Court Testimony – Masarat – ✍️ Mahfouz Abdeen
It was stated in Al-Asafir that a court in Shendi requested a certificate of evidence in one of the cases before the court, and these are certainly many cases, regardless of the nature of the case, in which the court requested a certificate of evidence, whether it is a case related to public rights or private rights, the court considers it important, otherwise it does not require it, and the news from the ambassadors who covered the news is that Al-Burhan will testify in court. court, and because thousands of people testify daily in courts and in hundreds of courts spread throughout Sudan.
According to the Asafir, the news is not the subject of the case, the testimony, but rather the news, in their case, is the subject of the testimony and constitutes the evidence.
But the news is that the court, during his trial, saw the need for the testimony of the evidence, and the evidence is, as everyone knows, that he is the head of the Transitional Sovereignty Council and the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, that is, the first man of the state, the army and the government, and he enjoys the immunities that he has, whether the lieutenant is in the police or in the armed forces or the judge himself, if he is at the lowest level, has an immunity that implies any action that requires certain steps specified by this immunity until this action is completed. So what about a person who has all these qualities at the same time?
However, the judge in this case did not hesitate to request the testimony of the chairman of the Sovereignty Council, the commander-in-chief of the armed forces and the supreme commander of all regular forces in Sudan.
This means the independence of the judiciary in Sudan and no interference by any party in it, and the judge who requested the testimony considers that this testimony is important in the course of the case or that it is really important for justice to be done.
Al-Burhan fully believes in the independence of the judiciary and should not interfere in its decisions except through the well-known right to appeal to the Supreme Court until the appeal reaches the Constitutional Court.
Many parties, journalists and others have publicly or implicitly indicated that Burhan should intervene in the case of the Inqaz putschists and those accused of them, President Omar al-Bashir and a number of senior officers of the armed forces who were involved in the coup, as well as a number of civilians, including senior officials of the Inqaz regime.
Al-Burhan did not intervene because he knows very well that the defendants are under the custody and care of the judicial authority until the decisions are issued, and that it is the court that authorizes the treatment, travel for treatment and transfer of the defendants from one place to another, knows their health condition and is the one that evaluates them after listening to the competent authorities in this matter.
It is therefore not strange that the court requests the testimony of the Chairman of the Transitional Sovereignty Council, the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces and the Supreme Commander of the Regular Forces in Sudan. In such conditions of security, war. rages in Sudan, and the Commander-in-Chief has the honor of defending the land, the people, the sovereignty and the identity of Sudan, and at a time when the Commander-in-Chief travels everywhere, he is the axis of the fighting. fronts in Sudan and works with all diligence and diligence to provide equipment and materials to thwart the aggression. At that time, a court comes to request his testimony in a case, regardless of its legal qualification. This testimony is requested at that precise moment. in order to obtain justice, according to the vision of the court.
