Jailing peace advocates: Sudanese army accused of using courts to silence anti-war voices
A six-year prison sentence handed to a Sudanese pharmacist after he called for an end to the war has renewed scrutiny of what critics describe as a growing campaign by the Sudanese army against voices opposing the conflict.
The case of pharmacist Ahmed Suleiman Ahmed Al-Waqi, who was jailed after expressing support for ending the fighting, is being portrayed by critics as part of a broader pattern of pressure against anti-war activists and civilians calling for peace.
Two Sudan experts interviewed by Al Ain News said the case raised concerns over the use of the judiciary to restrict dissent and suppress opposing views during the war.
Details of the sentence
A criminal court in El Obeid, North Kordofan state, sentenced Al-Waqi on Sunday to six years in prison after convicting him under Article 51 of Sudan’s Criminal Act and Articles 19 and 24 of the Cybercrime Law.
According to his lawyer, the case began after a dispute over taxes. Security personnel searched Al-Waqi’s phone and found private conversations in which he discussed the situation in Sudan and expressed his view that the war should end.
Lawyer Osman Saleh said a team from the General Intelligence Service detained Al-Waqi after examining his phone.
He said the court sentenced him to three years under Article 51, along with confiscation of his assets, two years under Article 19 of the Cybercrime Law and one year under Article 24, with the sentences to be served consecutively.
The Central Committee of Sudanese Pharmacists expressed concern over the ruling and called for a review of the legality of the phone search, the evidence used against him and the procedures leading to his conviction. It also demanded that his right to appeal and guarantees of a fair trial be upheld.
Critics allege widening restrictions on freedoms
Sudan affairs analyst Shawqi Abdel Azim told Al Ain News that wartime conditions had produced what he described as severe restrictions on freedom of expression.
He argued that authorities were attempting to promote a single narrative supportive of continuing the war for political purposes.
According to Abdel Azim, people opposing the conflict are frequently accused by army supporters of being traitors, agents or unpatriotic.
He alleged that the justice system was being used to reinforce those accusations and said Al-Waqi’s sentence should be seen within that broader context.
Abdel Azim claimed that others had also received prison sentences, death sentences and other penalties after expressing positions opposing the continuation of the war or criticising developments on the ground.
He said many Sudanese believe the conflict has devastated the country, displaced millions and caused widespread deaths without producing a meaningful political outcome.
Abdel Azim compared current restrictions to practices under former president Omar al-Bashir, arguing that attempts to control public opinion had returned.
Asked whether calls for peace were increasingly treated as hostile to the army, he said that in his assessment they were often portrayed that way by supporters of the military, Islamist groups and other actors with an interest in continuing the conflict.
Laws ‘used in service of the war’
Abdel Azim said the use of security and cybercrime legislation against critics of the war could lead to further human rights violations and deepen political divisions.
He warned that using wartime conditions to impose a single political narrative could ultimately increase tensions within Sudanese society.
He also said prosecutions of anti-war voices could undermine prospects for a political settlement, particularly when opponents are accused of treason, collaboration with the Rapid Support Forces or hostility to the state.
According to Abdel Azim, some defendants have faced death sentences under such accusations.
He argued that the use of state institutions against political opponents could have the opposite effect from that intended, increasing public scepticism toward the war and reinforcing perceptions that it is being used to advance political interests.
Concerns over targeting civilians for their views
Sudan specialist Asmaa Al-Husseini told Al Ain News that civilians across the country had suffered extensive harassment and persecution during the conflict.
She said political opinions, calls to stop the war or party affiliations should never justify targeting individuals.
Al-Husseini described the conflict as catastrophic and said millions of Sudanese had endured displacement, hunger, disease and insecurity.
She called for an immediate end to the war and for all unlawful measures against civilians based on their views to stop.
According to Al-Husseini, calls for peace are growing inside Sudan despite pressure and hate speech.
She argued that more Sudanese are becoming convinced that continuing the conflict threatens not only civilian lives but also the unity of the country.
Al-Husseini warned that prolonged fighting and abuses across different parts of Sudan could increase the risk of fragmentation or partition.
Wider pattern of alleged abuses
Al-Husseini said Al-Waqi’s case was not isolated and alleged that civilians in different parts of Sudan had been targeted because of their political views, humanitarian activities, tribal backgrounds or perceived dealings with one side of the conflict.
She said those affected had included women working informally, activists, humanitarian workers, former resistance committee members and other civilians.
She called on all parties to comply with the law, warning that abuses and arbitrary measures would deepen frustration and undermine efforts toward national dialogue and social reconciliation.
War and freedom of expression
Al-Waqi’s case has brought renewed attention to freedom of expression during Sudan’s war, particularly after private conversations about the conflict became part of a criminal prosecution resulting in a six-year sentence.
The Central Committee of Sudanese Pharmacists has called for scrutiny of the legality of the search of his phone, the evidence used against him and the fairness of the proceedings.
Both experts interviewed by Al Ain News argued that targeting people over their political views risks narrowing the space for dissent at a time when calls for an end to the fighting are becoming increasingly prominent.
