This article needs to be updated. The reason given is: missing information on the 2021 coup in Myanmar and its effects on the case. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(May 2024)
The Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar), commonly referred to as the Rohingya genocide case,[1][2] is a case which is currently being heard by the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The case was brought forward by the Republic of The Gambia, on behalf of 57 members of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation in 2019.[3]
Aung San Suu Kyi describes this conflict as an "internal armed conflict" that was triggered by Rohingya attacks on the government of Myanmar. The judge who is presiding over the case, Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, has given Myanmar four months to implement his rulings: Myanmar must take "all measure within its power" to prevent genocide.[11]
The Gambia also submitted a request for the indication of provisional measures of protection. The ICJ held a public hearing on that request for three days, 10–12 December 2019.[17] A commentator described the hearing as a "remarkable spectacle," noting that The Gambia's team provided "brutal descriptions" of atrocities, while Aung San Suu Kyi avoided using the word "Rohingya"—except in a reference to the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army.[18]
On 23 January 2020, the ICJ issued an order on The Gambia's request for provisional measures. The order "indicated" (i.e., issued) provisional measures ordering Myanmar to prevent genocidal acts against the Rohingya Muslims during the pendency of the case, and to report regularly on its implementation of the order.[19]
The Court issued a procedural order on the same date, setting filing deadlines of 23 July 2020 for The Gambia's Memorial, and 25 January 2021 for Myanmar's responsive Counter-Memorial.[20]
On 18 May 2020, The Court issued an extension for The Gambia's memorial and set a filing deadline of 23 October 2020. Similarly, an extension was granted to Myanmar set at 23 July 2021.[21]
Analyzing the decision in the blog of the European Journal of International Law, Marko Milanovic, a professor at the University of Nottingham School of Law, called the Court's order of provisional measures "obviously a win for The Gambia, and for the Rohingya cause more generally", but also stated that the order largely only replicated existing "state obligations under the Genocide Convention", and did not include the broader measures and statements that The Gambia had requested.[26]