The Center for Global Policy hosted a panel on February 25 to discuss the implications of the ICJ ruling regarding the situation of Rohingya Muslims in Myanmar. On the panel was Dr. Azeem Ibrahim, Chair of the Rohingya Legal Forum and Director of Displacement and Migration programs at the Center for Global Policy; Professor John Packer, Professor of Law and Director of the Human Rights Research and Education Center at the University of Ottawa; Ashley Kinseth, Executive Director of Stateless Dignity; Nadia Kourt, Program Manager at the Global Center for the Responsibility to Protect; and Tun Khin, President of the Burmese Rohingya Organization UK. Each panelist gave their thoughts on what the ICJ’s ruling meant for the Rohingya, and what outcomes can be expected in the future.
Dr. Azeem Ibrahim began the panel, and spoke about the ICJ’s ruling being groundbreaking. He reasoned this by saying that the decision was unanimous, and went above and beyond what was expected by many observers. He also said that it would have implications for other countries who are experiencing similar circumstances. Specifically, China was singled out for the abuse currently being directed toward the Uighur Muslim population in Xinjiang.
Following Dr. Ibrahim, Professor John Packer spoke about the implications of the ICJ ruling on international law itself. The case involving the Rohingya is the first ever brought as a public interest case, which means there is no injury suffered by the country who brought the case. The Gambia is litigating the case on behalf of the Rohingya, but the Rohingya are not present at the trial as plaintiffs. The case is also using the ICJ as an accountability mechanism, which isn’t the purpose of the court. Finally, Professor Packer warned that Gambia’s limited political power raises questions about how long the case can be sustained without a more powerful ally joining Gambia.
Ashley Kinseth spoke next, and analyzed factors within Myanmar’s domestic situation, and what obligation other states had in the aftermath of the ICJ ruling. She said that the Rohingya were stateless, and very few had been able to receive political asylum. She also said that the UN’s convention to prevent genocide could be invoked to protect the Rohingya, as Myanmar is a signatory of the treaty. Ms. Kinseth argued that more states should be willing to accept Rohingyas as refugees, as most Rohingyas that are able to escape Myanmar end up elsewhere in Southeast Asia or the Middle East as migrant laborers.
Nadia Kourt spoke of the impact of the ruling on the United Nations Security Council. So far, the UNSC has not made any statement or convened to discuss the situation, because China has threatened to veto any resolution. Members of ASEAN, the regional economic and cooperation body in Southeast Asia, are reticent to get involved in each other’s’ domestic politics, and China uses its presence on the UNSC to enforce the ASEAN strategy. Ms. Kourt pointed out that a potential solution to this would be for a UNSC delegation to travel to Myanmar to observe the situation on the ground. This idea has been supported by China in the past, and it is unlikely to veto any action that aims to do this. However, Nadia Kourt also argued that the UNSC should force a vote on action against Myanmar, in order to force China to be on the record defending the human rights abuses committed by the Burmese government.
Finally, Tun Khin spoke on the systematic oppression of Rohingyas through the repression of citizenship rights. Khin was the only Rohingya member on the panel and spoke about the experiences of Rohingyas through firsthand experience. He highlighted how the Burmese government restricted citizenship rights of Rohingyas, such as attending public universities and obtaining passports. He praised Gambia for taking the case to the ICJ on behalf of Rohingyas, and argued that countries such as the United States and United Kingdom should intervene and provide financial and material support in the case. Khin also illustrated the fact that Myanmar has dozens of minority ethnic groups similar to the Rohingya, and said that the other groups should band together with the Rohingya to support the case at the ICJ.
Enter the text or HTML code here
