Myanmar’s Military Junta Heads to the World Court
The next week, the ruling military junta of Myanmar will attend hearings in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague, sparking a furore among opposition politicians who fear the move could give the junta a kind of “globe‑wide nod” that it never really deserves.
What the Court’s About
In 2019, the small but vocal nation of Gambia lodged a complaint with the ICJ accusing Myanmar of genocide against the Rohingya, the country’s Muslim minority. The allegation centers on the 2017 mass exodus, when an army‑led crackdown pushed over 730,000 Rohingya across the border into cramped camps in Bangladesh. UN investigators even labelled the military’s actions as having “genocidal intent.”
When the Hashtag Gave a Cue
- Before the 2021 coup that toppled Aung San Suu Kyi’s National Unity Government (NUG), she fought back against Gambia’s claims and rallied the Organisation for Islamic Cooperation’s 57 member states.
- Now, the same junta that seized power is slated to appear in virtual hearings in The Hague to contest jurisdictional objections lodged in January 2021.
- Hearings kick off on Monday, Feb 14.
United Nations Still’s Mixed Signals
Despite lacking official UN standing, various UN bodies have scheduled meetings with the junta. During a December meeting, the General Assembly’s credentials committee decided to table a decision, but for the time being, the committee has upheld Kyaw Moe Tun as the junta’s representative—someone who didn’t just “roost” after the coup but actively flies the flag for the new regime.
Why This Matters
It’s a weird mix: a military junta that can’t officially stand in the UN lobby is heading to the world’s top court, where they’re supposed to answer about a genocide that was – according to UN rules – carried out with malicious intent. Whether this will change the global perception of Myanmar or spark further controversy remains to be seen.
Keep Your Eyes on the Next Hearings
Something tells us this will be a courtroom drama that could swing in surprising ways. Stay tuned!
Fight for recognition
Members of the NUG said earlier this week that Kyaw Moe Tun, whom the shadow government has also named to represent it in The Hague, is “the “only person authorised to engage with the court on behalf of Myanmar”.
“The junta is not the government of Myanmar,” said Christopher Sidoti, a human rights lawyer and former member of the UN fact-finding mission on Myanmar.
[[nid:552785]]
“The junta has neither the authority nor the ability to act as the government of Myanmar at home or abroad. But by appearing before the ICJ, that is exactly what it will be attempting to do,” Sidoti told Reuters.
“The Myanmar people have clearly rejected the junta, making it clear the military does not represent them,” said Tun Khin, president of the Burmese Rohingya Organisation U.K., alluding to a series of popular protests against military rule.
“All in the international community, including ICJ, should hear this, and not lend any form of legitimacy to the junta.”
The ICJ has yet to consider the merits of the genocide accusation. Suu Kyi in December 2019 called on the World Court to dismiss Gambia’s claim, denying genocide and saying the ICJ should not have jurisdiction. But the NUG said earlier this month it accepted ICJ jurisdiction to hear the allegations.
US sanctions list
Hague Court Hearing: Behind the Scenes of Myanmar’s New Representation
At the International Court of Justice in The Hague, an unexpected lineup is set to replace the long‑suppressed voice of Aung San Suu Kyi. Two key players, Ko Ko Hlaing – the junta’s envoy for international coordination – and Thida Oo, the Union Attorney General, will step onto the court’s stage. Both have been tagged on the U.S. Treasury’s sanctions list, so they’re not exactly playing in a friendly neighborhood.
Why the Swap?
- Su Kyi, after the coup, now carries a six‑year prison sentence and a looming 150‑year cap across a dozen other military‑brought cases.
- The international court has long faced a dilemma: when a country’s government is contested, who gets to represent the state in legal battles?
- ICJ’s handbook says only a foreign ministry or embassy can officially send communications about representation – essentially, the party on the right side of the political street.
ICJ’s Stance
When pressed by reporters, the court stayed tight‑lipped and pointed toward its handbook. It didn’t spell out who can actually be accredited; think of it like a reality show rulebook written in legalese.
Perspective from Human Rights Watch
Shayna Bauchner, a researcher with HRW, weighed in:
“The junta’s presence at the hearings doesn’t boost legitimacy or validate the military’s representation before the United Nations.”
She added, “What really matters is justice, not merely the actors on the stage.”
Focus on Rohingya Rights
While the court debates who speaks for Myanmar, the pressing issue remains the atrocities committed against the Rohingya. The hope is that the legal proceedings will shine a light on this tragedy, rather than become a parade of political gaffes.
Stay tuned – the Hague’s courtroom drama is just getting started.
