Press Releases

Gambia, Myanmar to Present Their Arguments Before World Court originally published by Human Rights Watch (The Hague) – International Court of Justice (ICJ) hearings in the Myanmar genocide case highlight the need for justice for the ethnic Rohingya, Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK, Global Justice Center, Human Rights Watch, Refugee Women for Peace and Justice, and Women’s Peace Network said today. Hearings on the merits of the case begin on January 12, 2026. In August 2017, Myanmar security forces began a sweeping campaign of massacres, rape, and arson against Rohingya in northern Rakhine State that forced more than 700,000 people to flee to neighboring Bangladesh. In November 2019, Gambia filed a case before the ICJ alleging that Myanmar’s atrocities against the Rohingya constitute genocide and violate the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. This is not a criminal case against individuals, but a request for a legal determination of Myanmar’s state responsibility for genocide. “Seeing Gambia’s landmark case against Myanmar finally enter the merits phase delivers renewed hope to Rohingya that our decades-long suffering may finally end,” said Wai Wai Nu, founder and executive director of the Women’s Peace Network. “Amid ongoing violations against the Rohingya, the world must stand firm in the pursuit of justice and a path toward ending impunity in Myanmar and restoring our rights.” In December 2019, the ICJ held hearings on Gambia’s request for provisional measures to protect the Rohingya remaining in Myanmar from genocide, which the court unanimously adopted in January 2020. The court’s provisional measures require Myanmar to prevent all genocidal acts against the Rohingya, to ensure that security forces do not commit acts of genocide, and to take steps to preserve evidence related to the case. Myanmar is legally bound to comply. Human Rights Watch and others have documented ongoing grave abuses against the Rohingya remaining in Myanmar, contravening the court-ordered provisional measures. On February 1, 2021, Myanmar’s military staged a coup, overthrew the democratically elected government, and installed a military junta. Since the coup, armed conflict between Myanmar’s security forces and opposition forces and ethnic armed groups has engulfed much of the country, with security forces committing grave abuses, including airstrikes against civilians in multiple ethnic areas. The Myanmar military has long subjected Rohingya to atrocity crimes, including the ongoing crimes against humanity of apartheid, persecution, and deprivation of liberty. Since late 2023, Rohingya civilians have been caught in the fighting between the junta and ethnic Arakan Army armed group. Both sides have carried out grave abuses, including extrajudicial killings, widespread arson, and unlawful recruitment. “The Myanmar military’s vicious cycles of abuses and impunity need to end,” said Shayna Bauchner, Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch. “This should begin with governments holding the junta to its legal obligation to comply with the ICJ-ordered provisional measures.” In January 2021, Aung San Suu Kyi’s ruling National League for Democracy government filed preliminary objections challenging the ICJ’s jurisdiction and Gambia’s standing to file the case. In February 2022, the ICJ heard Myanmar’s objections from the military junta. In July, the court rejected the objections, allowing the case to proceed on the merits. Establishing that genocide has taken place under the Genocide Convention requires demonstrating that genocidal acts were committed with an intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group in whole or in part. During the three-week hearings at the ICJ, the parties are expected to present their arguments and supporting evidence about whether Myanmar violated the Genocide Convention. Eleven countries intervened in the case but will not present orally at the hearings on the merits. While their written submissions remain confidential, their declarations of intervention outline several arguments in support of Gambia’s position, including on the issue of genocidal intent, the scope of the obligation to prevent and punish genocide, and the role of sexual and gender-based violence for a genocide determination. The latter is detailed in a paper being published by the Global Justice Center. “Genocide does not unfold only through mass killing,” said Elise Keppler, executive director of the Global Justice Center. “In Myanmar, targeted sexual and reproductive violence inflicted on Rohingya women and girls was designed to break families, threaten futures, and eliminate the possibility of survival as a group. A gender-competent analysis makes this intent visible – and without it, the case that genocide against the Rohingya occurred is incomplete.” In addition to Gambia’s ICJ case, there are several ongoing efforts to bring individual perpetrators of crimes in Myanmar to justice. In 2019, the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutor opened an investigation into alleged grave crimes against the Rohingya. Although Myanmar is not a member of the ICC, the court’s judges have determined that the ICC has jurisdiction over the situation because at least one element of the alleged crimes took place in Bangladesh, an ICC member. In November 2024, the ICC prosecutor requested an arrest warrant for Min Aung Hlaing, commander-in-chief of Myanmar’s military, alleging his responsibility for the crimes against humanity of deportation and persecution of the Rohingya in 2017. To bring comprehensive accountability, the United Nations Security Council should expand the ICC’s jurisdiction to address the full scope of criminality by referring the situation in Myanmar to the court, the groups said. In November 2019, a group of human rights organizations, including the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK, filed a criminal case in Argentina under the principle of universal jurisdiction against Myanmar authorities for crimes committed in Rakhine State. In February 2025, an Argentine court issued arrest warrants for 25 individuals from Myanmar, including Min Aung Hlaing. “To fully address the scale of the crimes against the Rohingya, it is key to seek justice and accountability through different avenues,” said Tun Khin, president of the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK. “This case and the pursuit of justice are not only about accountability for past atrocities, but about preventing future ones.” Gambia’s filing in 2019 was the first time that a country without any direct connection to the alleged crimes used its membership in the Genocide Convention to bring a case before the ICJ. In December 2023, South Africa filed a case with the ICJ alleging that Israel violated the Genocide Convention by committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza and by failing to prevent it, including by not holding senior Israeli officials and others accountable for their direct and public incitement to genocide. In January, March, and May 2024, the court issued provisional measures, but Israel has flouted the court’s orders to open the crossings into Gaza and allow sufficient humanitarian aid in. “Myanmar’s case before the ICJ is a beacon of hope for hundreds of thousands of people like myself that our plight for justice will not go unheard,” said Lucky Karim, founder and executive director of Refugee Women for Peace and Justice. “This and other cases before the ICJ are powerful warnings to abusive states across the world that one day, they too may be called to respond for their actions before a court of law.”

Originally published by Asia Justice Coalition As we mark the eighth year since the 2017 Rohingya exodus from Rakhine State to Bangladesh during the Myanmar military’s so-called ‘clearance operations’, the deteriorating situation of the Rohingya in both Myanmar and Bangladesh warrants urgent, coordinated, and decisive interventions from the international community. In blatant breach of the provisional measures order of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Five-Point Consensus, the Myanmar military continues to commit indiscriminate violence constituting crimes against humanity and war crimes, including airstrikes, drone attacks, heavy artillery shelling, and landmine casualties across the country, in clear violation of international humanitarian and human rights law. The military junta has killed more than 7,074 civilians, and over 22,314 people have been arbitrarily arrested and remain under detention, with widespread and systematic reports of torture, ill treatment, and sexual violence. According to the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, more than 3.6 million people have been internally displaced, and 19.9 million people are in urgent need of humanitarian aid. The devastating 28 March earthquake further deepened the humanitarian crisis in the country. The dissolution of the State Administration Council and the proposed election beginning 28 December 2025 by Commander-in-Chief Min Aung Hlaing, which will neither be free nor fair, threaten and risk further escalation of violence and hostilities between various non-state armed groups and the military. The military intends to legitimize its coup by conducting a sham election. The new election law is vague, overbroad, and imposes severe punishment, including the death penalty, for anyone who opposes or disrupts the elections. The intensified conflict in Rakhine State between the military and the Arakan Army has resulted in the mass displacement, deaths, and loss of property of thousands of civilians, including the Rohingya. The Arakan Army has been committing extrajudicial killings, arbitrary arrests and detention, forced labour, arbitrary raids, and widespread arson against the Rohingya, resulting in mass displacement. The military junta continues to persecute the Rohingya with impunity, especially more than 600,000 of those living under internment conditions in Rakhine State. The deliberate humanitarian and trade blockade imposed by the military, which is further compounded by the Arakan Army and may constitute war crimes, has contributed to a famine-like situation in Rakhine State. In Bangladesh, the refugee camps have been witnessing new arrivals of refugees from Myanmar since 2021. According to UNHCR, over 150,000 refugees have fled across the border from Myanmar since 2024, making it the largest movement of the Rohingya since 2017. The situation in Cox’s Bazar and Bhasan Char, with over 1 million refugees, is dire due to major cuts in humanitarian aid by foreign donors. These budget cuts have worsened the crisis in the camps, resulting in malnutrition due to the slashed food rations of less than $6 a month, closure of thousands of non-governmental organization-run learning centers for the refugee children, and reduced healthcare services, waste management, and maintenance of infrastructure, including roads, bridges, and toilets. This dire situation especially affects vulnerable groups—women, children, and the elderly. Due to overcrowding in the camps and persistent restrictions on the Rohingya’s freedom of movement and access to healthcare, employment, and livelihood, their susceptibility to abuse and exploitation, human trafficking, and child and forced marriages has been exacerbated. The widespread operation of Rohingya armed groups, in particular the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA), has significantly undermined the security in the refugee camps in Bangladesh, resulting in extrajudicial killings, abductions, sexual and gender-based violence, and torture. Rohingya men and boys, including LGBTQIA+ members, are also forcibly recruited and transferred to Myanmar to take part in the hostilities without protection or training by both the military junta and the Arakan Army. In search of safety and better living conditions in 2024, more than 7,800 Rohingya undertook perilous sea journeys, out of which over 650 people died or were reported missing. In violation of the non-refoulement obligation under international law, the Bangladesh authorities have been forcibly returning people fleeing violence by the Arakan Army, which exercises majority control over the Rakhine State. These pushbacks force Rohingya to live under de facto apartheid-like conditions where they face severe and systematic discrimination and restrictions on movement, access to education, employment, and healthcare. A High-Level conference on the situation of Rohingya and other minorities in Myanmar, proposed by Bangladesh’s Chief Adviser Professor Muhammad Yunus, will be held on 30 September at UN Headquarters. The conference aims to propose a ‘comprehensive, innovative, concrete, and time-bound plan for a sustainable resolution of the crisis’. However, its call for ‘meaningful participation’ is undermined by a recent U.S. travel ban on Myanmar nationals, effectively limiting all Burmese citizens. The stateless status and lack of proper documentation for the Rohingya also severely restrict their ability to participate. While the live-streaming of proceedings on UN Web TV is a welcome step, the event stands to lack inclusive effective representation and dialogue on pathways for the future, given concerns recently raised regarding the selection of ‘the voice of the Rohingya’ in the camps. Additionally, the exclusion of Special Rapporteur on the human rights situation in Myanmar Thomas H. Andrews from the conference is deeply concerning and must be reversed. In the absence of the possibility of the voluntary, safe, dignified, and sustainable return of Rohingya, the Bangladesh government and the international community must abandon their primary focus on repatriation program. Repatriation of the Rohingya to Myanmar is premature until the root causes, including accordance of ethnic identity and citizenship status, are addressed. Any such future roadmap, including return policy, must not be rushed but be carefully constructed, be victim- and survivor-centered, and include Rohingya, especially women and youth leaders, in policymaking and implementation. We welcome the movement in the ongoing cases at the ICJ in The Gambia v. Myanmar alleging violations of the Genocide Convention, where interventions by four more states have been accepted and the submission of the application of the arrest warrant against Min Aung Hlaing to the Pre-Trial Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) for the crimes against humanity of deportation and persecution of the Rohingya. The issuance of arrest warrants against 25 Myanmar military and civilian officials in Argentina, including Min Aung Hlaing and Deputy Commander-in-Chief Soe Win, marked the first time any public warrants have been issued towards securing justice for the Rohingya. However, the progress in these cases is slow, and there is no legal or judicial proceeding underway seeking accountability for post-coup human rights abuses, including those committed by the Arakan Army. The waning attention and mixed messages of the UN Member States, including ASEAN and neighboring countries, have emboldened the Myanmar military and left the Rohingya with an uncertain and precarious future. The Rohingya Joint Response Plan for 2025-2026 calls for a total of $934.5 million, but it has only received 35% of the funding to date. The international community must urgently bridge the funding gap by pledging resources and funding for the Rohingya by respecting the principle of equitable burden- and responsibility-sharing with the host state. UN Member States should undertake immediate action without delay—collectively and individually—to cease the ongoing hostilities and hold the Myanmar military and Arakan Army accountable, including through exercising universal jurisdiction, ending arms transfers to the military, and ensuring unimpeded humanitarian aid throughout the country without distinction, including cross-border aid. The UN Security Council must hold a public session on the situation in Myanmar without delay, impose targeted economic sanctions on the Myanmar military and affiliates, establish a binding global arms embargo, including on transfers of jet fuel and dual-use technology, and refer the full situation, including post-coup crimes, to the ICC.

originally published by Human Rights Watch (Monrovia) – Liberian President Joseph Boakai should follow through on his commitment to justice and human rights by renewing an executive order key to establishing a war crimes court to address accountability for civil war-era crimes in the country, six human rights groups said today. The order, signed on May 2, 2024, is set to expire on May 1, 2025.  The groups, Liberian and international nongovernmental organizations, are Advocates for Human Rights, Civitas Maxima, Civil Society Human Rights Advocacy Platform of Liberia, Global Justice Center, Global Justice and Research Project, and Human Rights Watch.  “Liberia’s quest to bring closure for victims of civil war atrocities, and ensure their access to justice, remains a major priority,” said Adama Dempster, secretary-general of the Civil Society Human Rights Platform of Liberia. “We call for government and international support to ensure the establishment of the court.”  Widespread and systematic violations of international human rights and humanitarian law characterized Liberia’s two brutal armed conflicts, which took place between 1989 and 2003. They included summary executions, massacres, rape and other forms of sexual violence, mutilation and torture, and forced conscription and use of child combatants. Nobody has faced criminal investigation or prosecution in Liberia for serious crimes committed during the civil wars. The only steps toward justice for serious crimes have been cases prosecuted abroad.  The country’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, in its final 2009 report, recommended the creation of an extraordinary criminal court, a hybrid court composed of Liberian and international judges, prosecutors, and other staff with a mandate to try those allegedly responsible for committing serious crimes. As the groups highlighted in a recent submission to the United Nations Human Rights Council in the context of Liberia’s upcoming November 2025 Universal Periodic Review, 16 years later, Liberia has yet to implement this critical recommendation. The May 2024 executive order established an office to “investigate, design, and prescribe the methodology, mechanisms, and the process” for the establishment of a war crimes court and a national anti-corruption court (Office for the Establishment of War and Economic Crimes Court for Liberia). “President Boakai promised Liberians accountability for wartime atrocities, but for this to become a reality, he needs to renew the executive order,” said Michelle Reyes Milk, senior international justice counsel at Human Rights Watch. “President Boakai should also work with the legislature to replace the executive order with legislation so the office can work sustainably to develop the framework for establishing the war and economic crimes court.” Over the course of 2024, the Boakai administration took further steps toward setting up the office. President Boakai made a public commitment to advance the process during a speech to the UN General Assembly on September 25, 2024. Additional steps included the withdrawal of the appointment of the first executive director for the office following strong reservations voiced by victim and civil society groups and the more consultative process involved in the second appointment, resulting in the selection of Jallah Barbu as the new executive director. President Boakai also wrote to the UN secretary-general requesting assistance in establishing a court. However, progress remains limited. In January 2025, the groups wrote to President Boakai calling on the government to take necessary measures towards the establishment of the court. The organizations highlighted the need to ensure the office has requisite staffing and budgetary support and called on the office to adopt an action plan, or “roadmap,” to advance preparation for the court’s establishment.  The plan should address the model on which the war crimes court will be designed; the composition of the court; a clear procedure for the election and appointment of its officials; a proposed budget; and efforts needed for the adoption of a statute, among other issues, and have clear action points and intended outcomes.  Despite the challenges in the process, prospects for a war crimes court continue to offer thousands of victims a promise of justice that has long evaded them, the groups said. President Boakai should renew the executive order and ensure sufficient funding is in place so that the necessary work to establish the court can accelerate.  “A comprehensive roadmap that can ensure the office has both the resources and mandate to fulfill its key mission—establishing a sustainable war crimes court—is therefore vital and urgent,” said Hassan Bility, executive director of the Global Justice and Research Project. “We urge the office to move swiftly in the adoption and implementation of such a plan of action.”

Resolution Sets Time-Bound Process for Adopting World’s First Stand-alone Treaty on Crimes Against Humanity The United Nations Sixth Committee today adopted by consensus a resolution to advance a draft treaty on crimes against humanity to negotiations. Once adopted by the General Assembly next month, states will negotiate the first stand-alone treaty that explicitly addresses state responsibility to prevent and punish crimes against humanity. Today’s resolution calls for a concrete and time-bound process consisting of preparatory sessions in 2026 and 2027, and three-week negotiations in 2028 and 2029, where a treaty will be finalized. “Today’s resolution is a historic breakthrough toward a crimes against humanity treaty,” said Kelly Adams, legal advisor at the Global Justice Center. “Despite the proliferation of crimes against humanity around the world, negotiations on this treaty have been delayed time and again. But today’s decision paves the way for a treaty, which will offer crucial tools to prevent and punish these most extreme rights violations.” The current draft treaty was developed over six years by the International Law Commission, a UN expert body charged with developing and codifying international law. For more information on the draft treaty, visit cahtreatynow.org. Although crimes against humanity are defined under various treaties, including the Rome Statute that established the International Criminal Court, there is currently no treaty which expressly addresses states’ responsibilities to prevent or punish these crimes. This gap distinguishes crimes against humanity from war crimes and genocide, each of which has its own dedicated treaty (the Geneva Conventions and the Genocide Convention, respectively). Negotiations for a new treaty present a unique opportunity to better advance justice for gender-based crimes, among other issues. In October 2023, a collection of human rights organizations and international law experts published a letter and several briefs that proposed changes to the draft treaty that focused on incorporating crimes like forced marriage, reproductive violence, and gender apartheid. A growing number of UN member states have expressed support for the inclusion of these crimes in a future treaty. “At present, treaty provisions have yet to catch up to the lived experiences of victims of sexual and gender-based crimes and judicial findings that acknowledge this fuller scope of harms,” said Adams. “A strong, progressive, and survivor-centric treaty will ensure international and domestic systems are better equipped to prevent, punish, and ensure redress for systematic or widespread attacks on civilians involving sexual and gender-based violence.” The General Assembly is expected to make a decision on the draft resolution in early December 2024.

Barriers, Opportunities to Investigating Reproductive Harms Revealed SEPTEMBER 30, 2024 — A new report published today by UN Women and the Global Justice Center (GJC) uncovers barriers and opportunities to the documentation of reproductive violence faced by UN-mandated mechanisms charged with investigating human rights violations and international crimes. The report, based on interviews conducted with current and former gender advisors to UN investigative mechanisms, also offers detailed legal guidance to support future investigations. Reproductive violence is a distinct form of sexual and gender-based violence targeting reproductive autonomy, a right protected under international law. Examples of reproductive violence include forced pregnancy, enforced sterilization, forced abortion, and restricting access to reproductive care.  This form of violence often has been overlooked in UN investigations, despite its profound impacts. GJC’s research reveals that stigmatization of reproductive issues, as well as structural and analytical barriers in investigations, have hindered documentation. The report also details that this oversight can foster a lack of accountability for perpetrators, gaps in services and reparations for victims, and an incomplete historical record. “From Ethiopia to Myanmar, sexual and gender-based violence continues around the world. If we want to halt these atrocities and bring justice for victims, international investigations must be equipped to document them fully,” said Tess Graham, report co-author and legal advisor at the Global Justice Center. “This is especially true for under-reported forms of gender-based violence like reproductive violence. By harnessing positive examples of documentation, and learning from shortcomings, we can ensure UN investigations have the tools they need to advance accountability and appropriate support for victims.” The report provides an analysis of international law on reproductive violence and details several “facilitating factors” that can foster its effective documentation. The report also provides examples of successful documentation of reproductive violence and concludes that it is “far from impossible” despite the challenges.

More than 300 civil society groups and individuals today issued a joint statement urging United Nations member states to declare support for moving the Draft Articles on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes Against Humanity into treaty negotiations. Human rights organizations based in Africa, the Middle East, Asia, the Americas, and Europe — as well as leading international law and human rights experts — are among the signatories. Beginning Monday, April 1, the UN’s Sixth Committee will resume its session to address crimes against humanity, where member states will have the opportunity to demonstrate support for treaty negotiations. Although crimes against humanity are among the most serious crimes in international law, there has yet to be a treaty regulating their prevention and punishment. The Draft Articles are the result of six years of work in the International Law Commission, an independent body of experts established by the UN General Assembly that is responsible for helping develop and codify international law. Civil society organizations and international law experts believe that the current draft is a strong starting point for negotiations. They have also recommended several areas where the Draft Articles should be improved. Ahead of a Sixth Committee debate on the treaty in October 2023, the Global Justice Center issued a series of legal briefs with recommendations to ensure the treaty is gender-competent and survivor-centric. A full list of signatories can be found here. Elise Keppler, Executive Director at the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “Activists from every corner of the globe have united to deliver the message that the world needs a treaty on crimes against humanity. Governments should step up and signal that they support moving to treaty negotiations. From Afghanistan to Myanmar, crimes against humanity are rampant, and more tools to combat these crimes are needed. A strong, gender-competent, and survivor-centric treaty is not only possible — it is necessary.”

NEW YORK — The Global Justice today joins its Rohingya partners as well as human rights activists around the world in commemorating the sixth anniversary of the Rohingya genocide. Akila Radhakrishnan, president of the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “The sobering reality on today’s anniversary is that the Rohingya are in a condition no less dire than the one they fled six years ago. Nearly a million are barely surviving in refugee camps with no ability to safely return home. A similar number remain in Myanmar, enduring massive rights restrictions and insecurity under the same authority responsible for their genocide. “This is an accelerating human rights catastrophe, and the international community must reckon with its responsibility for it. Impunity is the foundation upon which genocidal military leaders staged their coup in 2021, and it continues to serve as fuel for its brutal campaigns of persecution. Through its failure to take meaningful action, bodies like the UN Security Council have condoned and sustained this impunity. “Our international institutions helped to foment this crisis — they can help end it too. Existing sanctions and international court cases are critical steps, but it’s nowhere near enough. The world must listen to Rohingya, who have been clear about what they need from the beginning: accountability for perpetrators, an end to discriminatory policies against them and a pathway to a  safe, dignified return to Myanmar. They deserve no less.”

BUENOS AIRES/NEW YORK — The Global Justice Center and the Burmese Rohingya Organisation UK (BROUK) today submitted recommendations to the Argentinian judiciary in a case brought against Myanmar military leaders for the genocide of the Rohingya. The case was filed by BROUK and launched by the Second Chamber of the Federal Criminal Court in 2021 under the principle of universal jurisdiction, which allows any court to prosecute certain human rights abuses, regardless of where they were committed. Today’s submission seeks to prepare the court for testimony from victims of sexual violence. It presents internationally-recognized principles for interviewing and engaging with victims. The submission also sets out standards for how the court should asses evidence of sexual violence. Tun Khin, BROUK President, issued the following statement: “More than five years after the genocide of the Rohingya, this case represents a crucial path to justice for crimes committed in Myanmar, particularly for victims of sexual violence. The Argentinian courts have an opportunity to be on the right side of history and provide justice that, until now, has seemed illusive.” Angela Mudukuti, Senior Legal Advisor with the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “Supporting victims of sexual violence, and our partners BROUK in their quest for justice, is of the utmost importance to the Global Justice Center. We submitted these recommendations because, historically, courts all over the world have failed to engage with victims and survivors of sexual violence in a way that avoids retraumatization and gives their testimony the weight it deserves. We remain hopeful that our submission will support the Argentinian judiciary in treating survivors and victims with dignity.”

Ruling in Case Against Dominic Ongwen Sets Historic Precedent on Reproductive Autonomy NEW YORK/THE HAGUE  — The International Criminal Court today upheld the conviction of Dominic Ongwen, a former commander of the Lord’s Resistance Army, a rebel force that operated in Uganda for decades. In 2021, Ongwen was found guilty of 61 counts of war crimes and crimes against humanity committed in Northern Uganda between 2002 and 2005. This included many sexual and gender-based crimes such as forced marriage and forced pregnancy, neither of which had previously tried at the ICC. The Global Justice Center, Amnesty International, Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, and Dr. Rosemary Grey filed an amicus brief on the crime of forced pregnancy in the case in December of 2021. They presented this analysis to the court during appeal hearings in February of this year. In its ruling today, the court affirmed this analysis and found that the legal interest behind the crime of forced pregnancy is “woman’s reproductive health and autonomy and the right to family planning,” and that national abortion laws are irrelevant to the court’s analysis of the crime. Akila Radhakrishnan, President of the Global Justice Center, issued the following statement: “Today’s ruling is a victory not only for the victims of Dominic Ongwen, but for all victims of sexual and gender-based violence that come to the ICC for justice. This is especially true for victims of forced pregnancy, whose human rights are now further protected by the creation of a historic precedent on reproductive autonomy in international law.”  Alix Vuillemin, Advocacy Director at Women’s Initiatives for Gender Justice, issued the following statement: “Today, the crime of ‘forced pregnancy’ was recognized by the ICC as the incomparable violence done to women who are raped, forcibly made pregnant, and confined with the intent to keep them pregnant. As we said in the 1990s in pushing for the criminalisation of these acts, with forced pregnancy, the invasion of the body and self is total. Women are being treated as chattel for the purpose of reproduction, which is another form of gender enslavement. Decades later, with this judgment, the ICC has given us sharper tools to advance the recognition, accountability and prevention of this violence.” Matt Cannock, Amnesty International's Center for International Justice, issued the following statement: “The Appeals Chamber's decision will doubtless prove critical for the future of the International Criminal Court's consideration of the crime of forced pregnancy, and it firmly holds the door open to victims of this horrendous crime to access justice before the court and beyond. “In particular we welcome the court's crucial finding, centered around human rights considerations, that the crime of forced pregnancy seeks to protect women’s ‘reproductive health and autonomy and the right to family planning’ - an absence of which can cause severe physical and psychological harms and lasting personal, social and economic consequences.” Dr. Rosemary Grey, Lecturer at Sydney Law School, issued the following statement: “Today, the value of reproductive autonomy was recognised by the International Criminal Court’s highest chamber. The decision affirms that forced pregnancy is among the most serious crimes of international concern, regardless of whether reproductive rights are protected under national law. It’s inspiring — and long overdue — to see the court taking this strong stance on reproductive rights under international law. And inspiring to see the strength of the two women whose evidence supported this historic conviction for forced pregnancy.”