Sudan investigation names 25 commanders linked to wartime rape — and maps where they were

A year after the city of El Fasher fell, investigators have put names and places to the sexual violence that followed. A new open-source investigation has identified 25 commanders from both sides of Sudan’s war linked to five locations where sexual violence was reported, tracing their movements through videos and photographs posted online by the fighters themselves.

At a glance

What happened: The Centre for Information Resilience identified 25 commanders from Sudan’s rival forces who were present at five locations and periods where sexual violence was reported, using verified video and photographs.

Why it matters: It links senior officers to the places and times of reported crimes, including the fall of El Fasher, and gives investigators a starting point for accountability.

What happens next: The evidence can support further investigations and possible legal cases, while Britain has pledged £5 million for survivors and £10 million in aid.

What the investigation found

Sudan’s war began in April 2023, between the Sudanese Armed Forces and the paramilitary Rapid Support Forces (RSF). It has forced about 14 million people from their homes, according to The Guardian, and El Fasher, the capital of North Darfur, has become its most painful symbol.

El Fasher held out through an 18-month siege that slowly starved hundreds of thousands of civilians, before falling to the RSF in October 2025. In the days that followed, civilians were massacred and women and girls were subjected to horrific sexual violence, according to the British government. The Guardian reported that as many as 10,000 people are believed to have been killed within just two days, and that a further 40,000 remain unaccounted for.

CIR’s investigation, part of its Sudan Witness project, examined five locations and periods of reported abuse, comparing open-source material with evidence from the United Nations, human rights groups and Sudanese organisations. It names 25 commanders — from the RSF, the army and their allied forces — who held authority where sexual violence was reported.

The investigation is careful about what that means. It says it has reasonable grounds to believe the commanders identified were directly or indirectly responsible for sexual violence, but the limits of the available data prevent it from attributing individual responsibility for specific incidents. Being present and holding rank can guide further investigation, the researchers say, but on its own it cannot establish criminal guilt.

The video that started the trail

The investigation opens with a video posted on TikTok on 26 October 2025, the day the RSF entered El Fasher, in which a commander appears to encourage fighters to rape women in Sudan’s Northern State.

“The Northern State? You’ll just go for its women, so you cleanse their lineage and bring [brave] sons just like you,” the speaker says in the video, as reported by Al Jazeera.

The speaker was Khademallah Khashmin Herika, also known as Shiraz Khalid, a major commanding the RSF’s female contingent, according to CIR, which describes her words as an explicit incitement to rape. It could not establish where the video was filmed, but separate footage placed Herika in El Fasher and in nearby Garni, where survivors described girls being detained and raped.

One survivor described being held with other girls at soldiers’ quarters near Garni and raped over two nights; her family’s detention for ransom further delayed her access to specialist medical care. The United Nations fact-finding mission for Sudan has documented mass and gang rape during the RSF takeover of El Fasher, including at the Saudi Hospital and El Fasher University, and attacks on women and girls along the escape routes out of the city.

El Fasher and the chain of command

At the top of the chain of command that CIR traced around El Fasher sits Abdul Rahim Hamdan Dagalo, the RSF’s deputy commander and brother of RSF leader Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, known as Hemedti. Investigators verified Dagalo at the army’s former 6th Infantry Division base on 26 October 2025, the day the city fell, and at the Saudi Hospital on 4 November.

In drone footage from 27 October, a voice instructs artillery commander Hussein Abu Jalak to pursue vehicles fleeing an earth embankment outside the city, a site associated with civilian detention and executions. CIR matched the voice to Dagalo by comparing it with other verified recordings of him speaking.

Abu Jalak is one of the commanders Britain sanctioned on 26 October. The British Foreign Office linked the RSF colonel to atrocities during the siege of El Fasher. RSF sector commander Gedo Hamdan Ahmed, known as Ibn Shouk, was placed at the Zamzam displacement camp during the RSF assault in April 2025 and around El Fasher six months later, connecting two offensives under the same regional command.

That distinction runs through the whole report. The investigators are mapping command structures, not handing down verdicts. A commander in charge of an area where crimes were reported is a person investigators should look at closely. Whether that commander ordered, knew about, or failed to stop the crimes needs more evidence than a photograph can provide.

A commander on both sides

One of the most striking findings concerns an officer who fought for both sides. Abuaqla Mohamed Ahmed Alwakil, known as Kaykal, was appointed commander of an RSF division in Wad Madani, a city south-east of Khartoum, on 19 December 2023, according to an RSF announcement cited by CIR.

Investigators verified him at a former army base in the city on 24 December 2023. On the same day, the Strategic Initiative for Women in the Horn of Africa, a Sudanese women’s rights organisation, documented the rape of seven women at the city’s Industrial School.

In October 2024, Kaykal defected to the army. When army and allied forces recaptured Wad Madani in January 2025, CIR verified him in the city and in nearby Wad al-Mehidi, now commanding the Sudan Shield Forces, a pro-army group. The United Nations human rights office reported that Sudan Shield fighters abducted 13 women and a man from Tayba camp on 10 January 2025, and Human Rights Watch recorded witnesses identifying the attackers as Kaykal’s forces.

Kaykal’s story cuts against the idea that sexual violence in Sudan’s war belongs to one side: the investigation found evidence of abuse by the RSF, the army and allied forces alike.

Abuses in Gezira state

CIR also examined attacks in Gezira, the farming state south-east of Khartoum, on Kanabi communities — historically marginalised settlements of descendants of migrant farm workers — amid accusations that they supported the RSF.

Verified footage from Hantoub Bridge shows fighters beating and sexually degrading a detained man before pushing him off the bridge. CIR identified insignia in the footage associated with the army-allied Baraa Bin Malik Brigade, the General Intelligence Service and the Special Mission Forces.

The most senior army officer CIR placed in Wad Madani during its recapture was Major-General Abdelmoneim Abdelbasit Mohamed, commander of the Sennar axis, identified on 12 January 2025 — but his presence does not establish that he directed the filmed attack.

How the evidence was checked

Open-source investigation has become one of the most important tools for documenting wars that journalists and monitors cannot safely enter. Fighters post videos to celebrate victories and threaten enemies — and those same posts, collected and checked, become a record of where armed groups were and who was in charge.

CIR verified each sighting independently, using two analysts, and checked identities, locations and filming dates where possible. The organisation is funded by the British government, and its Sudan Witness project has been publishing evidence from the war for more than a year.

But the investigation is open about its limits. “Presence, rank and repeated appearances can guide further investigation; but they cannot alone establish criminal guilt,” the Al Jazeera report of the findings notes. A case based on command responsibility — the idea that a commander can be held responsible for crimes by forces under their control — would also need evidence that the commander had effective control, knew about the crimes, and failed to act to prevent them, stop them or report them.

Al Jazeera said it contacted the RSF and the Sudanese Armed Forces for a response to the findings, but received no response. Both forces have previously denied allegations of sexual violence by their personnel.

Britain’s sanctions — and what they do and do not mean

Four days before the Al Jazeera report, on 26 October, Britain imposed sanctions on 15 senior commanders from Sudan’s rival forces over suspected atrocities, including conflict-related sexual violence, during the fall of El Fasher. The measures impose travel bans and asset freezes.

Among them were Abu Jalak and Al-Nour Ahmed Adam, known as al-Qubba, whom the Foreign Office identified as prominent in besieging and attacking the city. The sanctions were timed to the first anniversary of El Fasher’s fall, and follow five earlier rounds of British sanctions linked to Sudan’s conflict.

The 15 names are a separate list from the 25 commanders in CIR’s investigation, and sanctions are not the same as criminal convictions. A designation is a government’s judgement that a person is suspected of involvement in serious wrongdoing. It freezes any assets they hold in Britain and bars them from travelling to the UK, but it does not require the standard of proof used in a court, and it does not by itself put anyone in prison.

Even so, the designations carry weight. By listing commanders from both the RSF and the army, Britain recorded a formal judgement that responsibility for the sexual violence at El Fasher does not rest with one side alone. The announcement was paired with money: £5 million for survivors, including healthcare and safe spaces for women and girls, and £10 million for the humanitarian response.

Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said those who carried out crimes against humanity “must be held accountable and support from all external backers to the warring parties must end”. He added: “A year on from the atrocities in El Fasher, UK-funded investigations have shown that rape and starvation are still being weaponised against the people of Sudan.”

What survivors still face

For survivors, the investigation is only a beginning. Stigma, insecurity and a lack of services still stand in the way of both treatment and testimony. Many survivors cannot reach specialist medical care, and many never report what happened to them at all.

Britain says its £5 million for survivors will fund healthcare, maternal health services, psychological support and safe spaces for women and girls. A further £10 million will support the wider humanitarian response, including clean water and sanitation in displacement sites around Tawila and health services in El Obeid.

The needs are growing. The Foreign Office warned that El Niño-driven drought threatens famine, and that whether famine takes hold is, in its words, in the hands of the RSF and the army — both must stop attacking aid convoys and let food reach communities.

El Fasher itself has been emptied by the violence: The Guardian reported that fewer than 70,000 people are believed to remain, compared with more than one million before the war. The fighting has increasingly become a drone war, with the RSF recently using coordinated drone attacks against power stations that caused mass electricity outages across eastern Sudan.

For the investigators, one point matters most. The fighters recorded themselves — their faces, their voices, their locations, their orders. That footage, preserved and checked, is now evidence. The record of what happened in El Fasher, in Wad Madani and in Gezira does not depend on memory alone. It is written in the perpetrators’ own images.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Centre for Information Resilience?

The Centre for Information Resilience, known as CIR, is a British open-source investigative organisation. Its Sudan Witness project collects and verifies video and photographs from Sudan’s war, checking them against evidence from the United Nations and human rights groups. Its work is funded by the British government.

Does being named in the investigation mean a commander committed rape?

No. The investigation identifies commanders who held authority in places and at times when sexual violence was reported. CIR says it has reasonable grounds to believe those named were directly or indirectly responsible, but it states clearly that the available data does not allow it to attribute individual responsibility for specific incidents. Presence and rank can guide further investigation, but they cannot alone establish criminal guilt.

What is the difference between the 25 commanders and the 15 under sanctions?

They are two separate lists. CIR’s investigation names 25 commanders whose presence and authority it verified at five locations where sexual violence was reported. Britain’s sanctions list names 15 senior commanders from both sides of the war who the government suspects of atrocities, including sexual violence, during the fall of El Fasher. Some names appear in both, such as Hussein Abu Jalak.

What do the UK sanctions actually do?

The sanctions freeze any assets the named commanders hold in Britain and bar them from travelling to the UK. They are a government measure based on suspicion of involvement in serious wrongdoing, not a criminal conviction, and they do not by themselves lead to imprisonment. They also record a formal public judgement and can support wider accountability efforts.

What happens next?

The evidence gathered by CIR can support further investigation by prosecutors, sanctions officials and human rights bodies. Britain has pledged £5 million for survivors of sexual violence and £10 million in humanitarian aid. For survivors, the most immediate needs are medical care, psychological support and safe conditions for testimony — all difficult to reach while the war continues.

Conclusion

The investigation into Sudan’s war does not end with a courtroom verdict. It ends with a record: 25 names, five places, and a chain of videos and photographs that place commanders where crimes were reported. That record is limited, and its authors say so plainly. But much of it comes from the fighters themselves.

A year after El Fasher fell, the war is still being fought, and the siege tactics — starvation, obstruction of aid, attacks on hospitals and power stations — are still being used elsewhere in Sudan. Sanctions and survivor funding are steps, not solutions. What the investigation offers is narrower and more durable: evidence that can outlast the war.

This article is for general information and education only. It is not legal or financial advice.

Sources

• https://www.byteseu.com/2485227/ (Al Jazeera, “Sudan investigation maps commanders linked to wartime rape”, 30 October 2026 — full text read via Bytes Europe mirror)
• https://reliefweb.int/report/sudan/uk-sanctions-senior-commanders-implicated-campaign-rape-sudan-and-unveils-new-support-survivors-enar (UK Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office, “UK sanctions senior commanders implicated in campaign of rape in Sudan and unveils new support for survivors”, 26 October 2026)
• https://worldrightnowlive.com/story/uk-sanctions-sudanese-military-leaders-implicated-in-el-fasher-campaig (The Guardian, “UK sanctions Sudanese military leaders implicated in El Fasher ‘campaign of rape'”, 26 October 2026 — read via World Right Now mirror)
• https://www.info-res.org/sudan-witness/press/ (Centre for Information Resilience, Sudan Witness press archive, listing the Al Jazeera investigation dated 30 October 2026)