Sudan’s El Burhan pledges guarantees, sets out amnesty rules for dialogue

El Burhan pledges guarantees for Sudanese dialogue as critics demand ceasefire first

Sudan's Sovereignty Council chair and army chief, Gen Abdelfattah El Burhan, has pledged to provide legal, political, and security guarantees for a planned Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue inside the country, while stressing that the state will not organise the dialogue or determine its agenda or outcomes.

Speaking on Friday evening at celebrations marking the 72nd anniversary of the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF), El Burhan said the call for dialogue had come from a national group that had come together on its own initiative to launch a purely Sudanese dialogue, beginning inside the country and bringing together all political and community forces, while placing citizens' suffering and their right to peace at the heart of its objectives.

As previously reported by Radio Dabanga, the call by El Burhan, for dialogue inside Sudan, coupled with reports of a forthcoming presidential amnesty, has prompted widespread reaction among political forces, civil-society organisations, and the Sudanese public.

In his speech, El Burhan added that the group had "presented its vision for working as an independent national mechanism to prepare for an inclusive Sudanese dialogue, aimed at achieving broad national consensus and putting our country on the path to stability." He said the group had asked the state to provide the necessary guarantees for the dialogue to take place, facilitate the participation of its parties, and protect their safety. He said he had agreed to provide logistical support and the necessary legal, political, and security guarantees, while stressing that the state would not organise the dialogue or determine its agenda or outcomes, in respect for its independence and to safeguard its national credibility.

El Burhan stressed that the guarantees did not mean that the state owned the dialogue, determined its participants, drew up its agenda, controlled its outcomes, or provided it with political sponsorship.

He explained that any action taken by the state against a dialogue participant would be a suspension of criminal proceedings, not an amnesty. He said dropping a charge should not be portrayed as an exemption from responsibility if the person was found liable. Suspending proceedings against participants in cases with private complainants does not constitute a final relinquishment of rights, but temporary immunity. Temporary procedural immunity has no effect on substantive rights, and proceedings will resume once the reason for suspension ceases.

El Burhan said participants would have full and permanent legal immunity for opinions and positions expressed during the dialogue, preventing criminal, civil, or administrative proceedings based on such statements. The protection extends to statements made in dialogue sessions or in connection with them. He said the immunity aims to guarantee freedom and frankness in dialogue, and that the success of the dialogue depends on creating a wider environment where freedoms prevail. The national dialogue should take place in an open public space allowing society to engage, express opinions, and criticise or support without fear.

Critics: dialogue without ceasefire is 'meaningless'

Sudanese women political and human rights leaders have criticised El Burhan's call for political dialogue, saying that any political process not preceded by clear steps to stop the war, create a suitable environment and ensure genuine participation by civilian forces risks becoming an attempt to reproduce past political experiences rather than address the roots of the crisis.

Speaking to Radio Dabanga's Kandakas & Miarems programme, they said a political process launched without these steps could ultimately fail to address Sudan's crisis.

Hiba Ahmed, a member of the leadership bureau of the opposition Beja Congress, told Radio Dabanga that the current call for political dialogue was intended, in her view, to prevent any genuine dialogue that could lead to an end to the war and address its root causes. She said El Burhan was seeking to consolidate his political position and install himself as president of the republic.

Ahmed accused the Islamist movement of designing the current dialogue process in order to return fully to power and pursue its political and ideological agenda. She said talk of guarantees, amnesty and temporary immunity was not based on sound political or legal foundations, describing the proposals as an attempt to reassure political forces without providing genuine guarantees.

She called for adherence to the plan announced by the Quad in September 2025, which, she said, links an end to the war with a political process. This should begin with a humanitarian truce leading towards a ceasefire, guarantees for the delivery of humanitarian aid and the protection of civilians, followed by a political process. Ahmed said her position was that the National Congress Party and the Islamist movement should not participate in the next political process. Any dialogue that did not clearly address these issues, she said, would not bring the crisis to an end.

Noon Kashkoush, a Sudanese lawyer and human rights activist, said El Burhan's statements represented a pattern in which military and coup governments sought legitimacy via dialogue initiatives. She compared the current initiative with Al Bashir's 'National Dialogue' or 'El Wathba Dialogue'. Kashkoush said any dialogue while the war continued would remain 'empty of substance'. She said the priority should be negotiations to reach a ceasefire and humanitarian truce before moving to the political stage. She noted that many civilian forces insisted on excluding the National Congress Party from any future political process. Kashkoush also criticised the use of laws to restrict movement of political leaders and activists, and described the call as a 'media stunt' and an attempt to seek political legitimacy. She warned that continued war could entrench divisions between areas controlled by different forces.

Azza Mohamed Ahmed, a member of the Women for Peace and Security group, said dialogue was necessary but must not serve a particular party. She said serious dialogue should be preceded by discussions on fundamental issues, including ending the war and guarantees for truce, and called for an official and clear declaration of principles before dialogue begins.

Perspectives

Government/Military: El Burhan presents the dialogue as a purely Sudanese initiative, with the state only providing guarantees and logistical support. He emphasises the independence of the process and offers legal immunities to encourage frank participation.

Women political and human rights leaders: They argue that without clear steps to stop the war, the dialogue risks repeating past failures. They call for a ceasefire first, adherence to the Quad's September 2025 plan, and exclusion of the National Congress Party and Islamist movement from the political process. They view the guarantees and amnesty talk as lacking sound foundations and suspect the initiative is designed to consolidate power.