Main points of security reform in Sudan

We will not tire of repeating our point that the Sudanese civil forces bear a major burden in averting the current disaster affecting the country, and we will not tire of reiterating that these forces will not be able to play an effective role in bearing this burden and transforming it into tangible action unless they unite or coordinate among themselves and adopt a practical program to achieve this. However, the unity of the civil forces and coordination among them will never be achieved unless they agree on a unified vision of how to stop the war and on the details of the political process.

As I have noted in several articles, the desired vision is the sum of answers to many questions, including those related to the nature of the war and the reasons for its outbreak, those related to the mechanisms for stopping the fighting and if there is any room to create demilitarised zones to achieve the flow of humanitarian aid through safe corridors. Those related to the question about the essence of the political process and its goals, and whether the leaders of the two conflicting military parties have any role in it, and those related to the priority of dealing with the war and the accompanying violations as a crime requiring legal accountability. The future of the army leadership and the future of the Rapid Support Forces and other armed militias, how to reform the security and military sector, and whether the political process be limited to issues of transition, or will it expand to discussing the issues of re-establishing the Sudanese state, and many other questions.

READ: Sudan: 30,000 babies will be born with no medical assistance, warns Save the Children

We expected and have waited a long time for the groups of Sudanese civil and political forces to organise into discussion groups with the aim of agreeing on answers to these questions in order to arm themselves with a clear vision, but … on my part, I have addressed most of these questions in previous articles, and all that remains is to complete the discussion we began about reforming the military and security sector, and then ending by presenting our point of view on the content of the political process.

I will begin by affirming that the process of reforming the security and military sector in Sudan cannot take place in isolation from the comprehensive reform of all other state institutions that are of a civilian nature and that the main goal of this process is to bring the sector’s institutions back to the realm of nationalism and patriotism, away from partisan, regional or ethnic affiliations, siding with the people and their issues and protecting them. It also aims to rebuild the sector’s institutions based on the concepts of democratic transformation, the rule of law, peace and sustainable development. This process cannot take place in one fell swoop or within a short period of time but, rather, is a series of complex operations made up of several components that will take a long time and can be initiated during the transitional period, provided that this is done in accordance with the principle of transparency and in coordination with civil institutions. However, completing the process and approving its results will be done by elected institutions. The reform process must not be subject to political whims and media bidding and must be implemented within the sector’s institutions and by their employees, provided that it is subject to the oversight of civil institutions, such as the government and the legislative council.

The main points of the reform of the security and military sector include – but are not limited to – modernisation, development and provision of capabilities in accordance with internationally adopted scientific concepts, guided by successful experiences in other countries; the security and military doctrine be based on the rule of law and the principles of democratic transformation and human rights, in accordance with international charters; purging the sector from political and ideological biases by referring all officers and non-commissioned officers belonging to retirement in accordance with the laws of the sector’s institutions while fulfilling their full rights and entitlements, while also issuing a political decision to return all those dismissed for the public good while resolving their conditions; the need for the participation of political forces and civil society in formulating policies for the national security strategy; transparency in the process of decision-making, security and military policy-making, including mergers and demobilisations; strengthening civil administration and democratic accountability of military, security and police institutions; strengthening parliamentary supervision and civil society oversight of these institutions; dealing seriously with the loss of confidence in the institutions of the security and military sector and accusations of political forces controlling them in order for these institutions to regain the lost trust and reconcile with civil forces; accountability and the lack of impunity in the sector’s institutions; punishment for any violations, that occurred previously or will occur later an fighting corruption and the exploitation of influence within these institutions, etc.

READ: Sudan RSF enters Wad Madani, aid hub where many were displaced

However, one of the most important topics of reform in the security and military sector is prohibiting the economic activity of the sector’s institutions, which was carried out outside the jurisdiction of the civilian government. It is known that the beginnings of the sector’s involvement in economic activity was the inclusion of the Al-Jazeera Company in the security apparatus established by the National Salvation Front, because the nature of the company’s broad commercial activity would provide continuous liquidity, enabling the apparatus to spend on its various secret operations without oversight. This company is originally the huge and long-established English company, Gellatly Hankey & Co., which contributed greatly to the development of Sudanese trade and economy, and has been operating in Sudan since the 1940s, until it was nationalised by the Nimeiry regime.

Then the Salvation Front added Coptrade to the police. It was originally a long-established national company that was owned by the Othman Saleh family but was also seized by the Nimeiry regime. Its activities extend into all sectors, internally and externally, and it provides continuous liquidity that the police administration can dispose of without accessing the state treasury. Those were the beginnings, and after that, these disruptive practices spread, as there were many investment companies affiliated with security and military sector institutions that work in vital, profitable fields but do not contribute to the public treasury.

I believe that the answer to the question about the nationalism of the army, police and security institutions and their lack of submission to the will of the ruling party, regardless of the party, lies in building the nation state, not the state of this or that party but, rather, the state of the rule of law, institutions, and good governance; the state of democratic transformation and separation of powers, and the national state that is built, or rebuilt, on the basis of a unanimously agreed upon national project. The formulation and implementation of this project will include everyone, including members of the army, police and security.

READ: Sudanese governorate of Al-Qadarif declares state of emergency amid RSF conflict

This article first appeared in Arabic in Al-Quds on 17 December, 2023. 

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Monitor.