The International Court of Justice and the Responsibility to Protect: Learning from the Case of The Gambia v. Myanmar

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-25
Author(s):  
Martin Mennecke
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Court ◽  
The Gambia ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Unique Contribution ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Accountability Measures ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Central Actor

Abstract It is a commonplace in the R2P discourse to describe accountability measures as key means to implement the responsibility to protect. In particular, the International Criminal Court is regularly highlighted as a central actor, both in the literature, the annual R2P reports issued by the UN Secretary-General, and the subsequent debates in the UN General Assembly. Conspicuously absent from this conversation is the principal judicial organ of the United Nations, the International Court of Justice (icj). This article examines the potential role of the ‘World Court’, as The Gambia in November 2019 started a new case under the UN Genocide Convention against Myanmar before the icj. Analysing the limitations and prospects and existing icj case-law, the article concludes that the International Court of Justice can make an important and unique contribution to the responsibility to protect.

The Situation in the People's Republic of Bangladesh/Republic of the Union of Myanmar Decision to Authorize Investigation (I.C.C.) and the Gambia V. Myanmar Order for Provisional Measures (I.C.J.)

2020 ◽  
Vol 59 (4) ◽  
pp. 616-693
Author(s):  
Alessandra Spadaro
Keyword(s):  
International Criminal Court ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
The Gambia ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Preliminary Stage ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
First Time

For the first time, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are dealing concurrently with the same set of events, which concern the violence to which those in the group that self-identifies as the Rohingya have been subjected in Myanmar, and that has prompted their mass exodus to Bangladesh. Before both courts, proceedings are at a preliminary stage.

scholarly journals Protection Rohingyas through International Adjudication-Decoding Provisional Measures of International Court of Justice in The Gambia vs. Myanmar.

2020 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Swargodeep Sarkar
Keyword(s):  
The Gambia ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Security Forces ◽  
Language And Culture ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Adjudication

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres acknowledged Rohingya, “one of, if not the, most discriminated people in the world”. In Myanmar, a country with a Buddhist majority, around a million Rohingya who is the minority having their language and culture, have been persecuted for decades. In the year 2014 census, Myanmar excluded Rohingya by denying basic citizenship. Thousands of Rohingya have fled to neighbouring States after facing persecution orchestrated by Myanmar security forces with the help of local Buddhist mobs. In this background, the Gambia with the help of Organisation of Islamic Cooperation filed the case in the International Court of Justice, alleging that the actions perpetrated by Myanmar violated the provisions of Genocide Convention 1948 to which both States are the parties. Myanmar rightly questioned the standing of Gambia as the interest of Gambia was not threatened or at stake. So, in the absence of a cause of action or rights of the Gambia not affected even remotely, the International Court of Justice should not entertain the case. One of the major issues before the Court whether the Gambia has stood without being affected directly from the violations alleged to have been committed on the Rohingya. The present author will discuss the provisional measures rendered by the ICJ on 23rd January 2020 and the challenges such as jurisdiction, admissibility, urgency or irreparable prejudice condition, faced by the Court with a special focus on the “Plausibility requirement” in provisional measures.

The ICC and the Crime of Aggression: A Need to Reconcile the Prerogatives of the SC, the ICC and the ICJ

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 655-686
Author(s):  
Vimalen Reddi
Keyword(s):  
Rome Statute ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Potential Interaction ◽  
Criminal Court ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
The Icj ◽  
International Rule

AbstractThis paper proposes a framework under which the ICC should exercise jurisdiction over the crime of aggression, in view of the much anticipated and impending Review Conference of the Rome Statute. In this context, it examines the potential interaction between the UN Security Council, the International Criminal Court and the International Court of Justice, in an eventual prosecutorial regime for the crime of aggression. The paper's underlying premise rests on the vindication of an international rule of law, so often dismissed in international relations.

When Ethnic Cleansing is not Genocide: A Critical Appraisal of the ICJ's Ruling in Croatia v. Serbia in relation to Deportation and Population Transfer

2015 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 937-944
Author(s):  
MARTIN STEINFELD
Keyword(s):  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Ethnic Cleansing ◽  
Population Transfer ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Actus Reus ◽  
The Icj ◽  
Judicial Recognition

AbstractThis article critically examines the concept of ethnic cleansing in light of the ruling of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in Croatia v. Serbia. It suggests that the lack of overt reference to it in the Genocide Convention constitutes a significant lacuna in judicial recognition and protection of atrocities committed in both the Former Yugoslavia and more generally, which the ICJ categorically refused to address. Having examined how the ICJ attempted to conceptualize ethnic cleansing as evidence of both the actus reus of genocide (particularly in relation to Article II(c) of the Convention) and its mens rea, the article then critically assesses the Court's reasoning in its refusal to rule that a violation of the Convention had taken place in relation to deportation and forcible transfer. The article then concludes by contending that the Court simply failed to provide a much-needed and workable precedent to properly include ethnic cleansing within the legal and factual matrix of genocide.

scholarly journals ICJ genocide judgment in the dispute between Croatia and Serbia: Legal analysis and its importance for mutual relations

2015 ◽  
Vol 67 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-44
Author(s):  
Mihajlo Vucic ◽  
Marko Novakovic
Keyword(s):  
International Order ◽  
Genocide Convention ◽  
Legal Analysis ◽  
Criminal Enterprise ◽  
International Court Of Justice ◽  
Joint Criminal Enterprise ◽  
Bilateral Relations ◽  
Court Of Justice ◽  
International Court ◽  
Mutual Relations

The Judgment of the International Court of Justice in the case of mutual claims for the breach of the Genocide Convention between Croatia and Serbia represents the final outcome of 16 years of a dispute which burdened their bilateral relations on everyday basis. Bearing in mind that the International Court of Justice, as the international judicial authority with highest legitimacy in contemporary international order, found both claims to be unfounded, the judgment can represent an impulse for governments of both countries to settle the problematic legacy of years of conflict and mutual allegations. However, some passages from the judgment might be used also as means of diplomatic pressure by both governments, since the International Court of Justice blamed the Croatian government for the grave crimes short of genocide commited during the Operation Storm, but also adopted the interpretation of the ICTY?s joint criminal enterprise jurisprudence which foreshadows further prosecutions for political personalities allegedly connected with the conception of Greater Serbia.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document