What’s Behind the Dismissal of Tribal Chiefs and Native Administration Leaders in Western Sudan?

Governors in Sudan’s western regions of Kordofan and Darfur have increasingly dismissed tribal chiefs, accusing them of siding with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) and mobilizing fighters against the army. Observers fear that the Native Administration Organization Law is being politically weaponized to remove tribal leaders, potentially fueling social polarization and ethnic division.

The Native Administration system in Sudan predates the modern state. It evolved from ancient kingdoms and sultanates, aiming to resolve disputes and promote peaceful coexistence based on traditional customs.

Native Administration refers to the governance of tribal areas by tribal chiefs under the supervision and oversight of the central authority. Governors are authorized under the Native Administration Organization Law to recognize tribal leaders, who typically ascend through inherited traditions, and to dismiss them for legal violations in consultation with the Federal Governance Ministry.

Tribal chiefs have been granted administrative, judicial, and financial powers, including presiding over customary courts, assisting in tax collection, and levying fees on property, livestock, and religious alms (zakat). The government also provides them with armed guards.

Mass Dismissals

On Thursday, the Acting Governor of North Darfur, Al-Hafez Bakhit Mohamed, dismissed 11 local chiefs (known as omdas) for violating the Native Administration Law.

According to a report by Sudan’s official news agency, the dismissed omdas were found guilty of “mobilizing and recruiting their tribal members to join the RSF militia, inciting attacks on state institutions, systematic killing, looting, and harboring mercenaries.” Criminal charges were filed against them.

Earlier, Bakhit had already dismissed several deputy tribal leaders and omdas for allegedly supporting RSF forces in the state.

On the previous Tuesday, Abdel Khaleq Abdel Latif Wadaa Allah, Governor of North Kordofan, dismissed 10 omdas in Sheikan, Umm Rawaba, and Rahad localities for cooperating with RSF forces before the army regained control of the latter two areas.

In what observers called a “mass purge,” Acting Governor of South Darfur, Bashir Mursal, dismissed 71 omdas, including 7 top tribal chiefs (nazirs) and other Native Administration figures. This followed a joint statement by the nazir leaders urging their tribe members to defect from the army and join the RSF. The state filed criminal charges in Port Sudan against the dismissed leaders, which could result in the death penalty or life imprisonment if convicted.

The governor accused them of participating in killings, looting civilians’ property, and leading thousands of their tribal members to die by urging them to fight for the RSF. Similarly, West Darfur Governor Bahreldin Adam Karama dismissed 37 Native Administration leaders on the same charges.

In March, West Kordofan Governor Mohamed Adam Jaid dismissed three tribal chiefs and their deputies, along with dozens of Native Administration figures, for collaborating with the RSF and violating the administration law.

Administrative Decisions

Commenting on the widespread dismissals, legal expert Ahmed Musa told Al Jazeera Net that “the current national crisis has blurred the line between what is necessary and what is possible, prompting authorities to issue decisions for the sake of security that may require judicial backing.”

Musa, who previously served as a legal adviser to the Beja leadership in eastern Sudan, noted that Native Administration falls under the federal authority of the Ministry of Federal Governance, as tribal affiliations often cross state borders, making local governors unsuitable as sole authorities.

He emphasized that removing a tribal chief should be based on a final court ruling after exhausting all appeals, and said the recent dismissals by some governors are administrative and can be legally challenged.

Social researcher Suleiman Awadallah stated that Native Administration has experienced various transformations since Sudan’s independence in 1956. Tribal leaders once held significant power and contributed to local security and stability.

He added that successive political regimes have relied on tribal chiefs to solidify their rule, often rewarding cooperation with increased powers and perks, or diminishing their influence when they failed to comply—as happened under former President Ibrahim Abboud, who passed a law to dismantle the Native Administration’s leadership and redistribute its authority to central institutions.

Political Instrumentalization

According to Awadallah, the regime of the late President Jaafar Nimeiri abolished Native Administration and stripped tribal leaders of land authority, replacing it with a popular governance law.

Nimeiri viewed Native Administration as a colonial relic and an outdated governance model. Yet in the final years of his rule, he attempted to restore it, a move later echoed by the elected government that followed him.

That government proposed reviving the Native Administration, which had lost much of its political and administrative clout. However, it was overthrown by President Omar al-Bashir’s coup in 1989 before it could implement the reforms.

Political analyst Faisal Abdul Karim believes that the Islamists under al-Bashir used Native Administration to advance their political agenda, rally public support, and recruit fighters during the civil war in southern Sudan.

He told Al Jazeera Net that the military council, led by Abdel Fattah al-Burhan after al-Bashir’s ouster, continued this politicization by mobilizing Native Administration support to build a political base against the Forces of Freedom and Change during negotiations for Sudan’s new political transition.

According to Abdul Karim, the alliance between tribal leaders in Kordofan and Darfur and the RSF predates the current war. RSF commander Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo (Hemedti) courted tribal leaders by establishing a tribal affairs unit, sponsoring peace efforts, gifting luxury cars, organizing conferences in Khartoum, recruiting their sons into the RSF, and even sending them to fight in Yemen—providing financial rewards that transformed their lifestyles.

Source: Al Jazeera