The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague has entered a critical phase in the landmark case of The Gambia v. Myanmar, concerning allegations of genocide against the Rohingya population. What initially appears as a technical legal proceeding under the 1948 Genocide Convention has, in reality, become a test of international law’s capacity to confront mass atrocities in an era where authoritarian regimes increasingly manipulate legal institutions for their advantage. For Bangladesh, which hosts nearly a million Rohingya refugees, the outcome of these hearings carries direct and profound implications for the future of the displaced population.

Since 2017, when Myanmar’s military escalated its campaign against the Rohingya, over 740,000 Rohingya have fled across the border into Bangladesh. They joined earlier waves of displacement that had already left the community highly vulnerable. UN investigators have documented a systematic and deliberate campaign targeting the Rohingya: killings, mass sexual violence, the burning of villages, and efforts to erase their cultural and religious identity. These atrocities prompted Gambia to file a case against Myanmar at the ICJ, arguing that the military junta violated the Genocide Convention. The hearings, which have formally commenced this month, bring into focus not only whether Myanmar is legally culpable but whether international justice mechanisms can withstand political subversion by regimes accused of mass atrocities.

The proceedings are unprecedented in scale. Eleven states, including Germany, the United Kingdom, France, Canada, and the Netherlands, have intervened formally in support of Gambia’s case. This level of multilateral engagement reflects the severity of the crimes committed against the Rohingya and the broader international consensus on the need for accountability. Yet, the case also exposes structural weaknesses in international law. Courts such as the ICJ were designed to adjudicate disputes between states, not to determine which government legitimately represents a nation. In Myanmar, this ambiguity has been exploited. The military junta, which seized power in a coup in February 2021 and continues to suppress democratic institutions, presents itself as the lawful government before the ICJ, even while perpetrating ongoing violence against its population.

This contradiction........

© Blitz