Summary

Non-signatory Sudan has expressed interest in the Convention on Cluster Munitions, but has not taken any steps to accede to it. Sudan has participated in meetings of the convention, most recently in September 2021. It voted in favor of a key annual United Nations (UN) resolution promoting the convention in December 2021.

There is no evidence that Sudan has produced or exported cluster munitions, though it has imported them and possesses stocks. There have been no new reports or allegations of cluster munition use by Sudan since 2015.

Policy

The Republic of Sudan has not acceded to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Sudan has expressed interest in the convention, but has not taken any steps to accede.[1] In November 2020, government officials reiterated that Sudan could only consider joining the convention if neighboring countries did so.[2] In 2016, a Sudanese official described “the regional security situation” as “unfavorable” for the country to join the convention.[3]

Sudan participated in the Oslo Process that created the Convention on Cluster Munitions and joined in its consensus adoption in Dublin in May 2008.[4] At the convention’s Oslo Signing Conference in December 2008, Sudan pledged to sign as soon as it had completed an internal process to do so.[5]

Sudan has participated as an observer at meetings of the convention, most recently at the Second Review Conference held in November 2020 and September 2021.[6]

In December 2021, Sudan voted in favor of a key United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolution that called on states outside the Convention on Cluster Munitions to “join as soon as possible.”[7] Sudan has voted in favor of the annual UNGA resolution promoting the convention since it was first introduced in 2015.

Sudan is a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty and a signatory to the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW).

Production, transfer, and stockpiling

There is no evidence that Sudan has produced or exported cluster munitions. However, Sudan has imported them and possesses stocks.[8]

In 2016, a UN Panel of Experts reported “clear evidence” of “current possession by the Sudanese Air Force of cluster munitions” in Nyala, South Darfur.[9] In 2014, an earlier UN Panel of Experts report had published photographs showing RBK-500 series cluster bombs at El Fasher Airport in North Darfur, where Sudan’s armed forces also have an operating base.[10]

Jane’s Information Group has reported that KMGU dispensers, which deploy submunitions, are also in service with the Sudanese Air Force.[11] Sudan also possesses Grad, Egyptian-produced Sakr, and Chinese-produced Type-81 122mm surface-to-surface rockets, though it is not known whether these include versions with submunition payloads.[12]

Use

There were no reports or allegations of Sudanese government forces using cluster munitions during 2021 or the first half of 2022. The last recorded use of cluster munitions by Sudan was in 2015.

Previous use

Sudan has repeatedly denied using cluster munitions in the past, but there is strong evidence that it used them in 2012–2015 in South Kordofan province, bordering South Sudan, during fighting with the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N).[13] Credible evidence of cluster munition attacks in South Kordofan emerged during that period:

• At least 23 cluster bombs were dropped in Alburam (Tobo), Delami, and Umdorein counties in 2015.[14]
• Remnants of RBK-500 cluster bombs containing AO-2.5 RT submunitions were shown in a video taken immediately after a government airstrike on Kauda, on 27 May 2015.[15]
• RBK-500 cluster bombs containing AO-2.5 RT submunitions were used in Sudanese Air Force attacks on Tongoli village, Delami county, on 6 March 2015; and on Rajeefi village Um Durein county, in late February 2015.[16]
• At least two RBK-500 cluster bombs were used by the Sudanese Air Force in Karigiyati, in June or July 2014.[17]
• Two cluster bombs were reportedly use in a Sudanese government aircraft attack on the village of Lado, on 18 April 2013.[18]
• An RBK-500 cluster bomb containing unexploded AO-2.5RT submunitions was sighted in Ongolo in the aftermath of Sudanese government airstrikes, on 15 April 2012.[19]
• Chinese-made Type-81 Dual-Purpose Improved Conventional Munitions (DPICM) were fired during a Sudanese government attack on Troji village, on 29 February 2012.[20]

This use of cluster munitions was widely condemned.[21] In June 2015, a resolution unanimously adopted by the Security Council expressed concern “at evidence of possible government use of two cluster bombs near Kirigiyati in North Darfur.”[22]

Sudan has repeatedly denied evidence that its forces used cluster munitions.[23] In November 2020, Sudan told States Parties that it has “contributed to refuting and clarifying all accusations against Sudan of using cluster munitions during the period from 2011 to 2014.”[24]

Other past use

Between 1995 and 2000, Sudanese government forces were reported to have used air-dropped cluster munitions in southern Sudan, including Chilean-made PM-1 submunitions.[25] Remnants of a Rockeye-type cluster bomb, with Chinese language external markings, were photographed by Landmine Action in Yei in October 2006. Clearance operators in Sudan have also cleared various submunitions, including the Spanish-manufactured HESPIN 21, the United States (US)-produced M42 DPICM and Mk-118 (Rockeye), and the Soviet-manufactured PTAB-1.5.[26]

Jump to a specific section of the profile:

Treaty Status | Management & Coordination | Impact (contamination & casualties) | Addressing the Impact (land release, risk education, victim assistance)

Country Summary

Sudan is contaminated with mines and explosive remnants of war (ERW) primarily as a result of more than 20 years of civil war between the Sudanese government forces and non-state armed groups in the south, mainly the Sudan People’s Liberation Movement/Army. A Comprehensive Peace Agreement was reached in 2005 and South Sudan gained independence in July 2011.

A landmine impact survey was completed in 16 Sudanese states in June 2009, with the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) estimating that the total residual contamination covered 107km². Since then, Sudan has made significant progress to address its remaining mine and ERW contamination. As of April 2018, three eastern states, Gadaref, Kassala, and Red Sea, were declared free of mines and ERW. As of the end of December 2019, only three of Sudan’s 18 states remained contaminated with antipersonnel mines. Blue Nile and South Kordofan states are the most heavily affected with the West Kordofan least affected. Demining operations continued to be limited in Blue Nile and South Kordofan states due to insecurity.

Some limited cluster munition contamination is believed to exist, but the areas are not under government control.

Risk education in Sudan is prioritized according to the categorization of communities as high, medium or low impact. Children are considered to be the most at-risk, and the National Mine Action Center (NMAC) and the Ministry of Education incorporated risk education into the school curriculum at primary and secondary levels.

Challenges remain with shortages of funding, particularly for victim assistance. Funding to victim assistance stopped to areas declared to be cleared from mines/ERW, including the eastern states of Sudan.

Treaty status

Treaty status overview

On 28 March 2018, Sudan submitted a second request for an extension of its Mine Ban Treaty Article 5 clearance deadline for a period of four years until 1 April 2023. The request was granted at the Seventeenth Meeting of States Parties. The plan under the extension request depends on the assumption that there would be an improvement in the security situation in all the regions contaminated by mines and ERW and that the required funds would be secured to implement the program activities. The other factors that may hamper the implementation include conflicts, population movements, the discovery of new hazards, high metallic content in the minefields, and the rainy season.[1]

On 30 April 2020, Sudan submitted an updated work plan for the implementation of Article 5 of the treaty, for the period 2020 to 2023.[2] Sudan has stated that it was on target to meet its deadline.[3]

Sudan is not a signatory to the Convention on Cluster Munitions and has not adopted a specific clearance deadline for cluster munition remnants.

Management and coordination

Mine action management and coordination

Mine action management and coordination overview[4]

NMAC has been responsible for the management and coordination of the mine action program in Sudan since completion of the United Nations Mission in the Sudan (UNMIS) mandate in 2011.[5]

In 2015, UNMAS resumed its advisory and support role in Sudan following an invitation from the Sudanese government. UNMAS supports NMAC building institutional capacity to meet its Article 5 obligations. It also manages land release, risk education, and victim assistance activities in coordination with NMAC and provides technical advice and training for the mine action center and national NGOs.[6]

Strategies and policies

The national mine action program is entirely nationally owned, managed, and coordinated by the Sudanese National Mine Action Authority (NMAA) and NMAC.

Legislation and standards

In 2019, NMAC reported that a review of the National Mine Action Standards (NMAS) had been completed and were awaiting endorsement. As of November 2020, these were still awaiting endorsement.^[7]The work of preparing, reviewing, and revising of the standards was conducted by a technical committee, consisting of NMAC, UNMAS, National Units for Mine Action and Development (NUMAD), The Development Initiative, JASMAR Human Security Organization (JASMAR) (previously the Sudanese Association for Combating Landmines), and the Friends of Peace and Development Organization (FPDO), with the support of the Ordnance Disposal Office (ODO) of the UN-African Union Mission in Darfur (UNAMID).[8]

Information management

Since January 2013 a data clean-up has been ongoing, its objective is to better utilize and improve the quality of data on hazardous areas.[9] In March 2018, NMAC reported that a process of upgrading the software of its Information Management System for Mine Action (IMSMA) database to a newer version, IMSMA New Generation (NG), was in progress with the assistance of the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining (GICHD).[10]

In 2019, NMAC’s information management system was in the process of migrating data from IMSMA Legacy to IMSMA-NG.[11] Reporting tools have been developed with IMSMA-NG and standard IMSMA reporting forms for non-technical survey (NTS), technical survey, clearance, explosive ordnance disposal (EOD), risk education, casualty data, victim assistance and impact assessment were being used.[12]

Gender and diversity

Sudan states that gender is considered in recruitment processes for key departments in NMAC and across the mine action pillars.[13]

Risk education management and coordination

Risk education management and coordination[14]

Coordination

Risk education teams are accredited in Blue Nile, Darfur, and South Kordofan states by NMAC. Monthly coordination meetings were held in 2019 with UNMAS, risk education implementing organizations and other relevant stakeholders.[15]

National Standards and guidelines

There is no standalone strategy for risk education,[16] but within its Operational Plan 2020–2023, Sudan has four objectives related to risk education. The objectives are: to integrate risk education activities with wider humanitarian, development, protection and education efforts as well as with survey, clearance, and victim assistance work; to provide context specific risk education; to prioritize people most at-risk by basing risk education interventions on casualty data analysis; and to build national capacity to deliver risk education.[17]

Victim assistance management and coordination

Victim assistance management and coordination[18]

NMAC held monthly victims assistance coordination with relevant ministries, national and international organizations and UNMAS, and also held a victim assistance department workshop on guidelines for the implantation of victim assistance projects including the National Council of the Disabled Persons (NCDP); national prosthetic centers, the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), and UN agencies.[19] Within the framework of the national-wide coordination, NMAC maintains ongoing coordination with the NCPD and other victims’ assistance entities in the country.[20]

Laws and policies

The 2017 Sudan Act for Persons with Disabilities was adopted by Sudan’s National Assembly in January 2017 and signed by the president in February 2017. In total, 14 out of 18 states also had state disability acts consistent with the newly adopted federal disability act.[21] An informal coalition of Sudanese disabled people’s organizations (DPOs) and civil society organizations submitted an alternative report to the Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities for Sudan that provided an assessment of the implementation of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).[22]

Impact

Contamination

Contamination overview (as of December 2019) [23]

* It is expected that this amount would increase following non-technical survey operations planned in 2019–2021.

Note: CHA=confirmed hazardous area; ERW=explosive remnants of war; and SHA=suspected hazardous area.

Landmine contamination

At the end of 2019, Sudan reported 13.27km² of mine contaminated land, with 43 CHAs and 52 SHAs in Blue Nile, South Kordofan, and West Kordofan states.[24] However, as of 1 March 2020, Sudan reported 90 recorded antipersonnel mine hazardous areas in eight areas including three SHAs in Blue Nile and four in South Kordofan, as well as one in West Kordofan states encompassing 19km² total contaminated area.[25] There is also contamination on the border with Chad.[26]

Sudan started NTS at the end of 2019 to establish a national baseline of antipersonnel mine contamination. The survey will be carried out across the territories of Blue Nile, South Kordofan, West Kordofan, and the five Darfur states, with completion planned by the end of 2021. However, the survey is dependent upon access being granted to insecure areas. It was expected that newly found contamination would be added to the database but that a large proportion of the existing SHAs would be cancelled.[27]

Cluster munition remnant contamination

The exact extent of contamination from cluster munition remnants in Sudan is not fully known. At the beginning of 2018 only two areas in Sudan were suspected to contain cluster munition remnant contamination: one in South Kordofan and the other in West Kordofan state, each with an estimated size of 1km².

At the end of 2019, NMAC reported that the security situation was an issue in the areas with the remaining suspected cluster munition contamination.[28]

ERW contamination

Darfur is contaminated by ERW.

The extent of ERW contamination in the disputed area of Abyei between Sudan and South Sudan is not known.

In Sudan’s Operational Plan 2020–2023 the total amount of ERW contamination was estimated to be 4.31km² in the three territories of Blue Nile, Southern Darfur, and South Kordofan. It was expected that the amount of recorded ERW contamination would increase with the completion of NTS in 2021.[29]

Casualties

Casualties overview

Casualties in 2019: details

In 2019, 30 mine/ERW casualties were recorded in incidents in Blue Nile, Central and North Darfur, and South Kordofan, states. Children represented the majority of casualties recorded in 2019 (24 or 80%).[30] Several challenges to data collection were identified by NMAC. These included that most of the casualties live in or move around rural and remote areas, as well as the tough geography and harsh topography of the affected areas. The impact of indigenous customs and traditions and lack of resources also constituted a challenge to data collection.[31]

Cluster munition casualties

A total of 39 casualties from cluster munitions were recorded in Sudan by the Monitor from 2000 through to the end of 2013.

Casualties from unexploded submunitions were reported in 2013 in Western Darfur; in 2012 in Southern Darfur and South Kordofan; and in 2011 in Blue Nile. Prior to 2009, casualties occurred in Blue Nile, Kassala, and South Kordofan.

Addressing the impact

Mine action

Operators and service providers

Clearance operators[32]

Clearance

Clearance overview[33]

Note: ERW=explosive remnants of war.

Land release

Landmines

During 2019, Sudan cleared 0.87km². Another 6.13km² of land was released through technical survey, which was above the target of 5.49km² for release through technical survey in 2019. No NTS was carried out in 2019, the target for cancelation through NTS was 4.9km².[34]

From 2004 to 2019, Sudan reported the total destruction of 10,307 antipersonnel mines.[35] Sudan reported only finding one antipersonnel mine in the Blue Nile province during clearance in 2019.[36]

During 2019, access to Blue Nile and South Kordofan states was limited for clearance and survey operations due to security concerns in some parts of these states.[37] However, in 2019, it was also reported that access to Blue Nile and South Kordofan improved, enabling the assessment of roads for humanitarian assistance and population movement. It was expected that the security situation for mine action would improve with the multiple signing of peace agreements during 2020.[38]

During 2019, no international humanitarian NGOs were conducting demining work in the country, while national operators included JASMAR, NUMAD, FPDO, and Global Aid Hand (GAH). In Darfur, UNAMID funds Dynasafe, a commercial demining company, and NUMAD to conduct NTS, surface, and subsurface battle area clearance (BAC) and EOD spot tasks.[39]

Cluster munition remnants

No cluster munition remnant clearance was reported in 2019.

Border clearance

There is contamination on the border with Chad, for which the Sudanese government initiated an agreement to clear it. Additional border contamination was reported near South Sudan; however, the government is waiting for further peace talks to have an agreement to clear the border.[40]

Residual capacity

The eastern states have been declared free of all known contamination, but the government continues to support a sub-office in Kassala and has emergency teams to deal with any residual contamination found.[41]

Risk education

Operators and service providers

Risk education operators overview

Beneficiary numbers

Beneficiary numbers[42]

Sudan reported a total of 4,200,936 beneficiaries of risk education between 2002 and 2019, including a total of 326,590 beneficiaries in 2019 alone.[43]

Implementation

During 2019, 10 risk education teams conducted activities in Sudan. The main risk education approaches employed in Sudan include: direct risk education to affected communities, internally displaced people (IDPs) and returnees; public campaigns; community-based risk education; mass media, including radio and television broadcasts; community liaison; safety programs (for humanitarian staff); and the inclusion of risk education in the school curriculum at primary and secondary level.[44]

Targeting of risk education is undertaken through the ranking of contaminated communities into high, medium, and low impact using impact criteria. Communities with a score of nine and above are considered high impact, with scores of five to eight medium impact, and one to four low impact. Sudan plans to target the high impact communities for risk education during 2020–2021.[45]

Target groups

School-age children are considered to be the most at-risk, which is substantiated by the casualty data. NMAC and the Ministry of Education have incorporated risk education messages into the school curriculum at primary and secondary schools and provided training for teachers.[46] In 2019 5,000 copies of the risk education school curriculum were printed and distributed in Darfur, 3,000 for primary schools and 2,000 for secondary schools.[47]

Community leaders are also trained to pass on risk education messages to their communities.[48]

Adult groups practicing agriculture, herding and the collection of water and wood are also a high-risk group, as are refugees and IDPs. NMAC also noted that there were specific risk behaviors resulting in intentional engagement with mines and ERW, including scrap metal collection and the use of war remnants for decorations or household and farming tools.[49]

Marking

NMAC organizes the marking of hazardous areas into four categories: improvised marking using available resources when temporary or permanent materials are not available; temporary marking in preparation for humanitarian demining; permanent marking of areas not scheduled for humanitarian demining in the near future; and route marking, to indicate where contaminated land exists on either side of a cleared road.[50]

Major developments in 2019

In 2019 several risk education workshops were conducted on the methodology, materials development, and risk education for explosive ordnance in Southern and Northern Darfur states. The workshops were conducted by the risk education department of NMAC and one by the Association of Aid and Relief, Japan (AAR Japan).[51]

Victim Assistance

Victim assistance providers and activities

Providers and activities overview[52]

Major developments in 2019

JASMAR implemented two victim assistance projects: one in Blue Nile and the other in South Kordofan funded by Japan and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). The projects included medical assessment, socio-economic integration, psychosocial support, and assistive devices.[53]

Funding to victim assistance ended in areas that have officially been declared cleared from mines/ERW including Sudan’s eastern states. This has negatively impacted the support to victim assistance in those states, and consequently Sudan provided resources to try to fill the gaps created by the deficiency of external funding flows.[54]

NMAC identified several opportunities that could enhance victim assistance including the increased willingness of donors to support future mine action; a greater level of coordination between NMAC, UNMAC, and partners and national entities; successful peace building; enhanced attention from Sudan to its own national mine action program.[55]

Needs assessment

Sudan reported that there were still important challenges associated with the gathering of information on the victims in order to include them in the centralized database. These challenges include: the access to remote places of some of the victims and ensuring their mobility; the difficulty to reach and access the affected areas due to their geographic nature; the local customs and traditions which sometimes have limited the achievement of the desired objectives; and the scantness and scarcity of support to the victim assistance programs.[56]

Information on mine/ERW survivors is collected in the national disability system, managed by the NCPD.[57]

Medical care and rehabilitation

Sudan reported that all hospitals in towns which are located in the proximity of mine/ERW affected areas have been equipped with surgeons and medical staff. Medical protocols of mine/ERW clearance teams are considered prerequisites prior to their operations commencement of such medical capacities.[58] Even if medical assistance is available, Sudan also reported that survivors in remote areas need to be taken to larger cities to receive proper physical rehabilitation. To improve this situation, specialized technicians were being delegated to the centers that are lacking this kind of services, especially when the physical rehabilitation projects were being implemented. Another issue stated for the general provision of assistance is that there were not enough first-aid professional providers in comparison with the number of mine/ERW contaminated areas, making it essential to train more first-aid providers.[59]

The ICRC supported eight facilities, including the National Authority for Prosthetics and Orthotics (NAPO) and the Khartoum Cheshire Home (KCH) to provide physiotherapy, rehabilitation, and assistive devices with supplies, training, and advice and other forms of assistance.[60] The ICRC Physical Rehabilitation Programme provided regular training and a three-week course for NAPO Khartoum technical staff and technical support for KCH staff.[61] The ICRC facilitated access to services at the Nyala physical rehabilitation center to economically vulnerable people with disabilities from Darfur and West Kordofan.[62]

Socio-economic and psychosocial inclusion

NMAC reported an increase in the provision of social and psychological support to mine/ERW survivors and their families in the affected areas, including peer support in and outside of hospitals, in partnership with the medical cadres and unions of persons with disabilities. NMAC also recognized a scarcity of the provision of similar psychological support services to the victims in remote and unsafe areas, and highlighted the need to train psychological support professionals to provide an appropriate service to mine/ERW victims in those areas.[63]

Social inclusion activities included the involvement of mine/ERW survivors in cultural, entertainment and sport activities held in the affected areas, including in remote villages, with places reserved for persons with disabilities in stadiums and theaters.[64] The ICRC continued its support for wheelchair basketball teams and referred them to its economic inclusion program.[65]

NMAC noted that there was improvement in the economic situation and social inclusion of mine/ERW survivors and affected families. NMAC also reported the inclusion of victims and family members under existing health insurance and social and psychological support mechanisms. The percentage of survivors employed in governmental institutions and cooperative projects was maintained. A quota for higher and postgraduate education for persons with disabilities has contributed to social reintegration measures.[66]

JASMAR conducted two workshops on awareness and advocacy of the rights of persons with disabilities in Blue Nile and South Kordofan states.[67]

Cross-cutting issues

The unstable security situation in some parts of Blue Nile and South Kordofan states hampered victim assistance efforts. Seasonal climate conditions and remoteness of the mine/ERW affected areas from available services were noted as additional impediments.[68]

Policy

The Republic of the Sudan signed the Mine Ban Treaty on 4 December 1997 and ratified on 13 October 2003, becoming a State Party on 1 April 2004.[1] Sudan adopted the Sudan Mine Action Law by Presidential Decree #51 on 31 March 2010.[2] The act is comprised of 29 articles divided into four chapters. Chapter four includes Mine Ban Treaty obligations, including the prohibition on antipersonnel mine use and stockpiling, clearance of contaminated areas, risk education, victim assistance, and transparency reporting. It also includes penalties for violations.[3]

Sudan regularly attends meetings of the treaty, including the Third Review Conference in Maputo in June 2014, and more recently the Seventeenth Meeting of States Parties in Geneva in November 2018, where it requested an extension for its Article 5 mine clearance obligations.[4] Sudan also attended the intersessional meetings of the treaty in Geneva in May 2019, where it provided statements on victim assistance and cooperative compliance, as well as an update on Article 5 mine clearance progress. Sudan consistently submits annual updated Article 7 transparency reports.[5]

Sudan is not party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions. Sudan signed the Convention on Conventional Weapons (CCW) on 10 April 1981, but has not ratified it. Sudan is not party to the Convention on Cluster Munitions.

Production and transfer

Sudan has declared that it “never produced” antipersonnel mines.[6] It has repeatedly stated that it has not produced or exported antipersonnel mines.[7]

Use

There have been no confirmed instances of government forces using antipersonnel mines since Sudan became a State Party to the Mine Ban Treaty in 2004, but there were several reports of use of antipersonnel mines in Sudan in 2011, 2012, and 2013 that the Monitor has been unable to confirm.

It is clear from evidence and testimony from various sources that in the southern part of the country antipersonnel mines are available for use, but the Monitor has not seen definitive evidence about what forces may have used antipersonnel mines. There is also a lack of clarity about whether antipersonnel mines or antivehicle mines, or both, have been used. In its Article 7 reports and statements the government of Sudan has provided little to no official information on the mine use allegations, for which it has denied responsibility.

On 22 July 2014, Spokesperson for the Sudan Liberation Movement (Abdel Wahid al-Nur, SLM-AW) Mustafa Tambur told Radio Dabanga that the Sudanese government had planted landmines in the Kutum locality in North Darfur. Heavy rainfall allegedly revealed 23 antipersonnel mines in the Fonu area near Kutum. Tambur also demanded that the international community call on the Sudanese government to stop using landmines.[8]

On 14 August 2014, the Leaders of the both factions of the Sudan Liberation Movement—Mini Minawi, leader of the SLM-MM[9] and Abdol Wahid, leader of the SLM-AW[10]—met in Geneva to sign Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment to ban antipersonnel landmines. Abdol Wahid told Radio Dabanga that this agreement brought Sudan closer to fighting the deadly landmine contamination in Darfur. Mini Minawi also told the radio station that this commitment was “an importance step” within this humanitarian framework.[11] With the two main factions of the SLM signing Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment, all four main non-state armed groups actively operating in Sudan have pledged to refrain from using antipersonnel landmines.[12]

On 29 August 2013, a delegation of the Sudan People's Liberation Movement-North (SPLM-N), comprised of Deputy Chairman Abdelaziz Alhilu and Secretary General Yasir Arman, signed Geneva Call’s Deed of Commitment, thereby agreeing to prohibit the use, production, and transfer of antipersonnel mines, to cooperate in humanitarian mine action activities, and to destroy its stockpiles. Upon signing, Alhilu said, “In compliance with our pledge, we will destroy all [antipersonnel] mines in our possession as soon as possible. These mines were captured during military operations.”[13] During Geneva Call’s third meeting of signatories to the Deed of Commitment, spokesperson of the SPLM-N’s delegation, Mubarak Ardol, stated that the SPLM-N will invite all interested parties to witness the public destruction of the landmines the group has acquired during “military operations over the past four year[s].” He also added that the SPLM-N’s delegation proposed adding a fourth protocol to the Deed of Commitment concerning humanitarian assistance in war zones.[14]

Stockpiling and destruction

Sudan reported completion of destruction of its stockpile of 10,566 antipersonnel mines on 31 March 2008, just ahead of its 1 April 2008 treaty-mandated deadline. The reported size and composition of Sudan’s stockpile, as well as the number of mines to be retained for training purposes, have varied.[15] At the Second Review Conference in 2009, Sudan stated that a total of 10,656 stockpiled antipersonnel mines were destroyed (possibly a typographical error from the 10,566 mentioned above).[16] However, Sudan declared in April 2012 and again in April 2013 that a total of 13,371 stockpiled antipersonnel mines were destroyed in Khartoum in 2007.[17]

In 2009, Sudan reported the discovery of arms caches including antipersonnel mines at various locations of southern Sudan that were subsequently destroyed in Blue Nile state in 2008.[18]

Mines retained for training purposes

In its April 2019 Article 7 report, Sudan stated that it is retaining a total of 739 mines. From 2009 to 2015, Sudan reported a total of 1,938 mines, but since 2016 has been steadily decreasing the number retained. In 2009, Sudan reported a reduction in the number of mines retained for training from 4,997 to 1,938 mines.[19] From 2009 to 2015, Sudan reported the transfer of 75 “Type 35” plastic mines from the Sudan Armed Forces (SAF) to the UN Mine Action Office “for training purposes,” but the total number of mines retained for training remained unchanged.[20] Sudan has not disclosed the intended purposes or actual uses of its retained mines, as agreed by States Parties at Mine Ban Treaty Review Conferences held in 2004 and 2009.

In 2019, four donors contributed US$3.5 million toward mine action in the Republic of the Sudan through the United Nations Mine Action Service (UNMAS) and national units for mine action.[1]

International contributions: 2019[2]

Note: N/A=not available; N/R=not reported.

Since 2015, Sudan has received more than $14 million in total international support to mine action activities, with annual contributions fluctuating from less than $2 million to more than $5 million.

Summary of contributions: 2015–2019[3]