Khartoum Resumes Work Reluctantly on a Difficult Path

Sudan Events – Agencies

The Khartoum State Government Council issued a decision to resume work in the state by no later than Sunday, June 15, thereby officially ending the “open emergency leave due to the war.” On that day, several ministries within the Khartoum State Government resumed work, including the Ministry of Health and the Ministry of Social Development.

Employees in the Khartoum Locality also resumed their daily duties at the locality’s headquarters and other administrative units on the same day. During the first working day, Executive Director of the Khartoum Locality, Abdel Monem Al-Bashir, addressed the employees at the locality’s headquarters in Al-Amarat, thanking them for their “noteworthy presence” and their efforts to rebuild the locality so it could “return to its former state.” He urged them to do their utmost to restore workflow to what it was before April 15, 2023.

The resumption of work in the Khartoum State Government seems to be part of a broader effort to reestablish Khartoum as the administrative capital and political center. On June 13, Prime Minister Kamal Idris announced the beginning of the gradual return of ministries and government institutions to Khartoum. He subsequently ordered the reopening of police stations in Khartoum State starting June 16, and on the same day instructed that universities be restored to the state, with an assessment and repair of war-inflicted damages.

Ambiguous Forms

According to Taher Malik, an employee at the Ministry of Social Development – Khartoum State, staff members were surprised to be required to fill out two forms as a mandatory condition for returning to work. The first form (electronic) was a job return request in which employees provided basic information: name, specialization, job grade, and the department they were affiliated with before the war broke out. The second – a paper form without the Ministry’s letterhead, a copy of which Atar obtained – contained security-oriented questions about the war period, the employee’s displacement location, and their alternative workplace during the conflict. Taher believes the underlying implication of this form is that some employees might have joined or cooperated with the Rapid Support Forces (RSF).

He objects to the question about displacement location, arguing that it stigmatizes employees who fled to their original hometowns, especially if those areas fall under RSF control, potentially branding them as traitors and hindering their return to work. He adds that some employees submitted applications and filled out the forms but have yet to be contacted by the Ministry, while others who applied from safer areas resumed work immediately.

Rashida Hafiz, also an employee at the Ministry of Social Development – Khartoum State, sees political motives behind the forms. She claims an employee’s stance on the war could determine their career trajectory, citing examples of regular employees receiving high-level promotions simply for bearing arms or appearing in photos with weapons.

A Struggling Return and Jobs Under Threat

Rashida further states that the decision to resume government work in the state left many employees feeling discarded, as it did not consider the situation of displaced workers, who would suffer its consequences due to their inability to return quickly, with many having had their homes looted or destroyed.

Speaking to Atar, Yasser Al-Taher, a Grade 8 civil servant, says he remains displaced and is not considering returning to work at this time, citing the collapse of living conditions in Khartoum and the complete looting of his home in Al-Lamab. “I haven’t received my full salary since the war began. I only received 60,000 Sudanese pounds in my account during the conflict. My supervisors haven’t mentioned any plan to pay our back wages or how we might return to work, even though they’re fully aware of our dire living conditions,” Yasser explains.

He adds, “I’ve heard threats of dismissing those who don’t return to work within the 45-day period allowed by law. There are also threats of prosecuting those accused of collaborating with the RSF. I don’t know how such cooperation would be determined, but it seems the governor wants to get rid of specific employees.”

Yasser hopes he won’t lose his job and that his institution will help him return to his home and create the conditions necessary to work normally, without having to fill out forms that incriminate or marginalize some employees: “I requested a 60-day leave, based on my legal entitlement to annual leave for 2024 and 2025, but I received no response. Many colleagues are in the same situation. If my request for two years is approved, I plan to request leave for 2026 when it’s due.”

Returning to Taher Malik, he says the General Director of his Ministry issued a letter easing the process of granting annual leave or transferring to the state where the employee was displaced, without acknowledging the circumstances that might prevent someone from returning to work or addressing their problems. Employees saw the letter as a veiled termination notice. “This procedure included everyone,” Malik says. “Many of us are facing very harsh living conditions. We suffered from the war like everyone else; our homes were looted or destroyed. Our salaries don’t cover the cost of living or even transportation to work. We have 14 months’ worth of unpaid back wages. Despite all this, we’re eager to return to work. We don’t want to go on unpaid leave, small as our salaries are.”

Legal Complications

Civil service legal advisor Abboud Ibrahim considers the return-to-work decision invalid, arguing that labor laws require a safe environment, occupational safety, and the payment of salaries. He adds that the decision is subject to appeal because people are currently living under “force majeure,” which suspends all contracts and undermines employee rights and access to workplaces. Speaking to Atar, Abboud believes the decision is political and challengeable, but the absence of union representation and the lack of explicit legal references to workers’ rights during wars and disasters make such challenges difficult.

Meanwhile, legal advisor Hafiz Osman believes employees have no right to demand that pre-war conditions in Khartoum be restored before returning to work. “No doubt the employee has the right to a safe environment, but they cannot demand the restoration of all services if they themselves are required to help bring these services back,” he says. Speaking to Atar, Hafiz adds: “As a general rule, the employer must provide conditions that allow the employee to perform their duties. But this is relative, given the country’s general state. Ensuring appropriate working conditions is a matter of fact that must be proven. Life in the capital will not return to normal unless state employees return to their jobs.”

In protest of the decision to resume government work in Khartoum State, the Sudanese Teachers Committee described it as a violation of labor laws, which require a safe environment, occupational safety, and consistent salary payments. It also stated that the decision contradicts International Labour Organization conventions. The committee emphasized that employees did not stop working by choice, but were forced to do so due to the outbreak of war on April 15, 2023, which scattered them as displaced persons, refugees, and the homeless. The committee accused the state of exacerbating teachers’ suffering by withholding salaries for over a year. It added that the decision failed to account for job security, health conditions, the scarcity of basic services in parts of the state, and the lack of security and widespread weapons.