The United Nations’ highest court will rule on November 19 on whether Myanmar’s crackdown on its mostly Muslim Rohingya minority amounted to genocide, officials said on Tuesday. The decision will come from the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands, where judges have spent years examining the matter.
The ruling is widely expected to carry weight beyond the courtroom. The court has no means of enforcing its decisions, but a finding that Myanmar committed genocide would increase international pressure on its leadership and would be seen as justice for hundreds of thousands of Rohingya people.
Gambia’s case before the International Court of Justice
Judges at the court have been weighing accusations brought by The Gambia for seven years. The Gambian government argues that Myanmar’s brutal repression of the Rohingya breached the 1948 UN Genocide Convention.
The Gambia took the case under the terms of that convention, which allows any state to raise concerns if it suspects genocide is being committed. During hearings in January, Gambian Justice Minister Dawda Jallow told the court that the Rohingya had suffered “the most horrific violence and destruction one could imagine.”
Jallow told the judges that the case was not an abstract legal debate. “It is about real people, real stories and a real group of human beings,” he said. He added that the Rohingya “have been targeted for destruction,” and said the alleged violations were “a stain on our collective conscience.”
Legal experts are also watching the outcome closely. The court’s approach could offer clues to how it might handle a separate genocide case, brought by South Africa against Israel over its campaign in Gaza.
Myanmar’s defence and Suu Kyi’s appearance in 2019
Myanmar has consistently denied carrying out genocide against the Rohingya. It has argued that its military operations targeted an armed uprising by insurgents, which followed a series of attacks that left a dozen security personnel dead.
At the January hearing, Myanmar rejected the allegations as unsubstantiated. Ko Ko Hlaing, a minister in the president’s office, said that “emotional language and blurry factual pictures are not a substitute for a rigorous presentation of facts.”
In an earlier hearing in 2019, de facto civilian leader Aung San Suu Kyi addressed the court in person at the Peace Palace in The Hague. The Nobel peace laureate told judges that the case risked reigniting the crisis that led to the Rohingya’s expulsion, and said there was no “genocidal intent” behind the crackdown.
Suu Kyi, now 81, will not attend the verdict. She has been under house arrest in the capital, Naypyidaw, since she was removed from power in a 2021 military coup.
Refugee exodus and other legal proceedings
The military crackdown, carried out by the Myanmar army and Buddhist militias, forced hundreds of thousands of Rohingya to flee to neighbouring Bangladesh. Those who fled brought accounts of gang rape and mass executions.
More than one million Rohingya still live across the border in Bangladesh, in what is the world’s largest refugee settlement.
The ICJ has already issued one order in the case. In 2020, it ordered Myanmar to take all measures within its power to prevent acts described in the Genocide Convention, including killing members of the group and inflicting conditions of life meant to bring about its physical destruction. The court also rejected a challenge from Myanmar to its jurisdiction, ruling that it could decide the genocide question.
The ICJ is not the only court examining possible crimes against the Rohingya. In 2024, the chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, also based in The Hague, asked judges for an arrest warrant for Myanmar’s then-junta chief, Min Aung Hlaing, over alleged crimes against humanity. A case is also underway in Argentina under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which holds that some crimes are so serious they can be heard in any court.
