Uppsala researcher testified about war crimes in Sudan

The trial against Lundin Oil is Sweden’s most extensive trial ever. Two directors of the Swedish oil company Lundin Oil are accused of facilitating war crimes in Sudan between 1999 and 2003. As one of Sweden’s foremost experts on Sudan, Johan Brosché has participated in the trial as a witness.

A preliminary investigation was started by the Swedish Police’s War Crimes Unit back in 2011. Brosché was one of the first witnesses to be asked whether there was a war in Sudan.

“They wanted to know whether there was a conflict, what kind of conflict it was and what was happening in Sudan. I became involved because I am a peace and conflict researcher and have been researching Sudan for the last 20 years.”

Questions about war crimes

The questions he was asked during the trial centred on the tactics of the Sudanese regime and the war crimes committed during the war.

“My knowledge of the Sudanese government is important because they have carried out many massacres and abuses for a long time, both before and after this period. The questioning concerned the Sudanese government, its war tactics and how oil extraction affected the war,” Brosché reports.

As a teacher, he found it interesting to follow the discussions on source criticism during the trial, such as whether reports from Human Rights Watch can be trusted.

“This is one of the most trusted organisations in peace and conflict research,” he notes.

Unusual unanimity among sources

It is particularly difficult to assess which sources can be trusted in war, but the peace and conflict researchers at Uppsala University know what they are doing. Moreover, there are many sources, in the form of articles and books, that describe what happened in Sudan between 1999 and 2003.

“I have a bookcase full of Sudan books and the picture they describe is very consistent, so I didn’t think my testimony would be relevant in court. I thought the trial would be more about what the company knew and did, and of course I know nothing about that,” says Brosché.

However, because the defendants had chosen to deny not only complicity in war crimes but even that a war crime had taken place at all, his testimony became important. He was questioned for a whole day, an intense experience that took a while to recover from.

“It was extremely stressful and tough because it’s such an unfamiliar situation. Especially being questioned by someone who tries to discredit you and elicit things.”

One of the defence’s tactics was to make it appear that Brosché himself had taken a stance in the case.

“I am not a lawyer, so I have never taken a stance on the legal issue, I’ve only answered questions about the war. There is no doubt whatsoever that there was a brutal war going on at the time in this area. The research is unequivocal on this.”

Was asked a total of 90 questions

He was questioned first by the prosecutor and the counsels for the South Sudanese, then by the two defendants’ lawyers. During the questioning, he was asked a total of 90 questions about the conflict and various events, some of them very detailed.

Even though it was a stressful situation, it felt good to contribute to the work of the court.

“This is a concrete example of why peace and conflict research is so important. Now it just happened to be Sudan, where I have done a lot of fieldwork, but we have experts in many countries as a department and even more as a research field. Another time, it could be a completely different conflict,” says Brosché.

It also felt good to spread awareness about the war in Sudan, which is still going on but is not so well known in the West.

“The war in Sudan is the largest ongoing humanitarian disaster. There is widespread starvation, there is ethnic cleansing and a huge number of people are dying in the war. At the same time, it is sadly a very under-reported conflict.”

Helping to raise awareness

He hopes that the trial may help to raise awareness, as international media such as the Guardian, Financial Times, BBC and Le Monde have reported on the trial. It is one of the first times since the Nuremberg trials that company executives have been charged with complicity in war crimes.

“There is international interest. Oil and other commodity companies extracting raw materials in conflict zones are also aware of this case. Hopefully, this will make them think twice and include this in their risk analysis. I think that’s one of the most important aspects of the trial itself,” Brosché concludes.

Annica Hulth