dc.description.abstract |
On 25 August 2017, the Myanmar security forces launched widespread and systematic attacks
against the Rohingya people with brutalities unbound. As a matter of fact, such persecution
is termed either “ethnic cleansing or “crimes against humanity, or “genocide” by diverse
personnel, scholars, organisations, and even representatives of many countries. Each term has
its own significance and recognition in the contemporary international law. The term “ethnic
cleansing” is an oblique expression that is generally used to avoid the liability of “genocide” or
any other mass violations of human rights. In contrast, the 1948 Genocide Convention defines
“genocide” denoting it as a punishable offence. These different scenarios generate an ambiguity
in the relationships as well as differences between “ethnic cleansing” and “genocidal intent”
because the International Court of Justice (ICJ) indicated in the Croatia v. Serbia [2015] case
that even a mere campaign of ethnic cleansing may amount to a genocidal act considering its
aftermath. This proposition fortified the author to find answer to a universal epidemic question
as to whether the persecutions committed against the Rohingyas can be termed merely “ethnic
cleansing” or “genocide”. This issue gives birth to certain interconnected questions such as,
what is intimately the criminal nature of Rohingya persecution, and what is the consequence
of defining the perpetrator’s criminality. This study has focused on the ample answers to
these questions. On the basis of the core findings, it has also highlighted the legal inferences
of the atrocities to prosecute the individual perpetrators of Myanmar, and to make Myanmar
accountable as a State. In order to determine the criminal nature of the persecution, the author
primarily relied on qualitative research approaches including focus group discussions. As per
relevance, various reports, international instruments, and precedents are also consulted in this
study. |
en_US |