Audio By Carbonatix
The UN's top court has dismissed Sudan's case against the UAE, accusing the Gulf state of complicity in genocide.
Sudan alleged the UAE supported the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF) in the Sudanese civil war, in which tens of thousands of people have died, forced millions from their homes and left many facing famine.
The UAE categorically denied the accusations, branding the case "political theatre" and "a cynical publicity stunt".
The International Court of Justice in The Hague ruled that the case could not proceed because the UAE had opted out of Article 9 of the Genocide Convention, which means that it cannot be sued by other states over genocide allegations.
The court said that it lacked jurisdiction and was therefore "precluded by its statute from taking any position on the merits of the claims made by Sudan". The case was thrown out in a 14-2 vote.
Sudan case had claimed that the UAE's alleged military, financial and logistical backing of the RSF - including weapons shipments and mercenary recruitment - enabled systematic attacks against non-Arab communities, particularly the Masalit, in Darfur.
The allegations included mass killings, forced displacement and the use of sexual violence as a weapon.
Reem Ketait, the UAE's deputy assistant minister for political affairs, said the court's decision was "clear and decisive".

"The international community must focus urgently on ending this devastating war and supporting the Sudanese people, and it must demand humanitarian aid reaches all those in need," she said.
Both the Sudanese army and the RSF have been accused of committing atrocities, including ethnically targeted killings, obstruction of humanitarian relief and looting.
Sudan's case at the ICJ was unusual because it targeted an alleged sponsor of atrocities, not the direct perpetrators.
The case was seen as a test of whether states can be held responsible for fuelling atrocities abroad.
While the ICJ's judges found they did not have the power to rule in the case, it nevertheless serves as a powerful illustration of how international courts are becoming diplomatic battlegrounds.
Latest Stories
-
England are tough, but we can play against Ghana, Panama – Croatia coach reacts to World Cup draw
1 hour -
We can beat anyone – Otto Addo reacts to World Cup draw
2 hours -
GPL 2025/26: Mensah brace fires All Blacks to victory over Eleven Wonders
3 hours -
This Saturday on Newsfile: Petitions against the OSP, EC heads, and 2025 WASSCE results
3 hours -
Ambassador urges U.S. investors to prioritise land verification as Ghana courts more investment
4 hours -
Europe faces an expanding corruption crisis
4 hours -
Ghana’s Dr Bernard Appiah appointed to WHO Technical Advisory Group on alcohol and drug epidemiology
4 hours -
2026 World Cup: Ghana drawn against England, Croatia and Panama in Group L
4 hours -
3 dead, 6 injured in Kpando–Aziave road crash
4 hours -
Lightwave eHealth accuses Health Ministry of ‘fault-finding’ and engaging competitor to audit its work
4 hours -
Ayewa Festival ignites Farmers Day with culture, flavour, and a promise of bigger things ahead
5 hours -
Government to deploy 60,000 surveillance cameras nationwide to tackle cybercrime
5 hours -
Ghana DJ Awards begins 365-day countdown to 2026 event
5 hours -
Making Private University Charters Optional in Ghana: Implications and Opportunities
5 hours -
Mampong tragedy: Students among 30 injured as curve crash kills three
5 hours
