The Myanmar envoy to the UN International Court of Justice (ICJ) further claimed that the Gambia wanted to convince the world outside the court that Myanmar authorities were genocidal and that the country had made irrelevant political statements at the hearing.
Ko Ko Hlang made the remarks in his closing remarks while presenting arguments in the second round on Friday at the International Court of Justice in The Hague, the Netherlands. He pleaded that the court had no jurisdiction to hear the genocide allegations and that Gambia's appeal was not admissible. He said that now is not the time to talk about the evidence and arguments of the disputed issues in the case. He said he would not comment on Gambia's political rhetoric.
Professor Christopher Stoker was the first to speak at the hearing, which was presided over by ICJ President Justice Joan Donahue. He said the ICJ had settled the question of jurisdiction and admissibility of the case while issuing an interim order to protect the Rohingya community. As a result, Gambia's claim that jurisdiction cannot be challenged in genocide cases is incorrect.
Professor Stoker said that without the court's jurisdiction, there would be no way for the Rohingya to be protected, and that Gambia's claim was not in line with the court's jurisdiction.
Gambia has independently initiated and led the case, in response to Myanmar's claims that various statements, media reports and tweets from the OIC and its member states did not provide evidence. Stocker said the OIC's proposal was first approved by the agency's foreign ministers, then the OIC committee backtracked on its decision to become an applicant and asked the Gambia to become an applicant. The Gambia then decided the case. He also argued that the law does not provide for a third party to sue.
Regarding Myanmar's right to sue Gambia out of a sense of international responsibility for not harming any of its citizens, another Myanmar expert, Professor Stefan Tallman, said the law did not provide that opportunity. He also claimed that the genocide charter did not give the court that jurisdiction.
Robert Klub, a professor of international law at the University of Geneva, further argued for a legal interpretation of the court's jurisdiction and role. The hearing on Myanmar's initial objections began on 21 February, and on that day Myanmar presented its arguments in the first instance. On 23 February, the Gambia responded to Myanmar's objections. The Gambia claims that two years ago, a court ruled in favor of the Gambia over its jurisdiction and the right to sue when it issued an interim order protecting the Rohingya people. For this reason, Myanmar's initial objections should be quickly rejected. The Gambia claims that Myanmar is basically trying to delay. Gambia will have a second chance to present its case in court on Monday afternoon.
0 Comments