Brussels – Amid the artillery exchanges between the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) and the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a quieter conflict is changing the lives of Khartoum’s residents. According to a recent Mediapart investigation titled “In Khartoum, women are victims of the return of Islamists,” there is a rise in Islamist influence in the capital. The report highlights the targeted harassment and coercion of women, signaling a regression in human rights, particularly regarding freedom of religion or belief and women’s bodily autonomy in a fractured state.
The events reveal a phenomenon termed the “return of Islamists.” As the government seeks support against the RSF, it seems to be reintegrating elements of the former regime’s ideological apparatus. This is not just political but social, manifesting in the enforcement of moral codes challenged after the 2019 revolution. For women in Khartoum, this means renewed surveillance and intimidation, with public spaces increasingly regulated by strict religious interpretations.
Eyewitness accounts indicate women face pressure to adhere to conservative dress codes and behavioral norms, enforced often by security forces or aligned militias, creating fear. Historically, targeting women is a tactic to control the social fabric. In international law terms, these actions violate fundamental human rights.
The legal framework on Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) explicitly protects against coercion. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), Article 18, includes the freedom “to have or to adopt a religion or belief of [one’s] choice.” The UN Human Rights Committee clarifies that this freedom prohibits state coercion to adopt a particular belief.
Khartoum’s situation contradicts these obligations. When state authorities enforce religious dress codes or conduct under threat, it violates women’s rights to manifest their beliefs—or lack thereof. Coercing citizens into specific religious interpretations breaches the ICCPR and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), Article 19, which protects freedom of opinion and expression.
The “Faith in UN Human Rights Treaties” analysis shows that using religion to enforce gender conformity is a perversion of FoRB rights. Treaties protect individuals from the state, not empower the state to enforce piety. Khartoum’s dynamics invert this purpose, using religious mandates for political and social oppression.
This imposition of religious conformity warrants broader analysis of how such policies take root. As Hannah Arendt noted, ideological enforcement can occur through ordinary individuals executing orders without critical reflection. Enforcing morality laws doesn’t require a grand decree but relies on security officials and local groups believing they restore order. This “ordinariness” of perpetrators—regular police or soldiers enforcing a dress code—makes rights erosion more insidious, posing a threat not through anarchy but suffocating order.
The psychological impact on women is significant, as the threat of punishment for non-compliance forces subjugation, stripping them of agency. This dynamic is worsened by ongoing conflict, displacing the rule of law. In this vacuum, extremist ideologies fill the gap, and religious strictures enforce power over vulnerable civilians.
These actions must be analyzed under the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Despite Sudan’s reservations, the principle of non-discrimination and freedom from coercion remains an international benchmark. Targeting women for religious enforcement is sex-based discrimination that cultural or religious relativism cannot justify. Reports by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief affirm that manifesting one’s religion does not include imposing it on others.
The “return” of Islamist elements raises questions about Sudan’s future. If military leadership appeases religious hardliners as a war strategy, long-term civil liberties consequences are dire. Normalizing religious policing sets a precedent hard to dismantle post-conflict, risking governance that views the female body not as individual possession but state-regulated.
International observers and human rights bodies must address this ideological shift beyond immediate humanitarian crises. Defending women’s rights in Khartoum is tied to defending FoRB. Allowing coercive religion on women negates their personhood and legal standing under international covenants.
Reports from Khartoum detailing women’s victimization by Islamist factions reveal critical international human rights law violations. Coercion into religious observance violates the ICCPR and undermines UDHR principles. As the conflict continues, eroding these fundamental freedoms is a parallel war, fought over individual autonomy against ideological absolutism. The international community must recognize protecting Sudan’s women requires not just aid but a steadfast defense of their right to live free from religious compulsion.
Leave a Reply