Across Sudan’s Darfur region, small teams of human rights monitors are secretly gathering evidence of killings, sexual violence, arbitrary detention, looting and the destruction of civilian communities.
The monitors reportedly operate inside territory controlled by the Rapid Support Forces, or RSF, where openly investigating the paramilitary organisation could lead to arrest, disappearance or death. Many work with little more than small mobile phones, trusted local contacts and secure communication methods intended to conceal their identities and locations.
The network works with Sudan’s National Commission for Human Rights, whose Darfur division says its teams are attempting to preserve evidence before bodies are removed, buildings are cleared, witnesses are displaced and digital records disappear. The operation was revealed in an Al Jazeera investigation into the covert documentation network.
Their objective is not merely to publicise what is happening. Investigators hope the information will eventually support criminal cases against commanders and fighters accused of war crimes, crimes against humanity or genocide.
Monitors Must Work Without Attracting Attention
Conventional human rights investigations normally involve visiting locations, photographing physical evidence, interviewing survivors and checking medical or administrative records. Inside an active war zone, almost every part of that process becomes dangerous.
RSF checkpoints and territorial control restrict access to villages, prisons and suspected mass-grave locations. Local monitors cannot openly carry professional cameras, evidence bags or visible documentation equipment without raising suspicion. Interviews may need to take place quickly and discreetly, while phones containing photographs or witness details can expose entire networks if seized.
Rahmatullah Mohammedin Abakar, director of the commission’s Darfur division, said the teams rely on local residents and concealed communication channels to document alleged violations. According to his account, evidence collected across RSF-held cities indicates patterns of violence directed at civilians partly on the basis of ethnicity.
The RSF did not respond to Al Jazeera’s request for comment on the latest claims. It has previously denied deliberately targeting civilians and has said individual members who commit violations will be held accountable. These allegations therefore remain subject to independent verification and any future judicial process.
The Network Is Recording More Than Battlefield Deaths
The documentation effort extends beyond people killed during fighting. Monitors are attempting to establish whether civilians were deliberately selected, detained or attacked after military operations had ended.
The commission says it has received information about mass executions and suspected mass graves in el-Geneina and el-Fasher. It also says nearly 4,000 cases of sexual violence have been documented across Darfur, with girls younger than 18 representing approximately one-fifth of the reported victims. These figures come from the commission and have not been independently confirmed in full.
The investigators are also trying to trace people held in detention. Abakar claimed that 1,480 civilians were being detained in el-Fasher, including hundreds of women and children. He also alleged that approximately 10,000 people were being held in Daqris prison in Nyala.
Such information can be difficult to verify because independent organisations are often denied access to detention facilities. Prisoners may be transferred, records may not exist and families may be too frightened to report disappearances.
Documentation can at least establish that a person was last seen in custody, identify possible witnesses and create a record that relatives can later use when seeking answers.
Evidence Can Vanish Within Hours
A burned village may remain visible for months, but other evidence can disappear almost immediately.
Bodies may be buried or moved. Blood and shell fragments can be removed. Phones may be destroyed at checkpoints. Social media platforms may delete violent videos, while the person who uploaded the material may later disappear or lose access to the account.
Investigators must therefore preserve original files whenever possible rather than relying only on screenshots or reposted videos. A useful digital record may contain metadata showing when it was created, although that information can be altered or removed. Investigators can also compare buildings, roads, shadows, weather conditions and landscape features with maps and satellite imagery to help establish where and when an event occurred.
The Berkeley Protocol on Digital Open Source Investigations provides international guidance for collecting, verifying and preserving online material relating to human rights violations. It emphasises that digital evidence should be handled methodically so its origin, integrity and relevance can later be explained to a court.
A dramatic video alone may not prove who issued an order or whether the footage has been edited. Its legal value increases when it is supported by witness testimony, satellite imagery, medical information, communications records and evidence connecting individual fighters to commanders.
Protecting Witnesses Can Be Harder Than Collecting Testimony
A witness may possess crucial information but face severe consequences for sharing it.
Survivors of sexual violence can experience stigma, rejection or retaliation. Former detainees may fear being arrested again. Witnesses from targeted ethnic communities may worry that an interview will expose their relatives or reveal their location to armed groups.
Investigators must decide how much personal information to collect and where it can be stored safely. A detailed witness file may strengthen a future prosecution, but it can also become a weapon if captured.
Some interviews may therefore be anonymised during early documentation. Names and contact details can be separated from testimony, while sensitive files may be encrypted and transmitted outside the conflict zone. Investigators must also avoid asking traumatised survivors to repeat their experiences unnecessarily, particularly when several organisations are documenting the same incident.
These safeguards affect the quality of future cases. Courts need testimony that is reliable and sufficiently detailed, yet evidence collection must not create additional danger for the victim.
International Investigations Are Finding Similar Patterns
The allegations collected by local monitors resemble findings reported by international organisations investigating Darfur.
A United Nations fact-finding mission concluded that evidence from el-Fasher indicated a campaign targeting non-Arab communities and documented conduct including mass killings, sexual violence and the use of starvation against civilians. The UN Human Rights Office said evidence from the city established underlying acts associated with genocide, while questions of legal responsibility would depend on the evidence concerning intent and individual perpetrators.
Amnesty International’s extensive investigation into North Darfur concluded that RSF forces committed crimes against humanity during the campaign to capture el-Fasher. Its report documented alleged murder, torture, imprisonment, rape, sexual slavery, persecution and forcible displacement between early 2024 and October 2025.
The investigation used interviews with survivors and witnesses alongside videos, photographs, satellite imagery and other documentary material. Amnesty described the violence as a systematic campaign against civilians, particularly members of non-Arab communities. The organisation’s North Darfur report launch also warned that similar tactics could be repeated elsewhere if accountability remains absent.
Documentation Must Cover Abuses by Every Side
The severity of the allegations against the RSF does not remove the need to investigate violations attributed to the Sudanese Armed Forces and its allies.
Human Rights Watch’s 2026 Sudan assessment states that all major sides have committed war crimes and other violations of international humanitarian law. It documents alleged indiscriminate air attacks, retaliatory killings, unlawful detention and obstruction of humanitarian assistance by forces aligned with both the RSF and the army.
Credible documentation cannot function as political propaganda for one armed party. Investigators must apply consistent standards regardless of the suspected perpetrator and distinguish between confirmed facts, witness allegations and analytical conclusions.
Failure to investigate one side can weaken public trust and allow perpetrators to dismiss legitimate evidence as partisan. Impartiality is therefore not only an ethical requirement; it strengthens the likelihood that evidence will survive legal scrutiny.
The ICC’s Authority Has Important Limits
The International Criminal Court already has jurisdiction over crimes committed in Darfur because the United Nations Security Council referred the region to the court in 2005.
That jurisdiction allows ICC prosecutors to investigate more recent crimes in Darfur, including those allegedly committed during the current conflict. However, the referral does not automatically cover atrocities committed elsewhere in Sudan.
Human Rights Watch has warned that Sudan lacks an effective independent mechanism capable of investigating grave crimes across the entire country. The ICC can pursue cases within its authorised jurisdiction, but national courts, foreign courts applying universal jurisdiction or a newly created international mechanism may be needed to address crimes outside Darfur.
Prosecutors must also identify individual responsibility. Showing that an atrocity occurred is not always enough to convict a commander. A case may need evidence that the accused ordered the crime, participated in it, knowingly assisted it or failed to prevent and punish forces under effective control.
That is why information about unit structures, vehicles, uniforms, commanders, communications and repeated operational patterns can be as important as images of the immediate aftermath.
Justice May Take Years, but Lost Evidence Cannot Be Recovered
Sudan’s earlier Darfur conflict demonstrates how slowly international justice can move. Victims may wait for years while suspects remain beyond the reach of courts, witnesses relocate and governments refuse cooperation.
The delay can make secret documentation appear futile. Yet the absence of evidence almost guarantees impunity.
Records collected today may later support arrest warrants, sanctions, truth commissions, missing-person investigations or compensation claims. They can also challenge official denials and preserve the identities of victims who might otherwise become anonymous statistics.
The monitors operating inside RSF-controlled territory are therefore fighting a different kind of battle. They cannot stop an armed unit or open a prison, but they can make it more difficult for atrocities to be erased.
Their work depends on secrecy because exposure could endanger the investigators and everyone who has spoken to them. Its eventual success will depend on whether international institutions protect those records, verify them rigorously and transform documentation into meaningful accountability.
