The ICJ’s Rohingya ruling will test the OIC’s promises

Muslim governments backed the genocide case against Myanmar. They must now show that their commitment to the Rohingya goes beyond words.

The Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has made Muslim solidarity central to how it presents itself. Nine years ago, Myanmar’s military massacred Rohingya civilians and drove hundreds of thousands from their homes. The persecution has not ended: the Rohingya remain stateless, face continuing violence and risk death while fleeing by sea. Throughout those years, the OIC has held summits and passed resolutions. Yet it has failed to protect them.

When I founded the Burma Human Rights Network 14 years ago, I believed that if we gathered evidence carefully and put it before institutions with the power to act, they would act. We have gathered testimony from survivors of massacres. We have documented the systematic destruction of Rohingya villages, the denial of their citizenship and the deliberate starvation of a people. Yet despite all this documentation, the situation facing the Rohingya has mostly grown worse. The International Court of Justice is expected to rule later this year on whether Myanmar’s actions constituted genocide.

I have sometimes asked myself whether a ruling could help stop the atrocities. The Rohingya survivors who gave evidence in The Hague relived the worst moments of their lives before international judges because they trusted that their testimony would matter. Many of them are still in Bangladesh, still in limbo, dependent on food assistance worth as little as $7 per person per month. One in every seven Rohingya who attempted sea crossings last year was reported dead or missing. They are unprotected, and governments that could do more have not done so.

People often ask me why we continue. I have never had a satisfying answer. What I know is that without a record of these atrocities, it becomes easier to deny they happened. I continue because, after hearing these accounts and seeing the evidence, I do not know how to walk away from it.

We have published evidence that governments did not want to confront, and we have called the atrocities what they are: genocide. If the court finds that Myanmar committed genocide, it would be the first time in the International Court of Justice’s 80-year history that a state has been held responsible for the crime.

I now address the OIC foreign ministers who will gather in Baghdad on October 17. The OIC backed this case, and your governments supported the effort to hold Myanmar accountable for its treatment of the Rohingya. Many Rohingya, along with many of us who work with them, took those commitments seriously. When the ruling arrives, I expect statements welcoming it and renewed promises of accountability. But another communiqué will not protect anyone. OIC governments should refuse to forcibly return Rohingya to Myanmar, protect Rohingya who reach their territory, sustain support for refugees in Bangladesh and agree on diplomatic and economic measures against those responsible for their persecution. These are choices your governments can make.

The way Rohingya are treated across the region is hard to reconcile with those commitments. Some governments that speak about the Rohingya in international meetings do not offer the same protection to those who arrive at their borders. A government cannot demand accountability from Myanmar and at the same time send people back into danger.

Bangladesh hosts 1.2 million Rohingya and has faced years of pressure to send them back. The OIC must also challenge abuses against the Rohingya by governments outside its membership. In 2025, according to testimony documented by Amnesty International, Indian authorities forced at least 40 Rohingya from a naval vessel into the Andaman Sea, leaving them to swim towards Myanmar. If the OIC says nothing when governments expose Rohingya to that kind of danger, those governments have little reason to change course.

To the Rohingya community organisations that kept working, the journalists who reported despite restrictions on access, those who helped survivors bring their testimony to international forums, and the advocates who stayed with this issue when official attention moved elsewhere, I can only say this: you did work that governments with armies and treasuries should never have left to you. The evidence you preserved is now part of the record.

The 57 governments meeting in Baghdad have repeatedly pledged solidarity with the Rohingya and supported efforts to hold Myanmar accountable for genocide. But solidarity means little if it does not translate into action. A judgment from The Hague will not protect the Rohingya by itself. What those governments do after it will show whether their support for this case has consequences beyond the courtroom.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.