Documenting War Crimes in Sudan Begins Now – Foreign Policy

Report on the Documentation of War Crimes and its Impact on Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: War Crimes as an Obstacle to the 2030 Agenda

The documentation of war crimes and atrocities is a critical component in the global effort to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions. Historical failures to prevent and prosecute genocides in Bosnia and Rwanda underscore the necessity of robust evidence-gathering mechanisms to ensure accountability, promote the rule of law (Target 16.3), and reduce all forms of violence (Target 16.1). The evolution of technology has fundamentally transformed this process, providing new tools to build a global framework for justice.

The Technological Evolution of Evidence Collection for SDG 16

The methods for documenting crimes against humanity have shifted significantly, enhancing the capacity of the international community to hold perpetrators accountable and support the development of effective and transparent institutions (Target 16.6).

From Human Testimony to Geospatial Intelligence

• Legacy Methods (Rwanda, 1994): Investigations relied almost exclusively on survivor testimonies. While vital for truth-telling, this process was slow and lacked the comprehensive, verifiable data needed for swift international legal action.
• Transitional Methods (Bosnia, 1995): The Srebrenica investigation marked a turning point with the introduction of rudimentary satellite imagery. U.S. intelligence used this technology to identify mass graves, demonstrating a new potential for evidence collection that could overcome attempts to conceal crimes.
• Modern Methods (Syria, Sudan): The systematic use of high-resolution satellite imagery, Open-Source Intelligence (OSINT), and digital verification has revolutionized the field. This aligns with SDG 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure, by leveraging technological innovation for humanitarian and justice-oriented purposes.

The Role of Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships (SDG 17)

The pursuit of justice is increasingly driven by collaborative efforts between diverse actors, a core principle of SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals. These partnerships are essential for collecting, verifying, and utilizing evidence in legal proceedings.

1. Investigative Journalism Groups: Organizations like Bellingcat use OSINT to identify perpetrators and military hardware, blurring the line between journalism and criminal investigation.
2. Academic and Research Institutions: Groups such as Forensic Architecture and the Yale Humanitarian Research Lab use architectural modeling, geolocation, and satellite analysis to reconstruct crime scenes and identify mass graves.
3. Civil Society and NGOs: The Reckoning Project trains journalists and lawyers to work collaboratively, ensuring evidence gathered in conflict zones is admissible in court. Organizations like Eyewitness empower citizens to capture and submit verifiable evidence of atrocities.

Case Study: The Conflict in Sudan and its Detrimental Impact on SDGs

The ongoing civil war in Sudan serves as a stark example of how conflict undermines multiple Sustainable Development Goals. The documentation of atrocities is the first step toward remediation and accountability.

Violations of Core SDGs in El Fasher

• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions): The conflict, marked by mass executions and the deliberate targeting of civilians, represents a total collapse of peace and the rule of law. Satellite imagery showing mass graves provides undeniable evidence of systematic violence.
• SDG 5 (Gender Equality): Widespread reports of rape and sexual violence by Rapid Support Forces (RSF) constitute a grave violation of Target 5.2, which calls for the elimination of all forms of violence against women and girls.
• SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being): The siege of El Fasher, which cut off access to food, water, and electricity, and the targeting of medical facilities directly contravene the goal of ensuring healthy lives and well-being.
• SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities): The violence often targets specific civilian groups, exacerbating deep-seated inequalities and threatening the social fabric required for sustainable development.

Conclusion: Bridging the Gap Between Evidence and Accountability

While technology provides an unprecedented capacity to witness and document war crimes, it is not a substitute for justice. The primary challenge remains the lack of political will to act on available evidence. To fully leverage these advancements for the 2030 Agenda, the international community must:

1. Integrate digital evidence into formal justice mechanisms, requiring courts and legal bodies to adapt to new forms of verification.
2. Strengthen international institutions (Target 16.A) by providing them with the mandate and resources to prosecute atrocities based on technologically-verified evidence.
3. Foster continued multi-stakeholder partnerships (SDG 17) between technology experts, civil society, and legal prosecutors to ensure a seamless chain of evidence from the conflict zone to the courtroom.

The use of OSINT and satellite imagery serves as an impartial witness that cannot be silenced. Acting upon this evidence is imperative not only to deliver justice to victims but also to prevent future atrocities, thereby creating the stable and peaceful conditions necessary for sustainable development worldwide.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article’s central theme is the documentation of war crimes, the pursuit of justice for atrocities, and the struggle to hold perpetrators accountable. It directly addresses the need for justice mechanisms and the reduction of violence, which are core components of SDG 16. The text discusses genocide, mass executions, and the failure of the international community, highlighting the importance of building strong institutions for peace and justice.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  The article explicitly mentions gender-based violence as a component of the conflict in Sudan. It refers to “reports of mass executions, rape, and deliberate obstruction of aid” and quotes a Sudanese advisor who speaks of the “moans of raped children and women.” This directly connects the conflict to the goal of eliminating violence against women and children.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  A significant focus of the article is the evolution of war crime investigation through collaboration and technology. It describes partnerships between journalists, lawyers, data scientists, civil society organizations (The Reckoning Project, Bellingcat), and academic institutions (Yale University). This multi-stakeholder approach to “share knowledge, expertise, technology” for the purpose of justice is a clear embodiment of SDG 17.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  • Target 16.1: Significantly reduce all forms of violence and related death rates everywhere. The article highlights the extreme levels of violence and death in conflict zones, citing figures such as “more than 150,000 people are estimated to have died” in Sudan, “more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys were slaughtered in Srebrenica,” and “an estimated 800,000 people were killed” in Rwanda. The entire effort to document these crimes is aimed at preventing future violence and addressing its consequences.
  • Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all. The article is fundamentally about achieving justice. It discusses the work of the “International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia,” the “International Criminal Court,” and the efforts of organizations like the Reckoning Project to gather evidence that is “admissible in court” to fight impunity and ensure perpetrators face legal consequences.

• SDG 5: Gender Equality

  • Target 5.2: Eliminate all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private spheres. The article identifies sexual violence as a key atrocity in the Sudan conflict. The mention of “reports of mass executions, rape” and the “moans of raped children and women” directly relates to this target, emphasizing the need to document and prosecute these specific crimes to eliminate them.

• SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

  • Target 17.16: Enhance the global partnership for sustainable development, complemented by multi-stakeholder partnerships that mobilize and share knowledge, expertise, technology and financial resources. The article details how technology and collaboration have revolutionized war crimes investigation. It describes how “lawyers, analysts, data scientists, and journalists” are brought together to “fight criminality.” The use of “OSINT, satellite analysis, and digital verification” shared between groups like the Reckoning Project, Yale University, and prosecutors exemplifies this target.
  • Target 17.17: Encourage and promote effective public, public-private and civil society partnerships. The article showcases the critical role of civil society. It names organizations like “Bellingcat, an investigative journalism group,” “Forensic Architecture,” and “Eyewitness” which works with “citizens in war zones to capture images and document atrocities in real time.” These partnerships between civil society and formal justice systems are presented as essential for modern accountability efforts.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• For SDG 16 Targets:

  • Conflict-related death tolls: The article provides specific numbers of deaths in Sudan (“more than 150,000”), Bosnia (“more than 8,000”), and Rwanda (“800,000”). These figures serve as a direct indicator for Target 16.1 (specifically Indicator 16.1.2: Conflict-related deaths per 100,000 population).
  • Number of individuals prosecuted: The mention that the U.N. tribunal for Rwanda indicted “93 individuals” is a quantitative indicator of progress towards justice and accountability under Target 16.3.
  • Volume and type of evidence collected: The article implies that the amount of verifiable evidence is a measure of progress. It refers to “terabytes of data, photographs, and radio interception” and the systematic use of “satellite imagery,” “OSINT,” and “geolocation data.” This body of evidence is a precursor to prosecution and an indicator of the capacity to ensure justice.

• For SDG 5 Target:

  • Documented cases of sexual and gender-based violence: While not providing statistics, the article refers to “reports of mass executions, rape” and witness accounts of “raped children and women.” The verification and documentation of these crimes by human rights groups, as mentioned in the article, serve as a qualitative indicator for Target 5.2, measuring the extent of the problem and the effort to address it.

• For SDG 17 Targets:

  • Adoption of new technologies for investigation: The article charts the evolution from “survivors’ testimonies” to the use of “satellite imagery,” “OSINT,” and “digital verification.” The widespread use of these technologies by various organizations is an indicator of knowledge and technology sharing as described in Target 17.16.
  • Formation of multi-stakeholder investigative bodies: The existence and work of the organizations mentioned—”the Reckoning Project,” “Bellingcat,” “Forensic Architecture,” and the “Yale Humanitarian Research Lab”—are themselves indicators of effective civil society and academic partnerships (Target 17.17) working towards a common goal.

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: foreignpolicy.com