Myanmar to undertake appropriate steps for safeguarding country’s sovereignty-Foreign Ministry
595
NP News - July 24
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Myanmar released a press statement responding to the judgement of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) on the preliminary objections raised by Myanmar and described, “Myanmar will endeavor its utmost efforts to safeguard the Country’s sovereignty and national interest and continue to undertake appropriate steps for the country.”
Myanmar reaffirms its position in a declaration over the ratification of the Convention and respects its obligations under the Convention without any violation of them, the statement added.
“The preliminary objections raised by Myanmar were believed to be strong as a matter of law and matter of fact,” said the statement adding that “Myanmar notes that Judge XueHanqin issued a dissenting opinion, and voted against the Court’s finding that it has jurisdiction and that the application is admissible. Myanmar is disappointed that its preliminary objections were rejected, while it notes that the Court has now determined the matter.Myanmar noted that this judgement will become not only a source of international law but also set a precedent for future cases.”
Myanmar asserted four preliminary objections during the provisional measures hearings including that the Court lacks jurisdiction or the application is inadmissible. However, the Court made rejection; therefore, it becomes a ‘Precedent’ that shall be considered for the court decision of subsequent cases in identical or similar facts or issues.
The four Preliminary Objections raised by Myanmar are as follows:
First, “that the Court lacks jurisdiction, or alternatively that the application is inadmissible, on the ground that the real applicant in these proceedings is the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (the ‘OIC’), an international organization”;
Second, “that The Gambia, as a non-injured Contracting Party to the Genocide Convention, lacks standing to bring the case against Myanmar under Article IX thereof, because the Convention does not provide for the concept of an actio popularis. Furthermore, The Gambia is also barred from bringing the case because Bangladesh, as the Contracting Party specially affected by the alleged violations of the Genocide Convention purportedly committed by Myanmar, has entered a reservation to Article IX and has thereby waived its right to settle disputes relating to the interpretation, application or fulfillment of the Convention by bringing a case before the Court under that provision”;
Third, “that The Gambia, as a non-injured Contracting Party to the Genocide Convention, may not seise the Court with a case arising under that Convention since Myanmar, when acceding to the Convention, has entered a reservation to its Article VIII”; and
Fourth, “that the Court lacks jurisdiction, or alternatively the application is inadmissible, as there was no dispute between The Gambia and Myanmar on the date of filing of the Application instituting proceedings”.