An Agenda for a Dignified and Sustainable Rohingya Refugee Response in Bangladesh 2.2.3 ICC, ICJ and other legal proceedings There is growing legal pressure on Myanmar at the international level through a series of legal actions that were initiated at the International Criminal Court(ICC),26 International Court of Justice (ICJ)27 and in an Argentinian court.28 In January 2020, the ICJ passed legally binding provisional measures directing Myanmar to take necessary steps to prevent all acts of genocide and report to the Court every six months on its progress on the implementation of the order.29 Targeted sanctions have been issued against Myanmar military leaders by several governments with regard to atrocities committed against the Rohingya as well as in relation to the recent military coup.30 Despite these measures, human rights violations against Rohingya continue. While these legal actions are a welcome step towards achieving justice and accountability for crimes committed against Rohingya, these proceedings are likely to continue over a long period, and will not provide any immediate relief to the Rohingya community.31 The international community should continue to uphold its responsibility towards Rohingya refugees as victims of mass atrocity.32 Containment policies, border closures, boat push-backs, denial of asylum and other human rights, need to be critiqued and good faith responsibility-sharing arrangements should be agreed upon. 2.3 Regional response to the Rohingya situation There is ongoing domestic pressure within Bangladesh to resolve the Rohingya crisis, with no resolution in sight within Myanmar. Meanwhile, there are increasingly stringent security measures in the Rohingya refugee camps in Bangladesh which are exacerbating security challenges, further 26 In November 2019, the ICC opened an investigation into the Rohingya situation in Bangladesh/Myanmar. Bangladeshi NonGovernmental Representatives (BNGR), an informal group of leading Bangladeshi civil society organisations, humanitarian agencies, eminent jurists and scholars submitted amicus curiae observations in the matter in three key areas: i) the circumstances surrounding the presence of members of the Rohingya people from Myanmar on the territory of Bangladesh; ii) the crimes, in addition to deportation, that commenced in Myanmar but were completed in Bangladesh that the Chamber may exercise territorial jurisdiction over; and iii) an overview of Bangladeshi law on territorial jurisdiction over cross-border crimes. 27 In November 2019, Gambia instituted proceedings against Myanmar at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for perpetrating genocide and failing to prevent it. In September 2020, Canada and the Netherlands formally joined Gambia in their intervention at the ICJ. 28 In November 2019, the Burmese Rohingya Organisation in the United Kingdom (BROUK), together with Latin American human rights groups, filed an application in a federal court in Buenos Aires, Argentina, calling for military and civilian leaders in Myanmar, including Aung San Suu Kyi, to take responsibility for crimes committed against minority groups. 29 Fortify Rights, Myanmar: Comply with World-Court Orders, End Ongoing Atrocities, 23 October 2020, available at https://www.fortifyrights.org/mya-inv-2020-10-23/ 30 Human Rights Watch, Myanmar, Sanctions and Human Rights, 18 February 2021, available at https://www.hrw.org/news/2021/02/18/myanmar-sanctions-and-human-rights 31 Katja Creutz, International Responses to the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar-From Political Inaction to Growing Legal Pressure, Finnish Institute of International Affairs, May 2020, available at https://www.fiia.fi/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/bp282_international-responses-to-the-rohingya-crisis-in-myanmar.pdf 32 World Summit Outcome document (hereinafter ‘WSO’), GA res. 60/1, paras. 138-9, UN doc. A/Res/60/1, 24 Oct. 2005. (“The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity… We also intend to commit ourselves, as necessary and appropriate, to helping states build capacity to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and to assisting those which are under stress before crises and conflicts break out.”). See Also: Brian Barbour and Brian Gorlick, Embracing the ‘Responsibility to Protect’: A Repertoire of Measures Including Asylum for Potential Victims, International Journal of Refugee Law, Volume 20, Issue 4, December 2008, pp. 533–566. 14 Act for Peace / May 2021