by Hafizur Rahman
The Rohingya crisis in Myanmar is currently under examination at the International Court of Justice, the highest judicial body of the United Nations. The case was brought by The Gambia, which has accused Myanmar of violating the 1948 Genocide Convention through its treatment of the Rohingya population.
Myanmar is a member of the United Nations and a signatory to the Genocide Convention. For decades, the country has experienced armed conflict involving the state, the Myanmar military junta, and various ethnic groups. Rakhine State, where most Rohingya historically lived, has been marked by repeated violence, displacement, and military operations.
The Rohingya, a Muslim ethnic minority, were effectively stripped of citizenship under Myanmar’s 1982 Citizenship Law. This law left them without legal recognition and exposed them to long term restrictions on movement, access to services, and basic rights.
Events Leading to the Case
In 2016 and 2017, attacks were carried out on Myanmar security posts by an armed group. Following these incidents, the Myanmar military launched large scale security operations in northern Rakhine State. During these operations, hundreds of thousands of Rohingya fled across the border into Bangladesh, where many remain in refugee camps in Cox’s Bazar.
The situation drew widespread international attention. United Nations investigations documented killings, sexual violence, village burnings, and mass displacement of Rohingya civilians. Several UN bodies stated that these acts could amount to serious violations of international law, including genocide.
Myanmar rejected these findings, arguing that its military operations were responses to security threats and that any wrongdoing should be addressed through domestic legal processes.
Filing of the Case
On November 11, 2019, The Gambia filed a case against Myanmar at the ICJ. It argued that all states party to the Genocide Convention have an obligation to prevent genocide, even if they are not directly affected by the alleged crimes.
In January 2020, the Court ordered provisional measures requiring Myanmar to take steps to prevent acts that could fall under the Genocide Convention and to preserve evidence. These measures remain legally binding.
Myanmar later challenged the Court’s jurisdiction, but in February 2022, the ICJ rejected those objections and ruled that the case could proceed.
What the Court Is Examining
The ICJ is now assessing whether Myanmar violated its obligations under the Genocide Convention. To make a finding of genocide, the Court must determine that serious prohibited acts occurred and that they were committed with the intent to destroy a protected group, in whole or in part.
The ICJ does not determine individual criminal responsibility. Its role is limited to deciding whether a state has breached international law.
Myanmar continues to deny committing genocide. It maintains that its military actions were aimed at restoring security and were not intended to destroy the Rohingya population. The state also argues that displacement and civilian suffering during military operations do not, by themselves, prove genocidal intent.
Significance of the Case
The ICJ’s final judgment will be legally binding on Myanmar, although the Court has no direct enforcement power. Implementation depends on state compliance and international pressure.
For Rohingya communities, the case represents the most advanced international legal effort to examine state responsibility for the crimes they have endured. The outcome may shape future approaches to accountability, prevention of mass atrocities, and the role of international law in responding to large scale human rights violations.
Recent Comments