- [Not loaded yet]
- A 'community' in #Bangladesh or #Myanmar cannot equal the entire population of a state. To deny #Rohingya their ethnonym, but to speak of #Bengali as 'community' makes no sense: either these are Bangladeshi of Bangladesh or they are Rohingya of Myanmar. Bengali is a language #WhatsHappeninginMyanmar
- "The court-settled case law acknowledges, that the evidential weight of witness statements is diminished significantly if the witness is not disinterested," says #Myanmar. This is why legal reasoning often seems inhumane to many: How can being 'disinterested' in the face of violence be good?
- #Myanmar is criticising that so many #IIMM witness statements were provided anonymously. "How can one know if the statements are not contradictory?" asks the counsel. I understand the point and think #TheGambia should clarify why it was necessary to protect anonymity in these cases.
- I'm leaving this here without much comment. I think we have enough literature on why witnesses withdraw or change their statements. There are many clues in this withdrawal provided by #Myanmar - I hope the court does not take the argument rgd. "pervasive anonymity" at face value ...
- I continue my thread after a 1-week break. All videos of the case #TheGambia vs #Myanmar are available at the #ICJ website. I have summarized the 1st week of the case by highlighting a crucial formal aspect when interpreting the #Genocide Convention: what counts as #evidence and what does not?
- After disputing that the material #TheGambia has provided carries any evidential weight, #Myanmar focused on #ARSA (Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army), an Islamist group active in the camps in #Bangladesh, but - at least acc. to #Myanmar - responsible for many of the killings in #Myanmar, too.
- On January 20th #Myanmar continued making their case, now focusing on #hatespeech and anti-Rohingya hate propaganda - asking whether it is at all relevant for establishing genocidal intent. "Myanmar says that it is not." Again, the criticism is that TheGambia has a "flawed genocidal intent approach"
- Against #TheGambia s approach, which "has no basis in the court's case law", Stefan Talmon ( #Myanmar ) positions the court's "inference from a pattern of conduct approach." Question is: Could #hatespeech be relevant to establish a pattern of conduct? #Myanmar: no. #hatespeech has no role to play.
- It is honestly hard to listen to a German legal expert (with whom I share an alma mater, having studied with the same law professor), advocating for #Myanmar and paraphrasing a statement of Min Aung Hlaing as "calling for cooperation" in Rakhine state. What is the worth of a state terrorist's words?Jan 28, 2026 21:16
- Rgd FB statements: "There is no legal basis to attribute statements by a regional political party, leaders of a fringe nationalistic opposition party, or Buddhist monks to the state of Myanmar ... for a state to be held responsible for #genocide, the state itself must have the intent to destroy..."
- "... or is to be established indirectly by inference from a pattern of conduct. It is not to be established by way of attributing the genocidal intent of individuals to the state." Anthropologist here: what / who is "the state" in this view, then?
- How can speech acts be "attributable to #Myanmar" (the state), as the agent of Myanmar demands, if not via individuals who do the speaking? How does "the state" speak?
- Still catching up with #ICJ hearing #TheGambia vs #Myanmar - on 20 January, 9 judges began to pose questions to the two parties. 1st Q: on the methodology of how #evidence was collected from anonymous witnesses by third parties. 2nd Q (to Myanmar): how many villages destroyed by ARSA/Tatmadaw/Gov.
- more Qs. Is The Gambia able to identify the locations where sexual violence has occurred and which measures were taken to investigate these incidents ? To Myanmar: How does each party characterize ARSA? Q to Myanmar: reasons for refusal to cooperate rgd. int. cooperation in prevention of #genocide ?
