On 23 January 2020, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in the Hague ordered Myanmar authorities to protect the Rohingya population from genocide.
The Muslim Rohingya are an ethnic minority, primarily residing in northern Myanmar’s Rakhine state. Since August 2017, the Rohingya minority have been victims of episodes of violence – including mass rapes, torture, and destruction of villages - perpetrated by the Myanmar military. As a result, more than 700,000 Rohingya have been forced to leave Myanmar and flee to neighboring Bangladesh over the last three years.
BACKGROUND AND RECENT DEVELOPMENT OF THE MYANMAR’S CASE AT THE ICJ
In November 2019, on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), The Gambia brought the Rohingya’s case to the attention of the ICJ, demanding immediate action by the Court to end the Rohingya minority’s suffering.
Alongside The Gambia’s petition, the Court also examined the many reports that the UN Special Rapporteur on Myanmar regularly submitted to theHuman Rights Council in Geneva concerning the development of the Rohingya minority’s situation since her appointment by the UN in 2014.
The ICJ judicial authorities have rejected Myanmar’s de facto leader Aung San Suu Kyi’s arguments and issued binding orders for the country, despite her attempts to defend her country before the Court last December. The ICJ panel of 17 judges agreed to order Myanmar’s government to implement measures aimed at preventing the Rohingya minority’s genocide. Hence, according to the ICJ’s ruling, the Myanmar government:
- should avoid a repeat of the Rohingya minority’s genocide, by any means necessary.
- should stop Myanmar’s armed forces’ reprisals against the Rohingya communities (almost 600,000 members) still residing in the country.
- should prevent the loss of evidence regarding past episodes of human rights abuses perpetrated by Myanmar militaries against the Rohingya.
- should document and report to the Court on the actual implementation of the above-mentioned ordered measures, every six months “until a final decision on the case is rendered by the Court”.
REACTIONS TO THE ICJ’S RULING ON THE ROHINGYA PEOPLE’S SITUATION
Whilst the sentence is binding on Myanmar under the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide of 1948, it does not represent the Court’s final verdict. However, the ICJ’s taking a strong stance against Myanmar armed forces does open a window to the Rohingya minority’s demand for justice. The Gambia’s minister of justice Abubacarr Tambadou, interviewed by BBC’s Focus on Africa program, said “I think that this represents a triumph of international law and international justice. […] genocide will not be accepted under any circumstances by any perpetrators”.
The Rohingya population has displayed great enthusiasm for the Court’s provisional judgement, reading it as if it were the international authorities’ long-awaited acknowledgement of their tragic situation. The President of the Burmese Rohingya Organization UK said “The ruling by the ICJ is a crucial moment for Rohingya justice, and vindication for those of us who have lived through this genocide for decades”.
On the other hand, the Myanmar government has firmly protested the Court’s ruling, which Myanmar’s minister of foreign affairs blamed of presenting nothing but a “distorted picture of the situation”. Myanmar’s politicians and political analysts continue to deny the ICJ’s allegation of the Rohingya minority’s genocide, saying that “The court ordered Myanmar to prevent genocide but there’s no need to make that order […]. […] the decision is made to defame (our) country”.
Andrea has recently completed the ‘M.A.S. in Transitional Justice, Human Rights and the Rule of Law’ from Geneva Academy of International Humanitarian Law and Human Rights, a MA of Global Affairs & Policy (PIC)’ from Yonsei University, South Korea, and a BA of Korean Language, Culture and Society from Ca’ Foscari University, Italy. She has worked at Seoul based NGO 'Human Asia' as a human rights intern. She is passionate about social justice, public health, human rights and the rule of law.