The Gambia hit out Thursday at Aung San Suu Kyi's "silence" over the plight of Rohingya Muslims after the Nobel peace laureate defended Myanmar in opposition to genocide expenses on the UN's high courtroom. More than 700,000 Rohingya fled to neighboring Bangladesh to escape what has been described as an ethnic cleansing campaign involving mass rapes, killings and the torching of homes. The goal of this week's hearings was to persuade the court to enforce "provisional measures" to ensure the protection and safety of the Rohingya, which would essentially pressure the UN Security Council to take concrete steps such as the elimination restrictions on humanitarian aid to Rakhine State, where the Rohingya are from, or the banning of any discriminatory practices in Myanmar against the group.
Gambia's attorney Abubacarr Marie Tambadou maintained there was evidence of genocidal acts against the Rohingya, adding that the case is now "in the hands of the court".
But her stance on the Rohingya issue has seen her stripped of many awards, calls for the Nobel committee to revoke her peace prize and strong criticism from former celebrity supporters and other organizations. I wish she was right in her argument that the army is wrongly targeted, because it probably would be one of the first instances where an autocratic hierarchy changed course and got down to looking after the interest of its citizenry.
Suu Kyi defended Myanmar's actions saying it confronted an "internal conflict" and that the navy performed "clearance operations" after an assault by Rohingya militants in August 2017.
"Armed conflict can never be an excuse for genocide".
The lawyer stated Suu Kyi had additionally did not deny the conclusions of a 2018 United Nations investigation that discovered that genocide had been dedicated in Myanmar in opposition to the Rohingya.
"What is most striking is what Myanmar has not denied", Reichler said.
Suu Kyi is expected to offer closing remarks later Thursday.
A decision on the measures could take months, while a final ruling if the ICJ decides to take on the full case could take years.