The Face of Truth | Dr. Ibrahim Shaqlawi Sudan: From the Bread Crisis to the Crisis of Arrest
It seems that crises in Sudan do not leave the scene so much as exchange places. When life becomes increasingly difficult for people, the cost of living rises, and the government’s ability to provide convincing answers to questions of the economy and livelihoods declines, unexpected political events emerge, capture public attention, and reorder priorities.
This brings to the fore a question in search of an answer: Is the government employing a tactic of addressing the economic crisis through a political crisis behind the scenes, or is what is happening merely a coincidence of crises that the state is no longer capable of containing and addressing?
The arrest of Ahmed Haroun, chairman of the National Congress Party, came following his media appearance on Sudan Podcast, bringing him back to the forefront of the scene after a long absence. Haroun spoke about his experience with detention following the fall of the Bashir government, indicating that he had spent approximately four years without being formally charged or appearing before a judge. This account carries particular significance given his background as a former judge, familiar with the nature of legal procedures and the guarantees of due process.
However, the recent arrest is not limited to Haroun’s personality or political experience; it extends to the timing and context of the arrest. It came one day after his media appearance, at a moment when the country needs to reduce tensions and polarization, rebuild trust among political parties, and turn its attention to addressing the economic and living conditions that have become citizens’ daily concern.
Could political tension suddenly become a means of redirecting public attention from the issues of bread, prices, and services towards power struggles, arrests, and political memory? Is this intended to divert attention? When efforts to address the economic crisis falter, the political scene, with all its tensions and provocations, becomes capable of diverting attention in another direction. In my view, this hypothesis deserves discussion, because this is precisely what has happened. However, shifting public attention does not mean solving the problem, just as engaging society in a political battle does not ease the burdens of living.
This leads us to an important observation when we consider the arrest alongside efforts to create a conducive environment for Sudanese-Sudanese dialogue. President Abdel Fattah al-Burhan announced his readiness to provide political, legal, and security guarantees for participants in the dialogue, and issued a decision to that effect. It included the dismissal of cases related to political opinion, the granting of temporary procedural immunity to participants, and protection for the views expressed during the dialogue. This step is intended to encourage participation and provide an environment that helps Sudanese people seek a national way out of the current predicament.
Between these guarantees and this tense atmosphere, a paradox emerges that deserves examination. Creating a conducive environment for dialogue does not mean suspending justice or granting immunity from accountability, just as enforcing the law should not become a practice that raises doubts about the consistency of legal procedures. What is required is a distinction between criminal responsibility, which is determined by the judiciary, and political differences, which should be accommodated within the space for dialogue. A state that calls for consensus is required to make the law a common reference for everyone, rather than leaving political practice open to different interpretations.
Between the guarantees of dialogue and Haroun’s arrest, the need to distinguish between legal accountability and political differences becomes evident, while safeguarding freedoms. Dialogue does not require suspending justice, nor should law enforcement undermine rights. Responsibility must remain subject to the judiciary, while dialogue must accommodate those with differing views without prior condemnation or the imposition of external calculations or pressures.
In my view, the most serious consequence of this discrepancy could be the erosion of confidence in the dialogue before its anticipated stages even begin. Political forces being called upon to participate need credible guarantees, while citizens exhausted by war are not waiting for renewed disputes as much as they are waiting for a state capable of recovering its ability to manage the economy, education, and security, and to secure people’s livelihoods.
It cannot be conclusively established that Haroun’s arrest was intended to divert attention from the economic crisis. However, according to experts, its coincidence with that crisis reshuffles public priorities, allowing political disputes to take precedence over the priorities of economic recovery.
Addressing the economic crisis does not come through creating a new political crisis or recycling old conflicts. Rather, it requires confronting the causes of the imbalance, restoring production, regulating markets, improving services, and opening the space for national consensus that excludes no one from their rights and exempts no one from responsibility.
Sudan does not need its citizens to choose between the question of bread and the question of arrest, for both are part of the broader question of the state and its ability to achieve justice and security. From the perspective of #TheFaceOfTruth, a crisis whose headlines change without its roots being addressed remains one and the same crisis, regardless of how many fronts it assumes. It is unwise for the state to move from managing the crisis of livelihoods to managing political disputes, while citizens continue to wait for an answer to the question of how to secure their most basic needs.
Wishing you continued well-being.
Tuesday, 9 November 2026
Shglawi55@gmail.com