Sudanese court sentences RSF paramilitary chief Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo to death over war crimes, ruling issued in absentia

A Sudanese court has sentenced Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as “Hemeti,” the commander of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), to death over war crimes, according to a report by BBC News. The ruling was issued in absentia, meaning Dagalo was not present to defend himself during the proceedings.

The BBC report says the court also handed down death sentences in the same case to 15 other RSF commanders and alleged allies. The record described the conviction as part of a broader legal effort to hold senior figures linked to the RSF accountable for alleged crimes committed during the conflict in Sudan.

The case was decided without Dagalo or the other convicted individuals appearing in court. In absentia judgments are often sought when suspects are believed to be outside reach of custody or when security conditions impede transfers to detention facilities, but the legal and enforcement mechanics can vary depending on the court system and the location where judgments are ultimately recognized.

The report frames Dagalo’s conviction as connected to allegations of war crimes rather than ordinary criminal charges. Under Sudanese and international legal practice, war-crimes cases typically focus on conduct during armed conflict, including claims involving civilians and the rules governing hostilities, with evidence presented through witness testimony, documentation, and other forms of case material.

Because the BBC account does not indicate, in the material provided for this draft, the specific court name, the legal statute invoked, or the location where the trial took place, details such as the precise procedural basis and what happens next in terms of appeal and enforcement are not fully established here. The practical impact of a death sentence issued in absentia also depends on whether authorities controlling relevant territories can enforce custody or transfer, and whether appellate courts review the convictions.

Dagalo remains a central figure in Sudan’s fractured security landscape. The RSF has been one of the principal armed actors since the war escalated, and senior leadership prosecutions have become a key part of accountability efforts that continue amid ongoing instability.

The BBC report indicates that the court’s decision targets not only a single commander but a cluster of RSF figures and allies, suggesting prosecutors aimed to connect alleged crimes to a command structure. Such cases can affect negotiations, administrative arrangements, and the willingness of armed actors to engage with state institutions, particularly when legal decisions include the most severe penalties.

For families and communities affected by Sudan’s conflict, the ruling represents a formal judicial milestone, even as enforcement remains uncertain when defendants are not in custody. The next developments likely hinge on whether the convicted parties challenge the verdicts, whether the court issues written reasoning and case records, and whether authorities can act to prevent impunity for alleged wartime abuses.