Myanmar has presented the second argument to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) which is holding a public hearing relating to the preliminary objections raised by Myanmar concerning the application filed by The Gambia alleging Myanmar of violating the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, from February 21 to 28, at the Peace Palace, in The Hague, Netherlands.

U Ko Ko Hlaing, the agent of Myanmar and Union Minister for International Cooperation, requested the court to adjudge and declare that The Gambia’s application is inadmissible.

The second argument hearing took place on February 25 and U Ko Ko Hlaing made the remark in his closing statement.

The hearing was attended by Union Minister for Legislative Affairs and Union Attorney General Dr Thida Oo of the Myanmar delegation as alternate agent.

During the second argument of Myanmar, representative lawyers Dr. Christopher Staker, Professor Stefan Talmon and Professor Robert Kolb also made their statements in response to The Gambia’s lawsuit.

“The counsel for The Gambia made many factual and political allegations that were not relevant to the preliminary objections.  The tone of these statements was inappropriate to a court of law at this stage of the proceedings.  Myanmar will not respond to these allegations as now is neither the right place nor time to do so. We will not waste the Court’s valuable time by making statements not really addressed to the Court but to an audience outside the Great Hall of Justice. In my understanding, these allegations were aimed at intimating to the Members of the Court and the public that the authorities in Myanmar should be considered perpetrators of genocide, even before there has been any decision on whether there will be a merits phase, let alone any decision by this Court.  Counsel for The Gambia also appears to suggest that the preliminary objections should not be considered seriously as the Court has already rejected them in the previous Provisional Measures Order. I must respond by emphasizing, first, that Myanmar is exercising its right as Respondent by submitting these preliminary objections, as clearly foreseen by paragraph 85 of the Provisional Measures Order”, said U Ko Ko Hlaing.

“Secondly, a Respondent has the right not to be prejudged on the merits at the preliminary objections phase.  At any merits phase, the burden of proof would be on The Gambia as applicant to prove its claims.  However, it cannot seek to discharge that burden now, or speak as if that burden had already been discharged.  As of today, The Gambia’s claims have neither been admitted to be heard nor have they been proved, and The Gambia should not act as if it were otherwise. Nevertheless, given that The Gambia have used this hearing as a platform to make allegations about the merits, as Agent for Myanmar I cannot just sit here in silence without responding at all.  In my closing remarks, I would like to take just a moment to say that Myanmar is committed to ensuring compliance with the Genocide Convention. For instance, on 25 August 2021, Myanmar amended its Penal Code and the Code of Criminal Procedure in order to insert additional articles criminalising genocide and providing for the trial and punishment of perpetrators.  Myanmar, as a responsible party, is also implementing its obligations under the Provisional Measures Order. There also are continuous efforts to improve the general situation on the ground. The region now is relatively calm and peaceful without any significant incidents of violence,” he added.

He, therefore, pointed out that the Court lacks jurisdiction to hear the case brought by The Gambia against Myanmar; and/or that The Gambia’s Application is inadmissible.

The second argument of The Gambia will be heard on February 28.