By @mir_sidiquee
Also here, recently the Military spokesman
Brigadier General Zaw Min Tun told Reuters the decision was made after the army
consulted with the government. “We, the military, will fully cooperate with the
government and we will follow the instruction of the government,” he said.
The office of Aung San Suu Kyi — Nobel Peace
Prize laureate and de facto leader of Myanmar — has
announced that she will travel to The Hague in December to answer the
law suit filed against Myanmar at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for
the Rohingya genocide and apparently this has been decided in agreement with
the country’s powerful generals, who control important ministries, major powers
including security and also who have carried out the “clearance operations
against Rohingya” for which the state of Myanmar has been accused.
In these days, many kinds of opinions are on air through the medias from Myanmar and international think-tank bodies.
Yes! It will take long time to have a result
of ICJ and ICC, a hope for Justice comes forward but the rights of nativity for
Rohingyas are still unexpected. The rights of nativity depending between
Rohingya and Myanmar, no one else can restore it. There should have a third
party to prepare both parties to bring on the table to negotiate the terms and
condition for smooth repatriation of Rohingya refugees.
It was very clear that Aung San Suu Kyi and
National League for Democracy (NLD) were involved in Rohingya genocide as she
has never responded the issue, stayed silent and fueled the issue of Rohingya
by saying fake news while the victims cried for justice.
Instead of blaming others Aung San Suu Kyi
should pay a visit to the Mayu region - Maungdaw, Buthidaung and Rathedaung - to see what happen there, then she can realize "why the Rohingya
community has knocked the doors of the world community." But unfortunately
Suu Kyi denied everything without any reason and without any visit.
"She has forgotten everything those we
have done for her. We were on the road while she was in house arrest, we were
praying in Mosque for her everyday. Many of our politicians have been jailed
for her, killed by Army for supporting her, myself one of those" a
prominent elderly Rohingya said. "Despite we don't want to see them at the
court, they are facing today for their denial" he added.
-In these days, many kinds of opinions are on air through the medias from Myanmar and international think-tank bodies.
“As
foreign minister, it is reasonable that she will lead the defense team,” said
Thein Than Oo, one of the founding members of the Myanmar Lawyers’ Network.
“As a leader of the country, Daw Aung San Suu
Kyi has consistently denied the accusations. This charge is not just for human
rights violations. She will be defending the genocide accusation. Daw Aung San
Suu Kyi has consistently denied that charge. I think she will deny it in the
court, too. She has to.”
Kyee Myint, chairman of the Union Attorney
and Legal Aid Association, noted that the state counselor's team has very
little time to prepare itself for the case.
“We’ve got a very short period for
preparation,” he said. “It’s less than 20 days. They should give us between
three and six months, so that we have enough time to prepare the defense.”
Kyee Myint also said that Aung San Suu Kyi
should point out to the ICJ her limited authority over the military, as
mandated in Myanmar’s constitution.
“During the defense at the court, she should
demonstrate her limited authorities over the military, showing them a copy of
the 2008 constitution,” he said. “If she is willing to take the fall when the
military is silent, that’s up to her.”
RFA interview:
An attorney assisting Gambia with its lawsuit
against Myanmar alleging state-sponsored genocide at the U.N.’s top court said
Thursday that he was confident that the West African nation would win the case
based on copious, strong evidence of army atrocities against the Muslim
Rohingyas.
“The evidence is plentiful,” Paul Reichler,
an attorney at Foley Hoag LLC in Washington, told Radio Free Asia’s Myanmar
service. He spoke a day after the Myanmar government announced that State
Counselor and Foreign Affairs Minister Aung San Suu Kyi would lead a team in
defending the country at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague,
the Netherlands.
“There are many, many fact-finding reports by
U.N. missions, by special rapporteurs, by human rights organizations,” Reichler
said.
“There is satellite photography, and there
are many, many statements by officials and army personnel from Myanmar, which
all together show that the intention of the state of Myanmar has been to
destroy the Rohingya as a group in whole or in part,” he said.
“And we’re very confident that at the end of
the day the evidence will be so compelling that the court will agree with The
Gambia,” he said.
“In one week there have been developments in 3 jurisdictions: the #ICC, the #ICJ and the domestic courts of Argentina. I have no doubt that this will have a deterrent effect.” said #ChrisSidoti of #FFM.Read: https://t.co/EZnnxCGk9aDr Azeem Ibrahim wrote on his article:
“This is a baffling but welcome state of
affairs. Why would Suu Kyi and the government of Myanmar acknowledge the
jurisdiction of the ICJ — thereby implicitly granting the court standing to
pass judgment on the Rohingya genocide?
There are two likely explanations. First, the
Lady (as she’s known at home) might be genuinely unaware of the full extent of
what has been happening with the Rohingya in Rakhine state. According to many
sources I’ve spoken with, she has taken to regarding factual reports about the
2016-2017 ethnic cleansing campaign against the Rohingya as malicious
conspiracy theories targeted to undermine her country and perhaps her
personally. When confronted with critical accounts, she
flies into a fit of anger, saying these are all fabricated allegations.
Perhaps Suu Kyi genuinely believes in the
innocence of her cause and of her government. And perhaps she genuinely
believes that if she, as a celebrated human rights icon, finally stands before
the international community at the ICJ, they will finally recognize the errors
of the “misinformation” aimed at her by her “detractors.”
Or it could be that Suu Kyi is taking a leaf
from the political playbook of insurgent populists around the world, including
her new friend, Hungarian Prime Minister
Viktor Orban. In the current moment in political history, when it appears that
facts do not matter anymore, a brazen lie told loudly and confidently may yet
be seen as the supreme act of political strength —
especially by one’s political base. And what better platform to grandstand your
narrative than an international court that can do little other than passing an
impotent judgment?”
In either case, the bad news for Suu Kyi is
that this trial at the ICJ is a serious affair. The effort, led by Gambia’s
Attorney General Abubacarr Marie Tambadou and the Gambian Ministry of Justice,
sets a new precedent in international relations: A state is taking another
state before the ICJ for a breach of the Genocide
Convention adopted by the United Nations in 1948. Nor can this be
dismissed as casual posturing by a random country trying to elevate its
international profile. Tambadou, a serious international jurist on questions of
genocide, previously served as a special assistant to the prosecutor at the
International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda. The man leading the charge is a
serious and established advocate of human rights and international law, and
Gambia’s effort is drawing more and more support
from the rest of the international community.
Anyone in their right mind, and with access
to all the evidence we have in the public domain about what has been happening
in Rakhine state with the Rohingya at the hands of the Myanmar military, would
expect the prosecution to win this case. This is not to say that the outcome is
certain, of course. But if I were a lawyer working for the defendants, I’d
certainly counsel them to drop the cavalier attitude.
It is especially striking that the country’s
military leaders have given their blessing to Suu Kyi’s planned appearance
before the court — especially because it marks an uncharacteristic
acknowledgment of international law and the jurisdiction of foreign “interests”
from the notoriously isolationist military establishment. It is hard to escape
the conclusion that she is being set up as the patsy for the genocide — by the
very same people who organized it and carried it out.
The good news is that international law has
been activated to respond to a genocide situation. This was not something we
could take for granted in a world of deepening authoritarianism, but at least
for now this is something we can celebrate. The Rohingya victims and their
supporters have a long journey ahead of them. But for now, this story seems to
be moving in the right direction”.
Further, the Rohingyas who are still in ghettos
– since 2012 – inside Myanmar and who are in restriction along the villages are
to be freed and facilities to be granted to them then further negotiation can
success unless unworthy.