'Emotional Language & Blurry Factual Pictures': Myanmar Denies Rohingya Genocide At World Court

Last Updated:January 17, 2026, 04:46 IST

The Gambia earlier laid out a harrowing catalogue of evidence, including mass gang rapes, indiscriminate killings of children, and the systematic torching of thousands of homes

According to Myanmar's defence, 'clearance operations' were intended to suppress an armed insurgency, and while civilians were regrettably killed and over 700,000 people fled to Bangladesh, these outcomes were the unfortunate results of an internal armed conflict rather than a state-sponsored plan of extermination. (Representational pic/AP)

Myanmar dismissed allegations of genocide against its Rohingya minority as “unsubstantiated" at the Court of Justice (ICJ) on Friday. As the three-week hearings on the merits of the case continued in The Hague, Myanmar’s representative, Ko Ko Hlaing, insisted that the 2017 military crackdown in Rakhine State was a legitimate “counter-terrorism operation" and not an attempt to destroy the Muslim minority group. Myanmar argued that The Gambia, which brought the landmark case in 2019, has failed to meet the rigorous burden of proof required to establish genocidal intent under international law.

Addressing the bench of fifteen international judges, Ko Ko Hlaing argued that the case is based on “emotional language and blurry factual pictures" rather than a rigorous presentation of facts. He maintained that the Myanmar military, or Tatmadaw, was forced to respond to coordinated attacks by the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), a militant group. According to Myanmar’s defence, the subsequent “clearance operations" were intended to suppress an armed insurgency, and while civilians were regrettably killed and over 700,000 people fled to Bangladesh, these outcomes were the unfortunate results of an internal armed conflict rather than a state-sponsored plan of extermination.

The Gambia, supported by several Western nations, including the United Kingdom and Canada, presented a starkly different narrative earlier in the week. Counsel for the African nation laid out a harrowing catalogue of evidence, including mass gang rapes, indiscriminate killings of children, and the systematic torching of thousands of homes. The Gambia’s legal team argued that “genocidal intent" is the only reasonable inference that can be drawn from such a widespread and brutal pattern of conduct. They pointed to the dehumanising rhetoric used by Myanmar officials and the long-standing denial of citizenship to the Rohingya as context for what they described as a coordinated effort to “erase" the group from Myanmar.

This merits phase of the trial marks the first time the UN’s top court will issue a final judgment on whether a state has committed genocide in the 21st century. While a final decision could take months or even years to be delivered, the court is currently holding several sessions behind closed doors to hear direct testimony from Rohingya survivors. As the hearings conclude on January 29, the international community remains focused on the outcome, which could carry significant legal implications for other ongoing genocide accusations globally and further isolate Myanmar’s military regime.

News world 'Emotional Language & Blurry Factual Pictures': Myanmar Denies Rohingya Genocide At World Court

Read More