HUDO Centre    The first defendant; accused by articles 21. 51, 53, 57 & 64 in Criminal Act, article 8 & 23 in Organizing the Voluntary and Humanitarian Activity Act and article 30 in Passport and Immigration Law2. The first defendant lawyer rejected the accusations and considered his client innocent because what was presented was not support by evidence. The lawyer requested the court to judge accordingly and he declared that he will not present witnesses. The second and third defendants were accused under articles 21, 53, 64 & 66 in Criminal Act. The defendants’ lawyers denied the accusation and they declared to defend their argument by witnesses who shall appear before the court. The case of the fourth defendant was rejected and he was set free because the evidence did not approve the conviction. The judge adjourned the session to 9th Jan2017 where the defendant’s witnesses were to be presented. Summary of the twentieth court session On 9th January 2017, the twentieth court session started at 12:30 pm. The main activity was to hear the testimony of two defendants’ witnesses mainly brought by the lawyer of the 3rd defendant. The 1st defendant’s lawyer announced that he has no witness from his side, the lawyer of the 2nd and 4th defendants’ also decided not to present witnesses and after consulting their panel. The two witnesses that were presented are; Mohamed Abakar Ahmed, 25 years and Adam Musa Mohammed Bosch, 25 years. Both of them are student and classmates of the burned student Ali Musa. Both witnesses are from Darfur internally displaced people (IDPs). They delivered their testimonies and were cross examined by the court and different lawyers’ panels. Below is the highlight of their testimonies;      Both of them did not see the photos of burnt student on the internet. The burning of the student (Ali Musa) happened at Alazhari University after the social event concerning Darfur student. The burning was a result of an attack using a Molotov by the National Congress Party (NCP)3 students and the NCP students used to attack the Darfurian student in different universities. They accepted that before his arrest, the 3rd defendant was the person responsible for the treatment of the burnt student. They used to collect money for the treatment because they do not have any source of income since they are IDPs. Both approved that the religion of the burned student and the 3rd defendant is Islam. After examining the two defendants’ witnesses, the defendants’ panels closed their defense. Then the judge adjourned the court session to 23rd January 2017 of which he will deliver his judgment. 2 For more information about the mentioned articles, please visit notes the in eighth update. http://hudocentre.org/update-8-oncourt-trial-of-nisssudan-against-pastors-and-activist/ 3 The ruling party in Sudan. 3