The Gambia v. Myanmar Case

At the end of February, public hearings began in the Hague in the case The Gambia v. Myanmar in the International Court of Justice. The Gambia filed a case against the government of Myanmar in 2019, claiming that the Southeast Asian country violated The Convention on the Prevention and Punishment on the Crime of Genocide, a treaty which 152 countries have signed, including Myanmar. The Gambia argues that Myanmar’s violence towards its Rohingya minority violates the treaty.

The Myanmar state has historically ostracized and persecuted the Rohingya, denying them citizenship, but beginning in 2016, frequent violent military-backed attacks on the Rohingya people triggered mass migration to neighboring Bangladesh. The Myanmar’s military’s actions have been defined as either ethnic cleansing or genocide by a number of governments.

The beginning of court proceedings comes a year after the Myanmar’s military seized control of the country’s government and imprisoned their government leader, Aung Saan Suu Kyi, who has received criticism over her silence on the military’s attacks on the Rohingya.

Transcripts of the hearings can be found on the International Court of Justice’s Website: https://www.icj-cij.org/en/case/178

An informative article from Human Rights Watch published in February is also available on this page: https://www.hrw.org/news/2022/02/14/developments-gambias-case-against-myanmar-international-court-justice

ICERM Briefing Myanmar

Download Briefing

The Gambia v. Myanmar: Conflict Summary.
Share

Related Articles

Building Resilient Communities: Child-Focused Accountability Mechanisms for Yazidi Community Post-Genocide (2014)

This study focuses on two avenues through which accountability mechanisms can be pursued in the Yazidi community post-genocide era: judicial and non-judicial. Transitional justice is a unique post-crisis opportunity to support the transition of a community and foster a sense of resilience and hope through a strategic, multidimensional support. There is no ‘one size fits all’ approach in these types of processes, and this paper takes into account a variety of essential factors in establishing the groundwork for an effective approach to not only hold Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) members accountable for their crimes against humanity, but to empower Yazidi members, specifically children, to regain a sense of autonomy and safety. In doing so, researchers lay out the international standards of children’s human rights obligations, specifying which are relevant in the Iraqi and Kurdish contexts. Then, by analyzing lessons learned from case studies of similar scenarios in Sierra Leone and Liberia, the study recommends interdisciplinary accountability mechanisms that are centered around encouraging child participation and protection within the Yazidi context. Specific avenues through which children can and should participate are provided. Interviews in Iraqi Kurdistan with seven child survivors of ISIL captivity allowed for firsthand accounts to inform the current gaps in tending to their post-captivity needs, and led to the creation of ISIL militant profiles, linking alleged culprits to specific violations of international law. These testimonials give unique insight into the young Yazidi survivor experience, and when analyzed in the broader religious, community and regional contexts, provide clarity in holistic next steps. Researchers hope to convey a sense of urgency in establishing effective transitional justice mechanisms for the Yazidi community, and call upon specific actors, as well as the international community to harness universal jurisdiction and promote the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission (TRC) as a non-punitive manner through which to honor Yazidis’ experiences, all while honoring the experience of the child.

Share

Conversion to Islam and Ethnic Nationalism in Malaysia

This paper is a segment of a larger research project that focuses on the rise of ethnic Malay nationalism and supremacy in Malaysia. While the rise of ethnic Malay nationalism can be attributed to various factors, this paper specifically focuses on the Islamic conversion law in Malaysia and whether or not it has reinforced the sentiment of ethnic Malay supremacy. Malaysia is a multi-ethnic and multi-religious country which gained its independence in 1957 from the British. The Malays being the largest ethnic group have always regarded the religion of Islam as part and parcel of their identity which separates them from other ethnic groups that were brought into the country during British colonial rule. While Islam is the official religion, the Constitution allows other religions to be practiced peacefully by non-Malay Malaysians, namely the ethnic Chinese and Indians. However, the Islamic law that governs Muslim marriages in Malaysia has mandated that non-Muslims must convert to Islam should they wish to marry Muslims. In this paper, I argue that the Islamic conversion law has been used as a tool to strengthen the sentiment of ethnic Malay nationalism in Malaysia. Preliminary data were collected based on interviews with Malay Muslims who are married to non-Malays. The results have shown that majority of Malay interviewees consider conversion to Islam as imperative as required by the Islamic religion and the state law. In addition, they also see no reason why non-Malays would object to converting to Islam, as upon marriage, the children will automatically be considered Malays as per the Constitution, which also comes with status and privileges. Views of non-Malays who have converted to Islam were based on secondary interviews that have been conducted by other scholars. As being a Muslim is associated with being a Malay, many non-Malays that converted feel robbed of their sense of religious and ethnic identity, and feel pressured to embrace the ethnic Malay culture. While changing the conversion law might be difficult, open interfaith dialogues in schools and in public sectors might be the first step to tackle this problem.

Share