PORT SUDAN – Sudan’s military chief and head of the de facto Sovereign Council, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, has ordered that all armed groups fighting alongside the Sudanese Armed Forces (SAF) be subjected to the provisions of the Armed Force Act of 2007.
In a statement released on Sunday, August 17, 2025, the SAF said the decision underscores “the rule of law and the strengthening of command and control” within the military framework. According to the army, the directive brings all supporting forces under the authority of two specific provisions in the law, Article 14 and 52.
Military analysts noted that this is the first time the army has formally extended its legal structure to encompass allied forces. They believe the move could help curb the longstanding problem of impunity when armed groups operating alongside the SAF commit violations against civilians.
The announcement coincided with a round of of promotions and retirements among senior SAF officers, which sources said followed coupled with the new legal directive, is seen as part of a wider effort to consolidate military hierarchy amid the protracted conflict with the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF).
Observers welcomed the decision as a step toward accountability, but questions remain over its practical application. The army statement did not clarify whether members of allied groups will be subject to prosecution in military courts if they are implicated in criminal acts.
Since the outbreak of war, multiple incidents of abuse by pro-army militias have been reported. In January 2025, civilians were killed in villages in Al-Jazira State during SAF operations to retake the area, with rights groups attributing some of the violations to allied groups acting alongside the army.
The number and influence of such groups have grown sharply during the conflict. What began as limited support forces has expanded into a patchwork of more than 20 armed factions now operating in northern, eastern, central, and southern regions of Sudan. Their rapid proliferation has raised concerns over fragmented chains of command and the risk of abuses going unpunished.
By subjecting these militias to the Armed Forces Act, the army appears intent on reasserting centralized control. Whether this legal framework will genuinely reduce abuses or simply formalize the groups’ status within the war effort remains to be seen.
For now, the move marks a notable shift in the army’s approach to managing its allies in the fight against the RSF, an attempt to impose order in a conflict that has deeply fractured the country.
