A special court operating under Port Sudan’s SAF junta has sentenced Rapid Support Forces commander Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti, his deputy Abdel Rahim Dagalo and 14 others to death in absentia, in a ruling critics are likely to view as another political verdict issued through the junta’s wartime judicial system.
The sentences were delivered by the Port Sudan-based Anti-Terrorism and Crimes Against the State Court over the June 2023 killing of former West Darfur governor Khamis Abdallah Abakar and the wider violence in El Geneina.
The court is part of a network of special tribunals operating in territories controlled by General al-Burhan’s army (SAF) and the Port Sudan authorities. Such courts have become central to the junta’s prosecution of military and political opponents, activists and civilians accused of cooperating with the RSF or opposing the SAF-led war.
Sudanese lawyers and anti-war groups have repeatedly questioned the independence of these tribunals, describing cases brought before them as politically motivated and warning that sweeping terrorism and state-security provisions are being used to criminalise opposition to the Port Sudan authorities.
The proceedings were conducted entirely in the defendants’ absence and without their lawyers presenting a defence before the court.
The authorities identified the presiding judge only as “Special Judge Mohamed al-Amin,” without publishing his full name, judicial résumé, appointment history or previous rulings.
No independently accessible biography could immediately be found establishing when he joined the judiciary, who appointed him to the specialised court or whether he previously served in judicial institutions during former dictator Omar al-Bashir’s rule.
The limited disclosure makes it impossible to independently examine the judge’s background, political independence or possible connections within a judicial system that Sudanese lawyers and former judges have accused of being repopulated by Bashir-era and Islamic Movement-linked personnel.
The complete written judgment has also not been made public, while the official account did not provide a detailed record of the evidence, witnesses or legal arguments considered by the court.
Despite those gaps, the judge reportedly issued sweeping findings extending beyond Abakar’s killing, concluding that the defendants were responsible for genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed during the violence in El Geneina.
The court reportedly convicted the defendants of participating in a systematic campaign involving killings, rape, forced displacement, looting, burning and destruction directed against civilians on ethnic grounds.
It also ordered the confiscation of property allegedly belonging to the defendants and instructed the authorities to pursue them through international police channels.
The account of the proceedings circulated by Sudanese and regional media was largely based on reporting from SUNA, the official news agency controlled by the Port Sudan junta. Independent courtroom reporting and the full evidentiary record were not immediately available.
RSF denied responsibility for Abakar’s killing
The RSF has consistently denied ordering or carrying out Abakar’s killing.
Shortly after the incident in June 2023, then-RSF political adviser Yousif Ezzat denied that the force was responsible and said the RSF commander in West Darfur had attempted to prevent armed groups from attacking Abakar but was unable to control them.
Ezzat said the perpetrators had refused to follow the commander’s instructions and killed the governor, describing those responsible as armed elements acting outside the RSF’s orders.
The RSF also said it was prepared to cooperate with a local or international investigation and that any individual RSF members found to have participated should be held accountable.
Abakar was killed on June 14, 2023, after footage circulated showing him being held by armed men in El Geneina. His body was later found mutilated.
The circumstances of his detention and killing generated immediate accusations against the RSF and allied armed groups. The RSF rejected institutional responsibility, saying the killing occurred amid a breakdown in security and violence involving multiple armed communal groups.
No independent investigation accepted by all sides has publicly established a complete chain of command linking Hemedti or Abdel Rahim Dagalo personally to an order to kill Abakar.
Nevertheless, the Port Sudan court convicted both RSF leaders in absentia and attributed broad command and planning responsibility to them without publishing the judgment or evidence supporting those findings.
Wider campaign against political opponents
The ruling comes as Port Sudan prosecutors pursue a growing number of in-absentia cases against military commanders, civilian politicians and opponents of the SAF-led authorities.
In January, proceedings began against Hemedti, Abdel Rahim Dagalo, former Prime Minister Abdalla Hamdok and nearly 200 other defendants in another case involving charges that could carry death sentences or life imprisonment.
Activists and defendants described those proceedings as politically motivated and aimed at eliminating opponents of the Port Sudan junta through the courts.
The anti-terrorism courts have also prosecuted civilians accused of communicating with RSF members, supporting the RSF online, undermining the constitutional system or criticising SAF leaders.
This record has reinforced accusations that the courts function less as independent judicial bodies than as an extension of the junta’s wartime security and political machinery.
No official statement had been issued by the RSF or the TASIS administration in response to the latest death sentences by Monday afternoon.
Early reactions from RSF- and TASIS-aligned commentators dismissed the verdict as unenforceable political theatre produced by institutions operating under the authority of the Port Sudan junta.
The emerging counter-narrative is expected to focus on two points: that the tribunal lacks independence from the SAF-controlled authorities, and that an opaque special judge reached sweeping conclusions in an uncontested proceeding without releasing the full judgment or evidentiary record.
The verdict has no immediate practical effect in territories administered by TASIS or controlled by the RSF, while the defendants remain outside the reach of the Port Sudan SAF junta.
