World Court orders Myanmar to take urgent Protect Rohingya Muslims

World Court orders Myanmar to take urgent Protect Rohingya Muslims
Rohingya Muslims Issues: Daw Aung San Suu Kyi defended Myanmar last month at the ICJ at The Hague.Credit...Koen Van Weel/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
3 Min Read

The Daily US Times: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) on Thursday ordered Myanmar to take urgent measures to protect its Rohingya Muslims inhabitants from persecution and atrocities, and protect evidence of alleged crimes in opposition to them.

Largely Muslim Gambia launched a lawsuit in November on the United Nations’ highest body for disputes between states, accusing Myanmar of genocide in opposition to Rohingya Muslims in violation of a 1948 convention.

Thursday’s ruling dealt only with Gambia’s request for so-called preliminary measures, the equal of a restraining order for states. It gave no indication of the court’s final decision, which might take years to achieve.

In a unanimous ruling by a panel of 17 judges, the court mentioned Myanmar should now take all steps within its power to stop serious hurt to Rohingya Muslims and report again inside 4 months.

More than 730,000 Rohingya Muslims fled Myanmar after a military-led crackdown in 2017, and have been compelled into squalid camps throughout the border in Bangladesh. UN investigators concluded that the army campaign had been executed with “genocidal intent”.

Moments earlier than the court in The Hague started studying its ruling, the Monetary Times published an article by Myanmar’s civilian chief Aung San Suu Kyi through which she mentioned war crimes might have been dedicated in opposition to Rohingya Muslims however that refugees had exaggerated the abuses in opposition to them.

Throughout a week of hearings last month, Suu Kyi asked the judges to drop the case.

The World Court’s rulings are final and without attraction, however, it has no possible way of implementing them.

Greater than 100 Myanmar civil society teams published an announcement saying they hoped international justice efforts would “bring forth the reality” and end impunity.

“Political and army policies have at all times been imposed with violent force and intimidation upon the people of Myanmar, systematically and institutionally, on the basis of their political and spiritual beliefs and ethnic identities and proceed till the present,” the statement mentioned.

“We perceive very clearly that the ICJ case in opposition to Myanmar is directed towards those responsible for utilizing political power and army may, and not to the people of Myanmar.”


Though an order on provisional measures is binding, the ICJ has no means of implementing its judgements. Many are asking whether Myanmar will implement the choice, should provisional measures be ordered.

Brody says Suu Kyi’s presence within the court is related: “By sending Aung San Suu Kyi to The Hague, Myanmar purchased into these proceedings in an enormous method. It is going to be actually exhausting now for the government to disclaim the court’s legitimacy.”

In case of non-compliance, The Gambia can refer the case to the UN Security Council – which can then resolve whether it should use its powers to induce Myanmar to conform.

Myanmar would possibly incur accountability whether it is subsequently confirmed that it failed to comply with the order. Brody provides: “The more precise the court’s order is, the easier it will be to establish whether there have been any breaches.”

Rohingya Muslims Issues and International scrutiny

The gravity of the crimes of which Myanmar is accused provides to the urgency, and places the case below higher international scrutiny, says Mike Becker, adjunct lecturer at Trinity Faculty Dublin and a former legal officer on the ICJ. 

However, he cautions in opposition to overestimating the significance of the provisional order: “This can be a preliminary decision that’s without prejudice to the deserves of the case.”

To date, the ICJ has ruled on just one different genocide case. In 2007 the court dominated that there had been a genocide within the Srebrenica enclave of Bosnia and Herzegovina and that Serbia violated its responsibility to stop genocide. Becker describes the provisional measures ordered in that case as “ineffective”.

Becker also factors out the two conditions are considerably totally different, and that an ICJ ruling in opposition to Myanmar could also be more effective than it was in Bosnia.

As a matter of maximum urgency

Among the many provisional measures that The Gambia requested have been an order that “as a matter of maximum urgency”, Myanmar should instantly take all measures to stop all genocidal acts. 

Myanmar also needs to make sure that the army doesn’t commit any genocidal acts, and Myanmar shouldn’t destroy or render inaccessible any events related to the underlying application.