An Agenda for a Dignified and Sustainable Rohingya Refugee Response in Bangladesh family disputes and sexual violence.116 This system usually led by male majhis is designed to manage conflict rather than provide justice117 and reinforces harmful gender-based power dynamics.118 Community perspectives on camp-based justice systems reflect the prevalence of corruption and bribery, delays in the justice process, difficulties in accessing information and the unpredictability of support received from relevant actors.119 Some studies show that refugees resort to seeking the support of armed groups in the camps, such as ARSA, to solve disputes.120 While ARSA’s role in the camps is much weaker than in Myanmar, there is some evidence to demonstrate their influence over majhis, their members and supporters serving as volunteers in the camps as well as religious leaders.121 Access to formal justice is only available to Rohingya for serious crimes such as murder, rape, kidnapping etc, subject to camp-in-charge (CiC) approval and discretion. Under Bangladeshi law, CiCs have limited judicial authority to influence justice processes in the camps. They regularly mediate disputes and dispense wide-ranging punishments ranging from detentions, imprisonment and imposition of fines to public beatings/floggings and public shaming.122 CiC approvals are needed for police investigations and refugees’ access to legal services outside the camps. UNHCR and its legal partners have reported difficulties in registering complaints with the police despite advocacy with law enforcement authorities and the judiciary.123Access to formal justice is further impeded by the lack of civil documentation such as birth, death and marriage registration for Rohingya.124 While legal empowerment programmes and legal awareness sessions are ongoing across all the camps, access to formal justice systems and timely and appropriate interventions by camp authorities and law enforcement agencies remains a challenge.125 While some NGOs help fill gaps in access to justice, the absence of a cohesive camp-wide justice mechanism leads to ad-hoc dispensation of justice at the hands of non-legal actors such as CiCs and majhis who are not adequately prepared and trained to serve this critical function.126 This was particularly evident during the COVID-19 pandemic when reduced protection presence coincided with increasing crime and insecurity in the camps. This ‘patchwork’ system that does not adhere to rule of law, principles of equity, fairness, justice and accountability, fosters a culture of impunity in the camps.127 International justice and accountability for crimes against Rohingya in Myanmar are being pursued with the proceedings in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and International Criminal Court (ICC). While these measures have sparked a ray of hope amongst the Rohingya refugees, there are 116 Kaamil Ahmed, For Rohingya refugees, patchwork justice leaves crimes unpunished, 17 September 2020, The New Humanitarian, available at https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/news/2020/09/17/Bangladesh-Rohingya-justice-systemcrimes 117 Ibid. 118 International Rescue Committee (IRC), Access Justice for Rohingya and Host Community in Cox's Bazar, February 2019, available at https://www.rescue.org/sites/default/files/document/3929/accessingjusticeassessmentexternalfinalsmall.pdf 119 Pereira et.al, supra n. 113. 120 Ibid. 121 International Crisis Group (ICG), The Long Haul Ahead for Myanmar’s Rohingya Refugee Crisis, 16 May 2018, available at https://www.crisisgroup.org/asia/south-east-asia/myanmar/296-long-haul-ahead-myanmars-rohingya-refugee-crisis 122 IRC, supra n. 118. 123 UNHCR, supra n. 16. 124 Pereira et.al, supra n. 113. 125 UNHCR, supra n. 16. See also, Bangladesh Legal Aid and Services Trust (BLAST) and Refugee Solidarity Network (RSN), Beyond Refuge: Advancing Legal Protections for Rohingya Communities in Bangladesh (forthcoming) 126 Pereira et.al, supra n. 113. 127 Kaamil Ahmed, supra n. 116. 30 Act for Peace / May 2021