The drone strike on the Umm Ruwaba courthouse in North Kordofan, central Sudan, on 8 September 2026 killed 13 civilians and wounded 22 others, according to confirmed medical figures and accounts from witnesses and Sudanese organizations.

The attack occurred during peak working hours while civilians, justice-sector workers, and people with pending cases were inside the courthouse and its surrounding area. Local witnesses and Sudanese organizations attributed the drone to the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), which has not publicly acknowledged responsibility or clarified the intended target. The circumstances require an independent investigation to determine whether the attack violated international humanitarian law and whether those responsible may bear individual criminal responsibility.

Background

The courthouse was struck while civilians and justice-sector personnel had gathered to complete legal and administrative procedures. The Sudan Doctors Network, the Emergency Lawyers group, and local witnesses attributed the attack to the RSF. Independent technical verification of the drone’s trajectory and the type of munition used has not yet been possible.

The strike occurred amid an expanding use of drones in populated areas, with reported attacks affecting markets, displacement camps, aid convoys, water facilities, schools, and hospitals. In February 2026, a drone attributed to the RSF killed 24 civilians, including eight children, near Al-Rahad in North Kordofan as displaced families fled. A drone attack on a World Food Programme convoy the previous day killed one person and destroyed food aid.

The UN human rights office documented at least 880 civilian deaths from drone strikes between January and April 2026. By the end of June, the verified figure had risen to approximately 1,100 civilians, out of around 1,400 conflict-related civilian deaths recorded by the United Nations during the first half of the year. In North Kordofan alone, the UN protection group recorded at least 141 drone attacks through 8 July 2026, with reported impacts on access to water, healthcare, and other essential services.

Institutional Position

International humanitarian law requires parties to distinguish between civilians and civilian objects and military objectives. A courthouse is presumed to be a civilian object unless and for such time as it qualifies as a military objective under the applicable rules. The presence of civilians, lawyers, judicial personnel, or other non-combatants does not make them lawful targets.

The circumstances of the Umm Ruwaba strike must therefore be assessed against the principles of distinction, proportionality, and precaution. If the courthouse was intentionally targeted despite its civilian character, or if the attack was indiscriminate, disproportionate, or carried out without feasible precautions to minimize civilian harm, the conduct could constitute a serious violation of international humanitarian law and, where the applicable elements are established, a war crime.

Applicable Legal Framework

The rules governing the conduct of hostilities in Sudan require all parties to protect civilians and civilian objects and to take feasible precautions in attack. Common Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions also protects persons taking no active part in hostilities. International criminal law provides for individual responsibility for certain serious violations of these rules, subject to the establishment of the relevant facts and jurisdiction.

Demands Aligned with International Human Rights Principles

Women Journalists Without Chains
Geneva, Switzerland —September 11, 2026