International Court of Justice – Crime of Genocide.

Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide (The Gambia v. Myanmar: 7 States intervening)

The Court decides that the Declarations of intervention filed by Slovenia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Belgium and Ireland are admissible.

In its Order, the Court:

“(1) Unanimously,

Decides that the Declaration of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute submitted by the Republic of Slovenia is admissible in so far as it concerns the construction of provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;

(2) Unanimously,

Decides that the Declaration of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute submitted by the Democratic Republic of the Congo is admissible in so far as it concerns the construction of provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;

(3) Unanimously,

Decides that the Declaration of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute submitted by the Kingdom of Belgium is admissible in so far as it concerns the construction of provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;

(4) Unanimously,

Decides that the Declaration of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute submitted by Ireland is admissible in so far as it concerns the construction of provisions of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide;

(5) Unanimously,

Fixes 25 September 2025 as the time-limit for the filing, by the Republic of Slovenia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Kingdom of Belgium, and Ireland, of the written observations referred to in Article 86, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Court”. 

History of the proceedings –

On 11 November 2019, The Gambia filed in the Registry of the Court an Application instituting proceedings against Myanmar concerning alleged violations of the Genocide Convention. In its Application, The Gambia requests, among other things, that the Court adjudge and declare that Myanmar has breached its obligations under the Convention, that it must cease forthwith any internationally wrongful act, that it must perform the obligations of reparation in the interest of the victims of genocidal acts who are members of the Rohingya group, and that it must offer assurances and guarantees of non-repetition. As a basis for the Court’s jurisdiction, the Applicant invokes Article IX of the Genocide Convention. The Application was accompanied by a request for the indication of provisional measures.

On 23 January 2020, the Court made an Order indicating a number of provisional measures, requiring among other things that Myanmar, in relation to the members of the Rohingya group in its territory, take all measures within its power to prevent the commission of all acts within the scope of Article II of the Genocide Convention; take effective measures to prevent the destruction and ensure the preservation of evidence related to allegations of such acts; and submit a report to the Court on all measures taken to give effect to the Order within four months, as from the date of the Order, and thereafter every six months, pending a final decision in the case by the Court.

By a further Order dated 23 January 2020, the Court fixed 23 July 2020 and 25 January 2021 as the respective time-limits for the filing of a Memorial by The Gambia and a Counter-Memorial by Myanmar. By an Order dated 18 May 2020, these time-limits were extended to 23 October 2020 and 23 July 2021, respectively. The Memorial of The Gambia was filed within the time-limit thus extended.

On 20 January 2021, Myanmar raised preliminary objections to the jurisdiction of the Court and the admissibility of the Application.

On 22 July 2022, following public hearings, the Court delivered its Judgment, in which it rejected the preliminary objections raised by Myanmar and found that it had jurisdiction to entertain the Application filed by The Gambia on the basis of Article IX of the Genocide Convention, and that the Application was admissible.

By an Order dated 22 July 2022, the Court fixed 24 April 2023 as the new time-limit for the filing of the Counter-Memorial of Myanmar. By Orders dated 6 April 2023 and 12 May 2023 respectively, the Court extended that time-limit, first to 24 May 2023 and then to 24 August 2023. The Counter-Memorial was filed within the time-limit thus extended.

By an Order dated 16 October 2023, the Court authorized the submission of a Reply by The Gambia and a Rejoinder by Myanmar, and fixed 16 May 2024 and 16 December 2024 as the respective time-limits for the filing of those written pleadings. The Gambia duly filed its Reply.

On 15 November 2023, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (jointly) and the Maldives filed Declarations of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court.

By an Order dated 3 July 2024, the Court decided that the Declarations of intervention submitted by the Maldives and the Joint Declarants under Article 63 of the Statute of the Court were admissible in so far as they concerned the construction of provisions of the Genocide Convention.

Four more Declarations of intervention under Article 63 of the Statute were filed, respectively, by Slovenia on 29 November 2024, by the Democratic Republic of the Congo on 10 December 2024, by Belgium on 12 December 2024 and by Ireland on 20 December 2024.

In accordance with Article 83, paragraph 1, of the Rules of Court, the Registrar immediately transmitted certified copies of each Declaration of intervention to The Gambia and Myanmar, which were informed that 29 January 2025, 10 February 2025, 12 February 2025 and 20 February 2025,respectively, had been fixed as the time-limits for the submission of written observations on those Declarations. In accordance with paragraph 2 of the same Article, the Registrar also transmitted copies of the Declarations to the Secretary-General of the United Nations and to the States entitled to appear before the Court.

Within the time-limits fixed by the Court, The Gambia and Myanmar each filed written observations on the Declarations of intervention submitted by Slovenia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Belgium and Ireland. While Myanmar objected to the admissibility of all Declarations, The Gambia contended that they were admissible.

By letters dated 4 March 2025, the Registrar informed the Parties, Slovenia, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Belgium and Ireland that, in light of the fact that Myanmar had objected to the admissibility of the Declarations of intervention, the Court was required, pursuant to Article 84, paragraph 2, of its Rules, to hear the States seeking to intervene and the Parties on the admissibility of the Declarations of intervention, and had decided to do so by means of a written procedure. The Registrar further stated that the Court had fixed 19 March 2025 as the time-limit within which the States seeking to intervene could furnish their written observations on the admissibility of their Declarations, and 3 April 2025 as the time-limit within which the Parties could furnish their written observations in response. The States seeking to intervene, as well as The Gambia and Myanmar, filed their written observations within the time-limits thus fixed.

Team Maverick