Subcommittee on International Human Rights Committee on Nov. 24th, 2025

[Mutasim Ali]

Thank you for the question.

In our work, we outlined numerous legal actions to be taken. Number one is to cut off the perpetrators from the funding sources that allow them to continue the atrocities. Their funding sources begin with external actors. This is number one.

Number two, we also believe in initiating legal proceedings against states that are complicit, whether it's in genocide, in ethnic cleansing or in violating international conventions. I think Canada can play a role. There are numerous states that we identified, and I think there is a strong legal case to be made.

Third, there is universal jurisdiction. We know that perpetrators continue to travel with impunity. Some of them travel, for the most part, to the regions in Africa, and others travel to other places. I do think there is a way to hold them accountable. The whole idea of accountability is to make sure that the perpetrators do not continue the commission of atrocities with impunity. I think there is a way to disrupt that.

One final point is to expand the ICC's jurisdiction to allow the investigation of atrocities committed in other parts of Sudan, not only in Darfur. As of now, the ICC is only mandated to investigate atrocities in Darfur, but we know that there are numerous atrocities committed in Khartoum, in Gezira and in other places by the warring parties, the Sudanese Armed Forces, the Rapid Support Forces and allied militias, so the expansion of ICC's mandate is critical.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

You spoke about this. I think that Mr. Diamond also brought this up a bit earlier.

How much is the historical impunity in Darfur and Sudan affecting the current crisis in Sudan?

[Yonah Diamond]

I would first say that part of it is failing to name it what it is, to name the genocide.

Mutasim, I think you might want to add more.

[Mutasim Ali]

Yes. The culture of impunity is one main reason that we see these atrocities across the entire country. Unfortunately, even during the transition period, accountability was sidelined. The actors during the transition period, the military at the time, the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces, and the civilian leaders, sidelined the accountability. Not even a single perpetrator was held to account. Not even a single person was extradited to the ICC.

There are five perpetrators wanted by the ICC, including Bashir, Abdel Raheem Muhammad Hussein and Ahmad Harun. They were in Sudan during the transition period, but they were not extradited. There is a prevalence of the culture of impunity that allowed these atrocities to continue.

At this time, Sudan's judiciary institutions are incapable of holding the perpetrators accountable; therefore, it is important that the international community and Canada take critical steps to end, to break, the cycle of impunity.

[Yonah Diamond]

We would be remiss not to mention the Streit Group, one of the world's largest armoured combat vehicle manufacturers, which is Canadian-owned by Guerman Goutorov. It should be investigated under the Export and Import Permits Act, as well as our obligations under the Arms Trade Treaty, to ensure that the end use does not end up in Sudan, even though their vehicles have been found in the hands of the RSF. They've also been found to have repeatedly violated arms embargoes, and they've already been charged by the U.S. government for illegal exports in arms.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Now I would like to invite Madame Anju Dhillon to take the floor for five minutes, please.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Thank you so much.

My first question will be for Mr. Omer, but before that, I would like to thank all the witnesses for sharing their painful stories and testimonies today about what they and their families have experienced. I think this whole committee sympathizes, empathizes and is with you on this.

Mr. Omer, you spoke about the root causes of these wars. Can you talk more to us about this? You spoke about how they started just before independence. Can you help us understand these root causes?

Thank you.

[Khalid Omer]

Quickly, I can say that Sudan used to be one of the most diverse countries in Africa, with more than 120 languages, 500 tribes and different religions, and this diversity has not been managed in an inclusive way. Actually, there have been extended decades of military rule and fascist ideologies that have tried to shape Sudan in one way.

When the people in South Sudan, in Darfur and in the Nuba Mountains revolted against this, the same army, instead of going for a negotiated solution to reach for an inclusive framework, created militias actually to fight on behalf of the army. That's what they practised in South Sudan, in the Nuba Mountains and in Darfur, and by the end, the whole country had been turned to war between parallel armies.

The main root cause of the problem of Sudan is how to manage the diversity. The diversity of Sudan cannot be managed by the Islamists, and it cannot be managed by the military. It can only be managed through civilian democratic transition. The source of instability in Sudan is suffocating the civilian voices and ending the opportunity for a true civilian democratic transition in Sudan.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

That was actually going to be my next question. Thank you for that segue.

I wanted to ask you about democratic civilian transition. Why do you think that hasn't happened, and how can it happen, hopefully, in the future?

[Khalid Omer]

In 2019, millions of Sudanese went into the streets to demand their freedom from 30 years of the rule of the Muslim Brotherhood, and the start of a promising transition toward civilian rule had already happened. During these two years, tremendous achievements happened. All the war in Sudan had been stopped, the freedoms had been assured and the economic, social and legal reforms happened. Actually, because of the success of this experience, the two fighting sides decided, with the Islamists, to get to the end of this experience.

Unfortunately, the world let the civilians of Sudan down during the transition with the lack of support and the very weak position against the coup. Now, in this war, siding with either of the two fighting sides is a betrayal of the Sudanese people. Speaking about one side as evil and being explicit about the other side or trying to portray that side as a legitimate side that represents the Sudanese is actually a betrayal of the Sudanese people. Prejudice against the two fighting sides should increase. Neither of them, nor the Islamists, should define the future of Sudan. They have to be sidelined, and the Sudanese should define their fate.

[Anju Dhillon, Liberal, Dorval—Lachine—LaSalle, QC]

Before, when you started your opening statement, you spoke about punishing both sides. What would you see as punishment for both sides?

[Khalid Omer]

I agree with Mutasim.

I believe the ICC's mandate should be extended to cover all of Sudan. The judicial system of Sudan is not capable of holding those who committed the crimes accountable. Second, the independent fact-finding mission should be supported, and the recommendation that came in its report should be adopted. The third thing is to extend the arms embargo to cover all of Sudan.

Also, especially in the gold sector, I think the smuggling and the use of the gold of Sudan to finance the war should be targeted. I'm not speaking about one side but speaking about the two sides. Cutting any kind of financing for the two sides, whether from the internal resources of Sudan or from the external supporters, is the way to shorten the war.

My final point is this: To stop all these atrocities from happening in Sudan, you have to stop the war itself. The urgent need is to stop the war. I think all of this attention should be diverted to the efforts to put pressure for a ceasefire and to stop the war in Sudan.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you, Mr. Omer.

Thank you, Ms. Dhillon.

Now I would like to invite Mr. Majumdar to take the floor for five minutes, please.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Thank you, Chair.

Let me continue the line of inquiry that my colleague started with you, Mr. Omer.

We know that the SAF has been refusing to participate in that ceasefire you just called for. The other party, the RSF, has announced that it would comply with the ceasefire. What does that mean? What's happening now, and what does it say about the SAF—rejecting the effort for a ceasefire?

[Khalid Omer]

Let me be frank about that: The SAF is really influenced by the presence of the Islamists within all the ranks of the SAF. The Islamists ignited this war, and they have interest in the continuation of the war because the Islamists have been toppled through popular uprising, so the only way for them to come back to power is through chaos. They have no interest in stopping the war. That's why they keep being against every single initiative: the Jeddah initiative, the Geneva initiative, the AU, the IGAD, the ALPS and the Quad.

To open the road for peace, look for who is benefiting from the continuation of the war, and target those who are benefiting from the continuation of the war.

The second reason is that the SAF ruled Sudan for more than 50 years. The generals within the ranks of the SAF think that they should be the rulers of Sudan for eternity. The only peace they want is the peace that keeps them in power. The Sudanese people rejected any kind of military rule. They want this war to be the end of the military rule and the start of a civilian transition. This is another reason the SAF is not engaging in peace initiatives.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

We've had a lot of reporting recently from various organizations. In 2025, a UN panel of experts looked into how foreign states were supplying or not supplying arms to various actors here. I know they did not mention the U.A.E. as principally arming the RSF in 2025, but we know that Turkey, Iran, Russia, Egypt and others have been providing the SAF with weapons, with chemical weapons, with drones, and with diplomatic cover for Hamas terrorists and others.

In your mind, why is it that so much of the international debate is focused on one party but not both parties for the kinds of atrocities—indeed, genocide—that have been conducted against the Sudanese people?

[Khalid Omer]

It's because, unfortunately, the aim of this campaign is not to stop the war. If you want to stop the war, you have to talk about all the actors that are financing and arming the parties, and you have to stop this kind of support. Unfortunately, there are different reasons for speaking about some actors and being explicit about the other actors, speaking about one fighting party and being silent about the other fighting party.

Unfortunately, I'm afraid that saying this—being silent about one side of the fighting parties and speaking about the other party—is like a promotion for a military solution for the problem of Sudan. By putting pressure on one side and neglecting the other side, you won't decide to win the war.

Let me tell you one thing. We have a long history of war in Sudan. No single war in Sudan has been decided militarily, and they have been extended for decades. Supporting one side is not a strategy. It's a strategy for the devastation of the country. You have to put bridges on the two sides, support not one of them, cut the supply for all of them, and push them for peace. This is the only way out.

[Shuv Majumdar, Conservative, Calgary Heritage, AB]

Mr. Taha, in terms of this region, Sudan, being proximate to the Red Sea region at large.... Too often, people think of the Middle East in a narrow conception, but the Red Sea region itself is a really volatile one, in which there have been actors promoting instability and actors promoting stability.

You reside in a country that has been looking to normalize relations and provide progress for the region in the face of ferocious adversity, whether it's deeply ideological or otherwise. In the debate and the negotiation among the Quad—America, the U.A.E. and others today—how do you define that these forces for modernity will be able to continue to move forward toward an end to the war and the beginning of some sort of civilian-led process for justice for the Sudanese and for the rebuilding of their country?

In your mind, what do you think the west can be doing?

[Amjad Taha]

I think the west can do a lot in counterterrorism right in Sudan. Sudan right now is becoming the hub of terrorists, especially in Port Sudan, where Iran was weakened in the Middle East. Right now, it's moving captagon, and all the drugs are there. Even RSF has that and even SAF had those companies. Even the weapons—Iranian weapons, Turkish weapons, Russian weapons and Chinese weapons—are all being moved through Port Sudan. It's becoming the hub of terrorists.

More than 6,000 Hamas members are living in Port Sudan. Some of them have diplomatic passports, which means that they can be your neighbour in Canada, at your home, and you would not know that there's an ex-terrorist right next door.

The weapons are various and have been through Turkey.... If you look at the radar of the airplanes, on a daily basis arms have been supplied, be it from Egypt, Turkey, Qatar, Russia, Iran—

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Can you wrap it up, please? The time is up.

[Amjad Taha]

Sure.

My question would be for some of the witnesses. I would please ask them to try, for once in their life, to speak about the atrocities that the Muslim Brotherhood army in Sudan has committed—just one genocide. At least speak about El Koma, which is in North Darfur and which has had 60 air strikes. The army did air strikes 60 times. They killed children and women—thousands of them—and displaced more than 10,000—

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you—

[Amjad Taha]

—but the witnesses would not speak about it, because they speak for SAF. They do not speak for their Sudanese.

[The Chair, Liberal, Fayçal El-Khoury]

Thank you.

Next is Mr. Brunelle-Duceppe.

Mr. Brunelle‑Duceppe, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Alexis Brunelle-Duceppe, Bloc, Lac-Saint-Jean, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I don't think that anyone is expressing support for one side more than another.

Mr. Diamond and Mr. Ali, are you here to side with one of the forces in Sudan, or are you here to explain the situation in Sudan to the committee?