Lessons From the Rohingya Tragedy: the Clash of Non-Intervention and the Responsibility of ASEAN Region Countries

Abstract

This study discusses human rights violations in Myanmar, particularly against the Rohingya ethnic group, from an international law perspective. Systematic discrimination through the Burmese Citizenship Law of 1982 has rendered the Rohingya stateless and subjected them to various forms of gross human rights violations, including mass expulsions, killings, rape, and alleged genocide. This issue has serious implications not only at the domestic level, but also transnationally with the emergence of refugee flows to neighboring countries, including Indonesia. In the context of international law, instruments such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (1966), the Genocide Convention (1948), and the UN Charter (1945) affirm the obligation of states to protect human rights. However, practical implementation faces political obstacles, both through the ASEAN principle of non-intervention and the use of veto power in the UN Security Council. The research questions include: (1) how does international law regulate human rights violations in the case of Myanmar, and (2) how do human rights violations in Myanmar affect the dynamics of international law? The results of this study show that despite normative developments such as the strengthening of jus cogens and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine, reality shows that there is a serious gap between legal norms and implementation. Thus, the case of Myanmar reflects a major challenge to the effectiveness of international law in realizing universal justice and human rights protection.