Myanmar has started defending itself at the International Court of Justice against accusations that it carried out genocide against the Rohingya minority.
The country argues that the case brought by The Gambia lacks sufficient evidence and that its military actions were necessary for national security.
Speaking before judges at the UN’s top court, Myanmar representative Ko Ko Hlaing dismissed the allegations, calling them “unsubstantiated”. He maintained that the country’s actions targeted militants, not the Rohingya population, in response to security threats in northern Rakhine state.
Earlier this week, The Gambia’s foreign minister Dawda Jallow said Myanmar had executed “genocidal policies” with the aim of erasing the Rohingya. Jallow told the court the minority had faced decades of abuse, including propaganda campaigns, before the army’s 2017 crackdown forced hundreds of thousands to flee to Bangladesh.
The 2017 operations left thousands dead and displaced over 700,000 Rohingya, many of whom now live in the Cox’s Bazar refugee camps, described by the UN as some of the largest and most overcrowded in the world.
A UN report released in 2018 recommended investigations into Myanmar’s top military officials for genocide in Rakhine and crimes against humanity in other regions. Myanmar rejected the findings, insisting its military operations were lawful responses to insurgent threats.
Hlaing told the court on Friday that “Myanmar was not obliged to remain idle and allow terrorists to have free reign of northern Rakhine states,” adding that the “clearance operations…refer to counter-insurgency or counter-terrorism operations.”
He argued that Myanmar’s ongoing efforts to facilitate the return of Rohingya refugees from Bangladesh show that the government has no intent to destroy the population.
Jallow explained that The Gambia filed the case in 2019 out of a “sense of responsibility” shaped by its own history under military rule. He said the Rohingya “had suffered decades of appalling persecution and years of dehumanising propaganda,” and that the 2017 military campaign, coupled with ongoing policies, aimed to eliminate them from Myanmar.
Philippe Sands, representing The Gambia, told the court, “When the court considers… all of the evidence taken together, the only reasonable conclusion to reach is that a genocidal intent permeated and informed Myanmar's myriad of state-led actions against the Rohingya.”
The case has the support of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation, which has 57 member states.
Hlaing emphasized that a verdict of genocide would have long-term consequences for Myanmar, saying it “would place an indelible stain on my country and its people” and highlighted the importance of the case for the nation’s reputation and future.
The court has scheduled three days for witness testimony, including Rohingya survivors, which will be closed to the public and media.
A ruling is expected towards the end of 2026 and could influence other genocide cases, such as the one brought by South Africa against Israel over the Gaza war.
The case is the first genocide trial at the ICJ in over a decade and is seen as a critical test for clarifying how genocide is defined under international law.
The 1948 UN Genocide Convention, cited by The Gambia, defines genocide as acts carried out “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group,” a measure adopted after the Holocaust during World War Two.
