur, Sudan, following our mandate of determining genocide, other international crimes and accountability. The Commission is currently in El-Fasher, Sudan, with plans to travel to Khartoum later this week.

Work we have done so far:

The Commission has received reports from the United States Department of State, African Union Mission in Sudan (AIMS), European Union Representative Elizabeth Kellogg, an Expert on Genocide, United Nations Security [Council], the Government of Chad, the Government of Sudan, two discussions with the member of the Janjaweed and discussions with a representative of the Sudanese Liberation Movement / Army. 

The Expert on Genocide:

The expert explained that genocide involves specific acts committed against a protected group. This list of acts, carried out by an organized government or entity with the intent to destroy the group, include:

1. Killing
2. Causing serious bodily harm
3. Inflicting destructive living conditions
4. Preventing births
5. Forcibly transferring children

Intent is the hardest element to prove, verbal calls to action or witness statements alone are considered weak evidence, and written proof is typically required. The expert stated that distinguishing genocide from war crimes against humanity can be difficult without the entire picture. Governments may hesitate to label a situation as genocide because doing so triggers obligations and consequences. Not only lack of evidence is seen as a challenge, but also proving intent. This led the Commission to interview a wide variety of representatives.

Sudanese Government Representative: Vice President Ali Osman Taha

The Sudanese government, represented at the Commission, emphasized that the conflict in Darfur originated primarily from rebel activity, particularly by groups such as the Justice and Equality Movement (JEM) and factions of the Sudan Liberation Movement/Army (SLM/A), while also acknowledging natural factors like drought that have contributed to population movements. The government stated nomadic and rural communities are among the most affected by the crisis and that displaced people are largely a result of both conflict and environmental pressures. Authorities highlighted that police and security forces are deployed along the borders of Darfur to protect civilians and that the government is committed to prosecuting any groups responsible for crimes. They affirmed that the government maintains relevant documentation including death and population statistics, military logistics records and other reports and is prepared to share these with the Commission. The Sudanese government repeated that its central focus is on addressing rebel threats, ensuring civilian protection and facilitating the commission’s work to investigate the conflict.

Interview with Elizabeth Kellogg, Representative of the European Union:

After the European Union offered to pay for half of the new 3,000 African Union troops, we called a representative to explain the rationale behind this choice, and any information they might have in relation to this conflict. When asked why the EU allocated such funding, Ms. Kellogg responded that the EU is concerned with the ongoing humanitarian crisis in the region, specifically citing concerns about security and risk to civilians. They assert that this funding is necessary to ensure peace and stability. Although some individuals connected to the EU have been present in Darfur, the EU mainly relies on mission reports and acknowledges significant danger on the ground. They have received outside reports since the conflict began in 2003 but emphasize that identifying patterns of violence or intent is the responsibility of the Commission. The EU is hesitant to draw conclusions without its findings. The EU has not communicated directly with the Sudanese government and is primarily focused on security, estimating that 700,000 to 1,000,000 people have been displaced, with at least 110,000 fleeing to Chad. While peacekeeping is prioritized, the EU also provides humanitarian aid, €1,200,000 through its civil protection and humanitarian aid department, and recommends the Commission consult the African Union directly regarding AU capabilities and efforts.

Janjaweed Representative: 

During the first interview, the Janjaweed representative provided responses regarding their involvement in the Darfur conflict. When asked about the origin of the conflict, they stated that Sudan is under threat from rebel groups and that their actions are in defense of the government against these rebels. The individual claimed to have no personal stake in the conflict and reported no knowledge of support from external groups, although they acknowledged awareness of rebel activity in the region, including the SLM/A and JEM.

Regarding the Janjaweed’s role, the representative emphasized their aim to protect Sudan from rebels, denying claims that they were involved in theft or criminal activity. They indicated that organizational and operational support, including arms and training, comes from the Sudanese government, with coordination reportedly from Khartoum and a western command center. While denying personal compensation, the Janjaweed representative stated that their alignment with the Sudanese government guided their activities. On interactions with humanitarian aid, the Janjaweed representative acknowledged that violence occurs but attributed it to rebel interference. They emphasized loyalty to Sudan and the government of Khartoum and maintained that their activities are patriotic and aimed solely at countering rebel opposition. 

SLM/A Representative:

During discussions with a representative of the SLM/A, rebel leaders described the Darfur conflict as fundamentally a genocide, stating that “our people”— specifically non-Arab communities—are being systematically targeted by the Sudanese government and the Janjaweed militias. They reported that arms used by their fighters are largely seized from government forces during clashes, and they asserted that the Janjaweed receive their weapons and support directly from the government of Sudan. Rebel representatives denied involvement in the recent kidnappings of relief workers and described the killings of the two humanitarian aid workers on 28 October 2004, as a tragic accident for which they accept responsibility, while emphasizing that thousands of civilians have also been killed. They denied receiving assistance from the Chadian government.

When asked which groups are being targeted, they stated that the violence is directed at non-Arab ethnic communities, citing killings of men, widespread sexual violence against women and destruction of livestocks and villages as evidence. They alleged that Janjaweed forces operate alongside the Sudanese military, often preceded by government airstrikes. Rebel leaders affirmed that they consider themselves Sudanese, noting that they are fighting to protect civilians from ethnic persecution and to bring the perpetrators to justice.

Regarding the purpose of their rebellion, they stated that their goal is to stop the mass killings of civilians and end what they view as ethnically motivated oppression. They claimed that the government views them as rebels because they are defending their communities against what they believe to be unjust and targeted violence. They reported threats to their Sudanese citizenship, stating that survivors are often told, “These are Arab lands now,” following the destruction of their villages.

On allegations by the Sudanese government that rebel groups commit crimes against civilians, the representative rejected these claims, arguing that the government is attempting to deflect responsibility for its own actions. They described the Janjaweed violence as the main force attacking their communities; burning villages and committing violence, and they expressed grave concern about the militias’ lack of control. Finally, they repeated their belief that the conflict is driven by ethnicity, stating that the government’s actions and targeting patterns indicate an ethnic cleansing campaign that requires urgent international intervention.

Next Steps:

The Commission calls on all parties to act with transparency to help the Commission determine clear recommendations for the Security Council to bring about an end to the suffering and much needed relief to those suffering in Sudan as a result. 

The United States (US) report outlined the evidence that led the US to categorize the situation in Sudan as a genocide. AMIS reported on the situation they have witnessed in Darfur on the ground, discussing the humanitarian situation and the destruction of property and killings of civilians. The European Union outlined their reasons for providing funding for troops in Darfur. The United Nations Security Office informed the Commission on the safety of travelling to regions of Sudan and Chad, leading the Commission to decide to relocate to Khartoum. The Government of Chad also provided information on the security situation in Chad, describing the humanitarian situation that has forced the displacement of Sudanese people to Breidjing Camp in Chad. In their security report, they labeled the situation a genocide and emphasized their cooperation with the Commission due to their concerns for Sudanese people. In a following report, the Government of Chad mentioned that the Janjaweed is conducting cross-border raids of Chad border villages, killing Chadians. In a meeting with a representative from the Sudanese President’s Office, the discussion framed the situation as a crisis caused by natural causes, with the Sudanese Government committing to full cooperation with the investigation by the Commission and stating, “We will prosecute any party committing crimes against the Sudanese people.” In the discussion with a member of the Janjaweed group, it was revealed that the Janjaweed are being supplied arms by the Sudanese military.

The respondent noted that they are a community coordinator and a mobilizer, focusing on local problem-solving and protection of civilians from rebel attacks. They reported awareness of violence in the region, particularly linked to rebels allegedly armed by Chad, and described the Janjaweed as a structured force rather than a ragtag group, with guidance and cross-recruiting from the government’s Popular Defense Force (PDF) and Sudanese military leadership.

In summary the Janajweed representative framed their involvement as defensive, organized and coordinated with the Sudanese government, while denying personal gain or criminal intent and identified the primary threat as rebel groups opposed to Khartoum.