The jurists pointed out that the ruling comes within the framework of several attempts to implement the decisions of the committee in preparation for more empowerment of the Brotherhood in the state’s public and judicial institutions.
The Sudanese street was engulfed in great anger following a ruling issued by a tripartite circuit in the Supreme Court to reinstate a number of judges who were dismissed by the committee during the past weeks due to some of them being related to the “Brotherhood” organization, and some of them violating the appointment procedures followed in judicial bodies.
In a press conference, the committee revealed significant obstacles facing its work, and said that the ruling did not meet the procedures supposed to be followed, stressing that it will address it through legal means.
According to jurists who spoke to “Sky News Arabia”, what is remarkable about the ruling is that it did not pass the originally suspended appeal committee, noting that the tripartite body that issued the ruling included two of the dismissed ones by the committee earlier.
suspicious attempts
The jurists described the ruling in violation of the regulations stipulated in the Civil Procedures Law currently in force, and considered it an attempt to block the way for the removal of Brotherhood cadres from the judicial authorities.
In this context, legal expert Kamal Al-Jazouli told Sky News Arabia that the court in question “considered a matter that does not concern it, as the procedure is supposed to take place through an appeals committee specialized in examining the grievances received.”
Al-Jazouli considered that the issuance of such a “flawed” ruling means that the revolution has not yet completed its goals, and that there are parties working to empower the elements of the former regime in the justice system.
For his part, lawyer Kamal Al-Amin drew attention to fundamental observations, including clear procedural violations and the presence of two dismissed judges in the three-judge circuit that issued the ruling, which indicates a clear conflict of interest, and renders the issued decision without legal effect.
obstruction of justice
Legalists point to the existence of “Brotherhood lobbies” within the justice system, which work systematically to abort justice in many crimes that Brotherhood elements participated in committing, including Al-Bashir’s coup in 1989, the case of the extrajudicial execution of about thirty officers in 1990 and the massacre that took place in a training camp Recruits in eastern Khartoum in 1998, in which more than 100 young people were killed, in addition to the many murders and rapes that affected hundreds of Sudanese during the Brotherhood’s rule that extended from 1989 to 2019.
Several indications of a defect in the justice system emerged, represented by the current stumbling block in the trial of those accused of carrying out the June 1989 coup, when the judge in charge submitted a request to disqualify him, becoming the second judge to withdraw from that case in less than 6 months.
It also highlights the great controversy surrounding the handling of hundreds of unidentified corpses piled in the mortuaries of a number of government hospitals.
Among the indications of the obstacles facing the justice file is what some consider to be the systematic smuggling of dozens of defendants in major corruption operations, including one of the brothers of the ousted President Omar al-Bashir and the Turkish-Sudanese businessman Oktay, who are currently living in Turkey, in addition to the fact that many have not yet been arrested or released. Among the Brotherhood elements accused of being involved in huge corruption operations estimated at hundreds of millions of dollars or killing hundreds of detainees and young people.
Lawyers blame the great failure that occurred in the process of reforming the justice system, stressing that the judiciary and the prosecution are still in the state created by the previous regime, which was built on loyalty rather than competence.
Former judge Seif al-Dawla Hamdallah referred to the inaction of the transitional government agencies in rebuilding the justice system and making it the first starting point in the process of transitional government, as demanded by everyone.
.