September 1983 Laws

In September 1983, Sudanese president Gaafar Nimeiry introduced Islamic sharia laws in Sudan, known as September Laws (قوانين سبتمبر), disposing of alcohol and implementing hudud punishments such as public flogging for alcohol consumption and amputations for theft. Nimeiry declared himself the imam of the "Sudanese umma", leading to concerns about the undemocratic implementation of these laws. Hassan al-Turabi (then the attorney general) assisted with drafting the law and later supported the laws, unlike, the leader of the opposition, Sadiq al-Mahdi's dissenting view.

Nimeiry's alliance with the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood aimed to end sectarian divisions and consolidate Islamic governance. Despite Nimeiry's assertion that the Sharia laws reduced crime rates, his economic policies, including Islamic banking, led to severe economic issues in Sudan, including high inflation and substantial external debt. This led to his removal in 1985, and the law was frozen during the transition to democracy between 1985 and 1989.

Ultimately, Nimeiry's Islamic policies contributed to Second Sudanese Civil War in southern Sudan in 1983, ending the Addis Ababa Agreement of 1972, which had granted Southern Sudan regional autonomy and recognised the diversity of the Sudanese society. This shift towards Islamic governance played a crucial role in Sudan's political landscape with multiple parties including the National Islamic Front advocating for Islamic laws during the Omar al-Bashir era between 1989 and 2019.

Background
As part of the terms for national reconciliation between Sudanese President Gaafar Nimeiry and Sadiq al-Mahdi, the leader of the National Front, a requirement was the reassessment of Sudanese legislation and a review of the 1972 Addis Ababa Agreement, which had authorised self-governance for the southern region.

By 1977, a committee was working to align Sudanese law with the sharia, and the Muslim Brotherhood, headed by Hassan al-Turabi, was gaining influence in university student political groups. The al-Turabi committee concluded that only 10% of the laws adhered to the Sharia. While legislative attempts to Islamise the law through the People's Assembly were met with resistance. In 1979, a longstanding dispute between the Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood and the main Muslim Brotherhood organisation re-emerged. At that time, al-Turabi, serving as the attorney general, refused to pledge loyalty to the International Muslim Brotherhood, resulting in a division. Sheikh Sadiq al-Mahdi and his supporters sided with al-Turabi, causing a split within the organisation. Although had assumed leadership of the Sudanese Brotherhood in 1969, it remained a smaller faction with restricted influence. Al-Turabi labeled his faction the "Sudanese Islamic Movement."

During the period between 1977 and 1985, Nimeiry's efforts to implement an "Islamic approach" in Sudan, which involved aligning with religious groups and aimed to end sectarian divisions especially the al-Mirghani and al-Mahdi rivalry and consolidate Islamic governance. His transition from nationalist leftist ideologies to a stricter Islamic stance was documented in his books "The Islamic approach, why? and "The Islamic approach, how?" The link between the revival of Islam and his efforts to reconcile with opponents of the 1976 coup attempt coincided with the emergence of militant Islam in other global regions. Nimeiry's association with the Abu Qurun Sufi order also played a role in his turn towards Islam, leading him to assign followers of this order to significant positions.

The law and its implications
The commencement of the legislation for the "Islamic path" initiated in 1983, resulting in the introduction of several directives and laws to enforce sharia law and other fundamental Islamic doctrines.

In September 1983, President Gaafar Nimeiry introduced sharia law in Sudan, known as the September Laws. He was assisted in drafting the laws by a group of Islamists including al-Nile Abu Qarun, Awad al-Jaid, and Badriya Suleiman, who were students of al-Turabi. The laws led to disposing of alcohol and implementing hudud punishments, like public amputations for theft and floggings for drinking alcohol.

According to Human Right Watch report from 1994 about Sudan: "Hudud offenses are specific crimes for which the Koran provides specific punishments. They include theft, highway robbery, fornication, drinking alcohol, unproven accusation of fornication, and apostasy. For instance, highway robbery must be punished by amputation or death by crucifixion."

Hassan al-Turabi backed this decision, in contrast to Sadiq al-Mahdi's opposing stance. al-Turabi, along with supporters within the government, also objected to autonomy in the southern region, a non-religious constitution, and the adoption of non-Islamic cultural practices. The Islamic economy was introduced in early 1984, removing interest and implementing zakat. Nimeiry proclaimed himself the leader (imam) of the "Sudanese Umma" in 1984.

Opposition to Nimeiry's Islamisation came from various quarters. Southerners, northern seculars and religious voices, and the judiciary, voiced concerns about the undemocratic implementation and lack of consultation. Sadiq al-Mahdi, leader of the Umma Party, was initially jailed for his opposition.

Nimeiry ordered all alcoholic beverages in Khartoum spectacularly dumped into the Blue Nile. Until this prohibition, the trade in such goods as well as ownership of nightclubs and bars had traditionally been dominated by Greek merchants, who controlled around 80% of the market. Since then, the purveying, consumption, and purchasing of alcohol has been banned in Sudan. Being lashed 40 times is the penalty for breaking the prohibition on alcohol.

Nimeiry was allied with the Muslim Brotherhood led by al-Turabi and allowed the group to work freely which they used to empower itself and take control. They publicly supported the introduction of laws in September 1983 through large marches and offered significant political support using their networks and influential members such as judges Muhammad Mahjoub Haj Nour and Al-Makashfi Taha Al-Kabashi. In 1984, Nimeiry articulated his vision of establishing an Islamic state in Sudan at an Islamic conference. He initiated proposals to extensively amend Sudan's 1973 Constitution to declare the country an "Islamic republic." These amendments aimed to designate the president as "a leader of the believers and the head and imam of the state" and assert Sharia as the primary source of law, excluding non-Muslims from certain aspects of public life. Nimeiry's affiliation with the Abu Qurun Sufi order influenced his belief in being the sole authority to interpret laws based on Sharia principles.

Nimeiry defended the adoption of Sharia law by citing an increase in crime rates. He asserted that the implementation of the Sharia led to a significant decline in crime, reporting a reduction of more than 40% within a year, attributing it to the imposition of new penalties. However Historian Gabriel Warburg asserted that examining the validity of Nimeiry's assertion regarding the decrease in crime rates in Sudan in 1985 is challenging as there appears to be a lack of independent statistical evidence that can either disprove or support this claim. Nimeiry credited Sudan's economic prosperity to the zakat and taxation law, emphasising its advantages for both the impoverished and non-Muslims. Nevertheless, his economic strategies, which encompassed Islamic banking, resulted in severe financial problems that worsened Sudan's economic condition, with inflation escalating to 41% and an external debt of nine billion dollars.

Amputation
The period from 1983 to 1985 brought severe drought and desertification in Sudan, which had a significant impact on agricultural productivity and food availability in the region, that lead to a famine declared on 29 November 1984 by the United States Agency for International Development. However, the implantation of the September Laws and hudud punishment was not hindered by the famine.

300 Sudanese individuals underwent limb amputations as a penalty for stealing property valued at more than $40 USD. These amputees faced continuous social stigma, struggled to secure employment due to the perception of their severed limbs as symbols of criminality, and often endured wrongful arrests. The amputation procedures, performed publicly by untrained individuals, exacerbated their suffering, leading to significant social and familial consequences, including shame within their families and enduring public humiliation. Muslims and Christians faced sharia punishment including 8 who were hanged.

To cope with the physical and emotional pain, some amputees resorted to crime or addiction. However, they rallied together to form a self-help association, aiming to establish small businesses and obtain medical and legal assistance. They sought recognition as a charity but faced opposition from the government, citing concerns that it might be used as a front for criminals and disrupt the Sudan's form of Islamic justice.

According to Sudanese historian al-Mahbob Abdul Salam, al-Turabi fainted while observing the application of the hudud punishment of amputation at Kober prison. In 1985, al-Turabi quoted saying that "ultimately you cannot do away with amputations because it's there in the book [Quran]."

Execution of Mahmoud Muhammad Taha
The Republican Brotherhood, established by Mahmoud Mohammed Taha, represented another Islamic movement in Sudan. This movement endorsed the idea of Islam having two messages and discarded various Islamic traditions. It promoted peaceful relations with Israel, gender equality, criticised Wahhabism, advocated for freedoms, opposed the enforcement of Islamic penal codes, and supported a federal social democratic governance system. Taha vehemently opposed the prohibition of the Sudanese Communist Party, denouncing it as an undermining of democracy, despite not being affiliated with communism. He was convicted of apostasy in 1968 and faced a similar sentence again in 1984.

Taha was executed on 18 January 1985 under the September Laws. He was sentenced to death for the crime of apostasy and sedition. Taha's execution sparked international outrage and condemnation, with many human rights organisations and individuals decrying the violation of his right to freedom of thought and expression.

Southern Sudan
On 5 June 1983, Nimeiry sought to counter the south's growing political power by re-dividing the Southern Region into the three old provinces of Bahr al Ghazal, Al Istiwai, and Aali an Nil; he had suspended the Southern Regional Assembly almost two years earlier. The southern-based Sudanese People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) and its military wing, the Sudanese People's Liberation Army (SPLA), which emerged in mid-1983, unsuccessfully opposed this re-division and called for the creation of a new united Sudan.

Nimeiry's Islamic phase marked the end of the Addis Ababa Agreement of 1972, sparking renewed tensions in Southern Sudan in 1983. The initial agreement had provided regional autonomy and acknowledged Sudan's diverse societal makeup. It guaranteed equality irrespective of race or faith, permitting different personal laws for non-Muslims. However, conflicts heightened due to the discovery of oil, the dissolution of the Southern Regional Assembly, and attempts at decentralisation. In the south, the September Laws were bitterly resented both by secularised Muslims and by the predominantly non-Muslim southerners. The SPLM denounced the sharia and the executions and amputations ordered by religious courts. Meanwhile, the security situation in the south had deteriorated so much that by the end of 1983 it amounted to a resumption of the civil war.

Aftermath
Nimeiry's partnership with the Muslim Brotherhood and the Ansar was intended to unify religious factions and introduce sharia law. However, despite initially working together, the Ansar criticised Nimeiry's application of these laws as being both un-Islamic and corrupt. After Nimeiry's removal in 1985, Sudan's political landscape transformed, giving rise to multiple political parties. The National Islamic Front (NIF), Ansar, and Khatmiyya Sufi order (DUP) became significant players in Sudanese politics. Hassan al-Turabi and the NIF consistently advocated for Islamic laws and opposed alterations to the existing framework.

The law was frozen during Sudan’s transition for democracy after the 1985 coup d'état but was reinstated during the Omar al-Bashir era between 1989 and 2019, after the 1989 coup d'état.

Sharia remained a source of legislation in the 15 states of the North. The 1991 Sudanese Criminal Act, in accordance with sharia, authorised hudud punishments in the north. The consumption of alcohol was punishable by 40 lashes for a Muslim and 20 lashes for a Christian. Islamic family law applied to Muslims in Sudan, while certain Islamic law provisions discriminated against women, especially regarding inheritance, marriage and divorce. Women were instructed to dress modestly according to Islamic standards, including wearing a head covering which was enforced by the Public Order Police. In addition, converting from Islam to another religion was considered apostasy under sharia and was punishable by death in the North.

For example, in 2009 a group of women, excluding journalist Lubna al-Hussein, were lashed for wearing jeans. In 2022, a woman was due to be stoned for adultery before being jailed for 6 months. In 1991, 2013, 2015, 2021, and 2023, there were documented cases of men being sentenced to hand amputation for theft. In 2013, 3 men were sentenced to be amputation for stealing cooking oil in North Darfur under article 173 of the 1991 Sudanese Criminal code, but the sentence was later overturned. On 14 February 2013, a man's right hand and foot was amputated at al-Ribat Hospital after he was convicted with armed robbery, known as "Haraba" in article 168 of the 1991 Sudanese Criminal Act. Similar cross amputation sentence was made in 2021.

The national government did condone some discriminatory practices against Christians living in the North. Also, the government required, for example, that all students in the North study Islam in school even if they were not Muslim.

On 17 March 2000, Curtis Francis Doebbler, a lawyer and human rights advocate, filed a case against Sudan, known as Curtis Francis Doebbler v. Sudan, before the African Union Commission. Doebbler alleged that Sudan violated various provisions of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights by arbitrarily arresting, detaining, and torturing individuals, including himself, during his work as legal counsel. On 29 May 2003, the African Union Commission found that Sudan violated Article 5 of the African Charter and requested that the Sudanese government to amend the 1991 Criminal Code, abolish punishment by lashing, and compensate the survivors.